Very bad news for Mike Vanderboegh.  Keep him in your prayers please.  I know I am.

It’s possible to kill the Iran nuclear deal, but John Boehner stands in the way.  He’s a drunken sot, a scandalous pig, a lazy bum without scruples, morality, decency or character.

David Codrea:

This appears to be yet another in a never-ending list of examples demonstrating that for “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day. The whole object of child protective services is to protect children, and of family services to serve families. In this case, the tax-feeding bureaucrats would clearly rather see children killed than protected by foster parents with a gun, and they’d rather see children institutionalized in state facilities than have the opportunity to live in a nurturing home environment.

New Jersey Supreme Court to deal with gun control.  Personally I couldn’t care less whether a former LEO gets to continue to carry unless you roll everyone else into the calculus.  But it’s interesting to note that Chris Christie appointed the majority of the justices.  Let’s see which way they go.

Popular Mechanics on why don’t we have smart guns?  We do – nobody wants them.

To all of you who have contacted me offline, I appreciate the well wishes and prayers for my oldest son Joshua.  He is doing incrementally better each day but still needs prayer.

Dependent care issues.  Return to regular posting soon.  Thank you.

In the mean time, read this (and this, and this and this).  Contemplate the list of survival equipment I have recommended you take even on a day hike.

Fox News:

Second Amendment groups are accusing the gun control lobby of putting law-abiding owners of firearms in danger by urging people to call the police on anyone carrying a gun in public.

As more states relax rules about open-carrying of guns, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has taken to social media to urge the public to assume gun-toters are trouble, and to call the cops on anyone they feel may be a threat.

“If you see someone carrying a firearm in public—openly or concealed—and have ANY doubts about their intent, call 911 immediately and ask police to come to the scene,” the group wrote on its widely followed Facebook page. “Never put your safety, or the safety of your loved ones, at the mercy of weak gun laws that arm individuals in public with little or no criminal and/or mental health screening.”

That approach, according to a blog post by Ohio-based Buckeye Firearms Association, could give rise to needless, tense confrontations between police and gun owners. The association and other similar groups liken the tactic to “swatting,” or the act of tricking an emergency service into dispatching responders based on a false report. Many online harassment campaigns have been known to participate in the practice.

“This practice is exactly what they [Coalition to Stop Gun Violence] are doing,” said Erich Pratt, spokesman for Virginia-based Gun Owners of America. “It’s one thing if someone is using a gun in an illegal or unlawful manner. No one is questioning that. But this clearly sounds like swatting.”

The gun control groups are certainly clearly to blame for putting lives at risk, but the primary responsibility for this lies in the fact that there is such a thing as a SWAT team at all for deployment in situations like this.

If the 911 operators and police would simply educate the public like they should, this sort of thing wouldn’t happen.  911 – what’s your emergency?  “I see a man carrying a gun down the street.”  Ma’am, that’s not illegal.  What’s your emergency, is he brandishing it or threatening anyone?  “Well, no.  But I can’t be sure of anything.” Ma’am, you are using the valuable 911 time that might be needed in real emergencies, so if you don’t hang up we intend to press charges for misuse and abuse of 911.  Click.

That’s all this takes.  It’s a lie to assert that every call must be investigated.  They don’t investigate your “widdle tummy hurting,” any more than they investigate why your cable TV stopped working.  In states where it isn’t illegal to open carry, 911 should be one stop shopping for explaining that police are only deployed when crimes are committed.  And claiming that the cops have a need to know who you are runs directly contrary to the notion of legitimate “Terry stops.”  No … they … don’t.  Not even in “stop and identify” states, for which the stipulation is suspicion of a crime.