• Category Archives Education
  • The not so pretty story behind Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns

    MAIG was founded in 2006 by then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and then-Boston Mayor Thomas Menino on the theory that mayors have a closer, more direct under-standing of the problems of violence. But Bloomberg, with his willingness to use his vast personal fortune to attack the Second Amendment, quickly became the face of the organization.

    New York-based MAIG is a relatively small outfit. According to its tax filing from the most recent publicly available tax year (2011), the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund group took in $3,476,643 that year and spent $2,834,151. It has received little support from the philanthropic establishment. Its two foundation donors are the David Bohnett Foundation of Beverly Hills, Calif. ($185,000 since 2007) and the Public Welfare Foundation ($25,000 in 2008). (Bohnett founded GeoCities, an Internet-based media and e-commerce company that was bought by Yahoo! Inc. in 1999.)

    MAIG Action also spreads its wealth around. In 2011 it gave grants to other anti-gun and leftist groups such as Coalition to Stop Gun Violence ($210,000), America Votes ($275,000), Progress Ohio ($17,400), and Progress Now Nevada Action ($10,000).

    Although no longer a mayor, Bloomberg is still expected to throw money into the group to make it a powerful lobbying force in 2014, as Democrats seek to resurrect the gun control issue—a perpetual loser at the national level—as a means of mobilizing their base. (Bloomberg’s philanthropy was examined in the September 2012 Foundation Watch.)

    It began with 15 mayors meeting at a summit on April 25, 2006, at Gracie Mansion in New York, and agreeing on an innocuous-sounding Statement of Principles that many National Rifle Association members might feel comfortable signing. MAIG has grown to more than 1,000 mayors in 45 states and has aggressively pushed for stronger gun restrictions on law-abiding citizens. The 1,000 mayors, by the way, represent about 5 percent of America’s 19,000 municipalities (Fox News, July 29, 2013).

    When both Bloomberg and Menino exited their respective city halls earlier this year, the group lacked a single authoritative figure to be its spokesman. MAIG merged with Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America—a group that started in response to the horrendous December 2012 massacre of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Conn. The mom’s group claimed to have 130,000 members in 50 states.

    “Combining the legal and policy expertise of mayors with the passion and determination of moms will create a force for change that political leaders will not be able to ignore,” said Bloomberg and Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts in a Politico op-ed in December 2013 announcing the merger.

    “And by uniting a broad coalition of millions of Americans, we intend to take the fight for common-sense gun safety measures to a new level,” Bloomberg and Watts added. “It’s a fight that can be won, and—unless we are willing accept that 33 Americans will be murdered with guns every day—it’s a fight we must win.”

    Read More (PDF LINK)


  • Progressive Racism: The Hidden Motive Driving Modern Politics (Gun Control)

    Progressive politics is rooted in racism. Look carefully at most social or fiscal policies advocated by progressives and you’ll see that underneath their false public rationales lie hidden racist fears and assumptions — some of which the progressives may be too embarrassed to admit even to themselves, much less to the world.

    In modern politics, everyone doubts everyone else’s sincerity. Each side automatically presumes that the other side presents a false public justification for its political views. And in most cases it is wise to doubt, because most public justifications are indeed lies — sometimes unconscious lies. But surprisingly often the hypothesized alternative “true” motivation guessed at by the opposing side is itself completely incorrect. Especially when conservatives come up with theories attempting to explain what to them are mystifying progressive obsessions. What conservatives don’t (yet) know is that under the surface, most progressive positions are motivated by racist attitudes and assumptions felt by white progressives, usually against African-Americans. Progressive positions often seem inexplicable to outsiders because the proposals emanating from them usually manifest as colossal social engineering experiments, which the progressives have only devised as a distraction from the shameful racist motivations at the core.

    This essay will likely be eye-opening for conservatives, and infuriating for progressives, who often don’t know their own history and never contemplated the origins of their own belief system. But it’s time to finally bring the uncomfortable truth out in the open.

    Below you will find eight separate entries, each focusing on a different policy pushed by progressives. Each entry follows the same format:

    BOLD: Name of topic.

    In yellow: A neutral description of the exact proposal which progressives champion.
    In red: The progressives’ stated justification or explanation behind their position, which hides their real purpose.

    In red: The inaccurate theory which conservatives mistakenly assume must be the actual progressive motivation.

    In green: The true racist reason underlying the progressive policy.
    Plain text: Additional notes on the origins of the progressives’ racist attitude and how it led to this specific policy proposal.

    If you want to just skim the essay and only read the highlights, then simply look for the green sections and skip the rest. Otherwise, read the whole thing to get a clear step-by-step explanation of the actual racist motivations driving each progressive position.


    GUN CONTROL

    Progressive position:
    Restrict access to guns as much as possible; ultimately ban and confiscate them all.
    False public rationale offered by progressives to justify their position:
    Gun violence is a scourge on society; easy access to killing machines unnecessarily facilitates murder and crime.
    Conservatives’ inaccurate theory of progressives’ real intent:
    Progressives want to disarm the populace to prevent armed resistance to the eventual imposition of a leftist totalitarian police state.
    The actual racist origins of the progressive stance:
    White urban liberals are deathly afraid of black gangbangers with guns, but are ashamed to admit this publicly, so to mask their racist fears they try to ban guns for everyone, as a way of warding off the perception that their real goal is to target blacks specifically.

    The basic dividing line in American politics is not (as it once was ) North vs. South, nor is it (as many people now assume) Coasts vs. Flyover Country, but rather Urban vs. Rural:

    The new political divide is a stark division between cities and what remains of the countryside. Not just some cities and some rural areas, either — virtually every major city (100,000-plus population) in the United States of America has a different outlook from the less populous areas that are closest to it. The difference is no longer about where people live, it’s about how people live: in spread-out, open, low-density privacy — or amid rough-and-tumble, in-your-face population density and diverse communities that enforce a lower-common denominator of tolerance among inhabitants. …The only major cities that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election were Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Fort Worth, and Salt Lake City.

    Or put more simply: In modern America, liberals live in cities; conservatives live in rural areas. And what else is concentrated in cities? African-Americans, and gun violence:

    The 62 center cities of America’s 50 largest metro areas account for 15 percent of the population but 39 percent of gun-related murders.

    Putting all these statistics together, we see that large cities have high concentrations of white liberals alongside gun-using black criminals. And yet it is specifically in Democrat-voting big cities where most of the gun-control measures are proposed. Why is that? Are the white progressive urban dwellers afraid of rootin’-tootin’ cowboys? Of backwoods deer hunters? Of hillbillies with shotguns? No: the average white progressive has never even met a cowboy, a hunter or a hillbilly. And frankly, progressives couldn’t care less if rednecks own guns, because progressives aren’t physically afraid of rednecks on a daily basis. Instead, they are afraid of gun violence at the hands of their fellow city-dwellers, the urban African-Americans who commit a wildly disproportionate percentage of the gun crimes in America.

    Progressives don’t want to ban guns to disarm resistance to any upcoming police state; that idea has never even occurred to them. Instead, progressives want to ban guns because progressives are afraid of black people.

    But God forbid that progressives’ racist motivations be exposed publicly. So to make the gun-control bans appear even-handed and race-neutral, progressives must try to ban guns for everyone, even though the bans are in reality aimed at one specific group. Rural gun-users are just collateral damage of a policy that actually targets inner-city blacks.

    Read More…


  • CT School Shooter’s Father: “I Wish He Was Never Born”

    Conn. shooter's dad: 'You can't get any more evil'

    In his most extensive comments about the 2012 Connecticut school massacre, the father of gunman Adam Lanza describes his struggle to comprehend what his son did — an act that “couldn’t get any more evil” — and how he now wishes that his son had never been born.

    Peter Lanza also told The New Yorker magazine in a series of interviews last fall that he believes Adam would have killed him, too, if he had the chance. And he often contemplates what he could have done differently in his relationship with Adam, although he believes the killings couldn’t have been predicted.

    “Any variation on what I did and how my relationship was had to be good, because no outcome could be worse,” Peter Lanza told the magazine in an article dated March 17. “You can’t get any more evil. … How much do I beat up on myself about the fact that he’s my son? A lot.”

    Read More…


  • The Medieval—and Highly Effective—Tactics of the Ukrainian Protests

    Ukraine’s Euromaidan movement is in control of the capital. The autocratic and ostrich-raising Pres. Viktor Yanukovych has fled Kiev, and the Ukrainian parliament has voted him out of power.

    For now, it’s a dramatic victory for the protesters, who have sought closer ties with the European Union and an end to the corruption represented by Yanukovych. It’s especially stunning considering the protesters had—on several occasions—seemed close to defeat.

    But to understand why the protests succeeded in toppling Yanukovych, it’s worth taking a glance at its strategies and military-style tactics. The protesters not only built a broad and inclusive coalition, but innovated where it mattered most: on the streets.

    Really, it turned medieval.

    Protesters shot fireworks with makeshift launchers. In combination with throwing stones and using slingshots, they overwhelmed disoriented Berkut special forces units, who were pelted with flying objects as fireworks exploded around them.

    Protesters wore military helmets and carried makeshift—or captured—shields. Wooden boards were used to protect their lower legs from shrapnel the police taped to exploding stun grenades.

    Among the array of homemade weapons, some were perhaps a little too ambitious. A crude trebuchet—a type of medieval catapult which uses a counterweight to fling objects—was overrun and dismantled.

    Read More…


  • How to Disappear from the Internet in 9 Steps!

     

    The infographic, pictured, from London-based WhoIsHostingThis, details the nine steps needed to remove yourself from the web. It includes deactivating accounts, such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google+

    THE NINE-STEP VANISHING ACT

    1. Close your Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn accounts.

    2. Search for yourself online and close any accounts you’d forgotten about.

    3. Falsify information on accounts that can’t be closed or deleted.

    4. Unsubscribe from mailing lists.

    5. Delete search engine results.

    6. Contact websites directly and ask them to remove details about yourself.

    7. Ask data clearing houses – companies that collect and sell data to other firms – to remove your records.

    8. Ask to be unlisted in phone books and online directories.

    9. Delete your email accounts.


  • 77 Years Ago Today The U.S. Apologized To Hitler For NYC Mayor’s Insult (Shades of Obama)

    article image

    Seventy-seven years ago today the U.S. apologized to Germany after the mayor of New York City made disparaging remarks about Adolf Hitler.

    NYC Mayor Fiorella La Guardia said he wanted to end the 1939 World’s Fair with a “chamber of horrors” that would have “as a climax … a figure of that brown-shirted fanatic who is now menacing the peace of the world.”

    The son of Italian immigrants, La Guardia’s mother was Jewish and his father was Catholic.

    The German press covered the story calling La Guardia a “dirty Talmud Jew” and “New York’s gangster-in-chief.”

    On March 6, 1937, three days after La Guardia’s remarks, U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull issued an apology to the German Embassy for the insult.

    Read More…


  • FBI Confirms Crime Is Down While Gun Sales Are Up

    The FBI’s semi-annual uniform crime data for the first half of 2013 confirms once again what the firearms community already knew, that violent crime has continued to decline while gun sales have continued to climb.

    The report says murders declined 6.9 percent from the first half of 2012, while aggravated assaults dropped by 6.6 percent nationwide and robberies were down 1.8 percent. Forcible rapes declined 10.6 percent from the same period in 2012 and overall, violent crime fell by 10.6 percent in non-metropolitan counties and 3.6 percent in metropolitan counties.

    Take our ‘Guns Save Lives Poll’ to voice your own opinions on the correlation between gun sales rising and violent crime declining.

    This new information reinforces the notion that not only do guns save lives, their presence in the hands and homes of law-abiding citizens just might be a deterrent to crime. The National Shooting Sports Foundation has been reporting a steady increase in firearm sales for the past few years.

    Taken as a whole, one cannot help but conclude that the predictions from gun prohibitionists that more guns leads to more crime have been consistently wrong.

    The tired argument from the anti-gun lobby that more firearms in the hands of private citizens would result in sharp increases in violence has run out of traction. Not only has the decline in crime corresponded with an increase in gun sales, it also coincides with a steady rise in the number of citizens obtaining concealed carry licenses and permits.

    The FBI report says burglaries and auto theft have also decreased and it is impossible to look at this pattern and not suggest that increased gun ownership just might be one contributing factor. Gun prohibitionists would, of course, dismiss that suggestion as poppycock, but you can bet your life savings that if the data was reversed, and violent crime had risen, the gun control lobby would be rushing to every available microphone declaring that guns were to blame.

    This continuing pattern brings up a pertinent question. If the gun ban lobby has been so wrong about more guns resulting in more crime, what else have they been wrong about? The word ‘everything’ comes to mind. One thing about criminal predators is that they don’t want to risk getting shot by an intended victim.


  • NYC Warns of Chinatown Skin Infection Outbreak From Handling Raw Fish

    New York City is seeing an outbreak of a rare skin infection that comes from handling raw seafood, causing skin lesions, pain and swelling to the hands and arms and even difficulty moving fingers, officials said.

    Health officials are warning those who purchase raw fish and seafood at Chinatowns in Manhattan, Queens or Brooklyn to wear waterproof gloves when handling those items, and to seek medical care if they discover red bumps on hands or arms.

    Read More…


  • NYC Government Says NYPD Under No Obligation To Protect Citizens

    New York City policemen are under no obligation to protect the city’s denizens from harm. So says the city in response to a lawsuit by a man who was attacked on the subway by a man with a knife.

    Joseph Lozito said police officers Terrance Howell and Tamara Taylor, who were on the subway at the same time, ignored Maksim Gelman as he stormed about the subway in a drug-fueled rage. They even dismissed other passengers who tried to warn them about Gelman’s actions.

    Lozito identified Gelman as the man who approached him telling him he was going to die before plunging a knife into Lozito’s face. Lozito wrestled Gelman to the ground — enduring multiple stab wounds to the back of the head while doing so — and held him until Howell tapped him on the shoulder and told him to get up.

    Read More…


  • The 1984 Brady Law Has Done Little To Keep Guns Out Of Criminals’ Hands

    Last Friday marked the 20th anniversary of the so-called Brady Law, a federal gun control in honor of James Brady, Ronald Reagan’s former press secretary who was wounded in John Hinckley’s assassination attempt.

    Since it requires background checks on all guns purchased from federally licensed firearms dealers, gun control advocates celebrated the law’s purported effectiveness.

    The description by the Capitol newspaper The Hill was typical: “The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which took effect 20 years ago Friday, has blocked more than 2 million firearm sales, preventing ‘countless’ killings and other crimes, gun control advocates said at an event to mark the anniversary … .”

    On Friday, the Brady Campaign claimed that half those blocked from purchasing a gun — over 1 million — were felons.

    Impressive numbers. But, alas, both are gross exaggerations.


  • Gun Entrepreneur Dick Cabela Is A Hero

    Entrepreneur Richard Cabela—the late founder of sporting goods empire Cabela’s—did more than create jobs. He protected our natural, God-given right to bear arms.

    Cabela passed away last Monday in his home state of Nebraska at the young age of 77. His story is empowering to entrepreneurs, gun owners and Second Amendment supporters.

    As tens of thousands of gun owners in the state of Connecticut commit civil disobedience and refuse to register their semi-automatic firearms, Dick Cabela’s legacy reminds us of the importance to never give up and never stop fighting for what we believe in.

    Cabela’s first attempt at advertising hand-tied fishing flies was a flop. Instead of giving up, he adjusted his marketing techniques and launched a mail-order sporting goods catalog. Within three short years, he and his family had more business than they could manage from their kitchen table.

    Read More…


  • Rifle used by Detroit Mom to defend family is illegal “Assault Weapon” in NY

    In NY State, this mom would be a criminal and facing jail time because of cosmetic features on the rifle.

    http://youtu.be/vpv9tJwjmAk

    I saw the videotape below at Ace of Spades HQ, as well as at Hot Air, regarding a Detroit mother at home with her children when three men, at least one of whom was armed with a handgun, attempted to kick open the front back door.

    Fearing for her safety and that of her children, this mother used a rifle in self-defense. She didn’t hit any of the intruders, but it was enough to scare them off initially, and again when one of them tried again to break in:

    Viewing the video, I wondered whether the rifle this mother used would be legal in New York State under the new SAFE Act, which was rushed through the NY State legislature on short notice after the Newtown, CT, school shooting.

    The SAFE Act was irrational in many respects, including a 7-round magazine limit that was unworkable and ultimately thrown out by the courts, a requirement that even 10-round magazines not be loaded with more than 7 bullets, and a definition of “Assault Weapon” that relied on physical characteristics that were cosmetic and common.

    Read More…


  • Justice Scalia Warns That Government Will Violate Your Civil Rights in Times of War

    At some point when America is at war, terrible violations of basic constitutional freedoms will occur. So says Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

    Speaking at the University of Hawaii’s law school on Feb. 3, Scalia talked about World War II, where American citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent were placed in internment camps in the 1940s. This government action was taken to court and ultimately was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Korematsu v. U.S.

    Korematsu is one of the most infamous cases in American history. It was an unmitigated betrayal of the Constitution’s guarantee that no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. How could such a thing ever happen in America? The answer, according to Scalia, is found in an ancient Latin phrase, inter arma enim silent leges.

    That translates as, “In times of war, the laws fall silent.” It expresses the reality that in times of desperate conflict, those who wield military power tend to do what they think necessary, even when the law is against them.

    Read More…


  • U.S. Firearm Production Sets Record in 2012: AR-15 Production Up Over 100%

    The number of firearms manufactured in the U.S. for sale to American customers hit an all-time high in 2012, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (BATFE) new Firearms Manufacturers and Export Report. American firearm manufacturers produced roughly 8.3 million firearms for sale in the U.S., a new record, up 33 percent from the 6.2 million produced for American customers in 2011.

    The report shows not only that Americans valued firearms in 2012 more than ever before, but also that they particularly valued the kinds of firearms that gun control supporters have tried the hardest to get banned–handguns and semi-automatic rifles.

    Production of handguns rose 32 percent to four million in 2012, as compared to 2011, including a 36 percent increase in pistols and an 18 percent increase in revolvers. Production of the AR-15, the most popular rifle in America, more than doubled in 2012, to over 825,000, not counting the large numbers made by Remington, Bushmaster and Sturm, Ruger. Total rifle production rose 38 percent, to three million, while shotguns rose 18 percent to 900,000.

    We’ve been hearing for some time from those who want to ban guns that Americans aren’t interested in them anymore; that firearm ownership is on the decline. Like their fanciful notions that gun crime is somehow “exploding” or that concealed carry licensees are ticking time bombs, the numbers simply don’t back up their claims.

    The anti-gunners are going to need all the “new math” they can muster, because the 2012 report contains figures for only two months of the surge in firearm purchases that began with President Obama’s reelection. Meanwhile, the FBI’s NICS figures indicate that Americans bought even more firearms in 2013 than they did in 2012.

    For those who support the Second Amendment and American manufacturing, these figures provide cause for celebration. For those still seeking to ban private possession of firearms, they may want to skip the champagne and head straight for the aspirin.


  • A Tale of Two Realities: A NJ Gun Controller’s Slanderous Rhetoric and a Mother’s Stand to Save Her Children

    Despite current restrictions that place New Jersey well outside the American mainstream, gun controllers and some state lawmakers have made clear their intent to push even further in 2014, with wide-ranging legislation targeting nearly every aspect of the remaining gun freedom Garden State residents enjoy (or cling to, perhaps more accurately). Chief among these proposals is a bill that would lower the magazine capacity limit from the current 15 down to 10. And it appears gun control advocates are prepared to sink to any level of rhetorical excess to get it passed.

    In a February 14 NJ.com article, Bryan Miller, Executive Director of the self-proclaimed “faith-based movement to prevent gun violence” Heeding God’s Call, is quoted as stating, “Nobody needs a 15-round ammunition magazine unless they are a domestic terrorist or a gangster.”

    Miller’s inflammatory remark is a transparent attempt to paint those who oppose the current legislation as extreme and in league with violent criminals. Needless to say, it ignores the millions of Americans who own standard capacity magazines for a variety of lawful purposes. Further, Miller’s concise list of who needs standard capacity magazines will no doubt come as a surprise to New Jersey’s law enforcement officers, who are routinely equipped with magazines with a capacity greater than 10 and are not subject to the 15-round limit.

    As one might expect, Miller’s comments weren’t the only nonsensical rhetoric from anti-gun advocates on the issue. Later in the NJ.com piece, the author quotes another magazine ban supporter as saying, “We do a lot of studying and research and we speak to gun owners and people all over the political spectrum… We hear universally for hunting, home protection and sport shooting that a 10 round magazine is certainly plenty.”

    By employing the term “universally” the gun control advocate gives the impression that there is no valid argument for, or group of people that support, the right to own standard capacity magazines for lawful purposes. That of course is absurd and begs the question, what sort of “studying and research” was involved? Given the wealth of evidence and experience contradicting this gun controller’s statement, one might suspect the “research” cited consisted of reading the public relations talking points of Michael Bloomberg and his cohorts or polls conducted only amongst known gun control supporters.

    An October 28, 2013, Gallup poll showed that “Personal Safety/Protection” is the number one reason cited for gun ownership. And an enormous portion of the handguns and rifles sold for this purpose are specifically designed to use magazines with a capacity greater than 10. Moreover, a growing interest in the practical shooting sports, such as 3-Gun, has led to more shooting sports participants using 11+ magazines than ever before.

    These gun controllers certainly weren’t paying attention to Colorado, where law-abiding shooters bought thousands upon thousands of standard capacity magazines, and lined up for 20,000 free 30-round magazines offered by Magpul Industries, before the state’s magazine ban went into effect. In one statement, Magpul noted that it had allocated “a little over a million magazines” to meet the pre-ban demand from Coloradans. Staunch mainstream opposition to magazine restrictions was also evidenced by the recall of two Colorado state senators, and the resignation of a third, in response to the ban.

    In fact, support for a 10-round limit is so far from universal, that another Gallup poll, taken shortly after the tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn., revealed it to be the least popular of Obama’s failed gun control proposals.

    Further, a recent case of self-defense in Detroit, Mich., brings into stark relief why millions of Americans choose to arm themselves using standard capacity magazines. The majority of the episode was captured on video and can be viewed here.

    The incident began when a trio of burglars, at least one of whom was armed with what appeared to be a handgun, attempted to break in through the back door of a home, while a mother was inside with her children. Upon becoming aware of the intrusion, the mother retrieved a semi-automatic rifle and warned the intruders she was armed. After the home invaders disregarded her warning and continued battering their way into the house, the mother fired shots at them, causing them to retreat. Once outside, one of the perpetrators picked up the weapon he had dropped and tried to reenter the house. At that point, the mother fired again, causing him to flee the scene for good. Police arrested the intruders a short time later and determined that two of them had been involved in previous home invasions.

    In this scenario a mother was forced to defend her home and children from a gang of experienced home invaders. All of the perpetrators were determined enough to ignore her warning that she had a gun and one even renewed the attack after being repelled by the initial shots. In this case, the mother’s ability to deliver follow-up shots after the first wave of the attack may well have made the difference between life and death for her and her children. If she were to conclude that a 20 or 30 round magazine is necessary for home defense in her neighborhood, is Bryan Miller in any position to tell her she’s wrong or to impugn her motives for having it?

    New Jersey lawmakers would be unwise to think that the rhetoric of gun control supporters in any way reflects reality on the issue. Millions of Americans and scores of New Jersey residents use magazines with a capacity greater than 10 for self-defense and the shooting sports every day. And while elections might seem a long way off to New Jerseys legislators, we’ll be sure to remind Garden State gun owners of who did, or did not, fall for the bogus anti-gun arguments before they head to the polls.