In the last couple days, the JoeBama mis-administration has trotted out the old, Marxist trope about “needs”. Specifically, “Who, in God’s name, needs a weapon that can hold 100 rounds, or 40 rounds, or 20 rounds?”
Sound familiar? Maybe because it’s derived, at least ideologically, from: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Same thinking. Same non sequitur. Same Marxist depravity.
Nowhere, in the US government’s purview is it to determine what I need or do not need. That is for me, alone, to decide. And, it is certainly outside the jurisdiction of “government” to attempt to frame my rights in terms of some political/bureaucratic arbitrary assessment of my needs. I won’t be having that. We won’t be having that conversation. And, if that’s your start point, then we have reached an impasse.
Let’s examine this philosophical non-starter through the lens of any other right. If the government can determine your need to keep and bear a weapon loaded with 20 rounds, what else do they get to control via the “needs argument”?
Does your family really need two cars?
Do you really need to earn more than minimum wage?
Do you need air conditioning in the summer?
Do you really need to eat 3 meals a day?
Do you really need to exercise all your rights or can you give a few up for the “common good”?
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit (formerly Estate/Property) do not limit your exercise of rights on the basis of need. Nor, does the Bill of Rights contain any measure of limit on the free exercise of any of the rights outlined therein. If we assume – as we rightly should – that the aforementioned rights are Natural Rights (not granted by government) then, it follows that government may not revoke or limit them. The only moral limiting factor on my rights is if my exercise thereof infringes on another’s similar rights. And… my keeping and bearing a gun with x-round capacity infringes on no one’s rights.
If would-be, Tin Pot Joe, feels that he doesn’t need 20 rounds… that’s his business. And, I’m fine with that. But, I will not be drawn into a goofy debate about my rights starting from a Marxist assumption. And, neither should anyone else.
While the mis-administration wrestles with and loses to that fundamentally American bit of orthodoxy, I’ll leave you with this:
So, a criminal with a warrant who resists arrest meets up with an incompetent government employee who can’t tell a Glock from a taser, then there are Democrat riots, and what’s the result? You must be disarmed.
If you’re looking for logical logic, keep on looking. If you understand the logic of power, you came to the right place.
Facts don’t matter.
Evidence is racist.
2+2=4 means you’re a transphobe.
This is about power, people. Their power over you.
Understand that you can’t reason your way out of this. We’re not going to explain to our enemies why it’s inefficient, ineffective, or unAmerican to do the things they are trying to do. You might as well try to teach your terrier particle physics with a thick, juicy ribeye in sitting his bowl in front of him.
Tangent: Pardon me for potentially misgendering your pooch.
Back to my point. There is no point, except power. They want to control you. If they can’t they want to destroy you. Everything – and I mean everything – is bent to that objective.
That’s why the media lies to you.
That’s why they selectively prosecute.
That’s why movie stars lecture you.
That’s why they want to take your guns.
That’s why they want to cheat in elections.
That’s why critical race theory is a thing.
You, a serf.
That’s it. That’s the goal. So, trying to reason your way out of it is useless.
It’s actually worse. It’s embarrassing. You look like a fool. Take Asa! Hutchinson, with his mush-mouthed palaver about “limited government” and citing Reagan to justify his spineless submission to the establishment. This guy literally would rather young children have their genitals mutilated than have to explain to his Walmart masters why he refused to go along with the scalpel zeitgeist.
He’s not just a weak person. He’s not just a stupid person. He’s an evil person.
And we know it. We see it. And we must speak it.
They want to blind us. They want to gag us. They want us tip-toeing through the PC minefield, afraid to take a step less we trigger a detonation of cancellation.
But have you noticed the rumblings of resistance?
Have you noticed the stirrings of pushback?
For a while we had Trump to do the pushing, but with him in Florida we can now see others stepping up. Ron DeSantis is banning critical racism. Brian Kemp found some vertebrae and he’s defying Delta, Coke, and “Major League Chinaball” to demand election integrity. The other night, Tucker Carlson charged into the “replacement theory” ambush where we are not supposed to say what the Democrats explicitly say, which is that they intend to import pliable foreign peasants to replace American citizens at the ballot box (of course, sensible Latinos had other ideas, coming around to Trump significantly in 2020). The garbage media and establishment announced that this fact must not be spoken and Tucker spoke the hell out of it.
The backlash begins.
Right now, it is mere stirrings. Americans are slow to anger, but they are mighty in their wrath. When woke bull-Schiff was confined to college campuses, we could live with it. We didn’t see it. It was not in our faces. But now it is. It’s everywhere in the institutions, and it’s filtering down to people in their jobs, on their televisions and even in their homed when young Kaden returns from Cornell as “Kasey” and informs xir parents they are committing literal violence on xim by not paying xir tuition anymore.
Do they imagine that people will just give up and give in?
Some will. The Fredocons did, of course, but they are weak.
But with Normal Americans, the risk is mistaking patience and restraint for weakness.
Think I’m wrong?
Go try to buy some 5.56mm rounds.
The backlash is building. The anger is real and rising. Yeah, everyone’s getting their .45s and AR15s, which is proper – an armed people is a free people – but the reality is we are unlikely to get to the kind of crisis where they come into active play. As much as some leftists salivate at the idea of declaring war on normal people (read their social media and tell me I’m wrong), there’s almost certainly not going to be civil conflict, though with cops as competent as Taser Girl and our broken military focused on pretending boys can turn into girls, I kind of like patriots’ odds against those few traitors who would not quit rather than suppress the American people for the benefit of their leftist masters. No, the violence will be limited to Democrat areas as Democrat voters burn Democrat cities ruled by Democrat politicians. Which would seem make it a Democrat problem.
But the backlash is coming, peaceful but unstoppable. First, you’ll see the social pushback. We will see brave pols like DeSantis and the newly-concervawoke Kemp. We’ll see conservative media figures refusing to honor the narrative guardrails of the lib-fascists, just like Tucker does.
Soon we’ll see comics attacking this garbage, then other artists joining in. Then more politicians, who will start passing laws banning these practices and gutting these woke corporations. Trust Busting. Banning Chinese collaboration. Regulating big tech.
And we’ll see normal people pushing back in their personal lives.
Of course, we’ll see latecomers like Nikki! and Kristi! who will try to pretend they always knew what time it is. But we’ll remember that when the fight, started these REMFs were cowering in the rear, afraid to offend the Chamber or the NCAA. And they will be ignored.
The 2022 election will be the key. We’re going to crush the left. Why? Because things will get worse, much worse. Crime. A wrecked economy. China will kick our woke military’s behind. Think Jimmy Carter in 1980, but without the competence and a lot more anti-Americanism.
This will be a tough fight, and it is only the beginning. Just do not fall into despair. Do not withdraw – they prefer you submit but they will settle for you giving up (for now – they’ll come for you eventually). Do not fear them.
Be part of the backlash. Get in now, at the beginning.
With President Joe Biden issuing a flurry of executive actions last week to strengthen federal gun laws, state representatives across the country are working in the opposite direction, taking a page from the playbook of immigration activists by advancing legislation that would make their enforcement illegal. On April 6, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, a Republican, signed the first gun control nullification bill into law.
“Nullifying unconstitutional, federal laws is both legal and it’s also the right thing to do,” says Anthony Sabatini, a Republican lawmaker and member of the Florida House of Representatives. “It’s silly to sit around and wait for something you know is unconstitutional,” he tells Reason. “It’s time to stand up and fight back. And the methods that we need to use are the ones already being used by the left.”
In 1987, Oregon passed a law prohibiting state and local law enforcement from using public resources to arrest or detain people whose only crime was being in the country illegally. Since then, hundreds of other jurisdictions have passed similar laws, becoming so-called sanctuary cities.
“We know this stuff has been working and the right can continue to complain about the things that the left is successful at, or they can look at it, learn from it, and replicate it,” Michael Boldin, the founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center, tells Reason.
Sabatini is cosponsoring a bill in Florida called the “Second Amendment Preservation Act” that would prohibit any employee of the state of Florida from enforcing, or attempting to enforce “any federal act, law, executive order, administrative order, court order, rule, regulation, statute, or ordinance infringing on the right to keep and bear arms ensured by the Second Amendment.” The bill says that any state employee who assists in enforcing federal gun control laws would be terminated and never again be allowed to work for the state of Florida.
Defying federal law is something that a majority of states already do in one way or another, by becoming immigration sanctuaries or through the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana and other drugs that federal law still deems illegal.
“In terms of the method it’s identical,” says Sabatini. In sanctuary cities, “they stopped reporting to or dealing with I.C.E., and that’s basically what we’re doing.”
Boldin says that if states refuse to cooperate with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), then federal gun control becomes difficult to enforce.
“The ATF only has about 5,500 employees for the whole country. About a third of them are in administration, and that means they don’t have the manpower or resources to enforce federal gun control on their own,” he says. “Their maximum capacity, year in and year out, is between 8,000 to 10,000 closed cases. So if you get a combination of more than 10,000 people violating a federal act, and then on top of it, you have states and local communities refusing to participate in enforcement. You’ve then opened the door to actually nullify that federal act in practice and effect.”
Boldin says that the legal case for nullification doesn’t depend on the constitutionality of the law a state wants to nullify thanks to a legal doctrine known as anti-commandeering, which has been upheld in five Supreme Court cases from 1842 to 2018. It holds that the federal government can’t require states and localities to participate in the enforcement of federal laws.
“Talking about constitutionality actually does kind of get in the way of anti-commandeering,” Boldin notes. “A lot of people like that as a line in the sand. And I think that’s a good approach, but I don’t think they should be helping enforce federal gun control. Even if a federal court says this federal gun measure is ‘constitutional.'”
In March 2018, when the Trump administration was fighting with local officials over the enforcement of federal immigration laws, John Bolton, who would be appointed by then–President Donald Trump as national security adviser the following month, challenged the concept of nullification in an interview with Breitbart News Daily.
“The idea that law enforcement at lower levels shouldn’t be required to cooperate with the feds is just unthinkable,” he told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow. “That was also proposed by South Carolina Sen. John C. Calhoun before the Civil War, to say that South Carolina and other slave states would not enforce federal law regarding slavery.”
Boldin says that argument is ahistorical. Anti-commandeering originated in the 1842 Supreme Court case Prigg v. Pennsylvania, which upheld the state’s right not to participate in enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. “The bottom line is nullification, as a tool banning participation in federal enforcement was actually a tool of the anti-slavery abolitionist North,” Boldin argues. “And when South Carolina seceded…they issued a document to explain their rationale. And they specifically cited Northern nullification of the federal Fugitive Slave Act.”
Sabatini says his bill is popular among Florida voters, but that doesn’t mean it’s likely to pass. In other states, law enforcement groups like the Missouri Sheriffs’ Association have worked to prevent gun control nullification bills from passing or to change their language, rendering them toothless.
Boldin says police departments want to continue enforcing federal law because it’s lucrative. “They get all kinds of funding from the joint task forces, through things like the Department of Homeland security grant, the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant…They get civil asset forfeiture…I don’t think they’ll admit that they’re getting a bunch of loot to do this federal enforcement, but they certainly are.”
Boldin says that for the nullification movement to succeed against gun control laws and beyond, more Americans will have to recognize that the most effective way to oppose federal policies that violate their rights is at the local level.
“The whole idea of federalism is so important because it’s the only way you can have a country with a few hundred million people living together with a wide range of social, economic, political viewpoints together in peace. What’s right for people in California is probably not right for people in South Carolina and vice versa. And when we see things that come down from a one-size-fits-all centralized solution, I don’t think anyone really ever gets what they want.”
Because 36 states have nullified federal marijuana prohibition, Boldin argues, there’s mounting pressure for the federal government to follow suit. “I think we can replicate that on other issues and learn that localism is really the way forward for liberty.”
Brooklyn Center, MN. Not far from 2020’s ground zero of uncivil unrest. Here we go again.
Observing the rule that “all initial reports are wrong”, we here at WC would like to point a few things out. In the end, they all point to the same conclusion: we are not doing ourselves, as Americans, any favors.
First, in a report from The Hill, we discover that the usual crew of suspects have spoken out of turn, and before all the facts are in, to condemn that which they don’t understand but are firmly against.
Rashida Tlaib, has “ruled” that the shooting was the result of “inherent & intentional racism”. Nonsense. We all know that’s not true. But, trotting out the “racist bogeyman” at every turn is good and profitable political theater. As demonstrated by BLM leaders buying $1M+ homes in gated communities.
Second, we have the body cam footage of the incident.
Again, understanding that “all initial reports are wrong”, this interaction after a point certainly doesn’t cast Brooklyn Center’s law enforcement training in a positive light.
The reports are that the intervening set of hands in the video belong to a 26-year police veteran who is currently assigned as a “training officer” with the department.
Ignoring the apparent lack of skill cuffing a detainee, and moving on to the shooting portion of the incident, the veteran “training officer” thinks she is deploying less-than-lethal means to disable the would-be detainee. I suspect that she really did believe in that moment that she was going to tase the suspect, based on her audibly notifying the suspect that she would tase him. However, what she actually deployed was her sidearm. And, pressing the trigger on a sidearm sends bullets down range, as opposed to electric current. A life altering difference.
And, third… in the aftermath of the incident and the subsequent uncivil unrest, the best that community leaders can do is fire the City Manager for suggesting the officer in question should receive due process, and dither about the differences in protests and riots. Fabulous.
Meanwhile a thousand miles away in the Nation’s Capital, the President who (as a senator) “authored” the “Crime Bill” and the VP who (as a district attorney) withheld critical evidence are the “change in administration” that would stop the 2020 unrest. Guess what…?
Our communities do not have the will to police themselves well. They are not protecting or serving.
Our politicians are nothing but hate-mongers who prematurely weigh-in on every local issue with the intent of sowing discord because it extends their 15 minutes.
At least some of our law enforcement personnel are not receiving the training they should be.
All of the above lead, very directly to a loss of State-legitimacy. At a certain point, it becomes apparent to everyone that “government” isn’t working and has neither the will nor the means to do so. And, at that point… civil society becomes something entirely different as otherwise peaceful people must take measures to protect themselves and their livelihoods from what amounts to government sponsored ruin.
Bottom line…? We aren’t doing ourselves any favors. Again.
Well, I wouldn’t expect anything less from Biden’s gun czar nominee. Joe decided to tap David Chipman to become the next director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. It’s part of his slew of executive orders to combat gun violence after the heinous mass shooting in Boulder, Colorado, which left 10 people dead, including a police officer. It has now been forgotten by the liberal media since it doesn’t fit their narrative. The shooter isn’t white. He’s a Syrian refugee named Ahmad Al Aliwi Al-Issa. He’s 21-years-old. Yet, never let a crisis go to waste, right?
Last year, Chipman mocked first-time gun owners, saying they were worried by zombies, and compared them to Joe Exotic of Netflix’s Tiger King. He was commenting on the massive 2020 spike in gun sales. Katie already covered how Chipman is a die-hard gun control advocate. He also spewed some big whoppers about the Waco siege too, suggesting a couple of helicopters were shot down by .50 caliber machine gunfire. That never happened. The Daily Caller has more on this nonsense (via Daily Caller):
President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives mocked first-time gun owners who purchased firearms during the coronavirus pandemic, saying in an interview last year that they were “putting themselves and their families in danger.”
Chipman said in the interview that he understood the pandemic-induced anxiety that led to a spike in gun sales. But he worried that purchasers were making “rash decisions” that could put them at risk.
“Most of the new buyers who went out to the gun store and bought a gun have no training whatsoever,” Chipman said in an interview with Cheddar that aired on April 3, 2020.
“In their mind they might be competent, they might think they’re die-hard and ready to go, but unfortunately they’re more like Tiger King. They’re putting themselves and their families in danger.”
He currently serves as a senior adviser to the gun control group founded by former Arizona Rep. Gabby Giffords.
Chipman said in an online chat forum last year that he supports a total ban on the manufacture and sale of so-called assault rifles.
Yeah, that’s a nice window into the mindset of who we’re up against. It’s a person who hates gun-owning Americans, hates they have the right to own firearms, and thinks that only government employees should have guns, the same government agents who misplace their service weapons or shoot themselves while speaking to kids. How about accidentally shooting a man while doing a backflip at a bar? See, I can play this game too, Davey.
Yeah, that’s a nice window into the mindset of who we’re up against. It’s a person who hates gun-owning Americans, hates they have the right to own firearms, and thinks that only government employees should have guns, the same government agents who misplace their service weapons or shoot themselves while speaking to kids. How about accidentally shooting a man while doing a backflip at a bar? See, I can play this game too, Davey.
JoeBama has gone on the record saying that, “no amendment is absolute.” In as much as it matters, as he’s no more legitimate an arbiter of what’s Constitutional than any other American… I say this: Bullshit, and fuck right off.
What he’s really saying is: “My administration will only observe the amendments we like and can use to forward our agenda.” Hell, Joe… even your boy, Barry, understood the Bill of Rights as a “charter of negative liberties”. i.e. a limit on Federal power
Well… we can all play that game, Joe. If we are going to look at all this Constitution stuff as mutable, let’s take a look at my (I’m as much an American and arbiter of Constitutionality as you are, after all) Bill of Rights (and other amendments) preferred observances, shall we?
I’m generally ok with this one… except where it pertains to people stomping on and burning my flag. As the man said, “the first amendment is to protect you from the government… not from me.”
I’m all for this one and will be exercising the hell out of it. In a wholly, uninfringed fashion.
I’m down with this one, too. Unless I know the soldier personally. In which case, he can stay for a bit. As long as he keeps his poop in a group and throws in for beer occasionally.
Yup. Good with #4. No unreasonable searches or seizures. I’ll be the arbiter of “reasonable/unreasonable.” Thanks for understanding.
Good here too. I reserve the right to keep my damned mouth shut. Or, not. YMMV.
Yup. Speedy trial when necessary is good. But, .gov has been dropping the ball on this anyway. So… Figure it out. Let’s cap it at a month. If you can’t get me on to the docket by then… I’ve been acquitted.
Ok. Jury of my peers. Only if you can find them.
Yes. No one likes cruel and unusual anything. Again, I’ll be happy to let you know exactly what those parameters are if it comes to that.
Yes. I retain the right to do what I want outside the specific confines that the Constitution has outlined as responsibilities of the government, Federal or State.
Yes. The States have rights and can choose not to participate in the Federal shit show.
Ok. State sovereign immunity… I’m generally down. It’s certainly better than the “Federal”, top-down option.
Presidents and Vice Presidents elected together… not sure on this one. I think I may prefer the Adams/Jefferson plan…
Abolition. Well… Slaves seem like a lot of work, but I’m not sure. Maybe we should give that a trial revival. The Third World seems to like it… On the fence.
Privileges or Immunities… Equal Protection… meh. The Feds haven’t observed this one for a while. What’s in it for me?
Prohibits voting restrictions based on race. There are still rules. You still have to prove you’re qualified. Venezuelan isn’t a race. Try to keep up.
Income Tax. Really? This one’s stupid. Tax is theft. Abolish the IRS. Audit the Fed. Not having it. I’ll pay for the stuff I want and will use as it comes up. Pound sand. I’ll keep my dough. Starve the Fed and a lot of other problems sort themselves…
Senators chosen by popular vote. Nope. They were appointed by State legislatures for a reason. That worked better and was much more Republic-an and less Democrat-ic. Let’s go back to the original.
Prohibition (repealed). Well good. Because, I wasn’t going to be observing that nonsense one way or the other.
Women can vote… maybe. Depends on the woman.
Presidential terms… does this really matter? I mean… we don’t have anybody at the wheel now…
Repealing 18. Ok. But, I’ll BMOB when and where I choose. Get stuffed and stay out of my business. My body, my choice.
Number of times Presidents can sit in the chair. Whatever. Again…
DC gets electors… Why? They aren’t a State. The intent was for DC denizens to be short term residents and from somewhere else… where, presumably, they’d be getting some representation. Figure it out.
Prohibits revoking voting rights on the basis of non-payment of taxes. Fine. See 16.
Presidential succession. You see how that’s working out… right? Time to go back to the drawing board…
Congressional Salary. Take care of 16 as I’ve outlined, and this takes care of itself. Why are we paying those clowns anyway? Shouldn’t they have real jobs? Producing a good or service? Maybe something shovel-ready…
Damn. I guess I’m out of amendments…. and I was just getting loose…
So, Joe… here’s the take away: Your terms are acceptable. You do your thing. I’ll do mine. From the sounds of it, you’ve a bit of a mess you need to deal with at home (like your crack-head kid and his laptop) before you get to start telling me how to live my life. I’ll leave you with a bit of appropriate entertainment as a parting gift…
Multiple governors signaled that they will be taking action against Democrat President Joe Biden after Biden officially unveiled his initial plan to attack Second Amendment rights.
Biden announced a series of actions, which he articulated during a press conference where he made multiple false claims, targeting two types of gun parts: pistol braces and chunks of plastic and metal that are unfinished firearms. The Biden administration also will be publishing “model red flag legislation” for states to consider. This comes just a couple of weeks after the Biden administration urged the Supreme Court to uphold a warrantless gun confiscation case.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said following Biden’s press conference that the president’s actions were his “initial actions,” that there “will be more,” and that he intends to “use the power of his presidency” to crack down on Americans’ constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights.
Numerous governors immediately pushed back on Biden’s attack on Second Amendment rights and indicated that they will be taking action to protect their residents from Biden’s agenda.
“Biden is threatening our 2nd Amendment rights. He just announced a new liberal power grab to take away our guns,” Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) wrote on Twitter. “We will NOT allow this in TX. It’s time to get legislation making TX a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State passed and to my desk for signing.”
Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy (R) said that Biden’s actions “won’t save lives or stop criminals,” and would only “disarm law abiding citizens.”
“Alaska is a Second Amendment sanctuary state, and we will be evaluating our options,” Dunleavy said.
“I think it’s out of control and it’s obvious that they can’t get it through Congress and so he’s acting on his own,” Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R) said. “He’s doing it at a rapid speed. There has not been another president, I don’t think, in history that has implemented the number of Executive Orders that this president has implemented. And the hypocrisy of running as a uniter and a president that was going to bring both parties together and heal this country, he has done anything but that. He is continuing to divide the country and he’s doing it through these outlandish Executive Orders.”
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) highlighted the portion of the Second Amendment that states “shall not be infringed,” writing: “Biden claims that his actions won’t infringe on the 2nd Amendment. That’s false.”
“Taking away guns with Red Flag laws is an infringement,” Noem continued. “Placing new limits on firearms sales is an infringement. Curbing ammo purchases is an infringement.”
Idaho Governor Brad Little (R) said that the state will be standing up for its residents’ Second Amendment rights.
“Idaho will not stand for President Biden’s unilateral actions to erode your Second Amendment rights,” Little said. “Idaho’s Congressional delegation and I are in lockstep in our opposition to the President’s actions and his direction to Congress to strip law-abiding Americans of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”
Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon (R) tweeted: “Wyoming is, has always been, and will continue to be a state where 2nd Amendment rights are recognized and protected.”
“I oppose any orders or actions imposed from the federal level that infringe on this fundamental right,” Gordon continued. “Today I signed HB 236 which prohibits financial institutions and payment processors in Wyoming from discriminating against firearms businesses engaged in lawful commerce.”
Earlier today Joe Biden raised some eyebrows when he said “no amendment to the constitution is absolute.” The first ten amendments to the constitution are commonly known as “The Bill of Rights.”
The occupant of the oval office, and head of the executive branch, saying the Bill of Rights is not absolute, should be challenged immediately to qualify that statement.
As a reminder:
♦ Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
♦ Amendment 2 – The Right to Bear Arms
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
♦ Amendment 3 – The Housing of Soldiers
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
♦ Amendment 4 – Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
♦ Amendment 5 – Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property
No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
♦ Amendment 6 – Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
♦ Amendment 7 – Rights in Civil Cases
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.
♦ Amendment 8 – Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
♦ Amendment 9 – Other Rights Kept by the People
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
♦ Amendment 10 – Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
This is an industry I am intimately familiar with. I am familiar with both the work environment and the potential threats. They are not so different than the threats that any manufacturing operation faces, but I am very familiar with the cabinetry industry environment.
Active shooters will disable any operation. But, manufacturing is particularly susceptible. Open spaces, poorly vetted employees, poorly controlled entry points, uncomfortable working conditions (particularly in the summer months)… It can be a charged enviroment.
Further, Texans are fond of telling me that they are armed and ready for such eventualities. I’ve always known that was bunk, but this particular case in point illustrates exactly how vulnerable facilities and enterprises are. Texan or otherwise.
Law Enforcement cannot be in all places at all times. And, even if they could, their job is not to protect specific individuals or enterprises. Their job is to respond after a crime has been committed.
No guns policies from HR will not prevent these incidents. Lawyers will not stand between your enterprise and a deadly threat. As a result, your only real option is to defend your enterprise by creating an in-house, proprietary security force. Capable of responding, real-time, at point of inception, to a lethal threat on premise.
As has been proven more than once, enterprise leadership is liable if a lethal event occurs and they have failed to secure their enterprise. Do not wait to secure your enterprise until something tragic has occurred. At that point, no army of underwriters will save you. You will be on the hook for the liability, the downtime, the employee counseling, the bad press, and the funeral expenses. Is that what you want? Your employees are your lifeblood. Why are you leaving them vulnerable by not preparing adequately?
Don’t be the CEO, COO, HR Director, or Ops Manager that allows this to happen on premise. Defend your enterprise. Distributed Security can help. Get in touch.
This particular Obama-ism makes my skin crawl and my blood boil. While it is apparently true, it is also a tacit admission that, when in power, politicians have absolutely no intention of actually representing their constituents. Their agenda is prime, and everyone who differs in opinion can pound the proverbial sand. I’m pretty sure there’s a line in the Declaration condemning a lack of representation…
As a case in point, the alleged, “great unifier”, Joe Biden, has made the case that his gun control proposals have bipartisan support and are overwhelmingly popular. However, while watching the Rose Garden roll-out of said proposals on YouTube (the official broadcast of the WH) the ratio of likes to dislikes tells a different tale.
In the screenshot below, the YT feed identifies 4700 people viewing (indicative of the Administration’s popularity all by itself) and about 400 “likes” as compared to greater than 3000 “dislikes”.
Now… I’m no statistician… and allowing for the fact that maybe many more people watched the feed on a different “channel… shouldn’t any representative sampling generally mirror the same statistical sentiment on a given issue? Are we to believe that just anti-Biden, pro2A folks tuned into the official WH feed?
And, assuming that the various representative samples would conform, generally, to the same statistical sentiment… Why do we allow the Powers that Be to continue to lie to us to further their agenda?
“Elections have Consequences”, translated: “You little people sit down and shut-up. We won and we’ll do what ever we please. And, there’s not a damned thing you can or will do about it.”
As a geographical location, the US, not necessarily under that name, can exist for a long time. But as a nation the US no longer exists. A nation requires a homogeneous population, which the US does not have, and far more unity than exists today in the US. Once past the colonial era when the immigration gates were opened, the English population was diluted with Irish, Italians, Poles, Jews, and a variety of other European peoples. With sensible immigration policies and requirements, the US was able to assimilate diverse European ethnicities into an English rule of law, English civil liberties, and the English language. These successful efforts of assimilation were abandoned decades ago and supplanted by “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” Today the US is a Tower of Babel.
Today the US is too diverse to live under the same laws. For example,Democrats have stated their intention of destroying the Second Amendment. Moreover, some of them are prepared to do so not by legislative action but by presidential fiat, a power that the US Constitution does not permit. For example, anti-constitutionalists US Representatives Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Val Demings (D-Fla.), and Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) have asked election thief Joe Biden to “take executive action” against “assault weapons.”
To request a president to exercise a power he does not have is how tyranny begins, but the Democrat Representatives are so lacking in American enculturation that they ask Biden to pull non-existent powers out of the air and use them against the US Constitution. This alone proves my point that there is no American nation. The United States is the Constitution. Devoid of the Constitution it is some other country.
Aware that the anti-American and illegitimate Biden regime intends to remove Americans’ constitutional right to defend their lives and property against criminals and their liberty against Washington’s tyranny, the Arkansas State Senate has passed in advance of federal action a bill banning the enforcement of Federal gun laws in Arkansas.
Today in the US there are many more sectional disagreements than existed in 1860.
In the US today traditional white Americans—not the woke Democrats—see themselves under threat. The officials of the ruling party and the media presstitutes have declared traditional white Americans to be “domestic extremists,” “domestic enemies,” “white supremacists,” and “Trump deplorables.” The FBI is searching for and prosecuting those who exercised their First Amendment right to free speech and association by attending the Trump rally in Washington and are falsely accusing those who exercised Constitutional rights of attempting a “Trump insurrection.” The crazed anti-American House Democrats actually tried to impeach former President Trump for a non-existent “insurrection against the US government.”
This shows that the US politically has degenerated into a backwoods third world country where the incoming regime arrests or executes the previous president.
Trump supporters are the patriots who historically have formed the backbone of the country’s armed forces. It is these people in the armed forces who the Pentagon is presently purging.
While the idiot appointed Secretary of Defense eliminates the fighting capability of the US military, the illegimate president in the White House calls the presidents of Russia and China names and issues threats. Simultaneously, the idiot playing Secretary of Defense issues an American guarantee to Ukraine against Russia, while the Defense department announces a lipsticked, painted fingernail, ponytailed, transgendered army in the interest of diversity.
The kinds of men who made the US Marines and paratroopers a fighting force are not going to join such an army or accept such creatures as officers. The US military is history. Ukraine should take this into account before they get themselves destroyed. The American guarantee is worth zero, and this worthless guarantee can start a world conflagration just like the worthless guarantee the idiot British government gave to Poland in March 1939.
The White House has released some details of the six executive actions the JoeBama team has put together for Joe Biden to sign.
(1) The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.” We are experiencing a growing problem: criminals are buying kits containing nearly all of the components and directions for finishing a firearm within as little as 30 minutes and using these firearms to commit crimes. When these firearms turn up at crime scenes, they often cannot be traced by law enforcement due to the lack of a serial number. The Justice Department will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of these firearms.
(2) The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act. The alleged shooter in the Boulder tragedy last month appears to have used a pistol with an arm brace, which can make a firearm more stable and accurate while still being concealable.
(3) The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states. Red flag laws allow family members or law enforcement to petition for a court order temporarily barring people in crisis from accessing firearms if they present a danger to themselves or others. The President urges Congress to pass an appropriate national “red flag” law, as well as legislation incentivizing states to pass “red flag” laws of their own. In the interim, the Justice Department’s published model legislation will make it easier for states that want to adopt red flag laws to do so.
(4) The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions. Community violence interventions are proven strategies for reducing gun violence in urban communities through tools other than incarceration. Because cities across the country are experiencing a historic spike in homicides, the Biden-Harris Administration is taking a number of steps to prioritize investment in community violence interventions.
The American Jobs Plan proposes a $5 billion investment over eight years to support community violence intervention programs. A key part of community violence intervention strategies is to help connect individuals to job training and job opportunities.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is organizing a webinar and toolkit to educate states on how they can use Medicaid to reimburse certain community violence intervention programs, like Hospital-Based Violence Interventions.
Five federal agencies are making changes to 26 different programs to direct vital support to community violence intervention programs as quickly as possible. These changes mean we can start increasing investments in community violence interventions as we wait on Congress to appropriate additional funds. Read more about these agency actions here.
(5) The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. In 2000, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) issued a report summarizing information regarding its investigations into firearms trafficking, which is one way firearms are diverted into the illegal market where they can easily end up in the hands of dangerous individuals. Since the report’s publication, states, local, and federal policymakers have relied on its data to better thwart the common channels of firearms trafficking. But there is good reason to believe that firearms trafficking channels have changed since 2000, for example due to the emergence of online sales and proliferation of “ghost guns.” The Justice Department will issue a new, comprehensive report on firearms trafficking and annual updates necessary to give policymakers the information they need to help address firearms trafficking today.
(6) The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. ATF is the key agency enforcing our gun laws, and it needs a confirmed director in order to do the job to the best of its ability. But ATF has not had a confirmed director since 2015. Chipman served at ATF for 25 years and now works to advance commonsense gun safety laws. (White House Link)
Gun ownership among black Americans is up nearly 60 percent following the record gun sales of 2020.
The Guardian reports, “gun ownership among Black Americans is up 58.2 percent.”
The paper cites National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) figures showing “Americans bought a record number of firearms last year,” including an “estimated 5 million people [who] bought their first ever gun between March and August.”
Black Americans witnessed the greatest increase among all first-time gun buyers.
Gun rights groups like the National African American Gun Association have subsequently seen giant leaps in membership.
Anubis Heru owns the 1770 Armory and Gun Club in Denver, the first firearm store and simulator range in Colorado to be owned by a black American.
Heru commented on the existence of gun rights groups focused on black Americans, “The value of these groups is learning with people who know your struggle and understand what’s happening and has been happening with this country. Black people and women of color like to come to our facility because we’re not the typical redneck with a tattoo of the Three Percenters.”
On March 2, 2o21, Breitbart News reported black Chicagoans were flooding into concealed carry courses seeking to defend themselves against the crime in the Windy City.
The Chicago Tribunereports that when one considers new customers nationally in the gun community in 2020, “black customers accounted for the largest increase of any racial group.” In Chicago specifically, black residents are pouring into gun courses and concealed carry courses, seeking a way to protect themselves from the violence that is all around.
The King Soopers shooting in Boulder is a tragedy. True. But, why is it a tragedy? What, exactly, is tragic about the event?
Yes, senseless loss of life at the hands of a lunatic is bad. There’s no denying that. And, the result is, indeed, tragic.
That said, there are a series of elements in this event that are much more tragic, in my opinion.
The fact that not a single employee or patron in that store moved to stop the attack is “tragic”.
The fact that the first cop on scene wanted to be a drone pilot to avoid job related hazards – after having made a fully adult, 40 year old decision to become a police officer (a job with inherent risk, as the gun requirement would make reasonably clear) – is “tragic”.
The fact that grown-ass men have a need and desire to tell the world/press how “frightened” they were as though they completely lack the necessary biological requirements to be men, is “tragic”.
The fact that King Soopers/Kroger chose an ineffective, “no guns” policy as a defense against a violent act is “tragic”.
The fact that the police didn’t control the scene well and mostly stood around with their heads firmly implanted in their collective fourth point of contact is “tragic”.
The fact that the only “solution” anyone can muster is related to more, dumb-ass, gun control laws (which criminals will ignore – hence, the title, “criminal”), is “tragic”.
The fact that anyone cares what Major League Baseball thinks about the event is… well, “tragic”.
Enough ranting… some facts and some sober questions:
2020 was a record year for gun sales. Best estimates now put 400 million guns in the hands of private US citizens. Presumably a couple of those gun owners were in King Soopers during the shooting. Why were they not carrying? If they were, why were they not properly trained to use the one tool that would have leveled the playing field and saved innocent life?
Why did King Soopers not defend their enterprise, their employees, or their patrons with anything more effective than an HR policy and a fucking sign?
The police most often looked to be standing around like they were in a park waiting for someone to serve a burger or a brat at some family gathering. Why? Is their training insufficient? Are they incompetent?
There are apparently police officers who would rather be flying kites… er… drones than being law enforcers or protectors. Why are they on the job? Has HR failed the cops as well?
In the interest of not simply kvetching about a problem and not offering any constructive advice, I present the following steps to remedy the “tragedies” above:
Buy a gun. Get trained. Real training. Not NRA “safety” training taught by a lobbying organization. Or, some crappo, State mandated concealed carry permission.
Carry your gun. It’s useless unless it’s deployable in a crisis.
Stop patronizing stores with “no gun” policies. They are kill-zones.
If you own or manage an enterprise, arm and train your employees to effectively respond to a violent threat.
If you’re a cop… get your shit together.
The world is not, has never been, and will never be a safe-space. If you are a man, you have an obligation to act as a protector, if not a warrior. Not to out-source that to civil servants. Acquire the tools and training to be able to accept that responsibility. Stop being a pussy. Stop being a victim. You can delegate authority. You may not delegate responsibility.
Ignore politicians who would dis-arm you and infringe upon your natural right of self-defense. Back to that delegation thing… when bad things happen to good people, the politicians will not be there. No matter how many laws they sign or how many tax dollars they spend, no one is coming to save you.
In the end, this event and the result is a direct reflection on who we are as a society and a complete abrogation of responsibility for one’s own safety and personal defense. Distributed Security has the training and tools necessary to prevent this in the future… created by guys with careers’ worth of real-world experience training and operating in environments and circumstances much more deadly than King Soopers on a Monday afternoon. In other words, professionals and warriors. You need those resources. Get them.
Bad enough that Harris panders to the antigun movement – no surprise there – but the egregious inaccuracies in this story illustrate that her prejudice, and theirs, is supported by “News Light” aka “McPaper”:
1) It is untrue that “online gun sales” are completed without background checks. No firearm can be shipped directly to an online buyer: all must be shipped from a federally licensed firearms dealer, to a federally licensed firearms dealer in the buyer’s state, who completes the transfer to the buyer just as he would if he were selling the firearm himself – that includes the background check.
2) State “red flag laws” do not result in orders “typically issued for two or three weeks”, nor are they “temporary” by any sane definition, as claimed several times in this story. They are enforceable immediately following a hearing in front of a judge where the accused has no right to speak for himself or through counsel; and their usual duration is at least a year, and in almost every case, the accused has to request termination of the order through another court hearing, at his own expense, where the burden of proof is on him. Hardly due process. Hardly “innocent until proven guilty.” Shall we treat all Constitutional rights this way?
3) Harris and her fellow travelers speak repeatedly about using a federal “red flag law” to remove weapons from “suspected” (!) “domestic terrorists” (!!) and “white nationalists” (!!!) while the closest thing to a reasonable commentator in this story is the former NCTC Director who cautions that such action could not be taken on the basis of someone’s exercise of First Amendment rights. But there is no statute, and no crime, titled “domestic terrorism” or “white nationalism,” so labeling someone as such is nothing but a chilling threat against free expression. To whom would you grant authority to determine which citizens fell into either category, and deserved to be stripped of a Constitutional right? I’m sure Kamala Harris has an answer, and most Americans won’t like it.
And those who do like the idea, because after all who cares about “domestic terrorists” or “white nationalists,” should remember Martin Niemoller, the German Lutheran minister who said of the Nazis:
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Let’s get this straight, first: 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse performed as well in the circumstances as most adults 2-4 times his age, and with far more training and experience, could hope to do. Once he found himself isolated and under attack, his decisions to retreat, his discretion in engaging only those that physically assaulted him, and his shooting leave little to criticize.
Of course, the Monday morning quarterbacks are going to work on him. He may have missed with several rounds he fired at his first assailant – except we’re still sorting out who all the other shooters were on the street that night – but in any case, he got good hits and stopped that assailant, in the first lethal force encounter of his life, in the midst of a huge adrenaline dump and Sympathetic Nervous System storm. He tripped and fell in the street while running from a pursuing mob (which could never happen given the cat-like reflexes and superior gym-rat conditioning of true operators, right?). He hesitated until the last second to fire on the third assailant, who was charging him with a pistol (perhaps confused by the stupidity of that assault, but in hindsight, a remarkable display of restraint). And so on. All in all, I’ll say it again, he did as well as most bad-ass “opr8rs” would have done, who have never before found themselves in the midst of an angry mob, fronted by at least three crazed felons, yelling “get the m-f!”
But that takes us to the real point: how did Kyle find himself in that situation? We do not know the details yet, as there is a gap in the video footage between the “tame” situation of several armed defenders on private property, and Kyle fleeing on his own across a lot with the now-deceased felonious pedophile hot on his trail. There is only one witness statement available which may shed some light on what happened in between, but we’re neither trying nor defending the case, nor trying to fill in the gaps in the second-by-second narrative. The truth will out.
All of this might have been avoided had the folks associated with that car dealership under siege in Kenosha exercised more foresight, planning, and preparation, and ensured a higher level of training and teamwork. In fact, we saw a demonstration of how it could have gone, in video footage from the night before that showed several rifle-armed men standing in front of a Kenosha business as a large mob flowed past. One at least of them verbalizes to the “protestors” who throw some harsh language back as is their wont, but quite rationally they “just keep moving,” while the defenders keep muzzles depressed, fingers straight, heads on a swivel – and in clear line of sight and mutual supporting distance, something Kyle missed terribly, the following night. Mission accomplished, that first night: that’s a good picture of how the protection of private property in a civil disturbance could go. The next night, not so much.
Distributed Security, Inc. (DSI) offers a well-developed
model of how an enterprise (i.e. private business), institution (i.e. church or
school), community, or a network of any or all of these can protect lives and
property in the midst of a violent civil disturbance. Here are the basic tenets of the DSI approach
– all of which were absent (or inadequate) in the Kenosha example we’re looking
Analysis, comprising a threat assessment, area study, site survey(s), and an evaluation of outside assets that may contribute to safety and security, such as police, fire, and emergency medical, and response times and capabilities for each. Understand the law, and its constraints (what you must do) and restraints (what you cannot do). Take a realistic look at the political, social, and legal environment. What have the local authorities said (and done!) about maintaining order, and protecting lives and property? What is their attitude about citizens doing so? This kind of information collection and analysis can’t be done overnight.
Establish full, open, and sustained communications with local law enforcement, ensuring that you operate within the law and are prepared for safe and effective linkup with responding officers. If you can’t get law enforcement concurrence and support for your efforts, you should probably consider voting with your feet – relocating – rather than trying to defend under conditions that will put you at odds with local government and the legal system.
Organize your private security force, so you don’t face a crisis with a last-minute pickup crew. Neighbors and friends pitching in on the spur of the moment may be better than nothing – but it’s a lot worse than what you can accomplish with some prior organization. One of the most important elements of this is to insist upon teamwork and “battle buddies” so that no one finds themself left alone facing a lethal threat. That alone could have changed the outcomes in Kenosha.
Develop plans and procedures, for both ‘normal’ day-to-day conditions and for facing the threats you have identified. Make sure everyone understands their role. Test your plans and procedures with validation exercises that can vary from a BOGSAT discussion (Bunch of Guys Sitting Around a Table) to formal war gaming, walk-throughs, and performance testing. Fix the errors, fill the gaps. Leave as little as possible to native wit and improvisation.
Develop leaders, an organizational structure with shared understandings about discipline and the chain of command, IFF, and redundant communications.
Make sure that everyone involved clearly understands their rights and responsibilities under the law, to include the crucial distinction between defensive actions wholly within private property versus engaging in melees, or projecting force, into public areas.
And finally, neither last nor least, is training: both individual and team training, in firearms and in tactical and decision-making skills. We see many examples like Kyle Rittenhouse, of gifted amateurs, or individuals with little or no formal training who manage to come through in a crisis – but relying on hope, luck, or divine intervention in a life or death crisis is not a good strategy.
DSI offers training and guidance
in all these areas. We train individuals
and enterprises to defend life and property. We pioneered distributed
security networks which enable businesses, churches and schools to coordinate an
active defense of their premises and their immediate community.
Our offerings range from $19/month on-line memberships for individuals to $1 million plus turnkey enterprise packages, all built on resources and programs including on-range training leveraged by on-line resources in 27 course formats, 6 enterprise service offerings, 114 online learning modules, 150 videos, manuals, training plans, a mobile app, and more. All this is designed to assist individuals, enterprises, organizations and communities avoid the pitfalls of standing up a security capability to protect lives and property at the last minute in a crisis, as happened in Kenosha a few nights ago. These are dangerous times; best to do the thing well.
Starting on April 18, 2020 in the Canadian maritime province of Nova Scotia, a 51-year old man perpetrated the nation’s deadliest mass shooting in history, killing 22 and injuring more.
I say “starting” because the incident ran almost 13 hours – from 2230 on Saturday night until the shooter was killed by police at 1126 the following Sunday. During that time, the shooter traveled through five or six small communities in the north central part of the island province, with all but the first two of his victims apparently selected at random, creating 16 separate crime scenes and burning down the homes of some of his victims.
This is the most inexplicable aspect of the whole event.Can you imagine a shooter carrying on a one-man shooting spree just about anywhere in rural America for that long before someone stands up and stops the bastard?
Now, it is true that Canada has very restrictive gun laws. Law-abiding citizens must obtain a license from the Canadian government to even acquire or possess a firearm. The license requires completion of safety training, background checks, interviews of character witnesses, and a dense and changing web of regulations defining classes of non-restricted, restricted, and prohibited firearms. A first-time applicant for a permit will wait a minimum of one month for approval, and has to renew his permit every five years. Transporting or transferring firearms requires additional permits. Concealed or open carry by a civilian is rarely approved except in rural areas for defense against dangerous wildlife. The good news (?) is that if you’ve complied with all these legal restrictions and have a gun in your home, self-defense with a firearm might be considered legal if – in the aftermath – you can prove that your life was in danger. Subjects of the United Kingdom, at least, must be envious.
One might think that somewhere in these six villages of rural Nova Scotia there were a few legally owned firearms, but no one resisted this killer with deadly force. Could this be as much a question of culture as capability?
Granted, there were other circumstances in play here – the shooter wore a police (RCMP) uniform and drove a car that resembled a police cruiser, which no doubt allayed suspicion; and the authorities did not issue a province-wide emergency alert although some notices did go out over Twitter and Facebook. But still.
There is a psychology we all know, that relies on government to keep us safe and secure. It is not uncommon even in the U.S., but this Nova Scotia mass shooting is a sad example of its shortcomings. It is simply and undeniably true that “when seconds count, the police are minutes away.”
Distributed security means, among other things, taking responsibility for your own safety, at the very least in that critical gap between the appearance of a lethal threat and the possibility of intervention by law enforcement.
And for a sad footnote, the response of the Canadian government to this incident was for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to announce that he will now, by executive order, ban the ownership and sale of “assault weapons,” which will be subject to a buyback program.
The shooter in Nova Scotia used a pistol, which he was already legally prohibited from possessing, as a result of an assault conviction in 2002. Don’t look for logic in any of this – it is how “gun control” works: never let a crisis go to waste. Again we see how vital the Second Amendment is to our freedom and self-reliance; and how vigilant we must remain.
In March, an Ohio district court appellate judge reversed a lower court’s decision regarding a school district’s policy mandating 26 hours of training for school employees authorized to carry concealed firearms for the protection of their schools. Read about it here.
Here we go again: lawyers, guns, and money. Ohio statute clearly authorizes the governing board of a school district to approve the carry of firearms by whomever they choose. This district – which in fact suffered a school shooting in 2016 – wrote a policy, similar to those of hundreds of other districts across the state and thousands more around the country, specifying the selection and training process for employees interested in carrying concealed firearms. Their training requirement was for 26 hours of initial training, which is a fairly common and entirely adequate standard.
The plaintiffs in this lawsuit, seeking to stop implementation of the new policy (passed by their elected school board), sued on the absurd basis that another statute, governing cops and security guards employed by schools, should override the clear intent of the legislature, and require that teachers, administrators, custodians, or any other employee authorized to carry a firearm complete the same 728 hours of peace officer training that full-time officers undergo. The first judge very sensibly ruled against this; now an appellate judge sympathetic to the anti-gun sentiments of the plaintiffs has reversed that decision and required full peace officer training for armed school employees.
Don’t for a minute think that
this is anything but lawyerly opportunism by anti-gun zealots, encouraged and
financially backed, as all reports confirm, by Everytown for Gun Safety, Mike Bloomberg’s
national gun control group. When will Americans
get tired of letting Mike Bloomberg’s money decide firearms law?
The merits of the case are
simple and clear. Allowing concealed
carry by school staff has only one goal: to enable an immediate response to a lethal
threat in the schools, during the critical response gap of 5-20 minutes
before police are capable of intervening, and during which almost every school
shooting is over and done with, leaving the victims bleeding out on the
floor. Armed staff are not cops; they do
not rescue cats and babies, save children from demonic clowns, write traffic citations,
or arrest students for selling drugs, vandalizing property, and fighting on the
In Ohio, those 728 hours of peace officer training encompass the following categories: Administration, Legal, Human Relations, Driving, Subject Control, First Aid, Patrol, Civil Disorders, Traffic, Investigation, Physical Conditioning, and oh yes, Firearms. Exactly 60 hours of firearms training covering handguns, shotguns, patrol rifles, and more.
Armed school staff train with
handguns only. Their live fire range time is supplemented with scenario-based
training that teaches specific and appropriate tactics and decision making
specific to reacting to a lethal threat on school property; specific state and
local laws defining the legal use of lethal force; and immediate life-saving
medical care as taught in the American College of Surgeons “Stop the Bleed”
course. This is very little different
than any good citizen’s training for safe, responsible, and effective carry of
a handgun for self-defense. Across
America, this training is accomplished by a wide variety of training providers
in 24-40 hour programs. Distributed
Security, Inc. is one of those providers; we know whereof we speak.
But the plaintiffs in this case and their fellow travelers across the country could care less about the logic of the thing. They don’t believe in self-reliance, self-defense, constitutional rights, or the principle of governmental decisions and responsibility at the lowest possible level. They just want fewer guns everywhere, fewer and fewer until they’re gone, and will fight bitterly with their sponsoring billionaires’ money to advance that goal. It’s a pity that we have judges on the bench who sympathize with them, but there are plenty of good ones out there too, and Ohio’s Madison Local Schools will almost certainly win this fight on the next appeal. If you don’t like the way this latest decision went, find a way to support them in their continuing fight for the safety of their schoolchildren.
Rush Limbaugh has been making this point for decades. And, no matter how you feel about Rush, he’s correct on this one.
Despite the popular beating that English takes for being an inconsistent, hodgepodge and difficult to manage, the English language, properly used, is an amazingly precise communication instrument.
Lately, I’ve seen the word “empowerment” thrown around a great deal. Particularly in the firearms industry. To the degree, in fact, that it’s become nauseating. I browsed one range website yesterday that made use of the word no fewer than 100 times when describing company values and mission. This company’s raison d’être is “empowerment”. It says so. Right there on the internet.
Everybody’s using it. It has become a multi-industry catchphrase. But, what does “empowerment” mean? If words, do indeed, mean things and if we are going to effectively communicate, we have to define terms and use them appropriately.
“Empower” was coined as a word somewhere in the 17th century as a compound of “en” and “power”. However, it never really entered common parlance until the mid-1980s.
One can obtain the textbook definition here. Without getting overly pedantic about it, I think it’s fair to say that:
Empowerment = Confidence + Competence
Further, if one of the components of empowerment is competence, we must clarify that competence is developed through “training”. At Distributed Security, our working definition is:
Training = Instruction + Practice
So, competence (and therefore, empowerment) is inextricably linked to training. Through that lens, I offer this piece from the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Ok. Let’s unpack the article:
1 or 2 instructors
a church basement cum pistol range
a few revolvers
Intention… “empowering” the attendees.
My rebuttal, point by point:
Even in the Army (where mass training is the model) you do not instruct basic marksmanship or administer range training with more than one company (<100 men) of novices
The Student:Instructor ratio in the army is roughly 10:1. Not the best case 90:1 ratio identified above.
Church basement? Does that seriously require rebuttal?
9 hours is too much to teach anyone to “fire a gun”. And, it is wholly insufficient to train men or women to a level of competence.
How effective do you suppose each of those hours were if each participant had access to a pistol for only a fraction of the time? Again… does that require rebuttal?
This ridiculous dollar amount reinforces the specious notion that training should be inexpensive or free. Per the article, the $25/head was to cover the rental expense of the space. So… the instructors were free? Their time was free? Where I’m from, you get what you pay for. And, if you pay nothing, well… You do the math. What sort of result would you expect if your auto mechanic charged you nothing? Further, $25 x 180 participants = $4500. If that is the cost to rent the basement for a day, I need to reconsider my career choices… I don’t need a job, I need to repurpose my basement. For that price a very nice, legitimate range could have been rented for a day or two.
If the intent was to empower, and we accept that empowerment is a function of competence, and that competence is a function of training, then this episode was a miserable failure.
Based on the definitions above, does that experience sound “empowering”? Does that constitute “training”? At best, that scenario speaks to “exposure”… but, certainly not training. To be fair, the headline had it right; “Learning how to Fire Guns”.
All that said, I want to give credit where it’s due. Kudos to Arm the Populace and to the ladies in attendance, I think their intent was admirable. I also think it was misguided. What the article demonstrates is a good (if tentative) first step, but falls severely short of anything resembling “Training” as we understand it… much less “Competence”. My concern is that what has been achieved is 180 women with a false sense of confidence about their firearms competence
If we accept that, as a civilian, gun handling and gunfighting is one of the most potentially lethal activities you can engage in, doesn’t it follow that one has a responsibility to train to a high level of competence? So that, one is not simply a danger to oneself and others?
Finally… answers and solutions
In the interest of providing solutions to problems, as opposed to simply armchair quarterbacking, consider the following:
Gun owners owe it to themselves and their loved ones to engage in real, effective, efficient training. We at Distributed Security, Inc offer World Class Combative Firearms Training. We have the broadest and deepest curriculum, developed and delivered by some of the most experienced Instructors in the business.
In contrast to the exercise from the article above, DSI training is offered, complete, as pre-range (online), hands-on (on range), and persistent, ongoing practice supervision, at a student:instructor ratio of 3:1. A model no one else in the Firearms Training Industry can replicate.
Circa 2500 years ago, a Greek fellow by the name of Heraclitus, observed the following:
Why, in 2020 AD, does that matter? It matters because, for all our advancement over the last two and a half millennia, the world is still a dangerous, unpredictable place and, as a result, bad things happen to good, innocent people. And, when they do, the good and innocent still need warriors to stand between them and danger. Willing, able, properly equipped and trained, warriors.
Training matters. Proper training matters more. Because when the balloon goes up, you will not “rise to the occasion” as many would have you believe. You will, however, default to your level of training. Warriors are not born, but trained.
Business Enterprises and Community Organizations do a fantastic job of convincing themselves that they are safe and secure because they have engaged in “Awareness” training, or “Active Shooter” training… or worse yet, that “it can’t happen here”. Yet, invariably, when the unthinkable happens and a violent attack occurs on premise, what happens? Best case… a handful of employees, customers, or community members are injured or killed. Why?
Because, the “training” those enterprises bought and participated in via death by PowerPoint, isn’t training at all. The preparations made, cameras bought, policies written, and signage hung don’t save a single person.
Running away is hysterical. Hiding under a desk, wrapped in terrified prayer is ineffective. Fighting back, armed with office supplies, is asinine and suicidal. And, all cameras do is record where the bodies fell. That’s not security or safety.
Most folks in any given organization have no business in a fight for life. But, someone ought to be trained to effectively respond… Right? Maybe a few someones. Trained to capably mount an Active Defense of life and property, giving Law Enforcement the time they need to respond and intervene.
Coming back to our friend Heraclitus… those aforementioned “someones” are the warriors. The one percent built to keep the other 99 safe.
So… What’s the punchline? Simply this: You and your organization do not have to remain helpless in the critical gap between the inception of a violent threat and Law Enforcement response. There are answers. There is training. There is “Heraclitus’ Niche”. There is Distributed Security.