Category: General

The thought police at work:

ICYMI: Legislators Propose ‘Social Media Checks’ Before a Firearms Purchase

Who gets to say what social media activity will lead to a loss of constitutional rights?

California has made it illegal (with some exceptions) for those age 18-20 to purchase any firearm – including common hunting rifles. Their reasoning seems to be that those 18 to 20 years of age are insufficiently mature to own firearms, as noted by the Brady Foundation in this Sacramento Bee article:

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which championed SB 1100, argued in a supporting statement that “maturity, impulsive or reckless behavior, and responsibility vary greatly among 18-20 year olds. This is recognized in other areas – those under age 21 cannot buy alcohol, rent a car, or purchase a handgun – and the same age restriction should apply to long guns.”

So, due to potential “… maturity, impulsive or reckless behavior, and responsibility…” issues, 18-20 year old Californians cannot own any firearm – but they can vote???

Seems a bit reckless to me….

Law-abiding citizens with firearms reduce or prevent crime. Think not? Ask this woman:

South Carolina Woman Shot Dead Escaped Convict Who Kicked Down her Back Door

Laws meant to disarm law-abiding citizens serve no purpose but to protect despotic governments and criminal enterprises.

Venezuelans regret gun ban, ‘a declaration of war against an unarmed population’

“Vote harvesting” seems like the perfect vehicle for voter fraud. How do we know these votes have not been altered, or that the ballots were actually completed by the registered voter?

California’s late votes broke big for Democrats. Here’s why GOP was surprised

Owning or possessing a firearm in America is not a crime. Why then do police keep shooting Americans for possessing them? Sadly, it seems that many of their victims are African-Americans (Remember this shooting?).

Is this just a police-driven scheme to discourage Americans, and especially African-Americans, from owning or carrying firearms? I’m beginning to wonder.

Police Fatally Shoot Black Security Guard Who Detained Shooting Suspect

…get out of the kitchen (or voting booth, or whatever).

For what NPR calls the “…most anxiety-ridden midterm campaign in memory…”, here’s some help:

Election Day Jitters? Here’s The Way To Keep Calm

Something they forgot to mention, though – we get to do this again in 2 years. So if you don’t like the results it’s not the end of the world.

From a Fox News story (and others) on Obama’s advice to hecklers at his campaign rally in Florida:

“If you support the other candidates, then you should go support the other candidates. Don’t be here …. Go to their rally.”

Maybe this would be good advice for Democratic party operatives, too?

Here’s a point-by-point rundown on a “Fact Check” published on NPR entitled:

FACT CHECK: Migrants Are Not Overwhelming The Southwest Border

1. An overwhelming influx
Here NPR argues that because only ~ 521,000 (!!) migrants came over our southern border last year, and that this number is far below the peak numbers from the 1990’s/2000’s, that we aren’t overwhelmed. I beg to differ. The term overwhelmed is dependent on how many we can process, not whether or not the numbers are lower this year than last. If the numbers are still higher than we can process, we are in fact overwhelmed. A report cited later by NPR from the U.S. Department of Justice shows our backlog in the immigration courts are growing every year. In addition, they show that the number of “credible fear” asylum cases have increased 10-fold. How is this not “overwhelming” our immigration system?

2. No more “catch and release”
Not sure what NPR is trying to say here…. they spend the first paragraph arguing that those who request asylum are not “illegal aliens” and thus not subject to catch and release (true – so why is this in a section ostensibly about catch and release?). NPR then goes on to state these asylum seekers are “being released in large numbers up and down the border.” (And how is this good, NPR, or different than “catch and release”?).

3. They never show up
NPR claims that the majority of asylum-seekers show up in court. A couple of points to make here: a) asylum seekers are not the only “migrants” with court dates, and so referring only to asylum seekers skews the results; b) the report cited by NPR does not separate asylum absentia orders (where the claimant did not show up for their court appearance) from others, so their claim is unsupported; c) to properly consider this statistic, we must consider only those released pending their court date – those held in custody don’t have a choice, and unfairly skews the apparent rate of appearance; and c) the rate of absentia orders more than doubled between 2012 and 2015. The trend is clear, NPR.

4. Abusing asylum
Here NPR denies that the asylum system is being abused, but evidence in the DOJ report cited by NPR disputes this claim. For instance, asylum claims have shifted from almost 60% affirmative claims (those who file an application for asylum in advance) to almost 98% defensive claims (those who file a claim of asylum once apprehended in the U.S. or at the U.S. border). Judicial forum shopping also indicates an abuse of our immigration system; in FY 2016, 50% of all asylum completions occurred in only 4 immigration courts (Los Angeles CA, San Francisco CA, New York NY, and Arlington VA; interesting how only one of these is a border state). The fact that there has been a nearly 1700% increase in “credible fear” asylum claims between 2007 and 2016 provides further evidence of likely abuse.

5. It’s an invasion
NPR states that “The president has claimed repeatedly, without evidence, that the migrants include dangerous criminals…”. It’s interesting that NPR chose to use their own story regarding the migrant caravan heading to the U.S. as validation for their claim. However, others have cited specific Homeland Security officials who have identified such individuals in this same caravan (sounds like “evidence” to me!). NPR makes no mention of these confirmations.

Sorry, NPR – but your roots are showing. How about we go back to reporting the truth, instead of the truth you want us to believe?

The press loves to sway opinion; their success at opinion mongering is a measure of how important a particular publication has become. However, some mislead in the process. Even NPR is not immune to this effect.

NPR published a story regarding a claim of President Trump that he can eliminate birthright citizenship in the U.S. by executive order (he can’t, but such an action will start the ball rolling on a potential Supreme Court review of the wording of the 14th amendment). In this story they note that 30 countries in the world (out of 194, or less than 16% of countries) confer birthright citizenship. What they don’t tell you is that the only 1st world countries that confer citizenship by birth are the U.S. and Canada – and that politicians in Canada are trying to eliminate this path, too. Note also that not a single country in Europe offers such citizenship – not Great Britain, not France, not Germany… the list goes on. In Europe, blood relations to a citizen is required for citizenship to be passed at birth.

Thanks, NPR, for the misleading story.