Skip to content

The Man Who Lost Congress.. and why

November 7, 2018


House Speaker Paul Ryan

You know his face. This is the man who lost Congress. Republicans used to control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. Not for long. Some people will say that the Republicans were outspent in the mid-term elections, and that is true. It isn’t easy to stay in office when billionaires are out to buy Congress. That excuse hides the reason the Republicans were both outspent and out hustled. It is hard to fight Bloomberg bucks and Soros cash, but that fight becomes impossible when you don’t even try. The truth is that the republican house didn’t deliver to its conservative base in the last two years, so the conservative base walked away and didn’t donate.

Middle of the road voter can be swayed in a campaign, but it is the conservatives who cough up cash and then man the phones. They go door to door and man booths for conservative Republicans. Sure, you might feed them a slice of pizza or two, but they don’t want much. Even though they eat cheap, these conservatives have issues and come with baggage.

Their issues are easy to understand. They want the US government to stop funding abortion on demand. They want a border between countries. They want their doctor back, and they want the right to keep and bear arms. These conservatives bring a history of broken promises in their relationship with the Republican party. Ryan failed to deliver on each of these core conservative issues, and he did so for the most banal of reasons.

Ryan and his team kept the border open because Congressmen liked the campaign money they received from the US Chamber of Commerce. The US Chamber of Commerce likes illegal immigrants as a supply of cheap labor. After the midterm election, the Chamber gets cheap labor for free because border control bills will die in the Democrat controlled Congress. Bad move, former Speaker Ryan.

Ryan refused to kill Obamacare because he and other Congressmen liked the campaign contributions from big-pharma. Since Obamacare is the Dems illegitimate child, big-pharma now gets to overcharge US citizens without having to donate to the party in power. Not too bright, Team Ryan.. but it gets worse.

Ryan held out on defunding planned parenthood and securing gun rights because he thought he could milk conservatives for donations in election after election with his hollow promises.  He was wrong. We didn’t donate because the RINOs never delivered. We’ve seen how the Dems deliver, and we won’t pay for a kiss and a promise.

Yes, the Republicans were outspent by billionaire donors who wanted to own the House. Yes, that is a hard opponent in an election. They problem is that Ryan didn’t even try. His old political alliances aren’t working.

As Kurt Schichter said, Ryan didn’t come armed to the political fight. He and the Republican establishment brought a balloon animal to a gunfight..and we’re tired of clowns.

We’ll support the Republicans when they show they are serious. Let’s see the model legislation that you should have passed last term. Let the Dems kill it in the House. Then, and only then, will we begin to believe you’re serious about governing.


Armed Citizens Stop Mass Murder- citizens save lives before the police arrive

November 4, 2018

Guns save lives. You wouldn’t know that from reading your newspapers or watching TV. If you only get your news from the mass media and popular entertainment, then you might think civilian gun ownership cost lives. Here is the important news you didn’t see. I showed you that guns save lives, but I’m going to go a step further.

Armed civilians stop mass murder.

There. I said it, and now I’ll show you that it’s true. First we’ll look at the collected data and then review some of the many examples. Sure, you can invent all kinds of possible problems that armed citizens might face, but this is what we saw over the last two decades.

Jacob Paulsen did a great job reviewing and expanding the FBI data on mass murder collected since 2000. If you think back, then you’ll remember that almost everything changed since the millennial celebration. The children who grew up with 24-hour-news have become adults. Today, they get news updates every minute on their phones. Over the same period, the number of people who legally carry a firearm in public surged from one million to 30 million citizens. There were also 283 mass murder attempts during that time. Armed civilians were present in 33 of those attempted mass murders. That is consistent with the number of concealed carriers in the general public.

Armed citizens were only involved in 11 percent of the mass murder events,
but when armed citizens were present,
they stopped or reduced the severity of the event 94 percent of the time.
That is fact, not fantasy.

If statistics don’t move you, then here are some recent examples.

First Example- Last week, a dad was at McDonalds for some fast food with his two teenage boys. The store was closing for the day and the doors were locked as the family finished their meal. When they were done, the store manager unlocked the door so they could leave. An armed and masked robber pushed his way into the store and started shooting. Customers ran outside as the employees locked themselves into the walk-in refrigerator.  The armed dad shot back and wounded the robber. That stopped the attack. The store employees called the defender a hero.

The robber had a criminal record for drug use and illegal possession of a firearm. A judge had revoked the robbers bail a few days earlier.

That is important news, but it is equally important that you know another story. Five years ago, the anti-gun group Moms Demand Action asked McDonalds to impose a ban on people legally carrying a gun in their stores. Who would have protected innocent people and stopped the attacker if the good guy was disarmed?

Second Example- A “Peace in the City” rally was giving away school supplies and backpacks at the end of the summer. The event took place at a city park in Florida and was attended by over 200 people. A fight broke out at the basketball court, and a man started shooting into the crowd. Another attendee at the rally saw the attack and moved toward the attacker. The defender drew his firearm and shot the attacker. The defender had his concealed carry permit and carried his firearm legally. The attacker did not. Local police called the armed defender a hero.

Also in Florida, the Democrat candidate for governor said law abiding gun owners should be banned from city parks. Will that save innocent lives, or cost lives?

Third Example- This week, a racist murderer tried to enter a black church during a weekday service. Fortunately, the doors were locked. The murderer then went to a nearby Kroger supermarket where he killed two strangers, a black man and black woman. The murderer was chased away from the Kroger parking lot by a white man who was armed that night. The defender traded gunfire with the murderer, and the murderer ran away. The defender was also a concealed carry holder and was carrying his firearm legally.

Four years ago, the anti-gun group Moms Demand Action asked Kroger to impose a ban on people legally carrying a gun in their stores.

These examples are only a small sample of the thousands of legal self-defense events that happen every day. Statistics may touch our mind, but these real life examples touch my heart. I’m grateful that these ordinary citizens were extraordinary when we needed them. We need more people like them. I’m also grateful because these ordinary citizens had the defensive tools they needed to save lives. Like I told you-

Guns save lives.


About the author-

Rob Morse writes at his SlowFacts blog as well as at Clash Daily and at Ammoland. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob is an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

I gave you 700 words. Please share this article and leave a comment. RM

Democrats Want to Take Our Guns..and they said it outloud

November 3, 2018


It has been rumored for years that Democrat/Progressive/Socialists want to take our guns. Times change, and campaign donors change too. Socialist candidates today tell their big donors that they want gun confiscation. These rights-restricting politicians also hope the rest of us won’t hear about their campaign promises until after the election. This time we have them telling the truth on video, and in black and white.

91 percent of Democrat Congressmen supported a bill to outlaw most contemporary firearms.

The exceptions in the bill are for the guns owned by police. In short, almost all the Democrat Congressmen want guns for the state, but not for the citizens..and they said it for all to see. There was no Republican support to this bill, so why did the democrats forward it when they knew it wouldn’t pass?

Several billionaire socialist campaign donors want gun confiscation. These donors wanted to see model legislation proposed before they would dump another tens of millions of dollars into the campaign. These rich donors needed a commitment that the Democrats were more serious about passing gun-control than the Republicans had been about supporting the right to bear arms. It was “show me” time.

Democrat minority leader Nancy Pelosi said gun-control would be a priority if the Democrats take control of the House. That was a start, but it wasn’t enough for the rich donors. The Democrats minority in congress filed  gun control bill, HR 5087 in February, and 176 democrat congressmen signed up as co sponsors. HR 5087 defined most contemporary firearms as assault weapons and banned them. This includes all ARs, AKs, and their variants. The bill also included many semi-automatic handguns.

There, they said it outloud again. ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all it.’

Democrats usually want to keep their gun-confiscation proposals out of the public spotlight. We have a name for it when you tell say one thing to one group of voters and then contradict yourself with another group. It is called lying, and we’ve seen a bunch of it. In particular, we’ve seen it from Democrats McCaskill, Sinema, Gillum, Spanberger, Heitkamp, and Beto O’Rourke. If your Democrat congressman says his is pro-gun, then he is lying too. I’m sorry you were lied to. I know it hurts because I’ve felt it before.

The question isn’t if Democrat politicians are lying to their moderate voters. The question is if the voters are paying attention. We’ll find out on November 6th.

How do you defeat billionaires trying to buy elections?
You beat Bloomberg, Soros and Steyer by voting.
It’s that easy.


I gave you 400 words. Please like, share, and leave a comment after you follow the links. RM

Repost- Who Attacks Jews in New York City?- Reality Collides with the Media Narrative

November 2, 2018

We conservatives and libertarians have been called violent bigots when we didn’t eagerly jump on an opportunity to again compromise our freedoms. Now we find out that violent bigots are really on the political left. In particular, anti-Semitism thrives in the deep-left city of New York.

From Elder of Ziyon, “NYC has hundreds of anti-Jewish hate crimes – and NOT ONE person caught in the last two years was far right. The actual numbers are even more stunning. In 2017, there were 151 complaints about anti-semitic hate crimes, as opposed to 34 anti-black crimes and 40 anti-gay crimes.”

We’ve confused reality with the outrageous claims made in campaign fundraising e-mails sent out by Socialist candidates.- RM


From the NY Times- “..there have been four times as many crimes motivated by bias against Jews — 142 in all — as there have against blacks. Hate crimes against Jews have outnumbered hate crimes targeted at transgender people by a factor of 20.”

Read more here==> Is It Safe to Be Jewish in New York? – The New York Times

The Anti-Gun Media Skews Public Opinion

November 1, 2018

Public misperception-

There was a mass murder at a Pittsburgh Synagogue. If you read the posts on social media after that attack then you would think that guns are pure evil. Those writers seem not to know that guns save lives every day. Unfortunately, they are not alone. I’ll go further and say the average voter is only vaguely aware that ordinary citizens use their firearms to save lives every single day. Most people don’t know that firearms are life saving tools because the US news media hides that story from us. This media distortion has serious consequences. What voters don’t know can move elections. Ignorance can cost lives.

Media distortion-

I don’t think the media’s treatment of self-defense and mass murder is merely a subtle editorial choice as assignment editors select articles based on excitement and novelty. It’s definitely newsworthy when a gun owner stops a sexual assault. It is important to the public debate that we know a legally armed citizen successfully defended police officers who were under attack. It is compelling news when a dad stops mass murder in a fast food restaurant, not just once, but here, and here again at a park. We could go on with millions of examples.

I’d have a lot less to write about if the media would set aside its agenda and tell the whole truth. Unfortunately, many of us only know what we read in the papers.

Crime prevention-

If you search deeply enough, you’ll find that victims who defend themselves with a firearm usually save their life. In addition, they make crime more difficult and less rewarding. An armed defender makes me safer even if I don’t carry a gun. Armed defense also reduces the incidence of rape after a sexual assault. Doesn’t that seem newsworthy to you?

Saving a family-

People who use a firearm for defense might protect themselves, but the might also protect their family. That saves lives for generations to come. I celebrate their defense as I would mourn their loss if they were injured.

Stop mass murder-

Sometimes, people who defend themselves save many lives as they stop what could be a mass murder. These events are more frequent than we would know by looking at the television, the newspaper, or from most online media. When a mass murderer is successful it is on the front page for days. The self-defense story that stopped mass murder might never make it to the last page of Section B. That editorial decision means we never hear about the mass murder that didn’t happen.

Effective self-defense-

The debate over guns in the US is skewed by media distortion and by public ignorance. The public thinks TV crime dramas are real. They don’t know the real life drama where law abiding citizens defend themselves with a firearm millions of times a year. The public never learns that firearms are effective tools in civilian hands. Citizens use guns more often than they use fire extinguishers.

Firearms safety-

The average citizen doesn’t know that US citizens with their concealed carry licenses are among the most law abiding and non-violent group of people on the planet. That means that guns in the hands of honest citizens are extraordinarily safe. Even with that safety record, we continue with firearms safety education. The Eddie Eagle gunsafe program reached its 31 millionth child this year. Unfortunately, there were 64 fatal firearms accidents with children under 13 years of age, so there is more work to do. The number of firearms accidents continues to fall over time.

Informed Debate-

If you didn’t know that guns save lives then it makes perfect sense to restrict gun ownership. Firearms and firearm ownership only looks like a virtue after you learn that people save their lives by using their gun as a defensive tool.

The gun debate generates a lot of heated opinions. I wish the argument was over different interpretations of the benefits and costs of guns in society. We can’t have that debate until we have a common set of facts. That means we have to get unfiltered news.

I say guns save lives. Now do your own research and find out what the news media won’t tell you.

About the author-

Rob Morse writes at his SlowFacts blog as well as at Clash Daily and at Ammoland. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob is an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

I gave you 700 words. Please leave a comment. RM

Gun Control Fails Again at the Pittsburgh Synagogue

October 31, 2018

Photo from VOA news

A murderer killed unarmed victims at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Many of us have asked how long will we allow mass murders to continue. We know the answer, but it is a bitter pill to swallow. Mass murders will continue until we stop them. Religious institutions are the target of criminal violence hundreds of times a year. That data comes from the dedicated individuals who work to protect our churches and synagogues. Sadly, it seems that every politician running for office also has an opinion on the recent attack. Fortunately, we can come up with better ideas than those campaign promises. Let’s look at evidence. Here is what failed in Pittsburgh and here is what works to stop mass murder.

The murderer purchased his firearms legally. That means he passed his background checks. He passed his FBI national background check when he bought his firearms in a gunshop. He also passed state background checks to buy his three handguns. Those background checks failed to stop a mass murderer because he was not a criminal until he killed at a Synagogue. The so called “universal” background checks would fare no better because all background checks contain a fatal flaw; looking backwards doesn’t predict the future.

We have looked at past mass murderers to see if proposed background checks would have stopped them. With the exception of the murderers who killed to obtain their weapons, mass murderers obtained their firearms legally and passed their background checks to obtain their guns. Background checks don’t stop mass murderers.

Pennsylvania state law requires that gun stores keep a registry of the handguns they sell. Criminals don’t buy guns over the counter, so that registry doesn’t stop criminals from getting guns. The registry didn’t stop this murderer either, even though he bought his pistols legally. Handgun registries don’t stop mass murderers.

Pennsylvania requires a license to carry a concealed firearm in public. In a singularly unusual turn, this murderer acquired his permit. That meant that the murderer carried his concealed firearms to the church in a legal manner. Having a state issued carry permit failed to stop him from murdering innocent people at the Synagogue, but the state permit requirements may have helped disarm the innocent victims sitting in the Synagogue.

When we listen to proposed solutions, the first rule is to do no harm. Most murderers don’t bother to get a permit, so more stringent requirements on carry permits could very well disarm more victims rather than disarm future murderers.

Armed security was frequently mentioned in the immediate news reports after the attack. Several politicians said that guns are not the answer to protect innocent people in churches, in synagogues, and in schools.  Without exception, the politicians I saw making those statements had armed bodyguards. A noteworthy exception was the Brooklyn, New York borough president Eric Adams. President Adams said he plans to carry his gun to church. He asked other retired law enforcement officers to carry at church or synagogue when they are off duty. Armed guards protect politicians when the politicians go to church. The rest of us should be protected as well.

Armed guards help, but off-duty law enforcement is only one of several known solutions.

The news media is a significant factor in promoting mass murder. Though less of a factor at the Pittsburgh synagogue attack, the extensive media coverage given to mass murderers lures the next narcissistic murderer to kill. We learned this lesson with teen suicide. Today, we have media guidelines in place. We won’t mention the name of the suicide victim. We know that works to reduce copycat suicide because we’ve looked at the data. Today, we don’t turn a teen suicide into a celebrity event..unless he takes several of his classmates with him.

That message is clear enough for a headline that any editor can understand-

Don’t Reward Murderers!

Armed security is already in place at many religious assemblies. These security teams can be made of off-duty police, dedicated church staff, and/or armed congregants. The only thing stopping more churches and synagogues from having armed staff is apathy. If you want protection when you worship, then ask your pastor or rabi. Armed security is only a part of a larger security plan, so ask if you can see the entire plan.

There is an exception to the trend of armed churches and synagogues. Almost all mass murders are in so called “gun-free” zones. Some states forbid or severely restrict armed church staff.  Arguing for armed churches is a difficult political proposition in some states. I propose we make the government strictly liable for every injury in a government mandated “gun-free” zone. If disarming churches and synagogues was really such a good idea, then the government wouldn’t have to pay a thing. If it is a bad idea, as most of us suspect, then the state must pay for the murders it caused.

Some churches have decided to deny their members the right of armed self defense. I propose we make these churches and synagogues strictly liable for every injury in their self imposed “gun-free” zone. Again, if disarming your congregations is such a great idea, then the church has no liability to worry about.  If these gun free zones actually increase the risk to parishioners and staff as the data suggests, then these churches and synagogues should be held liable for the safety of the people they disarmed.

Is there any “gun-free” zone where we have not found a gun?

When it comes to mental health, I’m tempted to add that we should hold bureaucrats responsible for the crazy people they release back into society. I can’t take that proposal seriously since we have never found a way to hold bureaucrats responsible for their actions. Claiming we could make bureaucrats responsible for mass violence is magical thinking, and this isn’t a blog about political fiction.

I gave you a thousand words. Please leave me a comment. RM

How Do We Stop Mass Murder?

October 28, 2018

After the murders at the Pittsburg Synagogue, I keep seeing this question on Quora; ‘How do we stop mass murder?’

Most of the people asking this question feel strongly about things they don’t understand. They have not studied the issues of physical defense or contemporary mental health. I’m sorry to give them the bad news, but there is no magic button to fix the human condition. There is hope.

We can not eliminate mass murder, but we can reduce it.

    1. We developed mass murderers after we developed mass media. Stop rewarding narcissistic murderers with a billion dollars of publicity.
    2. Almost all mass murders are in so called “gun-free” zones. Make the government strictly liable for every injury in a government mandated “gun-free” zone.
    3. Make owners/operators strictly liable for every injury in a privately mandated “gun-free” zones.

I’m tempted to add that we should hold bureaucrats responsible for the crazy people they release back into society, but we have never found a way to hold bureaucrats responsible. To claim that as a solution is magical thinking and this isn’t a blog about speculative fiction.

The three things I mentioned won’t end the problem of mass murder, but they will help a lot. If you doubt that conclusion, then please consider this;

Is there any “gun-free” zone where we have not found a gun?
I have not found a single one.

I’ve also heard people propose more background checks and more bureaucratic “no-buy” lists. That sounds too good to be true..and it is. Gun prohibition would disarm an honest citizen like me, but prohibition has not stopped criminals or determined murderers.

I’d love to hear your comments. RM

%d bloggers like this: