It's Who You Know

Ain't nothin' like equal protection under the law... [More]

Emily Miller is right, you wretched hive insects-- it's not part of America.  How telling, that your headcase boss has evidently enjoyed the same "prosecutorial discretion."

As for "journalistic ethics," you'll notice these other hive insects aren't calling for Timothy Johnson's head, which is no doubt buried in David Brock, anyway.

[Via anhourofwolves]

Armed American Radio Redux

From Mark Walters:

Live from Minneapolis studios of 1280 AM The Patriot.  Guests include Washington Times Senior Opinion Editor and author of Emily Gets Her Gun, Emily Miller.  CO. gun rights activist, Nick Andrasik, armed robbery victim, Lee Michaels, Emmy Award winners Peter Gould and Gary Theroux, David Codrea, Seanto, the Ogre and MORE!

Well, the Ogre didn't make it this time, but Firearms Industry Consulting Group lawyers Joshua Prince and Tom Odom did, to talk about the administration's new gun trust rule. During the third hour "roundtable," I got a chance to talk about spending yesterday afternoon at a gun rights rally at a park in Oberlin, OH, where the town council is trying to implement a gun ban in defiance of state preemption law. We ran out of time before I could tell about the TV "Authorized Journalist" asking gun owners to draw their weapons so she could get a camera shot of them. Fortunately, everyone besides her was too smart and informed to bite.

I think last night was an exceptionally good show, even more so than usual:

• AAR 9-15-2013 Hour 1
• AAR 9-15-2013 Hour 2
• AAR 9-15-2013 Hour 3

The Marilyn Miller Question

So, do you think she's just an ignorant parrot who is incompetent at actually investigating the stories she "reports", or do you think she's agenda-driven and knows perfectly well what she's doing? [More]

Either way, what can I say besides "Authorized Journalist"?

[Via David R]

A Question for WoG Readers

From Paul W. Davis:

David,

I left the following as a comment on the "Fincher Denied" post late last night. I would like an answer. -- Paul

All we were asking was to let the JURY decide what weapons were suitable for militia use. — per Miller

You know, it's really funny (and not "Ha Ha"), but WE, the citizens are the ones who vote to ratify a Constitution at the state level, and we would instruct our state representatives and senators how they should vote were another Federal Constitution to come before them for ratification. Moreover, we have instructed them on how we wanted them to vote on Amendments to the Federal Constitution in the last 50 years.

YET . . .

IN THE ESTIMATION OF THE COURTS — SOMEHOW WE ARE SO D%@?*^% DUMB WE CAN'T SIT IN A JURY BOX AND DECIDE WHAT THE LAW SAYS AND WHAT IT OUGHT TO MEAN!

Does anyone besides me see something horribly wrong with this picture?

My own thought is we've been given an answer, and that answer is "No." That "No" comes from the executive, legislative and judicial branches. Anyone who thinks we'll majority rule vote ourselves out of the "No," or sue our way out of it, is a self-deluded fool.

That means we can either accept the "No," or realize that their answer won't change unless the ones giving it come to understand they have no other choice. But it's not going to be us positing an "or else" proposition to the government. They're going to be bringing it to us.

But I speak out of turn. Paul hears from me enough. He wants to know what you think.

Just in Case There are Any Doubts...

...about this mudderfudder being a subversive Fifth Columnist in the shooting world...

Please, Let it be Grijalva for Interior Secretary

Ah, yes, Grijalva!
GOA rating: F-
NRA rating: F

He’s also co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus...

Bill Schneider, you say that like it's a good thing...

Caucus Member List: GOA/NRA GRADES
Co-Chairs
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-6)F-/F
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-9) F-/F
Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33) F-/F
Hon. Raul Grijalva (AZ-7) F-/F
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5) F/F
Hon. Hilda Solis (CA-32) F-/F
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-2) F-/F
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17) F/F
Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT) F/¹
House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-1) F-/D-
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-2) F/F
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) F/F
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)²
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-1) F-/F
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-3) F/F
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-8) F/F
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)²
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11) F-/F
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-1) F-/F
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-9) F/C
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14) F/F
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-7) F
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-7) F/F
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-4) D
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-3) F
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-5) F
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17) F-/F
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-2) F-/F
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51) F-/F
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-4) F-/F
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-4) F
Hon. John Hall (NY-19) F/F
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22) D-/C
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15) F-/F
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-2) F/F
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18) F-/F
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30) F/F
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-4) F-/F
Hon. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (OH-11) F-/³
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-9) F/C
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13) F/F
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10) F-/F
Hon. John Lewis (GA-5) F/F
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-2) F/F
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14) F-/F
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-7) F-/F
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-7) F/F
Hon. James McGovern (MA-3) F-/F
Hon. George Miller (CA-7) F/F
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-4) F/F
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-8) F-/F
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)²
Hon. John Olver (MA-1) F-/F
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-4) F-/F
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10) F/F
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15) F/F
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37) F/F
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-1) F/F
Hon. Linda Sanchez (CA-47) F/D⁴
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9) F-/F
Hon. Jose Serrano (NY-16) F/F
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) F-/F
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13) F/F
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-2) F/F
Hon. John Tierney (MA-6) F-/F
Hon. Tom Udall (NM-3) F-/C-⁵
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12) F/F
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35) F/F
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12) F-/12
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30) F-/F
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL) D-/A-⁶
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19) F-/F

I think it's safe to say this useful idiot couldn't get a job doing gun/hunting writing for a non-leftist rag or he'd be "Zumboed"/"Coopered"--as would be our right, despite his huffs and puffs of what-kind-of-people-are-these? indignation. I also think this whole New West venture bears looking into. I note the founder has been an LA Times writer, journalism professor and globalist who has partnered with a product of UC Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism... with everything that implies for bringing urban "progressive" thought to the last bastions of pioneer country under the guise of conscientious environmental stewardship.

You know: watermelons.

But backed by rich watermelons nonetheless:

New West Publishing is backed by a group of angel investors, including Boulder-based venture capitalist Brad Feld, former Microsoft CFO John Connors*, and television personality Maury Povich.

Thankfully, when the agenda is complete, the elites will still be able to enjoy Rocky Mountain resort living amidst pristine wilderness (that would be off limits "wildlands" to the rest of us). Heck, we won't even have to do any new drilling, and they'll still be able to jet in! And if you play your cards right, well, I'm sure they'll need servants and support staff, for those of you in ranching, mining, logging, etc. who can't move away and get city jobs.

¹Sanders not rated by NRA for 2008 cycle. Last rating (2006) was C-.
²At Large delegates for Guam, US Virgin Islands and Washington, DC--not rated.
³ Tubbs Jones died before the election. New candidates unrated by NRA.
⁴Based on their list, the Progressive Caucus doesn't even know their own members. Linda Sanchez is District 39. Loretta Sanchez is District 47. Linda has F grades from GOA and NRA. Loretta has an F from GOA and a D from NRA.
⁵Udall has been elected to the US Senate.
⁶GOA's rationale per below graphic (click to enlarge).


* Apparently Connors is more of a Bush RINO...but Feld is a rich democrat contributor, and Povich is, well, Mr. Connie Chung.

The Return of Emma Gee

I know I said I was done blogging for today, but this is important to me, to disassociate myself from a threatening email to a politician I was just copied on. If you're not familiar with Emma Gee, take a moment and read this.

Since this post, I've figured out who he is--this is a person who initiated correspondence with me some months back. It was pretty innocuous stuff, nothing to lead me to believe I was dealing with someone dangerous--either due to their own emotional issues or because they might be trying to entrap me into saying something stupid and criminal.

WoG regulars will also know that Toronto Mayor David Miller has been an occasional subject of interest.

Anyway, I just opened this email a short while ago, and it concerned me enough to make this post:



Note that in a prior email on April 2, he'd identified himself as "Marcus James." Here is my reply to the above:



This is international, which means it has surely attracted high law enforcement scrutiny--assuming he even sent it to his intended target, as opposed to just doctored something to send to me. I'll not be set up by either a crazy person or an operative. In accordance with my established "bang pots and pans and shine the light" policy, I'm posting this to keep that from happening.

For the record: My position on such matters has been clear for a long time. If anyone contacts me suggesting violent criminal activity, I will take all measures to protect my name and my freedom.

The more I think about Emma Gee, the more surprised I am that he hasn't been approached by the feds already. If he's still around acting like nothing happened after this post, I don't think the assumption that they are allowing (directing?) him to continue--would be completely off base.

If I were paranoid--and correspondence like this is certainly enough to set me off in that direction--I might wonder if this can be used as an excuse to seize my computer in a fishing expedition.

The Tip of the Iceberg

Toronto Mayor David Miller launched a major campaign to have handguns banned in Canada last week...

If a total ban is just the tip, does anyone care to speculate what the entire berg is gonna look like, and what it will do to anything that gets in its way?

The obscene reality behind this kind of legislation is it will not have the least effect on the violent criminal class that is causing ALL of the problem. Not what's registered, not what's banned, not what's confiscated (which brings us back full circle to what's registered, does it not?)

Let's analyze these two paragraphs, because they really contain the crux of this creature's subversive thesis:

There will be those who vigorously argue responsible gun owners are not the problem. The statistics are meaningless because collectors who own restricted weapons stores these guns properly and use the utmost caution.

And, maybe it is true. But, the deeper question for the community is the greater safety. Handguns must be banned, not just in Toronto, but also across Ontario and the country. Rifles and shotguns serve the purposes of those who hunt for sport. The laws cover this aspect sufficiently. Beyond this, there is no reasonable, logical argument.

Translation: Regular citizens are not the problem. All on their own, and with no prompting from us, they do the right and the safe thing. So we must take that choice away from them, not only here, but everywhere, and only allow them to possess what we decide to--for now. And there can be no counter-argument because I say so.

The neo-Stalinist "rwash" who penned this endorsement is a fanatic on par with those who, 600 years ago, would have burned people alive for suggesting that the Earth is not the center of the Universe. We look back now and wonder how such closed-minded zealotry could have represented prevalent thought with anything new deemed dangerous and heretical. Yet we still see the same basic phenomenon manifest itself today with the hatred and impulse to destroy radical new ideas--like that maybe men can rule themselves, and don't need the David Miller's and rwash's of the world to command what they may and may not possess.

[Via Bruce Mills]

Everyone Felt Better

Ban not enough to end gun violence...

The committee then passed a motion calling on Ottawa to ban handguns.

O-Ka-a-ay...

I sure am glad "everyone felt better."

David Miller. What a guy.

"I'm not your guy, buddy..."

What "Slippery Slope"?

"Why does a 22-year-old in a city like Toronto need a handgun? It's just not acceptable and I think it's time the federal government passed legislation to end the ownership of handguns in this country, period," the mayor said.

See--all you paranoids warning against a slippery slope are demonstrably wrong. If the antis had their way, it would be a sheer precipice.

And David Miller will finally achieve the world he so desperately wants to mandate, with even more guaranteed outcomes like this...

And then, of course, when that doesn't work, we'll need to look at the source of supply from the south and...naw...

That's crazy talk.

Foreign Mayor to Join Bloomberg Coalition?

A coalition of mayors working to crack down on illegal guns in the United States may soon include Toronto Mayor David Miller.

I think admitting foreign mayors is a great idea. Maybe they could also invite the mayors of Havana and Beijing and...

Questions and Answers

I received the following email and got permission to share it:

Dear David,

I hope you are well.

First, I want to apologize for the length of this question / screed.

I re-upped my Guns mag subscription for the sole purpose of supporting your column.

I am 48, 4 kids 9- 22, married 24 years, self employed 30 years having built 4 notorious businesses still in operation today. A couple of post grad degrees and recently graduated from law school. I’ve interned for a senior partner at (one of) the top criminal / (constitutional) law firms in the country for the last year and a half.

I plan to take the kalifornia Bar exam and specialize in firearms and 4th amendment law defending "law abiding citizens" charged with gun possession and other "crimes".

I grew up in a hoplophope family. I was a gun fanatic since Roy Rogers, Bat Masterson, John Wayne, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah. I bought my first "legal" gun at Buchanans gun shop on College Avenue in Berkeley at 10:05 on my 18th birthday. I was standing at the door waiting for him to open. Gun Shop in Berkeley? (he’s been closed and gone for 25 years).

My kids all shoot and hunt. (Look for my 9 year old to be an Olympic contender)

This is a long way of saying that I am a forever believer in the second amendment and I want to believe in it. I want my children to grow up free. I frame EVERY argument in my life in terms of the freedom of my children and their future families. But now I have gone to Law school and I have worked in a top law firm (as an intern) and everywhere I turn the people with the experience in the trenches that I respect tell me that the second amendment is NEVER the argument.

I continually talk to experienced, smart, creative attorneys that I respect who tell me there is no second amendment. Yesterday I had a long talk with the partner I work for and he told me to "forget the second amendment, it was poorly written, it’s been completely de-balled. U.S. gun laws are entirely statute driven and it has been increasingly thus since "U.S. v Miller" in 1938. He said with the exception of "U.S. v Lopez" there are no meaningful constitutional arguments for inalienable gun rights. The courts have routinely upheld restrictions on possession and ownership particularly local ordinances.

I should throw in that these are seriously constitution believing, gun owning, gun in the top desk drawer attorneys with years of experience, not the bRADY BUNCH.

This is a very long way of asking YOU, in your opinion, is there any point any more in the second amendment or is it just a fund raising dog and pony show? Has the second amendment been rendered entirely symbolic? What basis do YOU see for ever demanding rights under the second amendment? (And yes I am watching "Parker")

I am asking sincerely as a newly minted (though not born yesterday) attorney that wants to make the second amendment (and the constitution) the law of the land for my children (and yours). Everywhere I look I don’t see it as a practical reality. As much as I want to believe in the second, it seems like a mass delusion (or worse) a cynical use of the concept for pure fund raising hype with no expectation (by the professional promoters) that there is any argument to win.

I acknowledge that I am a paranoid nut case and I do not trust the state (particularly the current GENERATION of self serving one world "alleged representatives" selling out our children in every way at every opportunity)

I cling to these beliefs being aware that forty states have passed Shall Carry laws and being fully informed about the "castle doctrine" laws. But isn’t it possible that "Shall Carry", i.e. "Shall Register" may just be a ruse to determine where all the guns are and that with the stroke of a pen they could use those lists as the basis for confiscation? Again, I know I am an unreasonable "nut case" but if anything is possible and history repeats itself....repeatedly.......?

Instead of keeping high paid lobbyists going (al la Wayne La Pierre) would it be more prudent to tell our children that confiscation is inevitable, do not cooperate? Wouldn’t it be more effective to rally those that would fund these (arguably) gun control organizations (like the NRA) that are raking in millions compromising away our gun rights routinely and incrementally - particularly by pretending we have to ask permission instead of saying "storm the capitals" and "Shall not be infringed" has it’s plain meaning?

Wouldn’t it be more meaningful for us to promote the compact made with US by the Founders when they pledged "Our lives our fortunes and our sacred honor" that your children and mine would live free? With regular pitchfork parties at the "government houses". Are U.S. Citizens sooooo gutless that they will not stand up to a government that works for them? Are we a nation of girls? (Rhetorical questions, I know). Maybe we should be shaming the masses instead of hyping them on the second. What is your view? (Is it time to contemplate the need or the inevitability of having to "water the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots")?

Isn’t it long past time for civil disobedience and non cooperation? Isn’t it time to teach your (our / all) children that confiscation is inevitable. It’s a deliberate plot against the populace. That citizens should never cooperate, register or report? Shouldn’t second amendment focused organizations and publications start promoting non registration, parents buying for their children so the children are never "on record", acknowledging that the government has already so far overstepped their authority that they can not be trusted and to act defensively for the future safety of our children and our country? i.e. REALITY.

If the minders won’t mind the borders at the minimum when in excess of 70% of the population is demanding to close the borders - why should any thinking person believe the government, bent on one worldism will ever protect the constitution or the citizens god given inalienable rights to anything?????

Shouldn’t we be screaming that totalitarianism is coming at light speed? Instead of this constant fund raising subterfuge that the second amendment will someday form the basis of a winning lawsuit that will set the U.S. back on a constitutional course and abolish all gun laws, blah, blah, blah, blah, promote the myth? Isn’t this just delusion and masturbation and mental disorder????

If we keep up all this sound and fury promoting an argument that can never move the reality forward and we are just flailing about chanting a mantra that is effectively a political divide and conquer and slight of hand strategy to dilute and pacify / pussify the electorate.........Aren’t we mentally ill? Or DUMB????

Are we passing the point of no return where in the second amendment (and many of the others, 1st, 4th, 5th, etc..), no, the Constitution will be stolen from our children without a shot being fired by the absolute worthless, embarrassing, self serving, pandering, lowest common denominator dunderheaded "alleged representatives" from top to bottom, petite totalitarians and soccer moms and the lowest common denominator educational / indoctrination system "we" have built?

Have we be been completely screwed by the "greatest generation" who having won WWII, sat on their fat assess and voted entitlement and totalitarianism into this country and hope to party till the lights go out and save the bill for their grandchildren and die before they have to see the damage they have delivered their future generations?

I know you are a fan of "the prisoner". We ARE living in the village. More so all the time and on an accelerating path. But you and I, and a few pockets here and there are "not prisoners, we are free men! Or by our actions, are we?

What do you think?

I am asking your personal opinion for my own interest and direction and I will NOT republish your response.

No hurry. I appreciate and value your considered opinion.

Again, I apologize for the length of this "question".

Thank you for your time David.

Dave Licht

It will take time to do justice to Mr. Licht's thoughtful observations and questions, and I doubt I'll be able to do it all in one sitting (and get anything else done). I hope to be able to respond to some, possibly all of his points, over the course of this week.

In the mean time, if you think you have value to add to the discussion, well, that's why we have a "Comments" section...

Presumptions About "First Gun Death of 2006"

Reading the lead paragraphs, my immediate thought was "I'll bet he was involved with gangs."

Not more than five hours after ringing in the new year, a 21-year-old man was gunned down in the driver's seat of his Cadillac DeVille yesterday.

Dillan Yhanike Anderson of North York was pronounced dead at Sunnybrook hospital after he was found slumped over in the driver's seat of his car in an alley...

"What's a 21-year-old from New York doing in a Cadillac in a Toronto alley late at night?" I asked myself.

"Here we are just into 2006 and already there is another mother planning to bury her son," said homicide Det. Steve Ryan.

Now I started to feel bad for being presumptuous. Det. Ryan's spin evokes visions of June Cleaver grieving over a slaughtered Wally. Still:

Mayor David Miller said he was disappointed to learn of yesterday's murder.

"Every shooting fills me with sadness and this one again appears to be connected to the gang and the gun trade. It tells me that the things we're doing are the right things -- we just have to get them moving."

So my instincts were right? Anderson probably was up to something? And does anybody else find it creepy the way the mayor took the opportunity to publicly dance in fresh blood to hawk his citizen disarmament agenda?

"I think someone approached the vehicle and shots were fired from outside the car," Ryan said.

Yep, gangland hit, alright.

And there's one more "surprise" twist in this case:

Anderson was known to police. In 2003 Anderson and a 17-year-old were arrested in connection with the robbery and shooting of a man near Jane Street and Wilson Avenue. The victim in that case survived.

Dillan, my man: say it ain't so!

Would it be presumptuous and wrong of me to speculate about that victim?

"The Only Reason You Have a Handgun is to Shoot Someone"

More anti-defense lunacy from north of the border.

No, it's not the only reason. But it certainly is one of them.

Toronto Mayor David Miller's solution?

"We know what works but we need the money to support it. We need the federal government to commit much more strongly to job training and funding actual employment for young people. That will require significant resources."

Spend money on government programs! What else would you expect from a bureaucrat and tyrant who wants to rule people and ensure that they're disarmed?

Is this where I launch into "Gee, Officer Krupke"?

I also like how the vacuous reporterette helps perpetuate hysteria using "straight news" catchphrases like "killings caused by firearms..."

And here I thought killings were caused by killers.