Pray for Mike.  I am

David Codrea:

“College students in Brooklyn are about do to something the National Rifle Association has refused to — build a smart gun,” a purported “news report” by the New York Daily News proclaims in what it’s labeled an “Exclusive.” Right off the bat, and unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with how the rag compulsively lies about guns, they start off with a misdirecting falsehood.

Good.  Here’s what I want you to do, students.  Spend a lot of time on it.  Put your best and brightest on this project.  They can use “smart guns” to build their CV for when they apply for jobs.  I want you to pour money into this, enough to bankrupt the school if the gun isn’t sold.  Then I want you to market it at local guns stores.  If you’re in New York, you might have to drive a long way, or market it to your local police.  Write me a note and tell me how it goes.

Fred sums in football:

When people have no cause for conflict, they invent it. For this we have football teams in which armored felons having no connection to us attack somebody else’s felons—and we become deeply involved emotionally.

Courthouse News Service:

A Ninth Circuit panel on Tuesday refused to set aside a California law banning depictions of handguns on gun store advertisements.

I guess the first amendment doesn’t matter any more.

At Zero Hedge, from user barkingcat:

“General populace is dumber than a box of rocks.

They are mesmerized by whores and pimps and charlatans with shinny trinkets.

They do not care about anything but numbing their brains and stuffing their bellies with factory manufactured GMO crap.”

Perspectives from down under:

On a recent trip to the US while filming Unplanned America, we visited three groups of what some may call extreme gun nuts. And for a group of anti-gun Australians, we found them surprisingly hard to argue with.

[ … ]

When I popped my cherry and shot the vintage “Sten” sub-machinegun, the rapid pop pop pop of the bullets down the indoor range was deeply satisfying and the action movie-loving eight-year-old boy inside me was in heaven.

But when the next weapon came out, s**t got real and kick-arse elation turned to sickening shock. Legend has it that the Geneva Convention bans the Barrett M82A1 from being shot at human targets, due to it being a war crime. And while this may not technically be true, the US Army does train soldiers not to shoot it at personnel.

We were speechless. So why does the weapon exist, we asked? Tony replied that it’s to shoot at “material”. Like a building or vehicle or army equipment — even military issued zippers or military issued glasses. And if a human happened to be attached to that equipment, well it might be the case that the massive 50 caliber bullets accidentally ensure that human becomes nothing more than “red mist”.

One by one we leant over the huge weapon and pulled the trigger, and each time everyone within a two meter radius felt a shock wave from the barrel like a punch in the chest. Boom! And the chilling thought of a cloud of red mist left behind was felt in the pit of my stomach.

So why do Americans love guns? Why the hell do they need them? Why do they take such joy in owning and shooting these things, when so many Australians would be terrified to even touch them?

The way Tony explains it is that due to the prevalence of violent crime in the US, and given the remote location of his own home, he’d be crazy not to have a gun. He says if an armed intruder broke into his house to kill his loved ones, by the time the county sheriff eventually got there, he would be trying to solve a slaying, not prevent one.

Secondly, Tony says there are so many guns in the US it would take a government generations to entirely rid the nation of them. And most gun owners would never agree to it, indeed many would respond in violence.

This point is key. Once you consider that the guns might be here to stay, the issue gets infinitely more complicated.

Let’s stop and assess what we’ve read so far.  First of all, self defense is a legitimate reason for weapons ownership, and it’s partly why I own them.  But it isn’t the basis for the second amendment.  Amelioration of tyranny is the reason, but we’ll get to that in a moment.

Second, these authors need to get their information reviewed and checked before publishing it.  The Marine Corps Scout Snipers shoot the .50 rifle if needed, and some carry it as their primary weapon.  The Marines have two larger caliber rifles for this purpose, the .308 and the .50.  The Army uses a more filled out version of calibers, including the .300 Win Mag and the .338 (they also employ the .50 as needed, all calibers against personnel).  All of these calibers are used and have been employed for anti-personnel work, and the only reason the .50 is brought up as an anti-material round is because it is most effective for that type of work versus the .308.  Again, the authors need to get their stuff reviewed before publishing it.  Do they have editors in Australia?

The next group of presumed gun nuts we spent time with was the Virginia Open Carry group. Remarkably, in most states in the US it is totally legal to openly carry a firearm on your hip. Without a license of any kind. We could’ve even done it.

This immediately conjures up images of a lawless Wild West that has no place in a modern civilised society. But as we sat down for a lunch of BBQ ribs (what else) with the open carriers we found them to be intelligent and thoughtful in their views.

There was not a nut among them, but each was staunchly attached to their view and their gun and would never ever let them go. It’s the opinion of these guys that the tragic daily mass shootings in the US are the result of a mental health problem in America, not a gun problem and that the government misdirects the issue so they don’t have to tackle the more complex and expensive issue.

Where it gets tricky for our open carry friends however is that while they agree that psychologically disturbed people are the ones that carry out mass murders, they still believe they have a constitutional right to own a gun, and a God given right to privacy that means the government shouldn’t be allowed to dig into their backgrounds when they want to purchase a firearm. Tricky.

Stop it!  Just stop it.  Stop connecting violence to mental health.  We’ve discussed again and again and again and again how this just isn’t the case, so says mental health professionals.  It is counterfactual to say that when a shooter kills people, it was because of mental health issues.  And pimping this falsehood only leads to the conundrums that writers think they find in the gun rights community.  So just stop it.  Don’t do it any more.

The final group we shot the s**t out of a bunch of cans with were the ones we were most scared of before we met them. They were the Texas State Militia — a self-styled army consisting of ex-military men who have armed themselves to the hilt to protect the American way of life.

We were expecting racist rednecks, paranoid about Muslims and Mexicans taking over their country. This was far from the case. When we spoke to Matt, the young leader of the 1100 strong group we found an ex-soldier who feels deep guilt for the things he did in Iraq and thinks that the US wars in the Middle East are based on government lies.

His group for now however is still keen to work with the government like a terrifying Neighborhood Watch, until such a time where the government stops respecting the rule of law.

And herein lies the crux of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, the part that most Australians don’t understand.

All of those we spoke to believe that it is a citizen’s duty, as explicitly stated in the founding document of the United States, to be armed in order to keep the government in check. They say that the country was founded after their British rulers became corrupt and an armed uprising saved a whole nation from tyranny. They say it will happen again, and they’re ready to protect their freedom if and when it does.

And they might stand a decent chance, given there’s more guns that people in the US right now.

So we are at the crux of the issue, yes?  These folks explained why the second amendment exists, and why we will never give up our guns.  That would run contrary to the very justification for having them in the first place.  As to the soldier who feels guilty for his participation in the war, I wish I could talk at length with him and explain why he has no reason for such guilt.

If only they could find a way to stop turning their weapons on each other. Ending gun violence is one of the most serious and complex problems this country faces. And the most unique to the “land of the free”.

As a note to the authors, in case no one talked to you about this, the gun violence America faces is primarily an inner city black-on-black problem due to the breakdown of the family caused by entitlements (see here and here).  Guns aren’t responsible and bear no relation to the problem.

News from Massachusetts:

LOWELL — Police confiscated four replica guns from a 22-year-old Lowell man Saturday afternoon in the first instance of the new city ban on such weapons being enforced, according to police.

Officers were called to the area behind CVS at 1815 Middlesex St., Saturday at 2:53 p.m., after getting calls reporting a man who appeared to have a rifle, according to police.

Officers found Sharif Eltobgi and two females, whose identities were not released, on the train tracks that run under the Rourke Bridge, and Eltobgi had four weapons that are banned by the new ordinance, according to Capt. Timothy Crowley.

Police say what the rifle callers saw was actually a pellet gun, and that Eltobgi also had two BB handguns and a starter pistol that are covered by the ban.

“This incident is a prime example of the alarm that can be caused to the public when confronted with a subject armed with a replica firearm,” Crowley wrote in a press release.

The City Council passed the ban on replica guns with a 7-2 vote at its meeting on Feb. 9 to address police concerns about the confusion that can be caused by such weapons.

William Taylor is responsible for this, the very same one who wants to review your essay before approving your handgun permit.

This is the Lowell police at their finest, protecting the public from Islamic terrorism and Hispanic and Latino drug gangs.  Don’t you feel safer?

And how long is Smith & Wesson going to stay in this horrible state before relocating to America?

News from the misplaced Northern state:

Usually when the NRA and other gun groups say jump, the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature says, “How high and how many guns should we carry when we do it?” But a few gun fantasies are just a bridge too far for even some Floridians.

Yesterday, Sen. Miguel Diaz de la Portilla, a Miami Republican and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, announced that bills to allow “open carry” and another that would allow guns in Florida airports are dead.

As chair, Diaz de la Portilla basically has the power to kill any bill that comes through the committee by refusing to bring it up for a hearing. Bills in the Florida Legislature must pass three committees before making their way to a vote before the full House and Senate. The open-carry bill had already passed in the full House earlier this month.

Open-carry laws allow gun owners to basically walk around with guns on themselves and totally visible to the public. In some states, that right has led to bizarre sights, such as people toting around large, high-powered machine guns inside Target and Starbucks locations.

Florida’s proposed law would have allowed those who already have a concealed-carry license to openly carry their guns. Since Florida’s concealed-carry license laws apply to only handguns, open carry would still not have applied to larger guns.

“Open carry is not going to happen; it’s done,” Diaz de la Portilla told reporters yesterday, according to the Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau.

Diaz de la Portilla also killed a bill that would have allowed guns in airport terminals. Earlier this session, he dealt the same fate to a bill that would have allowed people to take their concealed weapons onto college campuses.

Gun-rights Republicans have tried several times in previous sessions to pass similar bills, but the efforts have almost always been killed in the Senate by more moderate Republicans.

This is the same thing that happened in South Carolina.  State Senator Larry Martin is head of the judiciary committee and single handedly killed open carry in S.C.

As for those moderate republicans, you mean communists, don’t you?  And as for the man who did this, Diaz de la Portilla, he seems rather proud of himself, doesn’t he?  Hey, that name … that sounds Hispanic.  I thought all of those Hispanics were going to be conservative rather than anti-gun?  That’s what they told us, anyway.

So what are you Floridians going to do about Diaz de la Portilla?

We’ve discussed it in the context of Jackson, Wyoming, where an out-of-control town council banned firearms in the city in spite of state laws.  It’s happening in Asheville, N.C. as we speak, where posting against carrying firearms in Asheville parks violates state law.

Now we see that a proposed bill in Massachusetts would stop this behavior.

BOSTON — Gun-rights advocates are rallying behind a bill in the state Legislature that would prevent municipalities from imposing their own regulations on who can possess a firearm.

Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners’ Action League, an association working to protect Second Amendment rights, said communities are “essentially creating a patchwork of laws across the state, and soon it will be untenable if (the state doesn’t) get in control of it quickly.”

State Rep. James Miceli filed a bill that would ban municipalities and counties from “passing or enforcing ordinances or regulations concerning the lawful ownership, use, possession, transfer, purchase, receipt or transportation of weapons, antique weapons, ammunition or ammunition components.”

“I filed this bill because a lot of the Legislature strives for a balance between towns and the state government,” the Wilmington Democrat said. “There has to be uniformity. No one twisted my arm to do it. I think the bill makes sense.”

Supporters cite a new gun-licensing policy in Lowell that requires applicants to complete an approved safety course that includes a “live fire” component. Applicants seeking unrestricted licenses to carry their weapons in Lowell must also provide a “submit a written statement providing specific reasons why they want to be granted unrestricted access.”

Recall we discussed this, where collectivist police chief William Taylor of Lowell wants to review an essay you are forced to write before granting you the privilege of a handgun license.

This is why it matters.  When a state recognizes certain freedoms, the only action a city, township or municipality can take if allowed to make rules of their own contradicting state law is to get more restrictive.  State preemption is necessary to prevent more restrictive gun laws.  Another way of saying it is granting permission to cities to make regulations more restrictive than state law can only result in one thing, i.e., regulations more restrictive than state law.  This always means a loss of recognized rights.

Sadly, I predict the bill will fail.  After all, this is Massachusetts.  And when, for heaven’s sake, is Smith & Wesson going to leave that awful state?

techdirt:

I guess this isn’t that surprising, but as the big legal fight heated up this week between Apple and the Justice Department over whether or not Apple can be forced to create a backdoor to let the FBI access the contents of Syed Farook’s iPhone, all of the major Presidential candidates have weighed in… and they’re all wrong. Donald Trump is getting the most attention. Starting earlier this week he kept saying that Apple should just do what the FBI wants, and then he kicked it up a notch this afternoon saying that everyone should boycott Apple until it gives in to the FBI. Apparently, Trump doesn’t even have the first clue about the actual issue at stake, in terms of what a court can compel a company to do, and what it means for our overall security.

This isn’t another Trump-bashing post.  I’ve had my share, and it’s so easy.  But in this case, every other presidential candidate – every other presidential candidate – is close to being as bad on the issue, and lacks even a basic clue as to what’s at stake.

There is also misunderstanding within the field who purports to comprehend the technology of the issue.  This post at Zero Hedge is an example.

On the surface, this appears like valiant attempt by the CEO of the world’s most valuable company to stand up against the Big Brother state made so famous in the aftermath of the Edward Snowden revelations.

However, a quick peek beneath the surface reveals something far less noble and makes Tim Cook seem like you average, if very cunning, smartphone salesman.

According to the The Daily Beast’s Shane Harris, in a similar case in New York last year, Apple acknowledged that it could extract such data if it wanted to. But the real shocker is that according to prosecutors in that case, Apple has unlocked phones for authorities at least 70 times since 2008. (Apple doesn’t dispute this figure.)

As Harris observantly adds, “in other words, Apple’s stance in the San Bernardino case may not be quite the principled defense that Cook claims it is.”

To this, my oldest son Josh sends the following.

He doesn’t understand the subject matter. He’s in over his head and backing in to a predisposition.

Apple was unlocking phones years ago, when security feature such as system-wide encryption hadn’t been implemented. It was a different kind of “unlocking.” This isn’t a fight over keys to a single device. This is a fight over encryption, which the government doesn’t want any of us to have, because the government is run by political science and history majors.

Of note is the fact that any device from the 4th generation forward (beginning with 5s) is impossible – IMPOSSIBLE – to decrypt without the actual key, because Apple has moved encryption duties to a separate System On A Chip (SoC) that runs its own OS, is married to the device by UUID, and totally inaccessible.

The phone the FBI is freaking out over is a 5c, not a 5s.

The FBI doesn’t need the phone. They have what they need already. This is about encryption. The government needs an event they can point to and blame for encryption, and they’ve chosen this one.

This is the politics of control and power. To categorize it as a publicity stunt is disingenuous to the point of being dangerous.

Note that we’ve discussed here and here the weaknesses in random number generators and the ability to hone in on keys, but Apple has a feature that cuts the entire system off and erases data if this approach is tried beyond just a few random numbers.

Concerning this report, Josh also send the following.

The phone was in the possession of the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health in the hours after the attack. An idiot IT worker with the department performed a remote reset of the iCloud account attached to the device.

This disabled an assortment of services and functions on the phone, including automatic backups to iCloud, which the FBI seems to think would have been helpful, even though they’re also encrypted.

They’re fixating.

Bottom line.  The fedgov has not asked for Apple to break into this phone.  They have asked Apple to develop an approach that allows them to completely bypass all security, thus making them malleable to a FISA court ruling for any or all phones in the future.

All of your worst suspicions are true.  This is the government at its most totalitarian.

Over the weekend the family took a hike up Chimney Rock.  This is the flag flying half staff for the lion of the court, the one who single-handedly changed the arc of constitutional interpretation in America.

Via Uncle, 9mm is the best round for the 1911.

The 1911 is probably the most iconic handgun design ever. No pistol in history has done more – from battlefield to CCW to every single flavor of competition, there are 1911s. It’s just a great gun. It’s also at its finest when it’s chambered in a cartridge it wasn’t originally designed for: 9mm. Now, before you come burn my house down, hear me out because there’s a method to my madness. Yes, I know that it’s harder to make a 9mm 1911 run right than a .45. Yes, I know that the 1911 was originally designed for the .45 ACP cartridge, and that saying it’s better when chambered in 9mm is tantamount to heresy. But it’s heresy like Galileo’s heresy, because I’m actually right.

Let’s look at defensive uses first: we know for a fact that there’s no difference in terminal performance between .45 ACP and 9mm (cue the ballistards), so there’s no point in giving up 2-3 rounds of ammunition capacity, right?

We know that for a fact, do we?  So I didn’t preserve the original title of the post, which was 9mm is the best caliber for the 1911, since the definition of caliber is in units of inches (i.e., it’s English, not SI).  I corrected it for the author.

So wait, I hear the phone ringing.  Hello, [talky talk …].  Thank you sir.  Hey, that was John Moses Browning.  He said … ring, um, hold on.  Hello, [talky talk].  Thank you sir.  That was John Basilone.  Both Browning and Basilone said you’re wrong.

So there.

There is an interesting comment left at PJM:

Matt Walsh is one of the best Christian bloggers out there. This is what he wrote on facebook today commenting on the election. Strong words, but they should be heard.

Trump won South Carolina, a supposedly conservative Christian state, by a wide margin tonight.

A few quick reactions:

– Don’t rationalize this. He didn’t win because of Democrats. The man won Evangelicals. The man who — JUST THIS WEEK — praised Planned Parenthood, and who fishes for applause lines by cussing out his competitors and mocking disabled people, and who can’t name a book in the Bible, and who said he doesn’t need forgiveness from God, and who brags about sleeping with married women, and who said he’d love to date his own daughter because she has a hot body, and who supported the murder of fully developed infant children, and who blatantly lies and then lies again about lying, and who has encapsulated literally the exact opposite of anything that could remotely be considered a “Christian value,” won with the indispensable assistance of Christians. The anger I feel towards those Christians in this moment cannot be put into words. They should be ashamed. I will pray for them.

– Speaking of winning conservatives, Trump — JUST THIS WEEK — said he likes the Obamacare mandate. This was, according to conservatives, the most important thing to defeat not but two years ago. Now some of those same conservatives are voting for a big government liberal who says he supports the very thing these very people were sure would undo the Republic just a few months ago.

– If Trump wins the nomination, conservatism in this country is officially dead, and the country itself will be close behind it.

– Speaking of the country’s demise, Trump fans are gleefully ushering in tyranny. I am tired of hearing about their “anger.” They claim they are angry at the very thing they now embrace. They aren’t angry. They’re bored. They’re immature. They’re infatuated with celebrity and fame and money.

I am not a Jeb Bush supporter (this comment was left on an article having to do with Bush).  I have openly supported Ted Cruz, but that doesn’t matter now.  It appears that no one can win the nomination except Donald Trump.  Christians have had a lot to do with his success.

My oldest son Josh works with someone who told him when asked why he was voting for Trump, “we need money and Trump knows how to get it!”  So much for the Southerners aren’t dumb hicks like you think they are meme.  This was why it was one time required that you be a head of household and land owner to vote.  Trump won South Carolina partly because of dumb people.

But the commenter is right.  The biggest part of Trump’s success in the S.C. primary had to do with winning the evangelical vote.  I have to hand it to Trump.  He knows how to perform a magic show.  It’s like the magician who shouts “Look here, Obamacare is a disaster …,” noise and flashing lights, and in the other hand he is hiding what he doesn’t want you to see, that he wants a single payer health care system just like Obama.  “Look here, A WALL, and it’s going to be big and beautiful and we’re going to get Mexico to pay for it …,” the people go wild, flashing lights, and in the other hand he holds the truth, that wall has a gigantic door through which they can all pass back in.  “I’ll tear down the system …” flashing lights, and in the other hand he holds the truth, he wants to meet with these people in the oval office and make deals.

Oh, on that last one, it isn’t hidden.  He said so.  Well, to be honest, he said so about the other two as well.  But the idiots didn’t see it for the flashing lights, or they didn’t want to see it because they are members of a religious cult.  But on the biggest one, “Look here, I think abortion is horrible …,” flashing lights, but I’m pro-choice and Planned Parenthood has good people and does good things.

It’s on this last one that the commenter has fixated, and for good reason.  I recall a time when we preached about abortion, and my family picketed the only abortion clinic in our city, and when Christians cared.  Trump has said that Planned Parenthood has good people and does good things.  Listen to me carefully.  Everyone working for Planned Parenthood is evil (or at a minimum, very naïve and deluded), the organization is evil, and it does not do good things.  Moreover, if you give money to any part of it, it’s just like giving money to the United Way.  You designate your giving, and they say “thank you very much,” and readjust and reallocate their dollars so that it all works out the way they wanted it to with the general funds anyway.

Planned Parenthood is a child of Margaret Sanger, a well-known eugenicist, and ideological follower of Adolf Hitler.  She was evil and now suffers in hell with Hitler (the only happy part of this sad story).  Christians who support Trump are supporting a man who unashamedly says that these people are good and do good things, and has given his money so that they can pimp eugenics.

But I don’t care about Trump.  This is the important part.  After hearing all of that, Christians still voted for him.  After searching my memory, my heart and my mind, I can come up with nothing more than the Christian church in America has lost its soul.  It one time cared about doctrine, theology, and good teaching.  At one time in history, theology and philosophy were heard from the pulpit (in the North it would have been from W.G.T. Shedd and Charles Hodge, in the South from James Henley Thornwell and R.L. Dabney).  At one time in history, the church wasn’t anemic.  But those times have long gone.  The Christian church in America may as well not exist.

I feel sorry for this loss – the loss of our scruples and values.  And before it is responded that Trump says he’s a Christian, and said of the Pope that it is disgraceful for a spiritual leader to question a person’s faith, or asks the question can someone’s behavior discredit a profession of faith?, I have some very direct words for you.

I am not a Roman Catholic and don’t believe in the so-called “Chair of Peter.”  No man is my intercessor except the God-man, Christ Jesus.  So I won’t waste my time addressing anything about the papacy.  Who can judge another man’s faith?  We can.  We all can.  We make functional judgments all day, every day.  If you are a Christian, you and your daughter decide whether the man she wants to marry is a Christian because of Paul’s command that husband and wife not be unequally yoked.  As for the words of Christ, you have heard them before: “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? (Matt 7:16, NASB).  So far from being forbidden from making judgments, we are commanded to judge.  Otherwise, how would be prevent ourselves from being “unequally yoked” (and please, before you cite Matt 7:1, go do some homework and read a dozen or so commentaries so that you understand what you are talking about, and include in your analysis a consideration of John 7:24)).

Works are not necessary for salvation.  But in the order of salvation (ordo salutis), there is still the perseverance of the saints.  We won’t be perfect until we are with Him, we will be in constant need of refreshing and repentance, setting our gaze upon the one who perfected our salvation.  But we who are Christians are being changed more and more to be like Christ.  Works aren’t the cause, but are the evidence of our salvation.

And finally note that I included forgiveness in the list above.  I attended seminary.  But the things I am saying are basic, child like stuff, the work of children’s Sunday School teachers.  If you are a Christian, you know what I’m saying is true.  And if Donald Trump is speaking the truth, he is not a Christian, and yes, I can indeed make that judgment.

“I am not sure that I have” ever asked God for forgiveness, telling the 2015 Iowa Family Leadership Summit that “I just go on and try to do a better job from there.

“I don’t think so,” Trump, who is Presbyterian, said in response to the question from pollster and summit host Frank Luntz. Trump was among 10 Republican presidential candidates at the daylong event in Ames, Iowa.

“If I do something wrong, I think I just try to make it right,” Trump said. “I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.

Doing a better job of anything doesn’t cut it.  Our works are as filthy rags, adding only to our judgment on that last day.  Salvation is by grace, through faith, lest any man should boast.  Either Trump is telling the truth, in which he has never sought forgiveness and is trying to work his way to heaven and therefore is not a Christian, or he is lying, for what reason I don’t know, and to what benefit I cannot fathom.

And yet the saddest part of all of this is still that the American church is officially dead.  I confess that I hadn’t seen this much change in the last two or three decades.  Perhaps I wasn’t watching carefully enough.  It was stealthy enough that I missed the death entirely.