Are Most Mass Murderers Really White?

Aside from attacks on the Second Amendment, there is a certain theme that’s now repeated after every massacre committed by an unhinged individual: that most all mass killers are white. After the recent Elliot Rodger murders, for instance, Michael Moore said that he no longer had “anything to say” before immediately saying, “Nearly all of our mass shootings are by angry or disturbed white males.” Not to be one-upped in the inanity department by a mass of male whiteness, one Brittney Cooper at Salon wrote, “How many times must troubled young white men engage in these terroristic acts that make public space unsafe for everyone before we admit that white male privilege kills?” Ironically, Cooper had mentioned, parenthetically, that “as many commenters have pointed out, [Rodger] had a white father and mother of Asian descent,” but, hey, you can’t let a minor detail get in the way of a good racial screed. And perhaps mass killing is such a Caucasian domain that perpetrating one bestows a person with honorary whiteness. Yet about this we should ask a question:

Before rushing to play pin the tale on the honkey, did anyone bother to check the history of mass killings?

Because I have — a comprehensive list dating from 1982 through 9/16/2013 is found at Mother Jones here — and guess what?

Of the last 20 mass killings of that period, 9 were perpetrated by non-whites.

That would be 45 percent, which exceeds non-whites’ 37 percent share of the population.

Of the last 30 mass killings, 11 were committed by non-whites — right at the 37 percent mark.

And what if we go all the way back to 1982? We then have 66 mass killings in which the races of the perpetrators were known, and 22 of them, or one-third, were at the hands of non-whites. Note here that America’s demographics have been changing, with non-whites comprising only about 20 percent of the population in 1982; thus, if we consider an approximate average non-white population of 28.5 percent during the 31-year period in question, it appears that, again, mass murderers are disproportionately non-white.

In other words, there is no evidence whatsoever that mass killings are a characteristically white phenomenon.

And there never was.

In fact, the group most disproportionately represented on the Mother Jones chart is Americans of Asian descent. While only 6 percent of the population, they have been 15 percent of the 31-year period’s last 20 mass killers, 13 percent of the last 30, and 9 percent of the last 66. This is quite interesting, too, since Americans of Asian descent have a very low crime rate in general.

So in light of this, why are whites implicated in mass killings? The answer is one word: Prejudice.

Note that prejudice is defined as:

“1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”

Claiming that a group commits a disproportionate amount of crime when, if anything, the truth is the opposite, is the epitome of forming beliefs without knowledge, thought, or reason. It’s seizing upon a fashionable falsehood for the purposes of maligning an unfashionable group and advancing a fallacious agenda.

The truth is that if we don’t want to be “cowards” on race, as Eric “the Red” Holder said Americans were, we do need to speak frankly about criminality in the US. But does this involve talking about “troubled young white men” who “make public space unsafe for everyone,” as Brittney Cooper suggested? Perhaps she might want to consult with Jesse Jackson, who once said that when he walked down the street, heard footsteps and thought robbery, he’d “feel relieved” if he turned around and saw a white person behind him. So, really, if we were cynical, we could think that the Coopers of the world were trying to deflect attention from black criminality by trumpeting the white-mass-killer myth.

Then again, this all could just be the result of the new Common Core math. Take Elliot Rodger, for instance. He killed half his victims with a knife, but the whole focus was on guns. (And he’s widely referred to as a “shooter.” I think he was a slasher.) He was half Asian, but the whole focus was on whites. You could also call it situational attribution: a mixed race person is defined by his minority half when he achieves, as with our first “black” president. But when such an individual is recognized as having committed a crime, he’s suddenly white. This can only make us wonder how long it will be before Barack Obama becomes white.

Anyway, the left may be upset that another one of their themes, the white-mass-killer myth, has bitten the dust. But all is not lost. In the area of massacres as in so many other things, they can always celebrate diversity.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

RELATED GRAPHIC:

guns and property crime

Gunophobia is a serious national problem — Therapy Now Available

child with water guns

Stop gunophobia – its the right thing to do!

It is time to end the irrational, psychologically impairing and irrational disease sweeping America known as gunophobia. Gunophobia is defined as:

An unreasonable fear or hatred of rifles, pistols, pop-tarts shaped like guns, cap guns, water pistols or strangers who own guns or of that which is foreign or strange like buying a gun, shooting a gun, duck hunting and/or carrying a gun.

Notable gunophobics include: Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Michael Bloomberg and the Brady Foundation. It should be noted that President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden like shotguns, which are guns.

The early explorers and settlers of the United States took full advantage of the abundant game to be found in the new lands they were beginning to inhabit. The ability to hunt wild animals for food not only offered a means for survival, but also allowed settlers to expand their territories farther west. It was taken for granted that every man, starting in his teenage years, would know how to shoot a rifle.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1791, as a direct result of the Revolutionary War; without access to weapons, the colonists would not have been able to defeat the British troops. In part, the Second Amendment states that 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.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mainstream: Girls with Guns in America
Texas Gun Store Marquee – ”I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters – Undocumented“
Wildlife is Thriving Because of Guns and Hunting

Disarming Americans 1-2-3: The Relentless Attacks on the Second Amendment

There is growing concern that law abiding gun owning Americans are under attack by every level of government.

In our public schools children are taught under Common Core that guns are evil and the Second Amendment is invalid. Joe Wolverton II, J.D. in The New American reports, “In a textbook approved by Common Core for use by students studying for the Advanced Placement (AP) history exam, the Second Amendment is defined this way: “The Second Amendment: The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

Anti-gun federal judges, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, are using the bench to help disarm law abiding citizens. Some governors, notably Mario Cuomo (D-NY), and a growing number of state legislators are joining with members of Congress, like Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA), to disarm the law abiding American gun owner.

Finally, gun manufacturers are either moving out of anti-gun states or have stopped selling their products in anti-gun states like California.

All of these efforts are leading to a national crisis, for whenever law abiding citizens are disarmed, violent crime increases. Both the U.S. Department of Justice and Pew Research have reported that when gun sales increase crime plummets.

The latest tactic used by anti-gun advocates and the U.S. Department of Justice is “Operation Choke Point.”

On May 29th The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) today issued the following statement:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has been investigating the possible role of the federal government in influencing banks in their lending and business banking relationship decisions regarding companies in our industry. We have heard from several industry members that they had banking relationships terminated by their lending institutions.

We respect the right of financial institutions to make business decisions based on objective criteria. It is unacceptable, however, to discriminate against businesses simply because they are engaged in the lawful commerce of firearms, an activity protected by the Second Amendment.

Another effort to disarm law abiding Americans is gun registration. James W. Porter, President of the National Rifle Association, in his special report “Registered Firearms Today – Confiscated Firearms Tomorrow” states:

The long, sordid history of “gun control” tells us that losses of our rights have come a step at a time, always with assurances—lies—from the gun-ban crowd that law-abiding gun owners have nothing more to fear.

Today, in long-ago free states like New York, Connecticut, Maryland and California, peaceable citizens are in grave danger of being transformed into criminals for failing to waive the exercise of their right to keep and bear arms.

Read more.

In the article “California’s Most Ambitious Handgun Ban Now Underway” the NRA-ILA reports:

In 1976, the Brady Campaign, then known as the National Council to Control Handguns, said that the first part of its three-part plan to get handguns and handgun ammunition made “totally illegal” was to “slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country.”  This month, anti-gunners finally got that wish in California.

America’s two largest handgun manufacturers–Smith & Wesson and Sturm, Ruger–have announced that they will stop selling new semi-automatic handguns in California, rather than comply with the state’s “microstamping” law.  The law applies not only to entirely new models of handguns, but also to any current-production handgun approved by the state’s Roster Board, if such handgun is modified with any new feature or characteristic, however minor or superficial.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the law was “intended to help police investigators link shell casings found at crime scenes to a specific gun.”  That’s pure spin, however. In reality, the law, signed in 2007 by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, is intended to terminate semi-automatic handgun sales and, over time, semi-automatic handgun ownership in the state. “Microstamping” will solve few, if any crimes and it is only a matter of time before a proposal to expand the law to include other firearms will follow.

Meanwhile, the National Shooting Sports Foundation has announced that it and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute have filed suit against the law in Fresno Superior Court “seeking both declaratory and injunctive relief against this back-door attempt to prevent the sale of new semiautomatic handguns to law-abiding citizens in California.”

Anti-gun activists often refer to California as the test bed for gun control laws they would like to have imposed throughout the country.  Thus, it goes without saying that gun owners outside California should anticipate “microstamping” efforts in their states, and do what it takes to elect pro-Second Amendment governors and state legislators to deny the anti-gunners additional victories.

The disarming of law abiding Americans is the goal, and any means are justified to achieve that end. A disarmed citizen is after all a dependent citizen. Unable to defend him or herself from criminals, including the government, is necessary for a totalitarian state to thrive and survive. History tells us so.

Beware of those bearing anti-gun gifts.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Operation Choke Point: Congressman Proposes Cutting Off Funding For DOJ Program Targeting Gun Dealers
Mayor Rahm Emanuel Continues Crusade: Wants Gun Purchases Restricted to Once A Month, Recorded, and Not Allowed Near Schools

Open letter to President Obama: On Using U.S. Military Forces Against We The People

Dear President Obama,

I understand you considered using U.S. military force against militia forces at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada. Well golly we are shaking in our boots. You understand this would have been in direct violation of the the 1878 “Posse Comitatus Act” and an act of war against “We the people”.

The Posse Comitatus Act states:

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

This would also explain the purging of our military at the highest levels. I guess these purged commanders refused to comply with your request to shoot upon the American people if called upon to do so by YOU! Well you fired over 200 of these brave patriots and now they are 100 times more powerful as armed private citizens. You made a huge mistake.

Mr. President, you considered a military attack against the militia at the Bundy Ranch by applying the unconstitutional Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” which was issued by the Pentagon on December 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.” To continue it states:

“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,”

The directive then states.

“In these circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances” under two conditions.

The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”

“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,”

Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.

The directive was signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn. The full text of the directive may be found on the Pentagon website.

So why did a U.S. official, a man who works in the White House state that you considered but then rejected deploying military forces under this directive during the recent standoff with our militia at Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s home?

Mr. President, why did you cave in and not fire upon the militia members at the Bundy ranch? Why did you order the Bureau of Land Management, (BLM) a federal, fascist like, militarized unit to stand down?

You must have seen the light and realized you would lose this fight. You would then have been arrested and impeached for crimes against the U.S. Constitution, charged with the murder of innocent Americans and you probably would have started a Second American Revolutionary War.

We the people will not permit such folly. The Second Amendment is probably the only thing keeping your progressive/socialist policies in check. It kept Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japanese out of our nation during World War II. Now its keeping you in check too. Agreed? Our founding Fathers were wiser than we could ever imagine, and you are the newest iteration of the Communist – Fascist – Marxist ideology they prepared us for.

Mr. President, defense analysts across this nation are watching you very closely and they state you have built tactical armed military units within non-security-related federal agencies. You have created Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams within the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Internal Revenue Service and the Education Department, etc., etc., etc.

Why are you doing this Mr. President and why is the Congress allowing you to do this? Where is Speaker John Boehner? There is ZERO leadership in the Congress for the people.

The militarization of federal agencies is in full swing and the White House continues to launch psychological Saul Alinskyesque attacks upon U.S. private citizens’ regarding ownership of firearms despite the fact that Americans are law-abiding citizens.

Where is the Congress of the United States? We paying them $175,000 a year for what, exactly? To sit around while the BLM, IRS, DHS and other federal agencies build armies against we the people? It is time for Speaker Boehner get off the fence and start writing a bill to disarm all of these federal agencies. DO IT NOW or blood will be spilled, American blood! Congressman Miller get off your seat and stand with the people! Write the bill, pass it and get it through the U.S. Senate.

I called the White House National Security Council direct line for an answer but your team won’t comment to me. What are you hiding Mr. President?

I am glad Mr. President you chose wisely and abandoned your attempt to shoot our Constitutionally legally amassed militia forces in Nevada. The outcome of such a battle would be a huge loss for the government. Trust me. There are more of us than you and we are not afraid to protect the Republic legally and constitutionally under all Amendments the Founding Fathers entrusted us with.

God Bless America and shame on the Congress for not protecting us. I guess it up to us. This is why more guns and ammo are being bought by American men and women. They are going to need them one day it appears. Mr. Obama is preparing a war against we the people.

Working off facts and not hear-say on this issue, I believe I am 99.9% right.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Undocumented Immigrants’ Will Be Able to ‘Join the Military’

Scandal: Veterans Administration taking guns away from 175,000 veterans

Within the past week, Gun Owners of America received an e-mail from a member being treated by the VA (Department of Veterans Affairs).  The member was also receiving Social Security benefits, and Social Security had appointed a guardian to manage his financial affairs.

The member wrote us because the VA, based on the Social Security guardian, was moving to take his guns away.

Although it is Standard Operating Procedure for the VA to appoint its own guardians and use this to justify its gun ban on more than 175,000 veterans, it now appears to us that the VA is searching for new “gun ban excuses” to strip even more veterans of their constitutional rights.

Which brings us to VA Secretary Eric Shinseki.  It appears that the Obama administration is so busy using the VA to strip veterans of their gun rights that it doesn’t have time to provide them with medical treatment.

Shinseki was dragged before a Senate hearing Thursday to explain massive waiting lists for treatment.  High level executives at the VA ignored warnings that these lists existed, and agency officials issued falsified letters to conceal them.  Altogether, these delays may have resulted in the deaths of 40 or more veterans at the Phoenix location alone.  The scandal has now spread to at least 10 states, and seems to reflect an endemic problem with the VA.

Shinseki’s response?  He is pushing an Inspector General investigation which will be completed in August.  But even liberal Democrats have questioned how many veterans will die between now and then as a result of the department’s misplaced priorities.

As a result, the American Legion has called for Shinseki’s removal.

Why does this matter to gun owners?

The answer is this:  The VA appears to be too busy with gun bans to do its job.

“We’ve known that combat veterans are being systematically stripped of their rights for some time now,” says Dan Cannon, the founder and editor of GunsSaveLives.net. “There have been numerous reports of veterans losing their gun rights due to seeking counseling or help with depression, PTSD, or for simply not having their financial affairs in perfect order.”

We’re sure that the Obama administration will counter that it doesn’t take much time at all to take away a veteran’s constitutional rights.  But no matter how many personnel or how much time it takes to promote Obama’s anti-gun agenda, it is too much!

This is another example of a phenomenon which is pervasive in the Obama administration:  Politics over performance.

And it’s not going to stop until someone loses his job for pursuing Obama’s anti-gun agenda, at the expense of his department’s mission.

RELATED STORIES:

Lessons of the VA Scandal
Sen. Ed Markey Wants $10 Million Per Year to Treat Guns Like Disease at CDC
Krauthammer on Obama’s Response to VA Scandal: “The Buck Stops Nowhere”
Miami VA Whistleblower Exposes Drug Dealing, Theft, Abuse – CBS Miami
Where VA Has Taken Veterans, Obamacare is Leading All Americans

Gun Control Works

Jot down what you think may have been the #1 cause of death in the world in the past 100 years then watch this clip. Bet you never thought of this!

Gun Free Zones Work. The number one killer of innocent people is gun control and gun free zones.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/0sujnvIV4g4[/youtube]

 

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Politico.

Texas Gun Store Marquee – ” I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters – Undocumented “

A gun store outside of Houston, Texas went for some shock and awe with its front marquee this week, at the expense of its characterization of President Barack Obama’s electoral demographic. The sign out front of Katy, TX’s Tactical Firearms reads, “I like my guns like Obama likes his voters: undocumented.” Tactical Firearms changes its sign every week, and the one-liners usually come from the staff. According to the owner, this week’s sign is reference to the fact that Texas does not require firearm registration. “Thank god for our First and Second Amendment rights,” he said in a statement to local news agencies. “It’s meant as a joke. It’s meant to be funny.”

[youtube]http://youtu.be/jbotP1QCuwE[/youtube]

This is not Tactical Firearms‘ first foray into the politics of gun control. Last fall the shop hosted a debate among then-CNN host Piers Morgan, Ted Nugent, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, and State Senator Dan Patrick.

Florida: Sheriff Jim Manfre from Flagler County wants to ban your rifle!

Sheriff Jim Manfre from Flagler County in Florida wants to ban your rifle and leave you defenseless against the tyranny flowing from Washington D.C. He calls these rifles “assault weapons.” My AK-47 sits happily in the closet and it has never assaulted anyone. Only people assault other people. Whether its with guns, knives, hammers or bottles.

According to Lee Williams of the Herald-Tribune:

At a meeting Tuesday night of the The Democratic Progressive Caucus of Florida held in Palm Coast, Flagler County Sheriff Jim Manfre called for a ban on “assault weapons,” said he wanted tighter regulation on private firearm sales, and called for changing existing laws on background checks.

According to a news story written about the meeting written by a reporter at the Daytona Beach News-Journal, the sheriff also said his “sensible gun control” ideas were supported by the Florida Sheriff’s Association.

Yesterday, Nanette Schimpf, spokesperson for the Florida Sheriff’s Association, told me the news story was inaccurate. The FSA has never called for ending private sales, banning “assault weapons” or changing background check laws.

Manfre also supports the legalization of marijuana, something the Florida Sheriffs Association is against. Indeed Sheriff Jim Manfre is just another Obama supporter who needs to voted out of office. He is unwilling to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and Florida, as he has sworn to do.

The Flagler County Sheriff’s Office has the solemn duty of serving and protecting the citizens of our great state. The following is contact information for Sheriff Manfre:

Address: 1001 Justice Lane, Bunnell, FL 32110
Email: jmanfre@flaglersheriff.com
Phone: (386) 437-4116
Fax: (386) 586-4820

Notice how his disclaimer is to protect the citizens, yet he wants to disarm law abiding citizens, so his disclaimer is a lie. This man is another example of Obama’s reach into the great State of Florida.

I will not disarm. I will not give up my 2nd Amendment rights to some Sheriff. He has betrayed his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and must be removed from office. I told him so in an email.

As for my weapons nobody will take them. I am protected under the 2nd Amendment. I gave sheriff Manfre my cell phone number. Lets see if he has the guts to call me back.

NRA Leader: Media Are ‘One of America’s Greatest Threats’

Wayne LaPierre, chief executive of the National Rifle Association, labeled the media in a speech Friday, calling them “one of America’s greatest threats.”

 

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of Gage Skidmore. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Florida: Minimum-mandatory gun sentences need revamping

Minimum-mandatory sentencing sounds like a good idea, because it keeps judges from imposing lighter, or no sentences upon dangerous criminals. But while legislators hold judges feet to the fire with broad-brush mandatory sentencing laws, many decent, non-dangerous people are being victimized with excessive penalties that they don’t deserve.

I would call upon the governor and the state representatives of Florida to reconsider these draconian mandates that strip judges of all discretion from considering extenuating circumstances in each and every case. We’ve gone too far in punishing people with minimum sentences just because they happened to be in possession of a firearm at the time of the alleged “crime.” I cite two particular Florida cases which serve as examples of overly “harsh” penalties imposed upon decent people whose back were to the walls in moments of domestic in-tranquility.

Our justice system has lost its sense of justice and humanity. Decent people who are no threat to society languish in prison for decades based on sentencing technicalities that strip judges from using judicial discretion. Meanwhile, dangerous criminals still roam the streets while honest and productive citizens languish in jail cells, leaving kids stripped of fathers and mothers.

Example One: Marissa Alexander, 31, Jacksonville. In 2012, this mother of a three small kids, holding a master’s degree and working at a job, was sentenced to 20 years in state prison. Her crime: Firing a gun toward a wall as a warning shot during a domestic fight with her estranged husband, who was under a restraining order.

Charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, prosecutors offered a plea deal for reduced charges, but she declined, feeling she was guilty of no crime. The jury found her guilty, compelling the judge to sentence her to 20 years, based on laws that give judges no discretion.

Said Circuit Judge Donald Jacobsen: “If it weren’t for the minimum mandatory aspect of this, I would use my discretion and impose some separated sentence, considering the circumstances of this event.”

The insanity of such cruel and harsh punishment is incomprehensible. Even if she showed poor judgment, there was no justifiable reason to incarcerate a productive, law-abiding human being for 7,300 days. The state not only punished Alexander, but three kids will grow up without a mother.

Example Two: Orville Wollard, 53, Davenport. This family man, gainfully employed, had been coping with a problem whereby his live-at-home daughter was often abused by her violence-prone boyfriend.

On May 14, 2008, Wollard was called at work by his wife, advising of a volatile situation at the house. He later saw that his daughter had a black eye. Having had arm surgery, Wollard was no match for the young man in a physical altercation. The boyfriend was ordered out of the house but refused.

The fighting escalated until Wollard retrieved his legally owned firearm. After the angry boy punched a hole in the wall, he confronted the older man. Wollard fired a shot into the wall. The boyfriend left. No one was hurt. Weeks later, the boyfriend called police and filed a report.

Wollard was prosecuted and convicted of the same crime as Alexander. As in that case, and because he was in possession of a firearm at the time of a felony, the judge was duty bound under minimum mandatory laws to sentence this good and decent man to 20 years in prison, wrecking his life and the life of his family.

At the sentencing, Wollard spoke to the court: “This person assaults my daughter, he threatens me, I protect myself. No one is injured, and I am going to prison. I would expect this from the Soviet Union not the United States.”

The state Clemency Board and/or Florida governor have the power to grant pardons and/or clemency when miscarriages of justice are wrongfully imposed against citizens. Alexander and Wollard certainly qualify for consideration.

Florida: Four pro-gun bills headed to Governor Rick Scott

“The seventh week of the Legislative Session was yet another exceptionally busy and successful week.  Four more pro-gun bills passed the legislature and are headed for the Governor’s desk,” reports the NRA-ILA.

The blue underlined bill numbers are the most current versions of the bills. You can simply click on those links to read the bills. A new version is prepared every time a bill is amended (changed) in committee.  If, there is no blue link that means the newest amended version is not yet available.

On Monday, April 21, 2014

HB-255 Discriminatory Insurance Practices by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Shalimar)
SB-424 Discriminatory Insurance Practices by Sen. Tom Lee (R-Brandon)

Both bills were on Special Order Calendar in the House Monday.  Since SB-424 had already passed the Senate, SB-424 was substituted for HB-255 and approved for the Third Reading Calendar and debate on the following day

On Tuesday, April 22, 2014

SB-424 by Senator Tom Lee PASSED THE HOUSE by a vote of 74-44.  The bill now goes to the Governor for final action.

SB-424 by Sen. Tom Lee & Rep. Matt Gaetz Discrimination by Insurance Companies is a bill to stop insurance companies from refusing to issue a policy, or refusing to renew a policy or canceling a policy, or charging unfair rates based on the lawful possession and ownership of a firearm or firearms or ammunition.  Such actions constitute unfair discrimination and are actionable.  Further, the bill protects privacy rights by prohibiting insurance companies and their agents from disclosing information on firearms and firearm ownership of its applicants and policyholders to others.

On Wednesday, April 23, 2014 

SB-1060 Zero Tolerance/Pop Tart Bill by Sen. Greg Evers (R-Baker)
HB-7029 Zero Tolerance/Pop Tart Bill by Rep. Dennis Baxley (R-Ocala)

Both bills were on Special Order Calendar in the Senate Wednesday.  Since HB-7029 had already passed the House, HB-7029 was substituted for SB-1060 and approved for the Third Reading Calendar and debate on the following day.

SB-544 CW License App/Tax Collectors by Sen. Wilton Simpson (R-Trilby)
HB-523 CW License App/Tax Collectors by Rep. James Grant (R-Tampa)

Both bills were on Special Order Calendar in the Senate Wednesday.  Since HB-523 had already passed the House, HB-523 was substituted for SB-544 and approved for the Third Reading Calendar and debate on the following day.

On Thursday, April 24, 2014

HB-7029 by Rep. Dennis Baxley PASSED THE SENATE by a vote of 32-6.  The bill now goes to the Governor for final action.

HB-7029 Zero Tolerance/Pop Tart Bill
 by Rep. Dennis Baxley & Sen. Greg Evers is a bill to stop some of the unbelievable actions by school administrators against children who behave like children and point fingers at each other pretending to shoot guns, or wear NRA T-shirts to school, etc.

SB-546 CW/Public Records/Tax Collectors by Sen. Wilton Simpson (R-Trilby)
HB-525
 CW/Public Records/Tax Collectors by Rep. James Grant (R-Tampa)

Both bills were on Special Order Calendar in the Senate Thursday.  Since HB-523 had already passed the House, HB-523 was substituted for SB-544 and approved for the Third Reading Calendar and debate on the following day.

On Friday, April 25, 2014

HB-523 by Rep. James Grant PASSED THE SENATE by a vote of 35-0.  The bill now goes to the Governor for final action.

HB-523 CW Applications
 by Rep. James Grant & Sen. Wilton SImpson is a bill to allow the Division of Licensing to designate qualified Tax Collectors to conduct the “Fast-Track” concealed weapons licensing application process in their respective counties.  This brings the process closer to the people and makes it more convenient for applicants.

HB-525 by Rep. James Grant PASSED THE SENATE by a vote of 37-1.  The bill now goes to the Governor for final action.

HB-525 CW Public Records
 by Rep. James Grant & Sen. Wilton Simpson by Rep. Jamie Grant is a bill to prohibits Tax Collectors & their employees from disclosing identifying information of applicants and license holders.

TO RECAP: A total of 5 pro-gun bills are now on the way to the Governor:

HB-89 Threat of Force
SB-424 Insurance Discrimination Prohibition
HB-7029 Zero Tolerance/Pop Tart Bill
HB-523 CW Applications/Tax Collectors
HB-525 Public Records Exemption/CW License Holders Information

STILL NEEDS TO PASS:

HB-209 Firearms/Mandatory Evacuation has passed the House and still needs to pass the Senate.  It will be up in the Senate next week.

RELATED STORY: Georgia Gov. Signs Bill Allowing Guns in Churches, Bars, and School Zones

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Bundy Ranch, Nevada: Has the American Spring begun?

10153046_243809939145413_6471996933610397881_n

Dennis Michael Lynch with militia members at Bundy Ranch, NV. Photo courtesy of Bud Parriott. For a larger view click on the photo.

The internet is ablaze with stories about what is and has happened at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada. When this all began I never expected that the federales would back down in the face of armed citizen militia members.

ABC NewsLiz Fields, via Good Morning America, reports, “A Nevada cattle rancher appears to have won his week-long battle with the federal government over a controversial cattle roundup that had led to the arrest of several protesters. Cliven Bundy went head to head with the Bureau of Land Management over the removal of hundreds of his cattle from federal land, where the government said they were grazing illegally. Bundy claims his herd of roughly 900 cattle have grazed on the land along the riverbed near Bunkerville, 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, since 1870 and threatened a “range war” against the BLM on the Bundy Ranch website after one of his sons was arrested while protesting the removal of the cattle.”

“I have no contract with the United States government,” Bundy said. “I was paying grazing fees for management and that’s what BLM was supposed to be, land managers and they were managing my ranch out of business, so I refused to pay.”

Here is an amazing Facebook post on DML Daily from Dennis Michael Lynch:

Its me DML. Today was insane. I got the best footage. I was in the heart of it all. In fact, I think I may need an appointment with a psychiatric specialist because I took the firs[t] step and walked alone toward snipers who told me I needed to retreat or else they’d shoot. I did not turn back and they continued to warn ne [sic] but i ignored the warning. Eventually, everyone behind me started coming forward and there was no way they could stop us. 

Amon Bundy later said to me, “Man you have guts like I’ve never seen.” I replied, “No, you do. Had you not stood up to the BLM, me and the other thousands of Americans wouldn’t be here.”

Today was a victory and a tremendous step towards taking back America. My footage and story of events will be on The Kelly File this Monday. Right now I’m going to drink a few scotches because it is sinking in that I had 40 plus AR15 riffles (sic) pointed at my head. 

i didn’t have a camera guy today — i shot all the footage myself — so the only proof that says I was in NV is this shot that i inadvertantly grabbed while I tried fixing the camera. However, I am sure other people captured the heated stAndoff when I was in it. More importantly, I captured everything that took place including BLM giving back the cattle. Great Americans stood up today. So many excellent new friends. Heroes all over Nevada and around America came together. One of the best days of my life. 

America won today!!!!!

I must agree.

RELATED STORIES:

UPDATE: Sheriff Announces BLM Will Cease Operation…
‘Serious concern about safety of employees and public’…
Backdown Comes Hours After Reid/China Land Grab Report…
Confiscated Cattle to be Released…
‘Control Our Borders, Not Our Ranchers!’
Wild horses targeted for roundup in Utah rangeland clash…

RELATED VIDEO FROM ABC NEWS:


ABC US News | ABC Business News

RELATED PHOTOS:

10171073_716235721749221_1615940644521970357_n

 

10155752_716179235088203_6642169996764298258_n

10169292_716147181758075_2942411614697547002_n

EDITORS NOTE: The photos used in this column are courtesy of Dennis Michael Lynch – DML Daily. 

Florida: Threat of Force to Stop Attackers PASSES

House Bill 89 by Representative Neil Combee and Senator Greg Evers is on its way to the Governor. On April 3rd, 2014, HB-89 passed the Florida Senate by a vote of 32-7. In the Senate, 6 Democrats and 1 Republican voted against the bill:

Republicans voting against the bill were:   John Legg (R-Lutz)

Democrats voting against the bill were:  Oscar Braynon (D-Miami Gardens), Dwight Bullard (D-Cutler Bay), Arthenia Joyner (D)-Tampa), Gwen Margolis (D_Miami), Jeremy Ring (D-Margate), Chris Smith (D-Fort Lauderdale)

Having previously passed the Florida House by a vote of 93-24, the bill  is now making its way to the Governor’s desk.

According to Marion P. Hammer, USF Executive Director and NRA Past President, “HB-89 is a bill to stop abusive prosecutors from using 10-20-LIFE to prosecute people who, in self-defense, threaten to use deadly force against an attacker as a means to stop an attack. Some anti-gun, anti-self-defense prosecutors have been abusing the 10-20-LIFE law to prosecute average citizens who displayed a weapon or gun in self-defense to make an attacker back off. Average citizens who never would have been in the system if they had not been attacked and in fear for their own safety, are being persecuted and prosecuted for defending themselves.”

“Because citizens took responsibility for their own safety, some prosecutors treat them like criminals and make them victims of a judicial system. 10-20-Life was passed to stop prosecutors and judges from slapping gun-wielding criminals on the wrist so they could quickly clear cases. The 10-20-Life law was never intended to be used against citizens who, in an act of self-defense, threatened the use of force to stop an attacker, including the unwise use of a warning shot. Yet, that’s what some prosecutors are doing. They are willfully and knowingly violating the intent of the law,” notes Hammer

RELATED STORY:

It’s Not About Warning Shots — The 10-20-Life law is being misused By Marion P. Hammer December 7, 2013

Nothing in SB-448 and HB-89, the House Companion, allows warning shots nor do they promote or encourage warning shots.

Warning shots are not safe. Nonetheless, when people are in fear for their lives or the lives of loved ones, they might fire a warning shot rather than shoot someone. People make mistakes and do irrational things when in fear of death or injury. That doesn’t mean they should go to prison for 20 years when there was no injury or harm done.

Warning shots are an unsafe result of the glorification of such conduct in movies and on TV. No one is recommending warning shots.

Nonetheless, a father should not be prosecuted under 10-20-Life for firing a warning shot. No harm was done yet a father was sent to prison for 20 years for firing a warning shot to stop an attacker from harming his daughter.

A mother should not be charged under 10-20-Life for firing a warning shot to stop an attack by an abusive ex-husband. It caused no injury and no harm yet she was prosecuted and sent to prison for 20 years. These are not isolated cases.

The simple truth is the intent of the 10-20-Life law is being violated. The law was intended to be used to lock up criminals who use guns during the commission or attempted commission of crimes.

It was intended to stop prosecutors and judges from slapping gun-toting criminals on the wrist so they could quickly clear cases.

The 10-20-Life law was never intended to be used against citizens who, in an act of self-defense, threatened the use of force to stop an attacker, including the unwise use of a warning shot. Yet, that’s what some prosecutors are doing. They are willfully and knowingly violating the intent of the law.

The cold hard reality is that some prosecutors are treating law-abiding people like criminals. People who never would have been in the system had they not been attacked and in fear for their own safety are being prosecuted. Self-defense is not a crime, it is a right and prosecutors are trampling those rights.

The threat of force in self-defense should have the same protection as actually shooting someone in self-defense. You should not be required to shoot an attacker to have the protection of the law.

The issue is not warning shots, it’s about protecting people from the abuse of prosecutorial discretion.

Marion P. Hammer is a past president of the National Rifle Association and executive director of Unified Sportsmen of Florida.

The 10-20-LIFE Law is a Minimum Mandatory law that mandates specific penalties for criminals who use guns to commit crimes:

10 years in prison for pulling a gunduring the commission of a crime.

20 years in prison for shooting a gun during the commission of a crime.

25 years to Life in prison if you shoot someone during the commission of a crime.

For more information on Florida’s 10-20-Life go here:  10-20-Life – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Today’s Totalitarianism

20140401_April2014600

FREEMAN April 2014 Edition.

When people go around armed with mobile phones and makeshift shields, what are the powers that be to do? Recent events in Venezuela and Ukraine suggest no status quo is safe when popular movements are networked and determined.

The trouble is, the world has not yet learned to be networked and determined as a permanent alternative to State control. After any revolution, a networked and determined people could be self-governing, though this rarely happens; revolutions remain as likely to usher in something not much better—maybe even worse—than what preceded them. Egypt is currently living out a version of this.

Most people still default to the idea that a more benevolent leviathan is going to make everything okay. And there are always would-be leviathans waiting in the wings. The hope that they’ll be less brutal is just that—hope. After regimes are toppled or swept aside, strongmen, puppet governments, or hostile neighbors are almost always well positioned to take and keep power. Problems return.

Further, when you strip off a dictator like removing a scab, what’s left underneath is often a factionalized people.

In the case of the Ukraine, it appears there’s a Russian-speaking faction that is sympathetic to Putin. There is a Ukrainian nationalist faction that is decidedly not into wearing any more totalitarian yokes, but that flirts with notions of ethnic purity, blood, and soil. There is yet another faction that fancies itself European and thinks the European superstate is the right umbrella. And on and on. Foreign powers may also have helped set a match to the tender—the United States, the EU, and Russia are all prime suspects.

In the case of Venezuela, however, the protests seem to have originated primarily among the young who are tired of shortages and suppressed freedoms that come from the Bolivarian state. CNN reports:

The weeks of protests across Venezuela mark the biggest threat President Nicolas Maduro has faced since his election last year. Demonstrators say they have taken to the streets to protest shortages of goods, high inflation and high crime.

Opposition protesters and government officials have traded blame for the violence for weeks.

The current Venezuelan leader argues that brutal suppression is justified; his charismatic predecessor, Hugo Chavez, thought the same thing. And in the mind of the State, it almost always is:

Think about what the U.S. government would do if a political group laid out a road map for overthrowing President Barack Obama, Maduro said.

“What would happen in the United States if a group said they were going to start something in the United States so that President Obama leaves, resigns, to change the constitutional government of the United States?” Maduro said. “Surely, the state would react, would use all the force that the law gives it to re-establish order and to put those who are against the Constitution where they belong.”

Surely it is a bizarro-world justification in which such regimes appeal to any Constitution in the same breath as President Obama, who thinks of the U.S. Constitution as quaint, brittle toilet tissue. But then again, Maduro is right that the U.S. government has all the power it needs to suppress any serious popular uprising—and, one expects, wouldn’t hesitate to use it.

What about states with determined but unconnected people? North Korea is still squirming along under a totalitarian thumb, as the portly Kim Jong Un takes leads from his father and grandfather, whose advice can be summed up in the dictators’ dictum: “A weak fist wipes away tears.” The highest echelon in Pyongyang reserves its fists for striking down and holding down its people—a determined, but sadly unconnected people. Thus the Hermit Kingdom could stay in penury and subjugation for many more years.

Wherever one lands on the continuum between pacificism and hostile interventionism, it is difficult not to let one’s feelings for oppressed people guide his thoughts away from either pragmatism or principle. And yet we must take care: Meddling in foreign affairs rarely ends up in any sort of postwar stability, liberation, or liberalization. It’s frustrating to see Putin get away with it. And we certainly wouldn’t want to live next to such a regime. But the simple fact that the United States could bomb or sanction Russia into even more suffering by no means guarantees a positive outcome if the United States does. The last 40 years of American military misadventures demonstrate that.

A couple of our readers challenged our publishing sentiments with respect to Ukraine. For example, we lent our pages to an anonymous Ukrainian journalist early on, when few outlets were reporting much of anything at all. Indeed, we got this story out relatively early. While we stand by any peoples longing to be free, we remain uncertain about the extent to which foreign meddlers were involved in the uprising, much less whether such meddling was warranted.

In any case, if The Freeman takes any position on matters like these, we side with peoples against illiberal States, realizing all the while that self-determination can be an imperfect process carried out in a world of opportunistic state actors and Hobbesian calculi. And of course we hope that determined and connected people can learn to do more than throw off power. We hope that someday, they can keep it and lock it away from the totalitarians forever.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of FFE and Shutterstock.

Florida Sheriffs Association is anti-Second Amendment

Florida Carry reports, “Thursday March 27th 2014, the Florida Sheriffs Association (FSA) openly testified against Second Amendment rights to the Florida House Judiciary Committee saying, “In our opinion, there is a difference between owning a firearm and carrying one concealed on your person. Owning a firearm is a right; carrying it concealed is a privilege; and it is a privilege that is earned…” In what can only be viewed as contempt and distrust for law-abiding gun owners, the Florida Sheriffs Association went on to say that during an emergency you are “least likely to use a firearm in a safe and responsible manner”. Think about that. The Sheriffs are telling your legislature that when you are under attack by looters and rioters, you should be disarmed because you will be the irrational person in the situation.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/qogTYo4mPuo[/youtube]

The Florida Sheriffs Association was testifying on HB-209 Firearms During Mandatory Evacuations by Representative Heather Fitzenhagen and others.  The final vote on the bill by the House Judiciary Committee was 17-1.  Committee members, all 12 Republicans and 5 of 6 Democrats stood up for Second Amendment rights.

If you want to watch the complete House Judiciary Committee hearing on this bill, along with questions and debate by Legislators who are members of the committee, click here and at the bottom of the screen and in time bar, move it to 1:40:00 to start the hearing on this bill.

According to Florida Carry:

The Sheriff’s Association also told the committee that “there is plenty of time before hurricane season starts to go out and get a concealed weapons permit so you can carry on your person.” This is completely false. Hurricane Season starts June 1st, only 62 days from now. Even if you already have your training certificate, your fingerprinting done, and have the $112.00 in fees ready to spend today, appointments at the regional offices are booked up to six months out and applications by mail are currently taking more than 90 days.

In other words, FSA is saying your Second Amendment right to BEAR arms can only be exercised if you have the time and money to get a license to carry a concealed handgun.

The Sheriffs go on to claim that “Given modern technology, the approach of storms can be predicted days in advance; and the last second flight scenarios are just not realistic.” Anyone who has tracked approaching hurricanes knows this to be false.

A similar law to the one that we are trying to fix was struck down in North Carolina in 2012. The federal court there said:

“[T]he statutes here excessively intrude upon plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights by effectively banning them (and the public at large) from engaging in conduct that is at the very core of the Second Amendment at a time when the need for self-defense may be at its very greatest.” Bateman v. Perdue, No. 5:10-CV-265-H, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47336, (E.D.N.C. Mar. 29, 2012)

In 1987 the Florida Sheriffs Association also opposed concealed carry, saying at the time that citizens should be forced to carry firearms openly so they would be able see who has guns. Once concealed carry passed, they turned around and pushed for the ban on open carry — which was legal until 1987. In 2011 the FSA opposed a bill that would have restored the open carry of handguns.

The fact is that the Florida Sheriff’s Association has opposed every right to bear arms bill that has ever been offered.

While the FSA may have some sympathy for people’s the Right to Keep Arms at home, it is obvious that the group has disdain for the Right to Bear Arms for self-defense. At the same committee hearing, Assistant Adjutant General for the Florida Army National Guard Maj. General Don Tyre spoke in support of the bill that will allow law abiding Floridians to take their guns with them during a mandatory evacuation order without the need for a concealed carry license.

We call on you to contact your local Sheriff and ask if the Florida Sheriff’s Association is representing their values. Is lobbying against the right to bear arms during an emergency how they are honoring the oath that your Sheriff swore to defend the constitution? Does your Sheriff really support the Right to Bear Arms?

RELATED STORY:

Harvard Study: No Correlation Between Gun Control and Less Violent Crime
Florida cops keep spy technology docs secret