Archive for the 'Second Amendment' Category

David Kopel.

International homicide statistics usually only count murders by individuals or small groups. A serial killer may murder two dozen people over the course of many years. A mass shooter may murder dozens at once. Those who use explosives or arson sometimes kill even more. But even in the aggregate, individual criminals or criminal gangs perpetrate vastly less homicide than do criminal governments.

In Europe in the 20th century, governments killed about 87.1 million victims, according to research by the late University of Hawaii political scientist R.J. Rummel. That figure does not include combat deaths, such as in World War I or II. It includes only the murder of civilians, from 61.9 million killed by the Soviet Union to 20.9 million killed by Germany. Over the long run, one’s risk of being murdered is much lower in the United States than in Europe. It’s no surprise that migration between the two has always been very heavily in one direction!

[ … ]

Rummel found that the less free the government, the more likely it is to perpetrate domestic mass murder. Totalitarian regimes perpetrate by far the most; authoritarian regimes less so; and democratic ones least of all. Indeed, no democratic government has committed large-scale murder against a population that was able to vote.

[ … ]

In 1942, Adolf Hitler explained the necessity of disarming his victims: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjugated races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjugated races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police.”

Dave is following up what I’ve seen him write (and I’ve linked) elsewhere.  But all of this stands to be repeated, over and over again.

The God-given right to bear arms is about self defense and defense of home, hearth and property.  Defense from thieves, invaders and tyrannical governments.

First, from 41mag.

Civilians will be facing multiple concurrent threats if the satanists in bLM keep their kinetic activities going. Spicey times are here. Larger capacity is more benefitting in our regards than caliber size. The satanists aren’t doing their work solo.

Second, Matt Bracken.

Here is the link to my hour guest-hosting the Alex Jones Show on Sep 10, 2020.

I read my AmPart piece on armed community defense at the beginning.

ARMED CITIZENS MUST DEFEND THEIR COMMUNITIES FROM RIOTING MOBS IF THE POLITICIZED POLICE WILL NOT

In it, I strongly suggest that arsonists should be shot on sight.

https://banned.video/watch?id=5f5aadc1af4ce8069e737e57

Here is the original column in American Partisan:

https://www.americanpartisan.org/2020/09/armed-citizens-must-defend-their-communities-from-rioting-mobs-if-the-politicized-police-will-not/

Matt Bracken.

So let me be very clear: if Democrat Party governors, mayors and DAs have hamstrung their police for political reasons, and won’t allow them to protect the lives and property of their local citizens using all required force, abandoning their primary mission in order to bow to the ABR mob, then it is time for their undefended citizens to apply the clear intent of the Second Amendment. There should be deep regret about the abandonment of the Rule of Law by the Democrat Party political ruling class, but there should be no moral quibbles or hesitation by American citizens concerning the legitimacy of armed community self defense, in the absence of expected law enforcement protection.

Therefore, it is my carefully considered opinion that black-clad and masked ABR mobs, rampaging and terrorizing innocent citizens under the cover of darkness in the style of the KKK of old, may morally and ethically be taken under preemptive fire by armed citizens at any level necessary to drive them out of their peaceful neighborhoods and away from their businesses, before the terrorists can reach their targets and throw their Molotov cocktails and other explosive and incendiary devices.

I agree with all of this, for reasons not mentioned.

First, in today’s America, I believe in the right of lethal action to defend property.  In OT times, robbers became slaves to the ones from whom they stole, until they paid back the debt in multiples.  Failure to honor that obligation of debt would get the robbers thrown into a pit at the edge of town and rocked to death.

Today in America, the FedGov sees debts as to society, and the offended never gets relief.  Insurance doesn’t even come close.  The laws and rules under which we currently live were intended for people who no longer exist.

Second, and perhaps most important, I would turn you to an article I wrote in which I cataloged an elderly couple whose home had been invaded, and after plundering the home, the invaders doused the couple with gasoline and set them on fire, killing both of them.  I won’t bother to find the link.

You cannot entrust your safety to an assumption.  You do not know the intent of the invaders, and maybe they don’t even know their intent.

Third, even if the rioters don’t intend to douse you with gasoline and set you on fire, there can be unintended consequences and collateral damage.  It’s extremely dangerous to have rioters and looters rampaging through neighborhoods.

Regardless of intent (which can’t be known anyway), women and children can perish.  Men cannot allow that to happen.  Men cannot allow increased danger to come to their loved ones if they can stop it.

Having said all of that, be careful.  Your enemy isn’t just Antifa/BLM.  Your enemy is the state as well, who will prosecute you for self defense.  They did with Kyle Rittenhouse, and they did with the McCloskeys.  They’ll do it to you too.

Via David Codrea, this interesting analysis at Reason.

Why did the SG take this strange course? The Affordable Care Act litigation may have played a role in its decision. In Texas v. U.S., the federal government argues that the ACA, which no longer raises revenue, cannot be construed as imposing a tax. The National Firearms Act no longer raises revenue, because the government won’t collect the payment.  Bronsozian argued that his provision cannot be sustained under NFIB v. Sebelius. As a result, the DOJ would have had to argue that the National Firearms Act, which raises no revenue must be construed as imposing a tax. There is a tension between the two positions. Perhaps the easier path was to simply dismiss the indictment to sustain the Obamacare case.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.  Hoist with their own petard, as it were.

David Codrea.

How Anderson Manufacturing “should have known” that a private party who legally acquired one of their products would then transfer it to the killer is not explained, because it can’t be. It would require psychic powers. The plaintiffs and their lawyer are looking to blame a party with deeper pockets than the dead killer’s “estate,” and they want the court to ignore the separation of powers and usurp authority by legislating from the bench. They’re also trying to end private sales and overturn PLCAA, major gun-grabber goals as per the Democrat Party platform …

It would be laughed out of court if someone stole or purchased an F150 and then ran into a sidewalk jogger, and Ford ended up in court under the claim that they should have known their truck was going to be used to kill someone.

But that’s exactly what these fools would have a jury believe, and juries are stupid enough to go along with it.

That’s why, in general, I do not trust any aspect of the American “justice system.”  It’s more than just that prosecutors have too much discretion, and it’s more than the fact that anything you say to police that exonerates you is inadmissible in court as “hearsay.”

Even if something does go to the jury, a jury is a cross section of America, at best, and therefore cannot generally be trusted to administer justice.

The PLCAA should never have even been necessary.  It is so because the American public is stupid and gullible, but even with it, some idiotic jury might still be swayed by a pit viper in a suit.

CreativeDestructionMedia.

First they come for your guns. Then they force you to take an experimental vaccine. Then they arrest you for bad thoughts.

A pregnant Australian women was arrested recently in her pajamas in front of her children for posting bad thoughts on Facebook, officially for ‘incitement’…ie, organizing a rally against lockdowns.

All of her computers and devices were also seized.

Meanwhile, in Melbourne…
Pregnant mum arrested in front of her children & all her devices/computers seized because of a Facebook post about a proposed lockdown protest..
pic.twitter.com/CuFyQzwxHp

— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) September 2, 2020

Heroes of the community, each and every one, keeping the world safe from pregnant mothers.  They must be proud.

And of course, there’s only one solution for this.

First of all, Dean Weingarten wants to know why the real perpetrators of crimes are not in prison.

As there were multiple, coordinated attacks, they could be charged with conspiracy to commit a felony, under Wisconsin statutes 939.31.

The first, unknown attacker, clearly committed battery against Kyle Rittenhouse with the flying kick attack; because it was countered, the damage may not have been great, making it a Class A misdemeanor under Wisconsin statutes 940.19.

Huber committed a battery, but Huber is dead, so he will not be charged. Because he died, however, in the commission of a crime, the other two combatants may be charged with felony murder, Wisconsin statute 940.30. All three attackers were acting in concert, so the felony murder statute is likely to apply.

Grosskreutz could be charged under the endangering safety by use of a deadly weapon, statute, 941.20, for his actions with the semi-automatic pistol. 941.20 has an exception for defense of privilege of self-defense, or defense of others, which Grosskreutz might claim, and which Rittenhouse is already claiming in his lawyers’ statement.

The Kenosha County Prosecutor has decided to press charges against Kyle Rittenhouse, and not against his attackers. This shows a reluctance, almost certainly due to political pressure, not to charge the rioters. All three attackers appear to be from Wisconsin, so there is no interstate nexus for federal charges, unless it can be shown that they received funding or direction from out of state, which would be difficult to prove.

The case shows the incredible power of prosecutors to decide who will be charged, and who will not. The voters have the ultimate authority to place or remove prosecutors. Prosecutors are almost never removed unless their crimes are blatant.

Kenosha County District Attorney Michael D. Graveley may be contacted at (262) 653-2400. Email can be sent through a email wizard at the Kenosha County website.

The Assistant DA who signed the criminal complaint against Kyle Rittenhouse is Angelina Gabriele. Her email is:
angelina.gabriele@da.wi.gov

But you know who is in prison?  Not the sexual predator, not the wife-beater (they are both in hell now), and not the felon who is guilty of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon, but Kyle Rittenhouse.

He is a fine man and seems to be holding up, but he deserves to be at home given that he is innocent of all charges.

KYLE RITTENHOUSE SPEAKS!!!!!! THIS MUST BE THE TWEET HEARD ‘ROUND THE WORLD!!!!!! RETWEET AND DONATE TO THE #FIGHTBACK FOUNDATION RIGHT NOW!!!!! #PaulRevere ⁦@LLinWood⁩ ⁦@realDonaldTrump⁩ ⁦@TuckerCarlson⁩ ⁦@michellemalkin⁩ ⁦@PressSec⁩ pic.twitter.com/fOCzeLGkcm

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) September 1, 2020

As for what the future holds, I suspect this won’t be over for a very long time.  Even when it’s over, it won’t really be over (remembrances of Mike Vanderboegh).

Finally, I’ve had a difficult time pushing the piece on the Comprehensive Time-Spliced Video of Kenosha and getting traffic to it.  First of all, I can say that I’m not responsible for much of the content, so the intent isn’t to make me look good.

Second, it angers me when I see the trash from the MSM on the Kenosha event, and this video is like artillery fire on the MSM trash.

Please send it to friends and family if inclined.

Joe Huffman.

I just created a White House petition asking for the prosecution of the district attorneys who changed Kyle Rittenhouse with murder.

This is the petition:

Prosecute district attorneys who charged Kyle Rittenhouse with murder under 18 u.s. code § 242

18 USC § 242 provides for the punishment of “Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States…”

The district attorneys in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, despite clear evidence of lawful self-defense, filed murder charges against Rittenhouse. This not only subjects Rittenhouse to unlawful deprivation of rights it creates a chilling effect on others who wish to exercise their specific enumerate right to keep and bear arms in defense of self and others.

The district attorneys and others involved in this unlawful activity should be prosecuted.

This is easy 30-second activism.  I did it.

Additionally, I’ve had a difficult time pushing the piece on the Comprehensive Time-Spliced Video of Kenosha and getting traffic to it.  First of all, I can say that I’m not responsible for much of the content, so the intent isn’t to make me look good.

Second, it angers me when I see the trash from the MSM on the Kenosha event, and this video is like artillery fire on the MSM trash.

Please send it to friends and family if inclined.

David Codrea.

In addition to demanding “sentence first — verdict afterwards” edicts and registration-enabling “background check” prior restraints, Casten calls for a ban on “common defense” weapons while misrepresenting the core purpose of the Second Amendment and actually claiming what the Founders wanted was a “standing army,” something Elbridge Gerry, Fifth Vice President of the United States, called “the bane of liberty.”

Challenger Ives, we are told, “voted against several gun-control measures while a state representative, including a red flag law and proposals that: created a 72-hour waiting period for gun purchases; created licensing rules for gun dealers; and sought to create minimum age limits for people buying assault-style weapons [and] sponsored legislation allowing people to carry concealed firearms.”

Given such choices, it would be easy to say “just stay home and grill a burger.”

Unfortunately, it’s not quite that simple.  David explains the details.

The moment his arm exploded, the pistol was being pointed at Kyle’s head.  While I’ll still cover this event, and pray for Kyle, I’ve seen everything I need to see.