Under The Radar

Most of yesterday's news was focused on the Brexit vote - Britain's decision to leave the European Union.

The stunning vote, 52 percent to 48 percent, plunged world financial markets into turmoil, the political consequences for the prime minister of Britain were swift, and the people around the globe reacted with shock and confusion.

FWIW, I heartily applaud the outcome. Anytime a populace can shed one layer of corrupt and inept politicians, along with the accompanying regulatory and bureaucratic overkill, indifference, and incompetence, well, that's a good thing.

It also shows that the 'silent majority' is alive and well, and is 'mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.' That may have implications for our own election come November.

But while Brexit hogged most of the headlines and airtime, several other noteworthy stories snuck under the radar. Just in case you missed them:

Senate gun compromise survives first test vote

The Senate voted Thursday to allow further consideration of bipartisan legislation banning gun sales to people on the terrorism "no-fly" list.

Senate Republicans could have killed the measure, but several sided with Democrats in allowing it to go forward.

No doubt the crybabies and spoiled brats who participated in the House sit-in protesting lack of action are pleased.

The premise - that someone who is considered too dangerous to board a commercial flight should be denied the right to buy a firearm - is hard to argue with. But, as always, the devil is in the details.

No Fly, No Buy? No Way

The problem with No Fly-No Buy is the foundation upon which the law would be based. The No Fly List is riddled with problems, from its secrecy (a violation of the Privacy Act), to its over-inclusiveness – the late Sen. Edward Kennedy was on the list at one point. The liberal lion even spoke out against the list, worried that the rights of non-senators could very easily be violated.

IMO Teddy should have been labeled a terrorist. After all, he killed Mary Jo Kopechne and then tried to cover up his culpability. But that doesn't negate the fact that the list is basically a form of 'guilty until proven innocent,' which is a gross perversion of our country's legal foundation.

In a delicious bit of irony, a muslim terrorist group spoke out against the proposed gun control legislation.

CAIR blasts Terrorist Firearms Prevention Act: ‘Mandela himself’ was on watch list

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a statement blasting legislation proposed Tuesday that would keep suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms, saying it lacks due process and unfairly targets Muslims.

“We oppose the Terrorist Firearms Prevention Act of 2016 because it appears to limit the ban on firearms purchases to American Muslims..."

Funny, that's not how I read the bill. I guess CAIR, like most of us, is having a difficult time distinguishing terrorists and muslims.

But they do have a point regarding the secrecy and appeals process. And, as they point out, in addition to Teddy Kennedy, another famous person was on the list.

“Nelson Mandela, then former South African president, Nobel Prize winner and anti-Apartheid leader was on a U.S. terrorism watch list until 2008,” the group said. “Mandela himself needed special State Department clearance to visit the United States in 2008".

It seems like a simple process. Fix the list first, then worry about 'No Fly, No Buy.' But I guess that's too complicated for liberals. So here's a proposal they might understand.

Just to be clear, here's my position.

In other news, Clinton failed to hand over key email to State Department.

Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

Speaking of Hillary:

Clinton’s State Dept. calendar missing scores of entries

An Associated Press review of the official calendar Hillary Clinton kept as secretary of state identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were not recorded or omitted the names of those she met.

The fuller details of those meetings were included in files the State Department turned over to the AP after it sued the government in federal court.

Expect nothing but yawns from the left and the media on those stories. After all, Hillary can do no wrong in their eyes.

While hillary does the political version of rope-a-dope, her partner in crime continues to treat the U.S. Constitution as an afterthought.

Obama: I'm Still Not Enforcing Immigration Law, No Matter What The Court Says

President Barack Obama said Thursday that despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s tie vote, which essentially blocks his immigration plan, the millions of illegal immigrants that he sought to make legal with his executive action will remain a low priority for deportation by his administration.

“Enforcement priorities developed by my administration are not affected by this ruling.”

Translation: “I am above the law. I can do whatever I want, and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop me.”

Asshole…

Meanwhile, in Baltimore:

Freddie Gray verdict: Baltimore officer who drove van not guilty on all charges

Baltimore police officer Caesar Goodson, who drove the van in which Freddie Gray was fatally injured, was found not guilty Thursday on all charges, including the most serious count of second-degree depraved-heart murder.

… the state has failed to secure a single conviction following three high-profile trials.

Four other officers await trial, but legal experts are now questioning whether those cases will hold up.

"It does not bode well for prosecution," CNN legal analyst Danny Cevallos said.

I'm sure the Black Lives Matter clowns are beside themselves over that, but frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

Remember, folks, a magician distracts you with one hand while tricking you with the other. So keep asking yourself "What are they really up to?"

From The Horse's Mouth

The Evil Black Rifle speaks:

Hi, my name is AR-15. Some of you know me, but many more of you know of me -- through the media. But you may not know the real me.

I’m that cool, sleek-looking black gun you’ve seen profiled by the press. They put me in newspapers and on TV, showing my picture as if it’s a mug shot, even though I’ve never committed a crime. Oh, bad people have at times used (and abused) me to do bad things, but not really that often; as even The New York Times admitted in 2014, firearms such as me -- which that paper and others call “assault weapons” -- are only used in two percent of gun crimes (most are perpetrated with handguns).

... The public knows my appearance well; people have seen my cousin and dead ringer, M-16, fired machine-gun style in war movies for decades. But, alas, I, AR-15 -- the weapon available to the public -- can only be fired semi-automatic. This means that every time you pull my trigger, one shot, and only one shot, is released.

So even if we accept the term “assault weapon,” that’s not me. To qualify, a gun must be capable of fully automatic fire (machine-gun style), and no such weapons are readily available to the public. So unlike cousin M-16, who originally had a select-fire feature allowing him to be shot in various ways, I’m just a one-trick pony.

Despite this, I’ve become a media whipping boy. Even when those rare crimes are committed in which a gun of my class is used, but which don’t involve me personally — such as the horrific Orlando incident, where Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen used a Sig Sauer MCX — my face is front and center.  In fact, that’s what finally inspired me to speak out, articles such as this outrageous one from Daily News writer Gersh Kuntzman. Reporting on how he tried me at a Philly gun range, he actually wrote:

The recoil bruised my shoulder, which can happen if you don't know what you're doing. The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions -- loud like a bomb -- gave me a temporary form of PTSD. For at least an hour after firing the gun just a few times, I was anxious and irritable.

None of the above is true; I know because I was there. Oh, in my younger and more impetuous days, I would’ve gotten a thrill out of being portrayed as such a macho guy. But the Truth will set you free (something the propagandizing Mr. Kuntzman should ponder).

And the truth is that I never bruised Mr. Kuntzman. One thing I can rightly puff up my chest over is that I have very little recoil because I’m high-tech -- my mechanism is designed to absorb much of the energy of the blast. And you don’t have to take my word for it. ... Below is a video of a seven-year-old girl trying me for the first time (forward to 2:55 if you want to see just the actual firing).

Did the little lass say “Ow!” or register discomfort in any way? Did she rub her shoulder? A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with buckshot could have knocked that little tyke on her kiester, but me? Also know that Kuntzman fired me only three times before bowing out, grousing that I was a “dangerous weapon.” And that fact, my friends, comes from Frank Stelmach, who was quoted by Kuntzman and who owns the gun range the journalist visited...

And by the by, Stelmach said that Kuntzman never mentioned anything about his shoulder or expressed that he was experiencing any kind of discomfort. Stelmach also called the notion that an ultra-low-recoil weapon such as me could bruise a grown man’s shoulder “nonsense.”

As for my “explosions” being “loud like a bomb,” well, I can belt out a song, but not like some other firearms. And no wonder. I fire the .223 cartridge, a small-caliber round the same diameter as a .22 (yes, .22s are those cute little rounds you put in your Marlin as a kid). Of course, my round is a lot more powerful than a .22 (in your face, Marlin!), but just take a look at these “killing power” rankings of rifle rounds. It’s hard to admit, but my small .223 has the second least power of the 41 cartridges listed...

Of course, then there are my magazines; for the Kuntzmans of the world, no, those aren’t things you read that usually contain liberal propaganda. They’re objects loaded with cartridges that, assuming they’re removable, you then insert into firearms. It’s true that high-capacity magazines are available for me. But criminals would always get them on the black market; moreover, with just a bit of effort, any gun’s removable magazine can be modified to hold a large number of rounds. So why am I singled out?

The answer is simple: my looks -- and others’ prejudices. Take a gander at me below:

Am I not a sharp-looking guy? Black is beautiful!

But it’s also seen as “menacing,” especially by liberals in the media. Face it, since I’m functionally no different from other legal firearms -- semi-automatic just as most guns sold in America are -- I can only conclude that I’m profiled as dangerous because of my sleek military-like appearance and my color. If I looked like those much more powerful hunting rifles, would you really be troubling over me?

... this is standard liberal style over substance...

It’s enough to make me want to shoot myself.

I'm Not Thrilled, But...

I'm not thrilled with the prospect of Donald Trump as our next president. But I am even less thrilled scared to death by the thought of hillary plopping her worthless butt down in the Oval office. Here's one reason why. (source)

If that doesn't motivate you to vote for Trump - albeit unenthusiastically - then you're brain dead.

Here We Go Again

Initial thoughts on the Florida nightclub shooting:

It's getting to be an old story. Some lunatic freaks out and shoots a bunch of people. Jerks on the left gloss over the tragic loss of life and the pain of the victims' loved ones, and instead rush to score political points while the bodies are still warm, trotting out the same old storylines.

Within hours, the Orlando mass shooting at a LGBT nightclub set off renewed political debates -- with Democrats calling for gun control and Republicans blasting "radical Islamic terrorism."

I might listen to the left's arguments for more restrictive gun laws with more of an open mind if they had the tiniest clue about the subject. For example:

"We should not be selling automatic weapons which are designed to kill people," (presidential candidate Bernie) Sanders said.

"...remember that these domestic terrorists also buy automatic weapons..." (former South Dakota senator Larry) Pressler said in a statement.

As I understand it, the shooter used an AR-15, which is not an automatic weapon. Of course, accuracy and facts are not allowed to get in the way of the all-important narrative.

Undoubtedly, the left will use this to argue that law-abiding citizens should be disarmed, as if we're the problem.

In a sadly ironic twist of fate, the incident pitted two of the left's protected groups against each other. The shooter was a muslim, and the majority of the victims were gay. So of course we must blame the gun - an inantimate lump of metal and plastic - rather than the person.

As for the republicans "blasting radical Islamic terrorism," well, judge for yourself.

Car bombs in Iraq kill more than the Florida nightclub shooting, and we collectively yawn. No one is calling for more restrictive car control laws.

Oh, yeah - islamic terrorists also killed a poor soul in a particulary horrific manner, but we don't hear an outcry about that.

Local officials in Ghor province said one of (the victim's) distant relatives was suspected of killing a former Taliban commander... militants dragged Ahmad from his house and cut out his eyes in retaliation.

Ahmad was still alive and screaming when the attackers began carving the skin off his chest, leaving his heart exposed. Then they threw the 21-year old laborer off a 10-story cliff, officials said.

“They skinned him alive,” said Ruqiya Naeel, a member of parliament from the area.

Islam also prescribes death for homosexuals, but somehow that little tidbit is conveniently overlooked by liberals.

The inspiration for Muslims to brutalize and mass murder gay people does not come from ISIS. It is deeply rooted in Islamic law, affirmed by many of Islam’s most renowned scholars.

"Those involved in the act should be punished. In fact, sodomites should be killed in the worst manner possible."

Meanwhile, it turns out that the FBI investigated the shooter on at least two seperate occassions for links to radical islam, but cleared him both times. It couldn't be that they were fearful of offending a protected species, or even - God forbid - being accused of profiling.

One last thought: I've noticed my wife and kids texting back and forth when making plans, coordinating events, and dealing with problems, when a real-time conversation would be much more efficient in resolving those issues. What is particulary ironic is that they do so using their cell phones  - using that device as a texting platform rather than a phone.

Which brings me to this.

A woman who was outside the club early Sunday was trying to contact her 30-year-old son, Eddie, who texted her when the shooting happened and asked her to call police.

No disrespect to Eddie. I truly hope he escaped unscathed. But why on earth would you text your mother and ask her to call the police, instead of calling 911 yourself?

Again, no criticism implied. Just observing how the younger generation sees cell phones not as phones, but rather as a means to communicate impersonally.

My final point:

More Guns Means More Murders

The more guns floating around a given country, the more murders there will be, right? I mean, it's just common sense. If more people have access to a firearm, there's a greater liklihood they will use one to shoot someone. At least, that's what the anti-gunners claim.

The only problem is, the facts say otherwise.

More Guns Does Not Mean More Murders

According to proponents of gun control, more guns in America equals more murders and a more lawless society. Every time there is a mass killing involving guns, liberal politicians rush to call for more restrictions on guns.

Those in favor of disarming the citizenry claim that fewer guns will mean less gun-crime. This assertion though is not based on facts as can be seen in the chart below. Not only is there no correlation between increases in gun ownership and homicides, the relationship in fact is negative.

Click to embiggen.

That's true not just in the U.S., but around the world.

A recent study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy entitled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” looked at firearms prevalence and violence in countries around the world. The authors found that gun bans are ineffective because they do not affect the socio-cultural and economic factors that are the real determinants of violent crime rates. Their study concludes:

    “[T]he burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.”

When confronted with data like this, liberals tend to react like my mother claimed my father did: "His mind is made up. Don't confuse him with the facts.

Speaking of facts...

Click to embiggen.

... and opinions.

Obama's Hypocrisy Is On Display - Again

As we all know, barack obama is one of the most antigun presidents we've ever suffered under.

He's also, to no one's surprise, one of the biggest hypocrites we've ever seen.

Take, for example, his recent action in commuting the sentences of convicted felons.

Obama has commuted sentences for 33 firearms convicts

Barbara Hollingsworth of CNS News reports that Senator Richard Shelby has sent a letter to Loretta Lynch criticizing the Obama administration for commuting the sentences of 33 criminals convicted of firearm-related offenses. “By my count, the President has commuted the sentences of over 200 of these ‘non-violent’ federal inmates, of which 33 were convicted of firearm-related offenses,” Shelby wrote. He also pointed to the hypocrisy of commuting the sentences of firearms offenders while pushing for gun control.

... Obama’s latest set of commutations puts a number of gun offenders back on the streets. Indeed, according to Shelby, 12 of the 61 recipients of Obama’s leniency were convicted of one, if not more, firearm-related offenses. These include:

Seven convictions of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime;

four convictions of possession of a firearm by a felon; and

two convictions of use of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense.

At a hearing in January of this year, Shelby quizzed Lynch about this issue. As Shelby reminds Lynch:

I. . .asked you how the President can say he is ‘committed to using every tool at the Administration’s disposal to reduce gun violence’ when his own Administration is not even following through with the sentences of criminals with firearm-related convictions.

At the time, you said that you were not aware of the particular sentence commutations involving firearm-related convictions, but that you would look into these cases. We have yet to hear back from you or the Department [of Justice] about these or any other questions from the hearing, which were due at the end of February.

Evidently, Lynch has no good answer to the question Shelby posed.

In his letter, Shelby said that his subcommittee will not approve any increased funding for the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney, which screens inmates’ applications for clemency before they are submitted to the president. He explained:

I have no confidence in the ability of the Office of the Pardon Attorney to properly screen requests for executive clemency or to effectively convey any recommendations throughout the Administration. I want to do everything I can to keep our communities safer, and that includes keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill, and violent offenders.

Right now, I am unsure if the Administration shares this goal.

There's a reason convicted felons are denied the right to keep and bear arms. Evidently obama thinks he knows better.

Another Year-In-Review List

I said earlier that I wasn't going to post Year-in-Review lists, but given all the Sturm und Drang building over the impending obama war on guns, I thought y'all might find this one interesting.

The 5 Best-Selling Guns of 2015

First, a few general comments. This is not about the 'best' guns (however you define that). It is about the most popular ones, as defined by sales reported by GunBroker.com. The list is also driven by a hot trend in 2015 firearm sales - the growing popularity of semi-autos designed for concealed carry. In response to that trend, the person who compiled the list limited it to the five best-selling new, semi-automatic pistols. (Hey, I'm to lazy to do all that work. I'm just happy to piggy-back off someone else's efforts).

Speaking of which, the methodology behind the list is simple. The author took GunBroker's monthly lists of gun sales, arbitrarily assigned points values for each place on the list (5 points for first, four for second, etc.), and then tallied up the results. Not the most sophisticated methodology, but again, I'm too lazy to do it myself. So take this list for what it's worth: an interesting, but not necessarily comprehensive, perspective on 2015's best-selling new semi-autos. Enjoy, and discuss freely among yourselves.

Fourth Place (tie): Smith & Wesson M&P9 and Sig Sauer P938. Neither gun landed in the top spot over the course of the year, but the models were gun buyers' second and third choices most often. The M&P9 is Smith & Wesson's direct challenge to Glock in the low-cost polymer frame segment and its lightweight design has helped the gunmaker enjoy tremendous growth as handgun sales have taken off.

In contrast, Sig Sauer's P938 is a hammer-fired, single-action semi-auto, with aluminum alloy frame and steel slide. It's super-lightweight and designed for concealed carry.

Third Place: Smith & Wesson M&P9 Shield. This is S&W's answer to the concealed-carry gun niche that is exploding. So popular are its Shield models that during the second quarter the gunmaker produced its one millionth model, which it says makes it "the best-selling personal protection and self-defense pistol" on the market.

Second Place: Taurus PT-111 Millenium G2. Yet another gun designed for the concealed carry market, the Taurus PT-111 is available in 9mm and built on a lightweight polymer platform in a subcompact form factor. Its appearance on the list would surprise many gun enthusiasts, but the fact it was the favorite gun four months in a row probably raised even more eyebrows, though it also attested to the gun's meeting a specific need in the market.

First Place: Kel Tec PMR-30. This might not have been the gun many would have expected to top the list, but the Kel Tec PMR-30 dominated sales at GunBroker.com this year, coming in first place more times than any other model (five), and regularly being a gun buyer's second or third choice. The Kel Tec was also on the top-five list more often than any other model (eight), and unlike Smith & Wesson, Ruger, or Sig Sauer, which each had three different models appear at any time over the course of the year, it was only the Kel Tec PMR-30 that gun buyers wanted.

FWIW, I own one gun on this list: a Taurus PT-111 Millenium. I bought it back in 2009, in response to another predicted obama gun grab. I also bought it after shooting one a friend owned. Hers fit my hand nicely, shot well, had a nice, crisp trigger break with very little take-up, and was reasonably accurate. Fun to shoot and it put holes where I aimed - what else could you ask for?

Unfortunately, the one I bought turned out to be a bit of a disappointment, mainly due to its long trigger take-up and mushy break. No complaints regarding accuracy or reliability. I've been meaning to take it to a gunsmith for a trigger job, but retirement has kept me so busy (*cough, cough*) I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

I'm also putting off the  gunsmith visit pending resolution of the Taurus recall settlement. Depending on the details, I may end up paying to fix it myself rather than depend on the tender mercies of Taurus customer service, which even in the best of times has a spotty reputation. In the meantime, I carry one of several .38 revolvers, depending on where I'm going, what I'm wearing and other assorted circumstances. When I travel I usually take along my personal favorite: a Springfield XD in .45ACP. Stopping power plus high capacity magazines - what's not to like? An added bonus is the sticker on the side of the case it came in: "Not legal in California." Gives me a tingle down my leg every time I see it.

Speaking of obama's war on guns, here's an illustration of the 'logic' running through barry's mind as he schemes to undermine the Second Amendment.

Know The Enemy

The following Letter to the Editor appeared in the Dec. 17, 2015 edition of the San Antonio Express-News.

Automatic weapons have one purpose and one purpose only, and that’s to kill multiple people at one time. Therefore, no one in this country should have an automatic gun other than our trained military.

We should remember that until 2004 automatic weapons were outlawed, and there has been an uptick of mass shootings since.

The lies and rationalizations regarding automatic weapons spewed by Republicans are an affront to the sensibilities of the vast majority of Americans who cry for stricter gun controls.

I hope that during the 2016 congressional elections, frustrated Americans go to the polls and vote out every congressman who has opposed common sense gun control legislation.

Thomas Lee

It would be easier to carry on an intelligent discussion of gun control laws with people like Mr. Lee if they weren't so ignorant of basic facts. (Of course, if they were concerned with facts they might not write such uninformed letters in the first place, but one can't expect leopards to change their spots, or liberals to change their preconceived notions. Anyway...)

To clarify, since Mr. Lee seems unclear on the concept, let's first define our terms. From the font of all knowledge - Wikipedia - we have the following:

An automatic firearm continuously fires rounds as long as the trigger is pressed or held and there is ammunition in the magazine/chamber. In contrast, a semi-automatic firearm fires one round with each individual trigger-pull.

Now that we understand what we're talking about, let's take a closer look at Mr. Lee's letter.

"Automatic weapons have one purpose and one purpose only, and that’s to kill multiple people at one time."

Or to make sure that one person is well and truly dead. But I quibble. Let's continue.

 "Therefore, no one in this country should have an automatic gun other than our trained military."

What about law enforcement? They are currently allowed to posses automatic weapons. Should we disarm them?

"We should remember that until 2004 automatic weapons were outlawed, and there has been an uptick of mass shootings since."

I was unaware that automatic weapons became legal in 2004. If true, I'd love to run right out and get one. Unfortunately, after doing a little research, here's what I found.

It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department... (Note: a fully automatic weapon is legally considered to be a machine gun (or submachine gun, if it fires a handgun cartridge) under the National Firearms Act.)

Furthermore:

Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

So it looks like ownership of automatic weapons is either tightly regulated or prohibited under two different federal gun control laws (not to mention multiple state and local laws). What on earth happened in 2004 to legalize automatic weapons?

As near as I can figure out, Mr. Lee is talking about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (officially, the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act) which was enacted in 1994 and expired in 2004. Assault weapons, of course, are not the same as automatic weapons, but to the confused residents of Liberal Land they are one and the same. So let's give Mr. Lee the benefit of the doubt on this one and examine his claim that "...there has been an uptick of mass shootings since."

The following comes from a report compiled by the Congressional Research Service dated July 30, 2015.

From the report:

Click to embiggen.

What this tells us is that the average number of mass shootings remained relatively constant at around 20 per year over two five-year periods (1999-2003 and 2004-2008), with a slight increase to an average of 22 per year over the five year period of 2009-2013. There was no "uptick" in the five years immediately following 2004.

Furthermore, in the period between 1999 and 2013:

...out of 317 "mass shootings," offenders used firearms that could be characterized as "assault weapons" in 31 incidents (9.78%), or roughly 1 out of 10 incidents...

Back to Mr. Lee's letter:

The lies and rationalizations regarding automatic weapons spewed by Republicans are an affront to the sensibilities of the vast majority of Americans who cry for stricter gun controls.

Based on the facts presented above, I think it's pretty obvious that it's not the Republicans who are lying and rationalizing about gun controls.

One final note: back to the 'automatic weapons' point. Even on this issue the facts are unarguably against the leftists.

Since 1934, there appear to have been at least two homicides committed with legally owned automatic weapons. One was a murder committed by a law enforcement officer (as opposed to a civilian). On September 15th, 1988, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, Patrolman Roger Waller, then 32, used his fully automatic MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant...

The other homicide ... occurred on September 14, 1992...

Yes, you read that right. In the last 81 years, legally owned automatic weapons have accounted for a grand total of TWO deaths. Yet they are feared and demonized by the left.

It's not about facts, or guns. It's about control.

Random Thoughts On The San Bernardino Shootings

On Wednesday in San Bernardino CA, 14 people were killed and 21 wounded by two heavily armed conservative Christian NRA members.

Oh, wait...

I'm sure many on the left were disappointed that the shooters were not members of the Tea Party. I'm also sure that they were chagrined to learn that the killers turned out to be muslims. 

Here's yesterday's front page from the New York Post.

 

Factually accurate. No hyperbole or stereotyping. But it runs contrary to the politically correct view that the vast majority of muslims are peaceful, law abiding innocents. Take this tweet, for example, from CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) referring to the Post's headline.


Maybe if muslims would quit shooting people the rhetoric would stop.

Speaking of off-the-mark responses, by now you've probably heard the usual response of anti-gun nuts. One thing I've noticed this time around is an emphasis on the number of mass shootings in the past year or so. Setting aside questions about the data collection and analysis methodology, let's take a look at the other side of the coin.

Several mass shootings this year have brought renewed attention to the issue of gun violence in America, and President Obama has again called for Congress to change the nation’s gun laws.

But the increased spotlight on guns does not reflect the overall gun violence trend in the country. Although most Americans think the number of gun crimes has risen, the U.S. gun homicide rate has actually stabilized somewhat in recent years, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of death certificate data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Between 1993 and 2000, the gun homicide rate dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Since then, the gun homicide rate has remained relatively flat. From 2010 to 2013, the most recent year data are available, the number of gun homicides has hovered between 11,000 and 12,000 per year.

The nation’s overall gun death rate has declined 30% since 1993. This total includes homicides and suicides, in addition to a smaller number of fatal police shootings, accidental shooting deaths and those of undetermined intent.

Something to think about. Of course, facts mean little to gun grabbers.

Just The Facts, Ma'am

I don't know when journalism morphed from the "who-what-where-when-how" school of reporting facts to the current "write-your-opinion-as-if-it-is-true" mode, but here's a prime example of the latter.

Wonkette is a liberal/progressive website. To its credit, it doesn't claim to be an unbiased news source. It succeeds magnificently in its self-proclaimed mission to be vile, nasty, and snarky. It also succeeds magnificently in displaying its profound ignorance on many topics - in this particular case, on gun safety.

Ted Cruz Doesn’t Care If He ‘Accidentally’ Blows Off Someone’s Head With A Shotgun

Here’s something that is not even a tiny bit funny: Ted Cruz casually and negligently mishandling a deadly weapon ... demonstrating how to “accidentally” kill someone, maybe in that farmhouse not far behind him. Oops, bang bang, sorry, kid — you’re dead.

Cruz, who so loves his guns that he supposedly uses them to fry up his breakfast bacon, is demonstrating to the kids at home exactly how not to handle a gun. Anyone who has had even a second of firearm safety training can recite the rules for you, but in case you’re not one of those anyones, here they are:

    Treat all guns as if they are loaded.
    Never point a firearm at something you’re not willing to destroy.
    Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot.
    Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

So far, so good. We're all for gun safety. And the author did get the "Four Rules" correct.

These are the rules. At all times, these are the rules. Even if you think you know better. Even if you are a licensed firearm instructor. Even if you are so sure that gun isn’t loaded. Even if you are positive you’re the only living creature within a 100-mile radius. Even if you’re certain it’s set to safety. Even if you’ve been shooting guns since you were knee-high. Even if, always if, every single time.

No argument there. In fact, I pretty much agree with what's been said. So what's the problem? What egregious - and potentially deadly - mistake did Ted Cruz make? Here's a hint.

The muzzle of Ted Cruz’s break-action gun is pointing all over the place — at the buildings, at people who might be behind him, but he doesn’t know because he’s not looking over his shoulder — instead of at the ground, in front of him, where he can see it. That’s where you are supposed to point your gun, even if if if if and if. Always.

Did you catch it? The key phrase there is "break-action." Here's the picture that got the author so riled up.

People who are knowledgeable about firearms will note that the shotgun is in fact 'broken open' - that is, the weapon is a breech loader, the breech is open or 'broken,' and the weapon is unloaded. Cruz is employing what is known as the "shoulder carry" method of holding a shotgun - a perfectly safe and acceptable practice.

For a more informed commentary on how Cruz is carrying that shotgun, here's an excerpt from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department's online hunter education course.

Shoulder Carry

The shoulder carry balances the rifle on your shoulder, controlling the firearm by a hand on the grip. Always keep your finger off the trigger and on the outside of the trigger guard. This is a good carry when walking beside or behind others. It is not a good carry if others are behind you.

As the picture of Cruz plainly shows, there is no one behind him. So what's the problem?

Guns in general, of course.

We can, and do, argue about how to reduce the number of gun deaths in America. Fewer guns, less accessible ammo, stricter background checks, stronger mental healthcare. All of the above.

I might be inclined to take the author's argument more seriously if she hadn't just demonstrated what an absolute moron she is. I guess it's too much to hope for that 'journalists' would have a basic understanding of what they write about...

Oregon Shootings

First of all, thoughts and prayers for the victims and their families of Thursday's shootings at Oregon's Umpqua Community College.

Second, I'm having a hard time containing my outrage at the antics of the loser currently wasting oxygen in the White House. I cannot believe that pathetic worm masquerading as the 'leader' of this country would politicize the tragic shootings while the bodies were still warm.

President Obama on Thursday made an impassioned case that gun violence is “something we should politicize” following a mass shooting at a community college in Oregon.

In his disgraceful rush to advance his political agenda while standing atop the dead bodies of the victims, barry performed his usual trick of misdirection, misleading, and outright lying about a problem - much less offering any solutions.

Eager to distract the country from the collapse of his Syria policy and the triumph of Russia in replacing the U.S. as the dominant force in the Middle East, he seized upon the deaths as means to advance his anti-gun agenda, with absolutely no knowledge of the guns used, or the means by which the shooter acquired them.  He referred to himself 28 times in the course of his 12-minute speech.

The president insisted that "modest regulation," consistent with the Second Amendment rights of "law-abiding gun owners," could "prevent this carnage from being inflicted someplace else in America." ... (but he) did not mention a single specific policy fitting that description.

So far, President Obama has said nothing about the ongoing carnage in his hometown of Chicago, where every weekend sees a slaughter nearly as bad as the event in Roseburg.

The reaction to these shootings will be predictable - on both sides. Leftists will call for more stringent gun-control laws. Those of us on the other side will counter that the shooter violated numerous existing laws, and more wouldn't have deterred him.

Perhaps the most obvious broken law was the one prohibiting firearms on campus. I don't understand why the anti-gun crowd believes that gun-free zones prevent gun violence. There are nine dead people in Oregon who could testify to the fallacy of that belief.

Thursday's events are going to be hashed and rehashed ad nauseum. I'll leave that to others. I will, however, save several thousand words by posing a few pictures that sum up my opinion.

A Second (Amendment) Look At Trump

I'll admit to flip-flopping on Donald Trump. I'm firmly in his corner when it comes to the issues he is raising, the corruption and dysfunction in D.C. that he is highlighting, and the straightforward non-PC language he is using.

On the other hand, I have my doubts about whether or not he has the gravitas to be President and Commander-in-Chief. He has a tendency to bluster, swagger, and bully people. He shoots from the lip and considers himself the smartest person in the room, often with little justification.

He has also, IMO, been long on grandiose pronouncements and short on specifics. We have some sense of what his policies would be, but not how he would implement them.

However, he has come out with a position statement on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms that makes a lot of sense.

PROTECTING OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

(Side note: I'm all for protecting our Second Amendment rights, and I agree that it will make America a better place, but I'm not convinced that it will 'make America great again.' Anyway, here's The Donald on the 2A.)

The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.

Hard to argue with that.

It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative. Here’s how we will do that:

Enforce The Laws On The Books

We need to get serious about prosecuting violent criminals. The Obama administration’s record on that is abysmal. Violent crime in cities like Baltimore, Chicago and many others is out of control. Drug dealers and gang members are given a slap on the wrist and turned loose on the street. This needs to stop.

Several years ago there was a tremendous program in Richmond, Virginia called Project Exile. It said that if a violent felon uses a gun to commit a crime, you will be prosecuted in federal court and go to prison for five years – no parole or early release. Obama’s former Attorney General, Eric Holder, called that a “cookie cutter” program. That’s ridiculous. I call that program a success. Murders committed with guns in Richmond decreased by over 60% when Project Exile was in place – in the first two years of the program alone, 350 armed felons were taken off the street.

Right on, Donnie! Project Exile, which was backed by the NRA and other gun rights groups, was a success. Commit a crime with a gun - go to jail. That's the kind of gun control I can support.

Here’s another important way to fight crime – empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Law enforcement is great, they do a tremendous job, but they can’t be everywhere all of the time. Our personal protection is ultimately up to us. That’s why I’m a gun owner, that’s why I have a concealed carry permit, and that’s why tens of millions of Americans have concealed carry permits as well. It’s just common sense.

Fix Our Broken Mental Health System

Let’s be clear about this. Our mental health system is broken. It needs to be fixed. Too many politicians have ignored this problem for too long.

All of the tragic mass murders that occurred in the past several years have something in common – there were red flags that were ignored. We can’t allow that to continue. We need to expand treatment programs, because most people with mental health problems aren’t violent, they just need help. But for those who are violent, a danger to themselves or others, we need to get them off the street before they can terrorize our communities. This is just common sense.

Agree in principle, but the devil's in the details. Labeling people as having mental health problems and subsequently taking away their rights is a path fraught with peril, and open to abuse. We must be very, very careful going down that route.

Defend The Rights of Law-Abiding Gun Owners

GUN AND MAGAZINE BANS. Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons”, “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own. (emphasis added)

Amen, brother!!!

BACKGROUND CHECKS. There has been a national background check system in place since 1998. Every time a person buys a gun from a federally licensed gun dealer – which is the overwhelming majority of all gun purchases – they go through a federal background check. Study after study has shown that very few criminals are stupid enough to try and pass a background check – they get their guns from friends/family members or by stealing them. So the overwhelming majority of people who go through background checks are law-abiding gun owners. When the system was created, gun owners were promised that it would be instant, accurate and fair. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case today. Too many states are failing to put criminal and mental health records into the system – and it should go without saying that a system’s only going to be as effective as the records that are put into it. What we need to do is fix the system we have and make it work as intended. What we don’t need to do is expand a broken system.

Similar to the mental health issue, this is a potentially terrible idea masquerading as a good one. It would be frighteningly easy for a background check system to morph into a gun registry.

NATIONAL RIGHT TO CARRY. The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

This one makes a lot of sense. That's why it will probably never pass.

MILITARY BASES AND RECRUITING CENTERS. Banning our military from carrying firearms on bases and at recruiting centers is ridiculous. We train our military how to safely and responsibly use firearms, but our current policies leave them defenseless. To make America great again, we need a strong military. To have a strong military, we need to allow them to defend themselves.

Common sense. Something that's in short supply in our nation's capital.

This makes me view Trump a little more favorably. I'm still not convinced he's The One, but he's looking better...

What A Great Idea

Here in Texas we get one weekend a year when the sales tax is waived on back-to-school purchases.

In 2015, Texas shoppers get a break from state and local sales taxes on Aug. 7 – 9 — the state’s annual tax holiday. As in previous years, the law exempts most clothing, footwear, school supplies and backpacks priced under $100 from sales and use taxes, which could save shoppers about $8 on every $100 they spend.Texas Tax Free Weekend 2015 starts August 7th, 2015.

Well, the good folks in Louisiana have taken that idea and improved on it.

Second Amendment Weekend Sales Tax Holiday

The 2015 Louisiana Second Amendment Weekend Sales Tax Holiday will take place Friday, September 4 through Sunday, September 6.  During that time, guns, ammunition and other hunting supplies will be exempt from state and local sales taxes.

The sales tax holiday applies to individual consumer purchases of a wide range of hunting gear. Eligible hunting supplies include:

• Firearms that may be legally sold or purchased in Louisiana 

• Ammunition intended to be fired from a gun or firearm 

• Archery supplies to be used for hunting 

• Apparel such as safety gear, camouflage clothing, jackets, hats, gloves, mittens, face masks and thermal underwear manufactured and marketed as being primarily for wear or use while hunting 

• Off-road vehicles such as all-terrain vehicles designed and intended primarily for hunting; the exemption does not apply to golf carts, go-carts, dirt bikes, mini-bikes, motorcycles, tractors, motor vehicles which may be legally driven on the streets and highways of Louisiana, or heavy equipment such as cranes, forklifts, backhoes and bulldozers

What a great idea. It would be fantastic if we could spread it across the country. In addition to saving most of us some $$$, it would drive the anti-gun crowd crazy. That in itself makes it a good thing.

It also gives me an opportunity to post some pro-2A cartoons that have been piling up on my computer

Busy...sorry

Sorry for the lack of active posting, but I've been busy. In the meantime, here's a couple of images that say a lot more than I could in words.

Hypocritical assholes...

That Certainly Didn't Take Long

The bodies aren't even cold yet, and these jerks are already using them to score political points.

Clinton, Obama seek gun control in wake of Charleston massacre

Assholes...

Oh, and BTW, just to refute barry's claim that "At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this kind of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries"...

Remember the massacre by muslim extremists in Paris not that long ago?

Oh, that's right - you didn't go to the memorial service like all the other world leaders.

I repeat - Asshole...

Second Amendment Updates

For your enjoyment and enlightenment, here's a few Second Amendment related stories that have been in the news lately. Let's start off with misdirection, distortion, and outright lies by who else - barack obama and the mainstream media.

Obama’s Gun-Control Misfire - Before the 2014 election, the FBI claimed that mass shootings were up. False.

Last September the Obama administration produced an FBI report that said mass shooting attacks and deaths were up sharply—by an average annual rate of about 16% between 2000 and 2013. Moreover, the problem was worsening. “The findings establish an increasing frequency of incidents,” said the authors. “During the first 7 years included in the study, an average of 6.4 incidents occurred annually. In the last 7 years of the study, that average increased to 16.4 incidents annually.”

The White House could not possibly have been more pleased with the media reaction to these findings, which were prominently featured by the New York Times, USA Today, CNN, the Washington Post and other major outlets. The FBI report landed six weeks before the midterm elections, and the administration was hoping that the gun-control issue would help drive Democratic turnout.

But late last week, J. Pete Blair and M. Hunter Martaindale, two academics at Texas State University who co-authored the FBI report, acknowledged that “our data is imperfect.” They said that the news media “got it wrong” last year when they “mistakenly reported mass shootings were on the rise.”

... Over the past 40 years, there has been no statistically significant increase in mass shootings in the U.S.

Gee, distorted facts... inconsistent data sources... cherry-picked reporting periods... kind of reminds me of global warming climate change weather reports.

Of course, corrections of the 'mistaken' report were either buried or not even published by that same MSM.

On the other side of the country:

Rise in accidental gunshots by L.A. County deputies follows new firearm

Accidental gunshots by Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies have more than doubled in two years, endangering bystanders and occasionally injuring deputies. The jump coincides with the department's move to a new handgun that lacks a safety lever and requires less pressure to pull the trigger.

Sheriff's officials say that the increase in accidental discharges — from 12 in 2012 to 30 last year — occurred because deputies were adjusting to the new gun. They expect the numbers to fall in the years ahead. So far this year, the department has recorded seven accidental discharges, five of which involved the new weapon.

But the problems may not be over, as more deputies switch to the Smith & Wesson M&P9. In response, department officials have imposed extra training requirements.

... The switch was prompted in part by the threat of a lawsuit by women who had failed the Sheriff's Academy.

Naturally. If a woman/minority/transgender fails something, it's obviously sexism/racism/whateverism. Therefore the only right thing to do is to change the standards.

Sigh...

But the sharp increase in accidental discharges has prompted an investigation by the Sheriff's Department's new inspector general. Critics say this type of semiautomatic, which is widespread in law enforcement and includes the Glock used by many agencies, is too easy to misfire.

For two decades, L.A. County sheriff's deputies carried the Beretta 92F, a heavy metal gun with a large grip.

People with small hands often have trouble flipping up the Beretta's safety as they prepare to fire. The first shot requires 12 to 15 pounds of pressure on the trigger, forcing some to use two fingers and reducing shooting accuracy for many. Subsequent shots take about 4 pounds of pressure.

The M&P is made of lightweight polymer, with a hand grip that comes in three sizes. Firing a round is as simple as pulling the trigger with a consistent 6 to 8 pounds of pressure.

L.A. County sheriff's deputies learning to shoot the Beretta were taught to rest a finger on the trigger as soon as they took aim. The mantra was "on target, on trigger."

With M&Ps and Glocks, the trigger finger should stay on the side of the gun until the last moment.

That's where it should be. If people heeded that dictum there would be far fewer 'accidental' discharges.

The M&P appears to have fulfilled its promise on one front: More women are making it into the department. The percentage of female recruits who failed the firearms test has plunged from 6.4% to less than 1%.

Pass rates are up across the board, not just for women. With the Beretta, more than 60% of trainees in one academy class needed extra firearms training. Ten out of 80 or so trainees in another class flunked because of the shooting test.

With the M&P, the class with the worst shooting results sent only 17% of trainees to remediation, and only three failed.

So riddle me this. If more people are passing the certification test, why are negligent discharges up? That seems to indicate the training is less rigorous...

...but the social goals are being achieved. That's what really matters.

For the record, I have no objection to 'reasonable accommodations' that recognize the undeniable physical differences between men and women. Case in point: different combat boots and tactical vests/body armor for male and female soldiers. What I do object to is the lowering of standards to inflate the number of women in a given role. Different boots are okay. Different forced march or load-carrying standards are not.

Meanwhile, closer to home:

Two controversial gun bills were signed Saturday by Gov. Greg Abbott.

Senate Bill 11 — otherwise known as “campus carry” — allows licensed gun owners to carry a concealed handgun in and around public college buildings and dorms. The bill includes a concession allowing schools to carve out “gun-free zones.” It takes effect August 1, 2016.

House Bill 910 — otherwise known as “open carry” — lifts a 140-year-old ban. It will allow licensed gun owners to openly carry a holstered handgun in any location that allows the carrying of a concealed gun. It takes effect January 1, 2016.

They're not perfect, but it's a start. Of course, the same old tired arguments were trotted out - it'll be the Wild West all over again; blood will be flowing in the streets; etc. etc. etc. Well, here's a little reality check.

When the Texas Concealed Handgun Law took effect in 1996, pundits and naysayers predicted anarchy. Any minute, there would surely be mass violence as armed Texas citizens began roving the streets settling arguments with gunfire. Certainly, several proclaimed, within a year there would be blood in the streets as Texas returned to the days of the Wild West.

Ten years later the facts paint a different picture. Texas under the Concealed Handgun Law isn’t the Wild West, but the Mild West. No recurrent shootouts at four-way stops, no blood in the streets. Quite the contrary, Texans are safer than before.

Since the passage of the Concealed Handgun Law, the FBI Uniform Crime Report shows an 18% drop in handgun murders, down from 838 in 1995 to 688 in 2004. And a 13% drop in handgun murders per 100,000 population, down from 4.5 murders per 100,000 Texans in 1995 to 3.95 per 100,000 in 2004.

In 2000, on the fifth anniversary of the Concealed Handgun Law, the National Center for Policy Analysis issued a report that indicated Texans with concealed carry permits are far less likely to commit a serious crime than the average citizen.

According to the report, the more than 200,000 Texans licensed to carry a concealed firearm are much more law-abiding than the average person.

The report illustrated that Texans who exercise their right to carry firearms are 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for a violent offense. They are 14 times less likely to be arrested for a non-violent offense.

More:

...the number of (Texas Concealed Handgun License) holders who commit murder or manslaughter is remarkably low. According to (Department of Public Safety) reports, the number of murder and manslaughter convictions for CHL holders has totaled 30 over the 16 years they’ve compiled the numbers . . .

... the ratio of CHL holder convictions for murder and manslaughter per 100,000 CHL holders per year (is) .70/100,000.

Yes, the decimal point is in the correct place. The rate of murder and manslaughter for the general population of Texas ... is 6.0/100,000.

Still, facts mean nothing to the anti-gunners...

Muslim Free Zone

Forget the ongoing peaceful protests riots in Baltimore, where seven cops have been injured...

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan declared a state of emergency and activated the National Guard after riots erupted in Baltimore on Monday.

Chaos and violence erupted on the streets of Baltimore late Monday as protesters clashed with police, several of whom were injured.

"This afternoon, a group of outrageous criminals attacked our officers. Right now, we have seven officers that have serious injuries, including broken bones, and one officer who is unconscious," Capt. Eric Kowalczyk told reporters.

... despite the mayor giving the peaceful protestors violent thugs 'space to destroy.'

"...we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well.”

I'll pass on the opportunity to point out the absurdity of a public official ceding control of her city to thugs and criminals so they can rampage and destroy with impunity. Instead, I'll focus on what obama's Justice Department is doing.

No, the Baltimore riots haven't attracted the interest of the Justice Department (other than to investigate the cops). But what does have the DOJ's panties in a wad is the refusal of an Arkansas gun range to allow muslims to fire weapons there.

The Department of Justice announced Friday that it is monitoring an Arkansas gun range on the grounds that it refuses to allow Muslims from shooting weapons at the facility.

The Washington Post reported Friday that the department was “monitoring the matter,” but no indication was given as to whether or not a full investigation into the Gun Cave Shooting Range in Hot Springs, or its owner, Jan Morgan, would be launched.

The Justice Department’s action came about as a result of two advocacy groups requesting an investigation into the shooting range’s anti-Muslim policy.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations wrote to the Department last year, arguing that the range was “systemically banning Muslims from a place of business” and that doing so was “a violation of federal laws prohibiting racial and religious discrimination.”

No, it's just common sense: preventing potential terrorists from honing their skills, and possibly turning their weapons on other patrons.

Upon hearing the news of the DOJ’s investigation, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations - a designated terrorist organization) civil rights litigation director Jenifer Wicks told the Post:

“We welcome this positive development and hope it leads to a thorough investigation of clear violations of the civil rights of American Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim by the gun range owner.”

The Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union also asked for a federal investigation in January.

Morgan is apparently ready to handle whatever the DOJ can throw at her. She wrote on her website Saturday that she has “been under the watchful eyes of federal law enforcement authorities for a long time” because of “years of death threats” from Muslims:

“I have nothing to hide. I have no secrets from the federal government.”

She also told The Examiner that she will be ready to handle a federal investigation if one is ultimately launched against her, saying:

“I was prepared to fight this from day one.

I will close my business before I will make any compromises that could jeopardize the safety and security of the members who shoot here… [I] will continue to follow the advise [sic] of two agencies within the DOJ to protect and defend my own life, as well as the lives of innocent American citizens in my presence, from any and all threats of violence connected to, and or associated with any and all terrorist organizations.”

She added that anything less “would be irresponsible, reckless, and life threatening.”

Morgan declared her gun range to be a “Muslim-free zone” last September:

I have officially declared my business, The Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range, a MUSLIM FREE ZONE.

While many critics thought she would face a backlash in the form of reduced sales following the announcement, business soared...

Gee, what a surprise. One of these days I'll have to go on a road trip to visit her place. Not just to shoot, but to check out the owner as well...

Jan Morgan, owner of the Gun Cave Shooting Range