Posts Tagged ‘Second Amendment’

LinkSwarm for January 24, 2020

Friday, January 24th, 2020

Burisma, Chinese plagues and falling iguanas all feature in this Friday’s LinkSwarm!

  • Emails tie “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella to Obama White House meeting on Bursima.

    Fox News host Laura Ingraham reported Wednesday evening that she obtained a chain of State Department emails stemming from a standard request for comment from New York Times journalist Ken Vogel, whose reporting helped generate scrutiny of Hunter Biden’s ties to Ukrainian gas company Burisma. Hunter Biden, 49, is the son of Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden, and Republicans have called for him to testify during the Ukraine-related Senate impeachment trial against President Trump.

    On May 1, 2019, Vogel contacted State Department official Kate Schilling about a story he was working on regarding an Obama administration meeting in January 2016 with Ukrainian prosecutors and mentioned the name of the CIA analyst believed to be the whistleblower whose complaint sparked impeachment proceedings that led to two articles of impeachment: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

  • Would you believe that the New York Times had and killed the story of the meeting? Of course you would. It reflected badly on Democrats. (Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)

  • Top seven lies Adam Schiff has told to booster impeachment. Pretty much all of these should be familiar…
  • “Democrats Warn That American People May Tamper With Next Election.” “‘When the Founders wrote that founding document thing, they never imagined there would be electoral outcomes that Democrats did not agree with.’ Democrats also said they even have hard evidence that the 2016 election was compromised by Republicans voting for Trump.”
  • Final Brexit bill passes. The EU is reportedly quite eager to hurt its largest trading partner to spite its face…
  • John Bercow is so very, very upset that Tories are blocking his peerage, in much the same way he blocked Brexit…
  • Giant warehouse explosion in Houston. No reports of injuries, but the explosion was said to be heard 20 miles away… Update: Now hearing it was a manufacturing facility, with a propylene tank as the suspected cause, with two dead and one missing.
  • China’s birthrate hits historic low. Mark Steyn always said that China would get old before it got rich.
  • China is also trying to control the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic:

    The Chinese government has placed the city of Wuhan under quarantine in an attempt to stop the spread of the deadly, pneumonia-like virus called 2019-nCoV.

    According to a Chinese news bulletin, all passenger transportation out of the city has been temporarily suspended. That means that the city’s 11 million residents, hundreds of whom have fallen ill and at least nine of whom have died from the viral outbreak, are trapped unless they receive special permission to leave.

    The virus quickly spread to nearby Japan, Thailand, and South Korea, and a traveler from Wuhan also carried it to the U.S.

    In the face of a global outbreak, the Chinese government has been trying to maintain control of the narrative, censoring media and deleting social media posts that don’t align with its official statements.

    (Hat tip: Director Blue.)

  • Last coronavirus death count is 26 people, with more than 30 million people under quarantine. By contrast, the 2014-2016 west African Ebola outbreak killed more than 11,000 people.
  • But wait! Wuhan is also home to a lab studying the world’s most dangerous pathogens.
  • Coronavirus case in Brazos County, Texas? That’s home to College Station and Texas A&M University.
  • For its new White House correspondent, CNN hired the guy who got caught asking the DNC what he should ask.
  • First! Rule! You! Fucking! Idiot!
  • Smear someone as a “white nationalist” on the says so of the SPLC, just because they want to enforce border control laws? Enjoy your $5 million lawsuit.
  • Hungary to abolish Gender Studies. Good.

    Hungary’s Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen has stated that such programs “ha[ve] no business in universities” as they represent “an ideology, not a science,” with a market profile “close to zero.” Similarly, Orban’s Chief of staff Gergely Gulyas said, “The Hungarian government is of the clear view that people are born either men or women. They lead their lives the way they think best [and] the Hungarian state does not wish to spend public funds on education in this area.”

  • Media estimates of 22,000 for the Second Amendment rally are probably too low. “I think when all is said and done, the crowd of gun rights supporters attending Lobby Day on Monday probably was double the official figure and approached 50,000.”
  • Speaking of Virginia Democrats trying to override inconvenient passages in that pesky Bill of Rights: “Virginia Democrats File Bill To Make Online Criticism of Elected Officials a Crime.
  • Norway’s government falls over Islamic State bride.
  • “Austin’s Homeless Policy May Be Implicated in the City’s First Murder of 2020.”
  • In addition to Steve Adler all but personally inviting every transient drug addict in the state to take up residence in Austin, the killer was out on personnel recognizance bond after committing a burglary, thanks to yet another Austin City Council decision.
  • Fun things from the SHOT Show. (Hat tip: CutJibNews on Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • Amazon sues to stop to stop Microsoft $10 billion “war cloud” project for the Pentagon, evidently because President Trump is a big meanie who didn’t let them get the contract. Eh, Pentagon procurement bidding is pretty opaque under the best of circumstances, much less under the zillions of possible variations on setting up a cloud infrastructure. There’s no way whether to determine this is a real grievance or just sour grapes over losing a big contract.
  • Denver Post writer fired for insisting there are two sexes.
  • Journalist Glenn Greenwald charged with hacking in Brazil. Though in this case, “hacking” seems to amount to “publishing embarrassing information about members of the Brazilian government.”
  • In praise of Christopher Tolkien. It’s probably only a matter of time until Disney buys the Tolkien estate now…or someone far worse.
  • Terry Jones has eaten his last mint.
  • Lost Klimpt recovered. (Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit. )
  • Tradwife. (Hat tip: Ann Althouse.)
  • Icy with a chance of falling iguanas.
  • Again?
  • Enjoy your weekly funny dog tweet:

  • Thousands of Non-Deaths At Virginia Second Amendment Rally

    Tuesday, January 21st, 2020

    What if they had a Second Amendment rally in Virginia and and nobody got shot?

    You and I know that there was never going to be any violence coming from Second Amendment advocates, and that if any started it was going to come from antifa. But oddly enough, antifa didn’t seem interested in showing up to confront armed opponents.

    Funny how that happens.

    It must have been a great blow to an MSM falsely accusing the event of being a “white supremacist” rally.

    They were heartbroken:

    “Nobody has so much as fired a shot. This is an unbelievable tragedy,” said one teary-eyed MSNBC reporter, clearly caught up in the anguish of the moment. “It’s tragic that we live in a country where reporters who are just minding their own business trying to push a narrative can have everything ripped away from them in an instant when protesters refuse to shoot at people.”

    (Do I actually need to flag the preceding from the Babylon Bee?)

    The media was hoping for a second Charlottesville, but without paid agitators and a police force willing to channel two sets of protestors into each other, it never materialized.

    Again, funny how that happens. There were also too many non-white attendees to pass it off as a “white supremacist” rally:

    Enjoy some tweets:

    More NRA Troubles: Wayne LaPierre And The Iron Law of Bureaucracy

    Wednesday, June 26th, 2019

    Lots more NRA turmoil has bubbled up since my previous piece, including the NRA filing two lawsuits against PR firm Ackerman McQueen and leaks of internal NRA letters expressing alarm over profligate spending. In addition to spending by Ackerman McQueen, a great deal of concern has been expressed over NRA’s outside attorney record Brewer Attorneys & Counselors, headed by William Brewer III. Then this week, NRA-ILA head Chris Cox was suspended and put on administrative leave and NRA-TV shut down production on new content.

    Lets tackle these in chronological order.

    As he was being shoved out the door, now-Ex NRA President Oliver North and NRA First Vice President Richard Childress penned a letter expressing deep concern about how much of NRA’s money was going to Mr. Brewer:

    As indicated in previous correspondence, we and others continue to be deeply concerned about the extraordinary legal fees the NRA has incurred with Brewer Attorneys & Counselors. The amount appears to be approximately $24 million over a 13-month period, $5 million of which apparently has been reimbursed in connection with the Lockton settlement.

    The Lockton settlement was the Lockton insurance company reaching an out-of-court settlement to the NRA over breaching a contract to underwrite the ill-fated Carry Guard program discussed last post.

    North and Childress complained about “lax management” of Brewer invoices in the past, and pushed for “an independent, outside expert to review the Brewer invoices immediately.”

    From April 2018 through February 2019, Brewer was billing the NRA $1 million to $2 million a month. North and Childress stated that “Invoices of this size for 12 months of work appear to be excessive and pose an existential threat to the financial stability of the NRA.”

    John Richardson of No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money suggests that Brewer was attempting to become a one-stop shop featuring legal services, public relations and communications, all in one big, expensive, billable bundle. One wonders whether the NRA authorized him to do anything beyond the legal work and, if so, why were they paying him to do some of the tasks they were already paying Ackerman McQueen so handsomely to perform. Richardson also wonders what the attorney of record for the NRA is doing sending political donations to such notable “pro-gun” luminaries as Beto O’Rourke, Patrick Kennedy and Hillary Clinton.

    North and Childress aren’t the only ones dissatisfied with NRA leadership. Boards member Lt. Col. Allen West has called on LaPierre to resign. Says West:

    I do not support Wayne LaPierre continuing as the EVP/CEO of the NRA. The vote in Indianapolis was by acclamation, not roll call vote. There is a cabal of cronyism operating within the NRA and that exists within the Board of Directors. It must cease, and I do not care if I draw their angst. My duty and responsibility is to the Members of the National Rifle Association, and my oath, since July 31, 1982, has been to the Constitution of the United States, not to any political party, person, or cabal.

    The NRA Board of 76 is too large and needs to be reduced to 30 or less. We need term limits of four (4) terms on the Board. We need to focus the NRA, the nation’s oldest civil rights organization on its original charter, mission, training and education in marksmanship, shooting sports, and the defense of the Second Amendment.

    I will dedicate all my efforts to the reformation of the National Rifle Association and its members, of whom I am proud to serve.

    Rangemaster and attorney Tiffany Johnson’s letter to the board.

    I attended the NRA Annual Meeting of Members on Saturday morning, and I am writing about a contentious resolution that came to the floor. The resolution decried recent reports of fiscal mismanagement centered around one of the NRA’s primary vendors, Ackerman McQueen. Among other things, the resolution called for the resignation of members of the Audit Committee as well as the NRA’s Executive Vice President, Mr. Wayne LaPierre. In light of the pending litigation between Ackerman McQueen and the NRA, Secretary Frazer successfully moved that the resolution be referred to the Board of Directors for consideration in consultation with legal counsel.

    As a practicing attorney, I fully understand the NRA’s interest in limiting public discussion of sensitive matters that are currently being litigated. I agree that the Association is best served by addressing the resolution internally rather than in the public sphere. However, I also understand the arguments raised against referring the motion to the Board. The resolution cited allegations of financial misconduct, self-dealing, and conflicts of interest within the Board of Directors, the Audit Committee, and other parts of the NRA’s leadership team, based on their alleged mishandling of vendor contracts and other business relationships with Ackerman McQueen. In other words, referring the resolution to the Board would be, in effect, asking the Board to adjudicate allegations against itself.

    I want the National Rifle Association to succeed. At Saturday morning’s meeting, Mr. LaPierre himself warned of the mounting existential threats we now face, both in the courtroom and in the court of public opinion. Given the intensified scrutiny facing the Association right now, I fear that yet another maneuver of impropriety (whether real or perceived) could be a proverbial death knell. It would serve as perfect fodder for the media to publish yet another scathing exposé that paints the NRA as roiled in unsavory scandal. It would also incite even more resentment from within the organization and sow more division among our ranks. Although Mr. Frazer’s motion to refer the resolution did ultimately succeed, the fierce opposition voiced by many in attendance shows that members want this issue to be addressed in a more transparent fashion.

    I have a humble suggestion to help avoid public airing of private business while also quelling further cries of impropriety. When the Board addresses this resolution, I request that any Board member, officer, or staff member who has a personal, financial, or fiduciary interest in, or fidelity to, Ackerman McQueen (or its subsidiary and affiliate companies) — as an employee, contractor, paid consultant, vendor, client, etc. — be required to recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on this resolution. That way, regardless of how the Board ultimately disposes of the resolution, at least the result will be less vulnerable to accusations of ethically dubious entanglements.

    Fast forwarding to the present, the removal of Chris Cox from NRA-ILA was quite unexpected, at least by me. ILA is generally considered not only among the most effective of NRA’s programs, but one of the most effective (if not the most effective) lobbying groups on Capitol Hill.

    The news yesterday regarding the National Rifle Association was headlined by a story in the New York Times that said Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, was suspended and put on administrative leave. This followed a late Wednesday filing in New York Supreme Court (the trial level courts in that state) in which the NRA sought a declaratory judgment that Ollie North was not entitled to his legal expenses as a director of the NRA. Also suspended was Scott Christman who served as Cox’s deputy chief of staff at the NRA-ILA.

    Both Cox and Christman are accused along with NRA Board member and former Congressman Dan Boren of participating in a failed “coup” attempt orchestrated by Ackerman McQueen and Ollie North. Cox vehemently denies this.

    “The allegations against me are offensive and patently false,” Cox said. “For over 24 years I have been a loyal and effective leader in this organization. My efforts have always been focused on serving the members of the National Rifle Association, and I will continue to focus all of my energy on carrying out our core mission of defending the Second Amendment.”

    PA Gun blog wonders just just who can suspend Cox, since he reports directly to the NRA board of directors. Say Uncle wonders if LaPierre even has a plan. “Is this some sort of scorched-earth move?”

    Stopping production on NRA-TV is much less of a surprise, given that was yet another thing run out of Ackerman McQueen. I asked NRA-TV personalities Dana Loesch and Colion Noir on Twitter if they had been informed of the moves and have not received a reply. According to LaPierre the issue was one of “focus”:

    “Many members expressed concern about the messaging on NRATV becoming too far removed from our core mission: defending the Second Amendment,” Wayne LaPierre, the N.R.A.’s longtime chief executive, wrote in a message to members that was expected to be sent out by Wednesday. “So, after careful consideration, I am announcing that starting today, we are undergoing a significant change in our communications strategy. We are no longer airing ‘live TV’ programming.”

    Unlike some of LaPierre’s other flailing moves, this one can largely be written off as a straight-forward cost-saving measure and an inevitably byproduct of the Ackerman McQueen lawsuit. There’s also probably some truth to the “focus” angle as well, though from a self-interested “free blogging content good” perspective, I liked a good deal of what they were doing, such as Noir’s look at the astounding rate of homeless crime in Seattle.

    Ammoland is not impressed with the moves:

    Enough is enough. The National Rifle Association’s Board of Directors needs to act to get things under control and to focus the organization’s energy and activities against major threats to our right to keep and bear arms instead of internal squabbles. The current legal fight and internal chaos have to be resolved immediately.

    Virginia-specific paragraphs snipped.

    I have already been on record as suggesting that Wayne LaPierre leaves as Executive Vice President after the 2020 election. But recent developments, including the suspension of NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox, now make some changes more necessary than ever. While LaPierre and Cox have past successes, the current drama, and the failure to see the new threats from corporations and social stigmatization that were part of the other side’s long game, including Andrew Cuomo’s abuses of power rank as significant failures on their part, and in combination with the internal drama, and Wayne’s lack of proper basic business management all warrant their replacement.

    Who should replace Cox, who obviously no longer has the complete confidence of his superiors at NRA? Whoever it is should not be a lobbyist, but instead should probably have close ties to grassroots activists. With Cuomo’s attacks tying up financial resources, having the activists on the ground will be more important than ever.

    LaPierre’s replacement will also need to come sooner, rather than later.

    At this point, this replacement should come from outside the NRA so as to have no connection with the current drama.

    Richardson agrees: “Wayne LaPierre’s scorched earth approach to maintaining power may be good for Wayne but is horrible for the NRA as an organization. I acknowledge there are many good people on the Board of Directors. Some want Wayne gone and some still support him.”

    I have to concur. The Ackerman McQueen separation and lawsuit was a necessary corrective given a large vendor whose financial drain endangered the organization. The NRA-TV move is quite defensible as a necessary cost-cutting measure. But the Cox suspension, absent any additional information about why the move had to be made, reeks of circling the wagons and sheer vindictiveness on LaPierre’s part. Ironically, it is his out-sized overreaction to an alleged “coup” that proves why a move against LaPierre is both justified and, at this point, probably sadly necessary.

    Jerry Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there are two kinds of people: Those devoted to the goals of the organization, and those dedicated to the organization itself. “The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.” LaPierre’s NRA is clearly been captured by the second group. Or to put it another way: “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” LaPierre’s NRA has become a racket. The NRA exists to serve its members and protect the Second Amendment, not to serve and protect Wayne LaPierre.

    As I said about the NRA previously:

    There are some that claim cleaning up the NRA would offer too much succor to the gun-grabbers. But the organizational dysfunction and self-dealing is already out in the open, and is already hurting the NRA’s effectiveness (and has been for several years). If not now, when? Better to do it now, the year before a Presidential election, with Republicans holding the White House and the Senate able to block gun-grabbing initiatives, than during it.

    Other than being a member, I am very far indeed from the center of NRA power. For all the grumbling over the NRA caving over bump-stocks, there’s no other organization with the size, scope and political power of the NRA to protect Second Amendment rights in America. But to do that, the NRA has to be on solid organizational and financial footing, and right now it does not appear to be on either. The NRA has to get its own house in order, this year, or expect forces hostile to it and its goals to do it for them.

    At this point, getting the NRA’s house in order necessitates Wayne LaPierre’s exit as Executive Vice President. This is not going to be easy, as (to quote Archer) “He’s dug in there like a tick!”

    But enough is enough.

    Update: Chris Cox has resigned. There’s also mention of NRA-ILA making a “substaintial” loan to the NRA, and refusing to do it again, followed immediately by Cox and Christman’s suspension. This is probably a good time to reiterate my call for a forensic audit of NRA finances…

    President Trump’s Speech To The NRA

    Saturday, April 27th, 2019

    Back in 2016, one of the knocks on then-candidate Donald Trump was that he was soft on Second Amendment rights, having backed the Clinton “assault weapons” ban in the 1990s. However, Trump’s views clearly evolved, as 18 years ago he stated he was against a handgun ban (“Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed.”), and Hillary Clinton was so bad on the Second Amendment that it was easy for the NRA to endorse him.

    Fast forward to today, and not only has President Trump kept almost all his promises on the issue (the bump stock ban, which the NRA itself went soft on, being a notable exception), he just gave an enthusiastically received speech to the National NRA convention.

    It was a speech full of red meat, and ranged considerably beyond the Second Amendment to border control, crime, sanctuary cities, and the deep state.

    A few excerpts:

    Every day of my administration, we are taking power out of Washington, D.C. and returning it to the American people, where it belongs. (Applause.) And you see it now better than ever, with all of the resignations of all of the bad apples. They’re bad apples. They tried for a coup; didn’t work out so well. (Applause.) And I didn’t need a gun for that one, did I? (Laughter.)

    All was taking place at the highest levels in Washington, D.C. You’ve been watching, you’ve been seeing. You’ve been looking at things that you wouldn’t have believed possible in our country. Corruption at the highest level — a disgrace. Spying, surveillance, trying for an overthrow. And we caught them. We caught them. (Applause.) Who would have thought in our country?

    Far-left radicals in Congress want to take away your voice, your jobs, your rights, and they especially want to take away your guns. You know that. They want to take away your guns. You better get out there and vote. You better get out there and vote. It seems like it’s a long ways away. It’s not.

    Democrats want to disarm law-abiding Americans while allowing criminal aliens to operate with impunity. But that will never happen as long as I’m your President. Not even close. (Applause.) I promise to defend the Second Amendment rights of every American, and I always will. I’ll never let you down. (Applause.) Never let you down. I haven’t so far, and I won’t. Because as the famous saying goes, when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Very simple. (Applause.)

    As we protect gun rights for law-abiding citizens, we are also getting guns out of the hands of violent criminals.

    When I took office two years ago, one of my highest priorities was to reduce violent crime. In the two years before my inauguration, the murder rate had increased by more than 20 percent, and the United States had experienced the largest increase in violent crime in over 25 years.

    For this reason, my administration resurrected Project Safe Neighborhoods, bringing together prosecutors, police, sheriffs, and citizens groups to put the most dangerous offenders behind bars.

    We funded 200 new violent crime prosecutors. We charged a record number of criminal offenders. And last year, we prosecuted the most violent criminals ever in our history.

    And now, violent crime is way down. Murders in America’s largest cities dropped by 6 percent between 2017 and 2018. But I do have to ask you: What the hell is going on in Chicago? What is going on? (Applause.) We could solve that problem. We would’ve been down even a lot more. And it’s not a tough problem to solve. You got to let law enforcement do what they have to do. They’ll solve the problem very quickly. Very quickly. (Applause.)

    We don’t think enough about the victims. They’re too worried about the people that cause the crime. It’s got to stop. That thought process is no good.

    The number of police officers shot and killed in the line of duty last year, I’m so happy to report, is down 21 percent compared to the year before. (Applause.) And that was the year before I took office.

    President Trump also announced he was withdrawing America from the UN Arms Trade Treaty:

    in the last administration, President Obama signed the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. And in his waning days in office, he sent the treaty to the Senate to begin the ratification process.

    This treaty threatened your subjugate — and you know exactly what’s going on here — your rights and your constitutional and international rules and restrictions and regulations.

    Under my administration, we will never surrender American sovereignty to anyone. (Applause.) We will never allow foreign bureaucrats to trample on your Second Amendment freedom. And that is why my administration will never ratify the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. I hope you’re happy. (Applause.)

    I’m impressed; I didn’t think too many of you would really know what it is. You what it is? A big, big factor. But I see a couple of very happy faces from the NRA over there.

    And I am officially announcing today that the United States will be revoking the effect of America’s signature from this badly misguided agreement. We’re taking our signature back. (Applause.) The United Nations will soon receive a formal notice that America is rejecting this treaty. (Applause.)

    President Trump also brought up several people who used guns to defend their lives against bad guys, including Sutherland Springs hero Stephen Willeford.

    NRA members had doubts about Donald Trump’s commitment to the Second Amendment when he announced he was running for President. I don’t see any having those doubts anymore.

    LinkSwarm for February 22, 2019

    Friday, February 22nd, 2019

    Enjoy a 2/22 LinkSwarm!

  • Trump Is On Solid Legal Ground In Declaring A Border Emergency To Build A Wall.”

    A review of existing federal laws makes clear that President Donald Trump has clear statutory authority to build a border wall pursuant to a declaration of a national emergency. Arguments to the contrary either mischaracterize or completely ignore existing federal emergency declarations and appropriations laws that delegate to the president temporary and limited authority to reprogram already appropriated funding toward the creation of a border wall between the United States and Mexico.

  • When lawmakers want to talk to President Donald Trump, they just pick up the phone. (Hat tip: Ann Althouse.)
  • Andy Ngo helpfully provides an extensive list of fake hate crimes in the Trump era.
  • “Covington teen Nick Sandmann sues The Washington Post for $250M.”
  • Shocker: Washington Post tells the truth about guns:

    Gun homicides have dropped substantially over the past 25 years — but most Americans believe the opposite to be true. Why? Perhaps in part because of the media focus on multiple-victim shooting incidents in recent years. Perhaps, too, because of the number and deadliness of those incidents. We’ve noted before that the number of fatalities in major mass-shooting incidents has increased dramatically in recent years; it’s possible that people are conflating increases in frequency and deadliness of mass shootings with the United States getting more dangerous generally.

  • New York Democratic representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez adapts quickly to the ways of Washington, puts her boyfriend on her congressional payroll. But that’s not all! She also featherbedded him on her campaign payroll by laundering the funds through a third party.
  • The fight between Second Amendment activists and Michael Bloomberg’s money:

    The time for division is not now. We need a strong NRA. If you quit NRA over bump stocks or red flag laws, you aren’t helping. I’m not saying we can’t have disagreement, but we all need to be rowing in the same direction and understanding what’s important. Miguel notes that activists in Florida are concentrating on Open Carry. I would advise concentrating on stopping the ballot measure Bloomberg is going to foist on you in 2020. NRA has to have money to fight that. We cannot write off the third most populous state. We will never be able to outspend Bloomberg, but we sure as hell can out-organize him. We have a blueprint, and last I heard the dude who pulled off defeating the Massachusetts handgun ban is still alive. The odds were stacked against him too.

    Forget about the fucking bump stocks. It’s not where the fight is. That’s over. The fight is preserving the right to own semi-automatic firearms. That’s ultimately what they want, because they are well aware no state’s gun culture has ever come back from an assault weapons ban. Gun bans are a death blow to the culture. If you want to get the hard-core activists worked up over saving an impractical range toy, or in some misguided effort to (badly) get around the machine gun restrictions, you’re not paying attention to where the actual fight is.

  • “Government report reveals CBO was scandalously off in Obamacare estimates.”
  • The Supreme Court unanimously rules that there are limits to civil asset forfeiture under the Eighth Amendment. Good. Now congress should tackle such abuse legislatively.
  • Note the obvious truth that the media is overwhelmingly liberal? Expect to be attacked.
  • Nicolas Maduro would rather let his own people continue to starve rather than let foreign food aid reach them. (Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)
  • His army evidently relies on Cuban military personnel. Too bad for him that Cuba’s military intervention in Angola showed the world that Cuban troops sucked. (Hat tip: The Other McCain.)
  • “Even the UN IPCC says we’re not headed for climate disaster.”
  • The boy who inflated the concept of wolf:

    Suppose that instead of one shepherd boy, there are a few dozen. They are tired of the villagers dismissing their complaints about less threatening creatures like stray dogs and coyotes. One of them proposes a plan: they will start using the word “wolf” to refer to all menacing animals. They agree and the new usage catches on. For a while, the villagers are indeed more responsive to their complaints. The plan backfires, however, when a real wolf arrives and cries of “Wolf!” fail to trigger the alarm they once did.

    What the boys in the story do with the word “wolf,” modern intellectuals do with words like “violence.” When ordinary people think of violence, they think of things like bombs exploding, gunfire, and brawls. Most dictionary definitions of “violence” mention physical harm or force. Academics, ignoring common usage, speak of “administrative violence,” “data violence,” “epistemic violence” and other heretofore unknown forms of violence.

    Ditto “Gas-lighting.” (Hat tip: Ann Althouse.)

  • Pro-top: Try not to steal guns from the SHOT show.
  • The English-language narrator of Islamic State execution videos has been captured.
  • Gay magazine takes the Mullah’s side to own Trump:

  • Former women’s tennis champion and out lesbian Martina Navratilova vilified for daring to point out that men shouldn’t be competing in women’s sports.
  • “Medical examiner barred from Travis County courtrooms amid Rangers investigation.” (Hat tip: Dwight.)
  • Stafford: the Texas city without property taxes.
  • B-1s to be retired before B-52s.
  • Followup: But they’re buying more F-15s. (Hat tip: The Political Hat.)
  • Philadelphia’s stupid soda tax has not reduced consumption, brought in less revenue than expected, and has cost Philadelphia over 200 jobs. Also, corrupt union officials helped push it through as a “screw you” to the Teamsters. (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • Lt. Governor Dan Patrick bitchslaps some shoddy journalism from the Houston Chronicle so hard they had to retract the story. (Hat tip: Cahnman’s Musings, though the Scribed link is broken.)
  • Giant “nightmare bee” previously thought to be extinct found alive. Pleasant dreams:

  • A new football league, the Alliance of American Football, just debuted. Their main bread and butter isn’t ticket sales or broadcast rights, its refining technology to help boost sports gambling.
  • Trump-supporting comedian Terrance K. Williams recovering from a car accident:

  • Speaking of Williams:

  • Instant classic:

  • “Atheist Requiring Evidence To Believe Anything Knows For Certain Trump Colluded With Russia.”
  • La zzzzOOOOOMMMMMMMzzzz Le schzzzzzzcchh-Mmmmmmmmmwaaaaaaahh!
  • ACLU Finds Clue, Backs NRA On Banks

    Monday, August 27th, 2018

    This qualifies as news because it’s actually novel:

    The official view of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) remains that the Second Amendment protects a “collective right rather than an individual right.” But the organization nevertheless is helping the National Rifle Association (NRA) fend off extralegal attempts by New York state officials to put it out of business.

    In a brief filed in federal court today, the ACLU argues that New York’s strong-arm efforts to compel banks and insurance companies to ditch the NRA as a customer represent a glaring violation of the First Amendment.

    “Although public officials are free to express their opinions and may condemn viewpoints or groups they view as inimical to public welfare, they cannot abuse their regulatory authority to retaliate against disfavored advocacy organizations and to impose burdens on those organizations’ ability to conduct lawful business,” the ACLU says.

    The ACLU’s amicus brief never says the group agrees with the NRA’s positions on firearms. Instead, the group invokes a long series of First Amendment cases to argue that the regulators should not use their power in office to punish political enemies.

    A timeline prepared by the NRA suggests the intimidation campaign began last fall. The anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety met with New York officials in September 2017; a month later the Department of Financial Services began an investigation that started with a company called Lockton, which administered the NRA-branded personal liability insurance program known as Carry Guard. Despite a 20-year relationship, Lockton responded by abruptly ditching the NRA as a customer in February; so did Chubb and Lloyd’s.

    Emboldened by this initial success, Maria Vullo, head of the state’s Department of Financial Services, sent a pair of ominous letters to all banks, financial institutions, and insurers licensed to do business in New York. Vullo warned companies to sever ties with pro-Second Amendment groups that “promote guns and lead to senseless violence” and instead heed “the voices of the passionate, courageous, and articulate young people” calling for more restrictions on firearms. All companies receiving the letter, she advised, should “review any relationships they have with the NRA or similar gun promotion organizations, and to take prompt actions to managing these risks and promote public health and safety.”

    New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo underlined the regulatory threat in a tweet the next day: “The NRA is an extremist organization. I urge companies in New York State to revisit any ties they have to the NRA and consider their reputations, and responsibility to the public.'”

    As a result of those not-very-veiled threats, the NRA says, multiple banks withdrew bids to provide basic depository services. The NRA is also worried about being able to continue producing its NRA TV channel, with hosts including Dana Loesch and Cam Edwards, unless it can obtain normal media liability insurance. (In May, NRA sued Cuomo and Vullo, a former Cuomo aide when he was attorney general. See J.D. Tuccille’s Reason coverage at the time.)

    “If Cuomo can do this to the NRA, then conservative governors could have their financial regulators threaten banks and financial institutions that do business with any other group whose political views the governor opposes,” David Cole, the ACLU’s legal director, wrote in a blog post today. “The First Amendment bars state officials from using their regulatory power to penalize groups merely because they promote disapproved ideas.”

    A few decades ago, the ACLU acting like, you know, a civil liberties union wouldn’t have been shocking at all. (In fact, back in the dim mists of time, the ACLU back the Texas Review Society in a lawsuit against the University of Texas for prohibiting non-university on-campus newspapers, even though the Texas Review Society was a registered student group). Lately, however, the ACLU has seemed little more than an extension of the liberal overclass (it’s Twitter timeline seems to have gone to an “All ‘OMG The Illegal Alien Children’ All The Time” format), and recently it’s gone wobbly on it’s signature issue of free speech.

    So it’s nice to see the ACLU at least pretend it still cares about free speech for deplorables…

    (Hat tip: Instapundit.)

    Brett Kavanaugh for SCOTUS Roundup

    Tuesday, July 10th, 2018

    Lots of reactions this morning to President Donald Trump’s nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

    First up, Jonathan Adler of The Volokh Conspiracy offers up an overview of Kavanaugh’s career (including links to his decisions):

    Judge Kavanaugh is widely respected on the Supreme Court. Many of his clerks go on to clerk at One First Street. More importantly, his opinions attract notice from the justices. Several of his dissents have been vindicated by subsequent Supreme Court decisions. His dissents showed the way for the Court in Michigan v. EPA (White Stallion Energy Center v. EPA concerning mercury emissions), UARG v. EPA (CRR v. EPA concerning GHG emissions), Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB (concerning separation of powers), and D.C. v. Wesby (concerning qualified immunity). And even when certiorari was granted, Judge Kavanaugh’s dissents have been noted in subsequent Supreme Court cases (as in Lexmark International v. Static Control Components which favorably cited Kavanaugh’s dissent in Grocery Manufacturers Association v. EPA). This suggests other justices will take the new junior justice’s opinions quite seriously, especially on administrative law.

    (Hat tip: Instapundit.)

    Second, Kavanaugh is also a strong believer in the Second Amendment. From his 2011 Heller v. District of Columbia (the follow-up lawsuit to the original Heller decision) dissent:

    In Heller, the Supreme Court held that handguns – the vast majority of which today are semi-automatic – are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens. There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semiautomatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semiautomatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It follows from Heller’s protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.’s ban on them is unconstitutional.

    (Hat tip: J.J. Sefton at Ace of Spades HQ.)

    Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut gave Kavanaugh what amounts to a strong endorsement on that very subject:

    Respectable liberal Alan Dershowitz endorsed Kavanaugh as well: “He has a lot of support from centrist academics. He is regarded as a very scholarly, very smart person. I probably will disagree with many of his opinions, but it’s hard to question his qualifications for the job.” (Hat tip: BigGator5.)

    Via Stephen Green at Instapundit comes this list of top six unhinged reactions to the Kavanaugh nomination. I especially liked the Women’s March drafting their blurb on what an extremist whoever Trump picked for the court was, then just leaving “XX” instead of inserting Kavanaugh’s name when they sent out the press release…

    Finally, liberals want you to know that the Federalist Society and Opus Dei are evidently the same thing. Maybe somebody should explain to them the difference between real life and a Dan Brown novel…

    The Mask Slips

    Wednesday, March 28th, 2018

    Finally!

    Finally, a high ranking Democrat finally has the guts to say what lies near and dear to the cockles of the vast majority of their party’s heart: “Repeal the Second Amendment.”

    Thanks you, John Paul Stevens, for not just, at long last, admitting what Democrats have long-believed, but doing so out-loud and in mixed company!

    There, was that so hard? All you had to do was tell the truth.

    Democrats want to repeal part of the Bill of Rights so they can forcibly disarm law-abiding Americans.

    Both left and right have known this for a long time, but Democrats felt compelled to lie about it for trivial reasons like “losing elections.”

    To thine own self be true!

    Additional reactions:

    Ann Althouse:

    Usually, advocates of gun control tend to give assurances that they’re not out to repeal the Second Amendment. A forthright demand for a repeal of the Second Amendment would wreck those assurances and elevate the pro-gun side, which could credibly intensify its rhetoric with reality-based anxiety that they are coming to take away your constitutional rights. If they can take away your Second Amendment rights — if the Bill of Rights is on the chopping block — they may come for your freedom of religion next, they can take away your freedom of speech, you right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures — whatever they like, whatever they think stands in their way.

    Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:

    The op-ed comes across as whining over his Heller defeat and the implication that the Constitution should be treated as a historical relic (Stevens’ term). That certainly explains some of his votes on the Supreme Court, perhaps most notably in Kelo, although courts had unfortunately paved that road long before. At least in this case, Stevens suggests using a valid constitutional process to erode individual rights rather than a Supreme Court decision that effectively rewrites the Constitution to expand federal power at the expense of liberty. That may have more to do with Stevens’ lack of a seat on the court at this time, though.

    So how likely will a repeal effort be? Maybe if Democrats really start pushing it — as they clearly would love to see it happen — it might get, oh, 40% of the House to vote for it, far short of what’s necessary to send it to the states. The only states likely to ratify such an amendment proposal are those whose gun-control regulations have utterly failed to stop violence in their jurisdictions, as was the case in Washington DC when Heller was decided in 2008.

    However, such an effort would certainly clarify the choices for voters outside of those jurisdictions in national elections, and Democrats would be lucky to comprise 40% of Congress if they tried to follow Stevens’ advice. Don’t expect too many of them to climb on Stevens’ bandwagon, especially as rickety as it is in this essay.

    And some tweets:

    Guns, Tyranny and Asymmetrical Warfare

    Thursday, October 19th, 2017

    One Standard Anti-Second Amendment Talking Point is that the Second Amendment is outdated and can’t possibly provide a bulwark against tyranny, because no group of citizens armed merely with legal firearms could possibly stand up to the technological might of the U.S. armed forces. The notion has a certain surface-level plausibility, as a bunch of guys armed only with AR-pattern rifles isn’t going to take out an M1A2 tank in open combat.

    Tiny problem with this argument: recent history shows it’s demonstrably wrong:

    Who exactly do you think has stymied the U.S. in Afghanistan for 16 years? The Taliban is made up of Afghan Bubbas. The Taliban doesn’t need to defeat nuclear weapons, though they are humiliating a nuclear power for the second time in history. They use a mix of Kalashnikovs and WWII-era bolt-action rifles. Determined insurgencies are really difficult to fight, even if they are only armed with Enfield rifles and you can target them with a TOW missiles system that can spot a cat in the dark from two miles away. In Iraq, expensive tanks were destroyed with simple improvised explosives.

    If the U.S. government (and the American people behind them) doesn’t want to use nuclear weapons on foreign fundamentalists in Afghanistan, why does anyone presume they’d use them against Americans in Idaho?

    It is not just our fecklessness. All great powers take into account the moral and manpower costs of implementing their rules and laws on a people. And an armed citizenry, especially if they seem to have a just cause to rally around, will dramatically raise the price of ruling them. The British Empire controlled one quarter of the world’s territory and ruled one quarter of the earth’s population in 1922. In that very year, they were forced to make an effective exit from the main part of their oldest colony, Ireland. Why? Because a determined group of Irish men with guns made the country ungovernable. The British technically could have deployed their entire navy, blockading the restive island, and starving any rebellion into submission. But they were unwilling to pay the moral price, or the price in blood. It was precisely this foreseeable event that had caused the British to ban Irish Catholics from possessing firearms hundreds of years earlier.

    And just as in the 1770s or the 1920s, governments in similar positions today or in the future would have a difficult time maintaining military morale while trying to impose rule on a people who resist it manfully.

    Let’s say that liberals get their wish, put Democrats in control of congress and the White House, and instantly pass Australian-style mandatory gun confiscation laws. If Democrats jump straight to violating the Constitution, the gloves come off. Not only will American gun owners form the largest armed insurgency the world has ever seen, but the “civilized” rules of engagement would no longer apply.

    Let’s let Scott Adams spell it out:

    The way private gun ownership protects citizens is by being a credible threat against all the civilians who might be in any way associated with a hypothetical tyrannical leader who uses the military against citizens. Citizens probably can’t get close to the leaders in such a scenario, but it would take about an hour to round up their families, and the families of supporters.

    That would do it.

    America is unconquerable.

    Imagine the top hundred Democratic Party donors in every state being taken hostage by an American insurgency. Imagine the immediate families of every Democratic U.S. Senator and Governor being taken hostage.

    Lee Boyd Malvo and John Allen Muhammad had two states and a dozen police departments freaking out in the Beltway Sniper attacks of 2002. Now imagine that times a thousand.

    The problem is compounded even further that those same “bubbas” are exactly the sort of men who make up the bulk of the United States armed forces. Do liberals seriously believe that, come an actual civil war and suspension of the Posse Comitatus Act, troops from Texas, Kansas and Georgia will cheerfully do the bidding of elites from New York and San Francisco to disarm their own fathers and brothers (many ex-military themselves) in deep red states?

    Once again, liberals openly pining for a civil war between red and blue America seem to have overlooked the tiny obstacle that red American is the half with all the guns.

    A well-armed citizenry as large as that in the United States would make Afghanistan and Iraq look like calk walks compared to trying to occupy America. That’s why the Second Amendment remains the ultimate bulwark of American liberty.

    NRA Endorses Trump

    Saturday, May 21st, 2016

    “The National Rifle Association threw its weight Friday behind Donald Trump, as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee personally assured the group’s members he would protect Second Amendment rights if elected – and claimed that likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton would threaten them.”

    Will it help unify the Republican Party behind Trump? Some. Gun owners and Second Amendment activists are a significant part of the GOP coalition. But Clinton and the Democratic Party are so clearly hostile to civilian gun ownership that it’s hard to imagine any NRA members voting for her, and culturally most gun owners seem to hail from the fraction of GOP primary voters which has already embraced Trump.

    Trump’s official policy statement on Second Amendment rights is fine, and whoever wrote it (clearly not Trump) has a firm grounding in the issue, and Trump has even said he has a concealed carry license himself. Whether Trump follows through or not remains to be seen, but he already starts so far ahead of Clinton on the issue that I’m not sure his past support of the idiotic “assault weapon” ban some 15 years ago really matters anymore. (And even then he was saying “Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed.”)

    If Trump wins in November, Republicans will almost certainly retain the House and possibly the Senate, which means no anti-Second Amendment legislation will be headed to his desk for at least two years. Trump could do absolutely nothing on guns during his presidency and still be a vast improvement over Obama or either Clinton.