JPFO is issuing a travel warning to Jews and other 2A supporters and urging an economic boycott for Middlesex County, Massachusetts after Newton Police arrested Scott Hayes for defending himself from a violent, antisemitic attack.
Scott Hayes was peacefully exercising his rights protected under the First Amendment with a small group of people in the town of Newton, MA. A person in the group was carrying an Israeli flag when a man began yelling antisemitic remarks at the group from across the street, calling them “sick” for supporting Israel.
After a few words were exchanged, the man charged across the street, tackling Scott Hayes to the ground and attempting to wrap his arms around his neck in order to cause even more harm than he had already done. At that point, Mr. Hayes exercised his natural right to defend himself, pulled out a gun and shot the assailant in the abdomen. After freeing himself from the man’s clutches, Scott retreated and attempted to get his assailant medical attention. The assailant is expected to survive.
Mr. Hayes was arrested by the Newton Police who sought and obtained a criminal complaint against him for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The District Attorney is pursuing charges against Mr. Hayes for having defended himself against a violent antisemitic attack. While many state officials in Massachusetts have, for years, been enemies of the Second Amendment, this latest event is a record-breaking atrocity even for them. State actors actively defending violent antisemites while leveling criminal charges against those who defend themselves against them, sends up a warning for all Jews to steer clear of Massachusetts, if at all possible, especially Middlesex County. Antisemitism is on the rise and now we have state officials in Massachusetts formally and proudly defending it.
I think it would be easier to just stay out of all of Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City until Federal prosecutors start charging and convicting the rights hating police and local prosecutors. Without prosecutions it is going to take a new generation to change the mindset of the criminals running these locations.
Looking at Earth was obviously very, very special. But when you look off to the side, you look out into the darkness of space, and you see your spaceship there, and how gritty it looks, it gave you this sense of, like ‘this isn’t going to be easy.’
You look down, there’s the blue down there and the black up there … there is Mother Earth and comfort, and there is, is there death? I don’t know, but is that death? Is that the way death is? … It was so moving; this experience, it was something unbelievable.
Establishing colonies on the moon, other planets, and perhaps ultimately in other star systems is going to take some very special people. The immigration to North America two to three hundred years ago and even the migration from the eastern states to the western territories in the early and mid 1800s was a harsh filter and resulted in a different type of people from their original stock.
It is difficult to imagine the type of person which will result from those willing to engage in space travel and the deprivation of a world so hostile there is not even any atmosphere to breath, a livable temperature range, water to drink, or food to eat. Every essential of human life will need to be brought with them or scratched out of the rocky, dust, surface of the giant rocks they intend to call home.
I would go into space (I attended Parent-Child Space Camp three times and once applied for a Mission Specialist position in the Shuttle program) but that would be knowing I was probably going to be back on earth in a most a few days or weeks. Going to some hostile rock will little chance of ever coming back is a much bigger decision.
She pointed to some state laws that protect individual privacy as obstacles preventing law enforcement officials from adequately responding to background checks, and said her office was currently working with state legislators to push for changes that would lift such restrictions.
Of course! Since they are infringing upon one specific enumerated right, they may as well infringe on two at the same time. Shoot, why not infringe on a bunch more at the same time. Why not throw people in jail if it is rumored they are thinking of buying a gun. Presume they are guilty and give them “due process” by an opportunity in court to prove they were not going to buy a gun to use to murder babies in hospital nurseries.
Also note this item from the same article:
In 2024, the gun background check system helped block more than 4,600 gun sales to people convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, according to the report. To date, the Department of Justice has charged more than 500 defendants with violating provisions under the law, and the expanded background check provision has kept guns out of the hands of nearly 900 young people who shouldn’t have them, federal officials said.
Notice the metric they use for the usefulness of the law. It is not a reduction in the crime rate. It is the number of people prevented from purchasing a gun from a FFL.
Their object is not making the general population safer. It is preventing the general population from purchasing firearms.
These people have zero respect for individual rights of the people.
More than 1,000 zombie knives and machetes have been surrendered to one police force as new legislation banning them becomes law.
Avon and Somerset Police said the weapons had been handed in to 15 surrender sites across the region and urged people who still had them to turn them in.
The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.
St. George Tucker Blackstone’s Commentaries 1:App. 300 1803
England and the US have certainly lost much of our liberty, and we are in danger of losing more. It is time to take it back.
With news continuing to filter in about the second assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, the nation’s prominent Democrats expressed relief that Hitler was OK.
Following a busy weekend of making public statements and social media posts clearly identifying Trump as “literally Hitler” and telling the country that he posed a grave threat to the existence of the United States, Democratic leaders quickly made it known how glad they were to find out he was unharmed.
“We’re just glad the greatest threat to democracy is safe,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. “I know just an hour or so before he narrowly avoided a second attempt on his life I posted online about how he was leading the charge to destroy America and had to be stopped, but I’m relieved to hear that he wasn’t harmed.”
Barb and I recently visited Central Europe. In Vienna we were walking from our Air B & B to some sort of public transportation to visit Schönbrunn Palace (the main summer residence of the Habsburg rulers set on what amounts to a 400-acre park) when I saw this and did a double take:
What? Oh, yeah, Freud was from Vienna!
In high school there was a psychology class, and I heard other students talking about the Id, Super Ego, Oedipus Complex, etc. I read a little about it and was not impressed. It wasn’t like so many other classes I took, like the math and science stuff which once the teacher introduced a topic it “just made sense”. Of course this was right, it fit in with everything else I knew. This psychology stuff was something different. Did the human mind really work like this? It just didn’t make sense to me and I didn’t take the class.
In college I had to take some “humanities” classes and in what I think was my second or third semester I took Psych 101. One of the first things the professor said was, paraphrasing:
Freud created the science of psychology. Other than the existence and importance of the unconscious mind, we have painstakingly proved everything he said about the human mind is not true.
Freud was such a powerful figure it had taken two generations after his death to finally reach the point where people called B.S. on his work. And to this day we still have remnants of his legacy with Markley’s Law.
I loved that psychology class. It wasn’t the “this makes sense” type of stuff to the extent of the of math and the hard sciences but it was based on decent research and did make a certain amount of sense. I took numerous other psych classes throughout my undergraduate years and probably was close to having a minor degree in psychology. It was really easy and I got A’s in all of them.
Now here I am, a two-minute walk from Frued’s office and residence. Whatever I think of Freud’s work, I have to see this museum. The next day, on September 1st, we visited the museum.
It was a little disappointing, but I’m glad I did it. Here are a few pictures:
Barb reading about the family tree:
This is an art exhibit at the museum, it is not his real couch:
Is that law evidence that [the] government has the power to ban dangerous people from possessing firearms, because people thought that African Americans and other racial minorities were dangerous?”
Harris and Walz can tout their status as gun owners and tip their hats in false homage to the right to keep and bear arms as often as they wish. It’s all subterfuge.
Another tidbit from the same article I found interesting:
In 2008 Harris joined an amicus brief defending complete bans on the possession of handguns and advocating for a 20th century revisionist view of the Second Amendment that renders it little more than a superfluous authorization of state National Guard units.
A complete ban? I wonder if that was before or after Heller. The distinction may be important at her trial.
During cross examination of Ronkainen, the state drilled into the difference between military spec and civilian firearms when considering pounds of pressure to pull the trigger. For military, Ronkainen said the pounds of pressure is higher, or around 6 lbs of pressure, to ensure there is no unintentional trigger pulls. For civilian firearms, the pressure could be as low as 2.5 lbs of pressure.
When the state asked if that means it would take 90 lbs of pressure to fire a 30 round magazine from a civilian firearm, the plaintiffs objected saying that was wrong. The state said it wanted to show the difference in level of fatigue in rapidly firing a civilian firearm versus a military firearm. Ronkainen said that is immaterial.
“I’m not sure the defense understood what a trigger pull was, but overall with what they got I think they did as well as they could,” Maag said.
If I had been asked that question while on the stand, I would have been tempted to ask for a higher IQ idiot to do the cross examination. I would further explain that this lawyer had just demonstrated such a profound level of ignorance and/or stupidity that I doubted there was sufficient common ground for me to realistically establish communication.*
This is the level of ignorance and/or stupidity that we are up against and yet they manage to win many of these battles.
It’s like debating an idiot. It is an unfair contest because they drag you down to their level and win via having vastly more experience.
* Once, at a party, I witnessed two friends of mine meet each other for the first time. One was a multimillionaire from numerous successful startups with a PhD and currently working on creating a state-of-the-art quantum computer. The other was a sweet lady who had a little too much to drink and even when sober was… not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
I kept as straight a face as I could as the PhD tried to establish some sort of communication. It went on for several minutes without a connection and he finally gave up.
As Barb and I went home after the party I told her I had watched as PhD and the lady talked to each other. Barb’s response was something like, “OMG! I would have loved to have seen that.”
I’m pretty sure there have been studies done which show that when the IQ difference is more than about two or three standard deviations apart, without sufficient training of the higher IQ person, it becomes almost impossible to communicate.
An Alaska man was charged and arrested Wednesday for sending numerous graphic and violent messages through a public Supreme Court communications portal that threatened to injure and kill six justices, according to court filings and the Justice Department.
Some of the messages, according to court filings, used the N-word in threats to “lynch” a justice – identified in the filings as “Supreme Court Justice 1” – while also threatening the justice’s “insurrectionist wife.” Other messages refer to shooting another justice – identified “Supreme Court Justice 2” – and killing his wife, and another alleged message threatened six justices total, saying that they should “be AFRAID very AFRAID to leave their home and fear for their lives everyday.”
“WE NEED MASS ASSASSINATIONS. If you’re corrupt you’re corrupt,” said one of the messages, one of more than 465 that Anastasiou allegedly sent to the Supreme Court.
…
The references to Justice 1’s wife and the racial slurs in those messages suggest that justice is Justice Clarence Thomas.
An Alaska man has been indicted on charges that he sent racist and violent threats against six Supreme Court justices and their family members.
…
They became increasingly more menacing this past January, including threats to assassinate the judges. Anastasiou also allegedly made lynching threats and used the N-word in statements aimed at a justice identified as “Supreme Court Justice 1” in the indictment, apparently referring to Clarence Thomas, who is Black.
The messages also included racial, homophobic and misogynistic slurs, the filings show.
Racist: Check. Fan of Lynching: Check Violent Threats: Check
The next time you see a social media post from a military veteran who claims to support banning certain firearms or any other infringement of our civil rights, realize they may be getting paid to violate their oath.
An email obtained last week by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project revealed that the “precision micro-influencer” marketing firm People First is hiring veterans to serve as paid social media influencers for the Harris-Walz campaign.
Through Dec. 31, 29,357 people had registered about 69,000 prohibited guns and over 42,000 accessories, according to Illinois State Police data. A little over 2.4 million Illinoisans have firearm owner’s identification cards, meaning only about 1.2% of FOID card holders registered guns or accessories subject to the ban, the statistics through 2023 show. However, the true degree of compliance with the law is not possible to determine, since residents with a valid FOID card may not own guns or accessories that are subject to the ban.
Pape surveyed more than 2,000 Americans in late June, before the first attempt on Trump’s life on July 13. The survey found a disturbing willingness, across the political spectrum, to say that violence was warranted to eliminate political foes.
The poll, from the Chicago Project on Security & Threats, released in June, showed that 6.9% of Americans — or the equivalent of 18 million adults — believed that it was justified to use force to restore Trump to the White House. In another question, 10% of Americans — or the equivalent of 26 million adults — said they believed political violence is justified to prevent Trump from becoming president again.
The ratio of people on the left willing use violence compared to people on the right in consistent with my hypothesis.
With 26 million people believing violence is justified to stop Trump from reaching office we should expect assassination attempts every few weeks. And every attempt against Trump increases the likelihood of an attempt on Harris.
Remember, the spark that started WW1 was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. A civil war could easily be sparked by a political assassination in this country.
A man with an AK-style rifle pointed the firearm’s muzzle into Donald Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida, as the former president was playing a round, prompting the U.S. Secret Service to open fire, according to three law enforcement officials.
The FBI is investigating what it called an “attempted assassination” of former President Donald Trump after Secret Service agents fired at a man with an AK-47 on or near Trump’s Florida golf course on Sunday.
A spokesperson for Donald Trump‘s campaign said the former president is “safe.” Law enforcement sources told ABC News a suspect is in custody.
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said the gunman was 300 to 500 yards away from the former president when he was spotted. Secret Service agents fired and the suspect dropped the gun and fled, a senior law enforcement official told ABC News. It was not clear if the suspect was aiming his weapon at Trump.
The source said the suspect got into a vehicle and witnesses reported the license plate number which was tracked by authorities. The suspect was stopped and taken into custody.
Even at 300 yards a semi-auto AK has pretty low odds of connecting with a single fatal shot. But it sounds like the suspected assassin may have been waiting for Trump to get closer.
A gunman was captured Sunday after apparently trying to shoot former President Donald Trump at a golf course in Florida.
Trump is OK, and no injuries were reported by authorities after Secret Service agents fired at the gunman they spotted in the bushes.
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said the incident took place about 1:30 while the former president was golfing at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach.
They immediately sealed off the area, after Secret Service agents fired four to six rounds at the gunman.
The agents were a couple of holes ahead of where the former president was playing when they spotted a rifle barrel sticking out of the course shrubbery.
I could make a lot of speculative comments but I’m going to let the story develop more before saying what Trump supporters are probably already thinking.
As we enter the homestretch of the 2024 election, Harris is trying to pull off the greatest magic trick in the history of American politics. She is attempting to make the Biden-Harris administration disappear. She wants to convince voters that she and President Biden had nothing to do with the last three-and-a-half years.
More than that, Harris seemingly wants to pretend that Trump is somehow the incumbent president, and that she is the upstart “change” candidate fighting against the failed policies of the last three-and-a-half years. It is surreal to say the least.
It is a slick sleight of hand doomed to fail, because people will believe their “lying eyes.” For tens of millions of voters, the number one failure of the Biden-Harris administration is the economy, quickly followed by immigration, crime and health care. These voters will tie the incumbent vice president to those failures.
Harris, elitist Democrats, academics, media personalities and celebrities existing in entitled bubbles of luxury and personal safety can embrace Jan. 6, Roe v. Wade, etc. all they want, but this election is still going to come down to the bread-and-butter issues of the economy, immigration, crime and affordable and reliable healthcare.
And on that score, it will be the Americans living paycheck-to-paycheck who will push Trump over the top to victory in November.
A falsehood they have a significant investment in.
Celebrities pontificating on subjects they know nothing about.
A comforting falsehood, even when the uncomfortable truth is obvious.
I don’t think anyone can reliably know what will happen in the next few weeks before the election to predict anything better than they can predict the flip of a coin.
Furthermore, a good case can be made that it is not a fair coin, and a probable T side result will be reversed in the dark of the night to show an H.
A Trump judge in Kansas ruled that the Second Amendment invalidates criminal charges against a defendant charged with illegally possessing a machine gun. The case is United States v. Morgan.
Judge John Broomes’s decision in Morgan is obviously wrong, even under the Supreme Court’s most aggressively pro-gun opinion, which Broomes relied on heavily.
…
This chaos is likely to continue until Bruen is overruled. The history and tradition test announced in the case provides lower court judges with no meaningful guidance on which gun laws are constitutional. And Bruen allows judges who are determined to reach pro-gun conclusions no matter what the consequences to strike down virtually any gun law — which may explain Broomes’s decision in the Morgan case.
I find it very telling that Millhiser says the decision is obviously wrong but doesn’t bother to explain it to those of us, including federal judges, he apparently thinks are too stupid to figure it out on our own. I would especially enjoy seeing him tap dance around the U.S. v. Miller decision on the topic of machine guns.
He also is either stupid, ignorant and/or deliberately lying when he fails to mention that in both Heller and Bruen SCOTUS said the 2nd Amendment text has already taken into account any balancing of interests. The “consequences” he is concerned about cannot be considered in determining whether a law is unconstitutional or not.
In last night’s three-on-one debate the ABC News moderators used misleading crime data from the FBI to ‘fact check’
@realDonaldTrump. The reality is that Trump (as he usually is) was right – crime is not down – it is up, way up. Kamala Harris and her willing accomplices in the mainstream media would have you believe that violent crime in America is at a 50-year low, a narrative eagerly parroted by so-called fact-checkers at Politifact and now ABC News. The reality, however, is far from what they claim. The only thing at a 50-year low is the integrity of violent crime data. Less than a year after taking office, Biden-Harris’s administration had the FBI dismantle the long-standing crime reporting system, replacing it in 2021 with a new, ‘woke’ system that is optional for state and local law enforcement agencies to use. As a result, at least 6,000 law enforcement agencies aren’t providing data, meaning that 25% of the country’s crime data is not captured by the FBI. This deliberate underreporting skews the statistics, painting a falsely optimistic picture of public safety while real Americans continue to suffer from rising crime rates.
Democrat-controlled cities from New York to San Francisco have effectively decriminalized violent crime. For instance, in New York City, 52% of violent felony cases are downgraded to misdemeanors, and offenders are typically offered diversion agreements that keep these offenses out of crime statistics. This manipulation alone could account for a 50% or more drop in reported violent crimes in the Big Apple. Across the country, Soros-backed prosecutors are refusing to prosecute violent criminals or downgrading their charges in record numbers. This systematic underreporting and leniency are tactics used by Democrats to create a misleading narrative about public safety, while communities continue to suffer from unchecked crime. It’s not far-fetched to imagine that the Biden-Harris regime and the Democrats replaced the FBI’s universal crime data system with a new optional system to fabricate this massive decrease in ‘reported’ crime. The move raises serious questions about their motives and the integrity of the data. Of course, the Democrats will argue that the new system is more inclusive, allowing law enforcement agencies to record pronouns and gender identities, including transgender and nonbinary, as well as the sexual preferences of both criminals and victims. The timing and optional nature of the new system suggest an ulterior motive: to obscure the real rise in crime and present a false narrative of improvement under Democratic leadership.
Additionally, we know that the 70 Soros-backed prosecutors, representing 72 million Americans and half of the nation’s 50 most populous cities and counties, have made it their mission to implement so-called restorative justice. This approach often means refusing to prosecute violent criminals based on factors such as race and gender identity. The few criminals they do prosecute almost always have their violent felonies downgraded to misdemeanors. Both of these realities—the new optional reporting system and the restorative justice efforts—have led to violent crime data that fails to reflect the true state of our communities since 2021. These manipulations distort public perception and allow Democrats to promote a false sense of security. National polls reveal that most Americans believe crime has increased significantly over the past four years. The situation is even more dire in large Democrat-controlled cities, where almost all residents report a massive surge in crime. Most residents even report that they or someone in their family has been a victim of crime. Take Chicago, for example. Every weekend, approximately 70 people are shot. The crisis has escalated to such an extent that the mayor recently canceled the city’s contract with a company that detects and reports gunfire. There are so many gunshots in Chicago that police can only respond if someone is actually hit by a bullet. New York City is similarly experiencing a huge spike in robberies and assaults, often occurring in broad daylight. The situation became so severe this year that the governor had to deploy National Guard troops to the NYC subway system to deter criminals. Before District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Attorney General Letitia James took office, these violent crimes would have been prosecuted as felonies. Now, if they are prosecuted at all, they are often downgraded to misdemeanors with diversion deals. There is also ample evidence that the FBI and the Biden-Harris regime are simply cooking the books. Watch Jesse Waters expose what he calls Enron-style corruption in their crime reporting. The next time someone tries to tell you that Biden and Harris have reduced crime to its lowest levels in 50 years, let them know the truth. It’s easy to claim a decrease in crime when you leave out data from 25% of the population living in major cities like Los Angeles and New York City. The reality is, these omissions paint a misleading picture of the state of crime in America. Don’t let them gaslight you with manipulated statistics. Demand full transparency and accountability in crime reporting to get the real story.
Candidate Harris and her co-conspirators claim crime is at a 50-year and the gun control she and Biden implemented are responsible for this. That Biden and Harris are responsible for the violent crime rate is at least partially true. But it is not something to be proud of.
‘Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We’re not taking anybody’s guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff,’ she said during the debate with former President Donald Trump.
Did you hear that? She is one of us! Yay!!!!
But, of course, the way you can tell she is lying is that her lips are moving. From the same article:
During the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Harris proposed a series of gun control policies, even backing a controversial government-run mandatory gun buyback program.
She detailed her position in an MSNBC forum on gun safety in October 2019.
‘We have to have a buyback program, and I support a mandatory gun buyback program,’ she said.
Harris warned there were already estimates of up to 10 million assault weapons in the United States.
‘We’re going to have to have smart public policy that’s about taking those off the streets, but doing it the right way,’ she said.
“Mandatory gun buyback”? She can’t “buyback” something she didn’t sell us. Of course, the phrase really means they will take our tax money at gun point, give some of it back it to us as an inadequate payment for the guns they are forcibly taking from us and will then tell us we should be thankful they gave us some of our money back.
