8 is when we exercise the second FLUENTLY. #BlackGunsMatter
Maj Toure @MAJTOURE
Tweeted on November 27, 2021
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Category Archives: Gun Rights
Quote of the day—Cal Thomas
If confronted by someone seeking to loot, destroy your business, or kill you, would you see your armed self as the best defense, or would you call 911, hoping the police will show up in time, if at all? Or would you be glad that a Kyle Rittenhouse is patrolling your streets like a neighborhood watchman, doing the job the police are unable, or reluctant to do?
Cal Thomas
November 27, 2021
Cal Thomas: The Rittenhouse verdict
[I think a bit more context is necessary to correctly answer these questions. I would be inclined to give the police a couple of free passes until it was clear they weren’t going to do their job. I would then reevaluate the situation.
There could be situations, much later in the timeline, where I would give people a pass for taking the action to the derelict and/or malicious politicians failing to do their job.—Joe]
Quote of the day—John Hinderaker
I am not sure how liberals expected the Kyle Rittenhouse murder trial to go. Anyone who had seen the videos of Rittenhouse’s interactions with the men who were chasing him, striking him and trying to kill him knew that he had a strong case of self-defense. But apparently the fact that Rittenhouse has a defense–and is so bold as to assert it!–came as a surprise to the Left.
John Hinderaker
November 12, 2021
RITTENHOUSE TRIAL BRINGS OUT THE CRAZY
[I don’t think it’s “surprise”. I think it’s indignation. It’s all about political currency. Violence is the political currency of the left. Non-leftists should stay in their lane and rely on the police. And since they had essentially neutered the police during this “summer of love” they expected, nay, they deserved an open field of operation. Someone dares to put out a fire they started? That is intolerable and must be punished. That Rittenhouse didn’t accept his well deserved beating was a gross violation of their expected rules of engagement. He had to guilty of something. He shouldn’t have even been there.—Joe]
How to Lie About Guns
By Frank Melloni:
How to Lie About Guns, New York Times Style
One of the easiest ways to lie and not get sued for libel is to simply do so through exclusion. The New York Times is famous for this and if you don’t know enough about guns they can make things sound pretty bad, just by leaving out a little bit of information. In the wake of the Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict we ought to brush up on the tactics of far-left media.
James D. Zirin of The Hill is a liar
It starts with the headline and continues nearly non-stop with the lies:
A miscarriage of justice in Kenosha
The unimaginable has occurred. Kyle Rittenhouse, the admitted killer of two men and maimer of a third, has been acquitted on all counts.
It certainly was imaginable to me and millions of others. After the videos came out it was crystal clear to anyone who had a glimmer of knowledge about the use of lethal force in self defense. The author is a former federal prosecutor and cannot possibly claim ignorance of the law.
On Aug. 25, 2020, Rittenhouse armed himself with a borrowed AR-15-style assault rifle loaded with full metal jacket armor-penetrating ammunition and marched into downtown Kenosha, Wis.
FMJ bullets are not “armor-penetrating”.
An AR-15 is the same kind of gun, in design and function, that our troops carry in the field. But Rittenhouse from the evidence had never undergone any training, military or otherwise, in the use and operation of the deadly weapon, which was illegally purchased and given to him by a friend.
It is not the same kind of gun and does not function the same as any rifle used by any military in at least the last 60 years.
As a (formerly) certified firearms instructor I can say with 100% certainty this was not the first time Rittenhouse had used a firearm. Some people, and I agree with this, say:
Based on the videos I’ve seen Rittenhouse is one of the best weapons handlers under pressure I’ve ever seen.
This was not an untrained person.
The gun was not illegal purchased. There was nothing illegal in any of the transfers of that firearm.
One shot might have qualified as self-defense, but four shots, it would appear, doth a murder make.
False. This was drilled into my General Defensive Handgun classmates and I back in ‘97:
If it ever becomes times to shoot someone, do they need to be shot a little? Or a lot? If that time comes you should shoot early and often — until the threat is over. If you shoot a “set”, such as a double tap, you may stop shooting too soon.
Zirin is a former attorney. Having watched the trial we can conclude his education must have been suitably refreshed. That he still claims such falsehoods is evidence of deliberate lies.
Although his second victim, Anthony Huber, was “armed” only with a skateboard, Rittenhouse claimed he shot him dead because he believed Huber was threatening his life.
Rittenhouse was on the ground and Huber hit him in the head with the skateboard. This is clearly lethal force. You are legally allowed, and I would say morally obligated, to defend innocent life using lethal force when confronted with lethal force by your attackers. Zirin learned this in the trial as well because he quoted the judge saying essentially the same thing. The only question here is, “What is the objective of these lies by Zirin?”
The trial was highlighted by emotional and illuminating testimony from Rittenhouse himself, who wept as he protested that he had acted in self-defense when he fatally shot Rosenbaum not once but four times. Rosenbaum had thrown a plastic bag at him and chased him.
Lying by omission. Zirin left out the part about Rosenbaum threating to kill him, then chasing him, and finally attempting to take Rittenhouse’s rifle.
I find it interesting and someone comforting that the poll taken at the end of the article shows I’m not the only one taking issue with this liar:
Large increase in guns without serial numbers
Ghost guns accounted for more than 40% of guns confiscated by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and one-third of crime guns recovered by the Los Angeles Police Department in 2020.
On Oct. 19, the LAPD reported to the police commission on the “epidemic” of ghost guns, which department officials say have increased “exponentially over the last year.”
“The current trend shows these figures will continue to grow exponentially,” according to the LAPD report, which notes that 3D printing allows the components to be more accessible.
“‘Ghost guns’ are replacing firearms people would normally purchase, with no background checks required,” according to the report.
Between January and June of this year, 863 ghost guns were recovered, more than the 813 recovered during the entire year of 2020. So far in 2021, 1,445 “ghost guns” have been recovered, a 202% increase over last year, according to the LAPD.
“…one third of crime guns…” It’s already against the law to commit a crime with a gun. So what is it they hope to change with another law? It would be so easy to make it near zero percent of guns confiscated be “ghost guns”. Remove the restrictions on guns which have serial numbers and the “ghost gun” problem would go away.
That the ordinance was proposed by the same guy, Councilmen Paul Koretz, who said this tells the world all we need to know:
This is absolutely ridiculous to think that the manufacture, sale and marketing of these weapons is intended for anything but skirting a loophole in the state and federal gun laws to get firearms into the hands of people who law enforcement and we as a society have deemed as unfit to possess those guns.
As long as there are criminals in the public wanting a gun to commit a crime there will be guns available to them. This is Black Market 101 stuff here. Look at the failed 100 year long ban on some recreational drugs.
If society knows who are “unfit to to possess those guns” then there can be no justification for those people to remain in public. That Koretz makes no effort to remove such people from the public tells us he is representing them and their agenda. They are literally his constituents.
Koretz compounds his evil allegiance with criminals by making it more difficult for innocent people to obtain cheap firearms to protect themselves from Koretz’s criminal constituents.
One has to wonder if he is another Leland Yee who is running a gun smuggling business on the side and doesn’t want the homemade guns competing with his guns. Regardless, what he is doing is illegal and I look forward to his trial.
The next stop is SCOTUS
Via Tom Gresham @Guntalk and CNN:
A federal appeals court in California on Tuesday upheld the state’s ban on high-capacity magazines, reversing a lower-court ruling in which a federal judge in San Diego compared an AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife.
The 7-4 decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit says that the state’s restriction on the size of magazines that may be used with firearms only minimally interferes with the right to self-defense, and there is no evidence that anyone was unable to defend their home and family due to the lack of high-capacity magazines.
As Gresham said, “Time to appeal to SCOTUS.”
Winnie the Pew
Via email and Gab from Rolf with the comment “Peace does not come to the Hundred Acre Wood by magic.”
Clever marketing
Quote of the day—Joe DiSano @JoeDiSano
I have a constitutional right not to see someone’s substitute penis.
Joe DiSano @JoeDiSano
Tweeted on November 17, 2021
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday it’s another science denier!
Via a Tweet from In Chains @InChainsInJail.
You have to wonder what color the sky is in this guy’s universe if that is part of the constitution of his government.—Joe]
Printing will continue
VIa Daniel Lambert @NavyLambo:
You can plan on it continuing beyond then too. But I don’t have a problem letting Giffords @GiffordsCourage, who this tweet was aimed at, believe it will stop after some incremental improvement in freedom.
Erwin Chemerinsky of the LA Times is a liar
The verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial sends a chilling message
Rittenhouse, then age 17, went to Kenosha, Wis., where protests were expected after police officers shot and seriously injured Jacob Blake. Rittenhouse had an AR-15-style rifle, which he was too young to legally possess. A teenager carrying an assault-style weapon in a tense situation is a recipe for disaster, and that is exactly what happened. Rittenhouse shot and killed two people and seriously wounded a third.
Rittenhouse testified at the trial that he went to the city on Aug. 25, 2020, to provide protection for local businesses and patrol as civil unrest developed. There is so much that is disturbing about that: a teenager deciding that he needed to provide law enforcement, when he lacked training or experience, and illegally arming himself with a semiautomatic rifle.
Not surprisingly, Rittenhouse’s presence with a big weapon provoked a reaction. Joseph Rosenbaum, a person with a history of mental illness who had been released from the hospital that day, allegedly grabbed at Rittenhouse’s gun and then was shot four times and killed. Anthony Huber apparently struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard. Huber then was shot and killed when Rittenhouse thought Huber was reaching for his weapon. Gaige Grosskreutz felt his life was in danger when he saw Huber killed. Grosskreutz reached for a weapon and then was shot and wounded by Rittenhouse.
Rittenhouse was not too young to legally posses the rifle.
Rittenhouse did not decide to be there on his own. He was asked to help defend private property after the police watched it burn the previous night.
Not surprisingly, Rittenhouse’s presence with a big weapon provoked a reaction.
The reaction of normal people is to be polite and not commit crimes such as igniting a dumpster on fire and pushing it into a gas station. That Rosenbaum chased and grabbed (not allegedly, the coroner confirmed muzzle blast marks on his hand) at Rittenhouse’s rifle. Perhaps that his usually victims were young boys caused him to generalize that no serious resistance is to be expected. Regardless, this shows a catastrophic failure of his victim section process and does not reflect poorly on Rittenhouse.
“Huber apparently struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard”? The video and stills are very clear that it happened.
“Grosskreutz reached for a weapon and then was shot..” Lying by omission. Sure, he had to “reach for his gun” before he could use it. But the video shows, and he testified under oath, that he was not shot until he actually pointed his gun at Rittenhouse.
Quote of the day—Colin Wright @SwipeWright
The Left-wing media narrative on the Rittenhouse case is extreme, malicious, and untethered to reality. It is well beyond insane. It would be laughable if it weren’t so utterly frightening.
Colin Wright @SwipeWright
Tweeted on November 20, 2021
[It was my independent conclusion of this (although not articulated nearly as well) that led me to create a new blog category dedicated to exposing their lies.—Joe]
KYLE TRIAL ENDS IN JUSTICE
Even clean self defense puts you in dire jeopardy—
KYLE TRIAL ENDS IN JUSTICE
The only reasons for tension were outright lies by woke left
Acquitted on all counts—so he gets vilified by leftists and “news” media
Too much happened for just another news release. How about a list:
- The court system worked, video-obvious self-defense was exonerated properly
- Leftist-led jury intimidation should be prosecuted, including “officials”
- NOTE: Even with clear evidence of self-defense, you are very much on the line
- If not for multiple dispositive videos Kyle likely would have been railroaded
- Leftist reactions for months, and afterwards, exhibit derangement syndrome
- Mass media has again proven itself a biased, prejudicial propaganda source
- Reporting shows media hates guns, gun owners and even righteous defense of life
- No one expects corrections for countless egregious mass-media errors
- Everyone who cried guilt before the unanimous trial verdict should be ashamed
- We the People got to see just how bad prosecutors can be, reprehensible
- City riots were already on, leftists ran them, not Kyle, this is now clear
- Claims of vigilantism, mass shooting, proven false—borne of media-fueled hysteria
- A convicted felony child molester, out of jail, shot just before committing murder, is now hailed as hero and victim by media and leftists, this is crazythink.
- If Kyle had not acted he’d be dead, no show trial, that must count for something
- Judge advised court not to call the perps and rioters victims, a very good call
- Gunfire in self defense is vindicated once again (14 cases OK’d by U.S. Supreme Court)
- A dead criminal, shot in self defense by an innocent person, is not a victim, despite numerous almost uniform reporting otherwise by media in most cases
- The left are still calling racism, with no ethnic element involved, that’s deranged
- So-called “news” stations keep spinning out of control, immune to reality, justice
- Biden labeled this young man a white supremacist, clear slander, can he be sued?
- Lawsuits should fall like rain against the slanderers, libelers, character assassins
- Lawsuits needed to help tame the movement to destroy reputations shamelessly
#####
Support JPFO, speaking truth to power https://store.jpfo.org/11-donations
Never give up your guns
Via Rolf.
Australia: Army Forcibly Throws Covid-Exposed Citizens in Quarantine Camps
Two Northern Territory communities in Australia, Binjari and Rockhole, have imposed strict lockdowns after nine new positive coronavirus cases were registered. The military has been called in to bring positive cases and close contacts to a quarantine center.
We live in interesting times.
The USA Today editorial board are liars
The USA Today editorial board is incoherent and/or has a reading comprehension problem and/or is lying. And they tell the lie that they believe an inanimate object can be guilty:
He said the weapon was a key reason he shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum during the mayhem. “If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it,” Rittenhouse testified during the trial.
Demonstrators saw the shooting and chased after Rittenhouse in an apparent effort to disarm him. One of them was Anthony Huber armed only with a skateboard. Huber grabbed the barrel of the AR-15, and Rittenhouse shot him to death.
“The irony of the case is that Mr. Rittenhouse has become a cause célèbre among gun-rights advocates, even though, according to his own defense, it was his carrying of the rifle that put him in danger in the first place,” the Economist noted.
Rittenhouse said no such thing. And they quoted the testimony which refutes their claim! The key reason for all legal use of lethal force is the reasonable fear of imminent severe injury or death. Rittenhouse articulated this well, repeatedly, and the video supports his claims. Without the rifle Rosenbaum would still have been outraged at his dumpster fire, being pushed into a gas station, being put out with the fire extinguisher. And that outrage led to Rittenhouse being chased by Rosenbaum and others. And when they cornered him without the rifle they almost certainly would have caused him severe injury or death. Hence, the rifle cannot be the “key reason” justifying the use of deadly force.
They are also liars:
Such weapons were expressly designed for the battlefield, and that may be a good part of their appeal.
Wrong. Such weapons are expressly designed to be easy to shoot, maintain, carry, economical, and accurate. They are the most common rifle sold in the United States and no AR-15 style rifle has ever been issued to a military for battlefield use (the AR-15 is semi-auto, militaries all use select fire rifles).
The primacy of assault-style rifles in American society is not a Second Amendment issue. When the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia authored a Supreme Court ruling in 2008 underscoring the Second Amendment’s right to possess firearms, he said the freedom is “not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever.”
This must be a deliberate lie. Here is the complete quote from the 2008 Heller decision (emphasis added):
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26
We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.”
I cannot imagine having read to middle of page 54 to pluck the “not unlimited” quote they did not read to the top of page 55 and see the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.”
Being the most popular rifle style sold in the United States the AR-15 qualifies as “in common use”. Hence, the AR-15 is protected by the Second Amendment.
Quote of the day—єℓ αѕнα’мαη∂σ @sporrendo
Every single gun owner has a mini mushroom for a dick.
єℓ αѕнα’мαη∂σ @sporrendo
Tweeted on November 16, 2021
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday it’s another science denier!
Via a Tweet from In Chains @InChainsInJail.—Joe]
David S. Cohen of Rolling Stone is a liar
The mention of Rolling Stone and anything to do with guns and then bring up lies is probably being entirely redundant, but it doesn’t hurt to make it explicitly clear.
While patrolling the streets, there was gunfire that resulted in some of the Black Lives Matter protesters thinking Rittenhouse was attacking them. They charged Rittenhouse, and he opened fire, killing Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber and injuring Gaige Grosskreutz.
That’s not how it happened. You can watch the video of every shot fired and see for yourself. The gunfire was as the “protestors” had boxed Rittenhouse in between some cars and were closing in on him. One of those attackers fired the gun into the air a few dozen feet from Rittenhouse. The shooting of Huber and Grosskreutz were a minute or so later as Rittenhouse was attempting to reach the safety of the police and the attackers caught up to him after he fell. They struck him with a skateboard, kicked him in the head, and pointed a gun at him. Each person shot was an imminent threat of permanent injury or death to Rittenhouse.
Pilar Melendez of The Daily Beast is a liar
Deception and lying by omission:
During the already-chaotic protest over the Blake’s shooting last August, a video played in court showed Rittenhouse, then 17, shooting Rosenbaum after the unarmed man tossed a plastic bag his way. As Rittenhouse ran away from the scene, still holding his AR-15, the teen is seen in another video running down the street with several protesters in tow.
Technically true. But Rittenhouse did not shoot Rosenbaum because of the plastic bag. A few seconds later, and unmentioned by Melendez, Rosenbaum had Rittenhouse boxed in between several cars and another guy who had just fired a handgun in the air and Rosenbaum was reaching for the rifle. Any competent firearms instructor will tell you that when your attacker is attempting to disarm you it’s almost certainly time to start shooting.
New blog post category
When Brother Doug and I get together we frequently have long talks about our country’s political state. The illegal gun laws, the U.S. debt, the out of control printing of money, etc..
One of the things Doug frequently points out is that the average person doesn’t get outraged because the legacy media gives the political left cover through, at best, selective reporting of the facts and implications of things that are not true. And frequently outright lies.
So how do we combat these lies? Doug and I get frustrated at this point. Politely pointing out their errors doesn’t work. After all, as Lyle frequently points out a good case can be made they actually pride themselves on there ability to lie and get away with it.
I finally came up with decent response. I have created a new blog post category, Legacy Media Liars. This category will be used to call out individuals (when available) as liars. I don’t know that my blog has enough Google Page Rank to bring searches for the liars names into the top ten on Google but it’s better than doing nothing.
I have gone back to a few previous posts and categorized them as well to kind of jump start the category. This is as if I actually will be short on material. The Rittenhouse verdict probably gave me 100 articles to blog about in the first 12 hours after the verdict was announced.
This is going to be a busy category.