Skip to content

Now We Know There are Armed Good Guys on Our Streets

November 26, 2021

The news media sells shock and revulsion to keep us watching through their many advertisements. Politicians lie to us so we will vote for them. Both have told us that guns are frighteningly dangerous, and that we’d be safer if more honest citizens were disarmed. We’re tempted to believe them if that is all we know. Now, we have data that calls their story into question. We confirmed something we’d long suspected about good men and women who legally carry personal firearms in public. Now we know that concealed carry and armed defense are common.

The mainstream media tells us about crime all the time. What the news media seldom bother to tell us are the many stories where good guys stop crime with a personal firearm. We don’t see that news article even though armed defense happens several times for each time a criminal uses a gun during a crime. (Criminals only use a firearm in about 8% of violent crimes.) In contrast, our neighbors use a firearm for self-defense about as often as criminals commit any violent crime, either with or without a gun in the criminals’ hands.

One claim that the media and anti-gun advocates use is that good guys don’t carry a firearm in public. They claim that if armed defense happens at all, then it is extremely rare. That would be odd because we already know there are more than 20 million of us who have a license to carry a concealed firearm.

That doesn’t mean that 20 million of us necessarily carry every day. Until now, we didn’t have solid proof that honest citizens with a license to carry concealed in public leave their home with a gun at all. In many states you can carry concealed in public and the license is optional.

Now that we know they are out there in public, do good guys and gals with a gun make us safer or less safe? We’ve looked at criminal records, so we know that private citizens who have their concealed carry license are extraordinarily nonviolent and law abiding. It is no surprise that police officers are dozens of times more law abiding than the average citizen. What surprised me is that citizens who have their carry permits were several times more law abiding than even the police. We can’t find a group of people who are more law abiding and less violent than concealed carry permit holders.

When they do have to use their firearm, licensed concealed carriers are both more accurate and several times less likely to shoot the wrong person than the police. That is old news, and we were told it didn’t matter since no one except the police and criminals actually have a gun in public. We might have suspected that wasn’t true, but now we know. Now we know the media’s claims were false.

We don’t see our neighbors carry their gun because concealed carry is concealed. We don’t ask our neighbors if they are carrying a personal firearm with them in public. Maybe you ask them, but I don’t. Now, someone did.

The 2021 National Firearms Survey asked if people carried a personal firearm in public. On-duty police and security guards were considered separately. Over 50 thousand of us answered the survey.

We learned that guns and gun owners are everywhere. Two of the largest anti-gun states, California and New York, also had some of the most firearms owners compared to other states.

Where the state permits it, many gun owners carry a firearm in public for personal protection. That happens in some areas even in “anti-gun” states. There are many counties in California and in New York where ordinary citizens with a clean criminal record will get their carry permits if they ask for them. That isn’t the portrait the media paints of gun owners in those red states.

Having a personal firearm can make us significantly safer. Examples where the armed victim defended themselves dwarf the number of firearms accidents. Being armed increases the gun owner’s safety, the safety of their family, and the safety of their neighborhoods. About a third of all gun owners in the survey reported using a firearm for personal defense, though most of those self-defense events were at or near their home and not necessarily in public.

As you would hope, our armed neighbors were wonderfully reluctant to use lethal force. More than 80 percent of armed defense incidents ended without the defender having to fire a shot. The victim saying he was armed, showing the firearm, or threatening to shoot was enough to stop most attacks.

That is good news, but it shouldn’t surprise anyone. You don’t want to shoot someone, and neither do your neighbors who own a gun.

We also learned more from this year’s firearms survey. When we asked them, many of our neighbors said how often they go armed in public. They were offered several choices to describe how often they carried; always or almost always, often, sometimes, only in dangerous situations, and never. That created four broad categories for those who carry in public. I narrowed the end categories to 20 percent, and gave the categories of “often” and “sometimes” a range of 30 percent each.

Shown below, I estimate that over 17 million of us legally carry a concealed firearm in public every day. That works out to between one in 12 and one in 13 of the adults over the age of 21 are carrying in public each day. In round numbers, call in one-in-a-dozen adults on the street.

Of course, there are more gun owners in some states than in others. We suspected that when we found that over 50 percent of adults in some counties had their carry permits. In contrast, the state of Hawaii hasn’t granted a single concealed carry permit to an ordinary citizen this year.

In general, the fraction of carry permits issued is much lower in some deep-blue cities in deep-blue states. The obvious examples are New York, New Jersey, and California. In cities like Los Angeles, in New York City, and in Trenton, police chiefs and judges only gave concealed carry permits to their friends. Politicians and judges get permits, but ordinary citizens like us can’t.

What isn’t well known is that concealed carry permits are issued in some rural counties in California and New York. Those permits allow ordinary citizens to carry in every county in that state.

We assumed that there were no good men and women with guns on the street because we didn’t see them. Now we know they are there.

Good men and women carry their personal firearms near us even if we can’t get a permit from our sheriff. Armed Americans are at our coffee shop in the morning. They are on the road with us as we drive to work. They work next to us. They are sitting at the restaurant, and they are in the store where we shop on the way home. They are our neighbors, and they use a firearm to defend themselves over a million times each year. Good for these honest citizens, and it is good for all of us that they protected themselves and their families.

Gun ownership is common and one-out-of-a-dozen of us are carrying in public today.

Now we must ask why in some counties half the adults have their permits, yet that right is denied to all the ordinary citizens in some states.

I gave you 1200 words. Please share them with a friend. RM


“2021 national firearms survey







Death, Life, and Gun Prohibition in 2021

November 15, 2021

We’ve heard advocates of gun-prohibition say that more guns mean more crime and that disarming honest citizens stops criminals from committing violent crimes. It is fortunate for all of us that gun-prohibition laws are not new ideas. We’ve had gun-control laws for over a century. We can look at what those laws accomplished so we don’t have to guess. I’ve looked at the record. I am not convinced that gun-prohibition laws work as advertised. We also have some tragic stories to consider where gun control succeeded and people died. The closer I look the more I think that gun-control laws cost lives. See for yourself.

History of Gun-Prohibition

The most straight forward thing to do is to look at history. Politicians have always used their power to punish their political enemies. At one time, England allowed Protestants to go armed while Catholics were disarmed. Early America was slightly better since it allowed free white men to go armed but not freed black men or indentured whites. Recognizing the right for the common man to bear arms was a revolution in its time since as it allowed more than the nobility to be armed.

We’ve yet to fully accept that lesson. Today, some states only allow judges, politicians, and billionaire’s hired security guards to go armed in public. Those are today’s nobility and their hired knights. Too bad for the serfs who are attacked on the streets at night.

In contrast, some states in the US today grant their citizens varying degree of freedom. There are about 20 states where every person with a clean criminal record may carry a concealed firearm in public, state permission slip optional. In sharp contrast, there are states where you must ask the government for permission to so much as touch a gun, and then ask again before you can buy it and take it home. We see everything in between.

We’re told this oppression is done in the name of public safety. I’m skeptical since the states with severe gun-prohibition include some of the most violent areas in the country. Some states with the fewest gun-control laws are among the most non-violent. In rebuttal, the political lords say they have not made enough things illegal and they simply need more regulations to bring peace for everyone. I don’t believe them because I’ve looked at our history.

We have over 23 thousand firearms regulations in the US so far. If that flood of ink on paper could stop them, then we would never see another criminal use a gun today. That isn’t what we see. We have over a million violent crimes each year and most crimes go unsolved. It is a dangerous fantasy to think criminals obey our laws, and more dangerous when the people in power use that fantasy to disarm honest men and women.

That isn’t to say that criminals can’t be stopped. They can and they are. Honest citizens like us use a firearm to stop over a million criminal attacks a year. Most of the time the criminals ran away when they saw that their intended victim was armed. The victim defended himself with no shots fired. That happens several thousand times a day.

We don’t have to guess if guns cause crime. We have the numbers for gun sales each year. We have the rates of violent crime as well. We’ve seen gun ownership increase year after year. Crime has gone up and down, but had a generally downward trend decade to decade. Far from causing violent crime, if the data indicates anything then is says that armed victims reduce the rate of violent crime. Some politicians and judges refuse to believe that, or they don’t care about the facts.

Guns versus Crime

Causing Mass Murder

Not only do gun control advocates tell us that guns cause crime, but they say modern firearms cause mass murder. That makes very effective click-bait headlines for the media. That also makes effective gun-control propaganda, but it is a lie.

That isn’t what the record shows. Yes, some mass murderers used long guns. Most victims in mass murders were injured by handguns. The sad fact is that mass murderers were more deadly with handguns. They were more dangerous with that weapon because they moved closer to their victims and shot their victims in more vulnerable areas of their body.

What surprised even the gun-prohibitionists is that we did not see fewer people killed in the cases where the attacker used a smaller capacity magazine. Making the attacker reload is only an advantage when there is an armed defender waiting to return fire. Mass murderers plan their attacks to avoid armed defenders. The murderers usually seek “gun free” zones where their intended victims are disarmed.

What the mass media won’t admit is that the news media promotes mass murder. We first saw this media effect with teen suicides and the effect was dubbed “celebrity suicide”. Teenagers didn’t mind dying, but they hated to live unrecognized. They would kill themselves for the posthumous publicity they received.

Today, the news media gives mass murderers a multi-million-dollar publicity campaign, particularly if they shoot children with a “black rifle”. That publicity inspires more murderers. Those are not my words, but the words of the mass murderers themselves. That is what the surviving mass murderers told us and what the dead murderers left behind in their journals.

We learned our lesson about “celebrity suicide”, and now the media won’t mention the dead teenager’s name in a suicide. We’ve yet to learn the lesson of “celebrity mass murder” and leave the mass murderer un-named.

Just as mass murderers are predictable, so are gun-prohibitionists and anti-gun politicians. Our Lords propose more gun-prohibition laws after each mass murder. Meanwhile, the unholy trinity between mass murderers, mass media, and anti-gun politicians rolls on before the latest victims are even buried.

Preventing Mass Murder

I said the news media ignores their roll in celebrity mass murder. The media also ignores the mass murders that were stopped by armed civilians who happened to be in the right place at the right time. That scenario doesn’t happen all the time because, as I mentioned, most mass murderers seek out “gun free” zones. What surprises everyone is that armed civilians were overwhelmingly successful when they decided to stop an attack. The FBI put our success rate at 94%, or about 17 out of 18 times.

This is how an armed defender changes everything.

You hear an unexpected noise in the shopping mall. You don’t know what is happening so you move toward the sound. You see a man shoot into the crowd and people are starting to run. You move behind a corner as people run past you. You look again and see the murderer aim at the crowd for the third time. That is when you shoot him.

The average number of victims killed by the murder is 2.3 when armed civilians intervene. Waiting for the police adds another dozen fatalities. That phenomenal reduction in body-count is not because armed civilians are supermen; it is because they are there when they were needed. Unfortunately, preventing a mass murder doesn’t sell newspapers, so the media hardly covers it.

They don’t talk about it, but I do.

A dozen lives

Politics as Usual

We see judges and politicians act to disarm ordinary citizens at ordinary times in ordinary places. That costs us both time and money. We pay for that decision in both blood and treasure. Disarming honest people leaves us as disarmed victims of crime. It also makes more honest citizens into felons when they run out of time and have to protect themselves and their family before they get the state permission slip to carry a gun.

Armed guards for a politicians children,
but not for your family.

Meanwhile our lords say one thing while they do another. They reserve the right to go armed when, where, and how they choose. Just last week we had a Democrat Alderman in Chicago arrested for having an illegal machine gun. The news media didn’t ask him, but I’m sure the alderman needed his machine gun for “public safety”.

That is what the nobles always tell the serfs.


 I gave you 1200 words and a lot of thought. Please leave a few words of your on as a comment, and share my words with a friend. RM






Dangerous Cities, and Guns 2021

November 13, 2021

We’ve heard the advocates of gun-control say they haven’t done enough and we need even more gun-prohibition laws than we already have. They say that disarming honest citizens stops criminals from committing violent crimes. Those are bold claims, but that doesn’t make them true. Politicians lie to us all the time. I’ve looked at the record. I am not convinced that gun-prohibition works as advertised, and we have some tragic stories to consider as well. The closer I look the more I think that gun-control laws cost lives.


Much of our so called “firearms policy” is driven by emotion. We all feel compassion for the people of Chicago, Saint Louis, and Baltimore who cringe at the sound of gunfire every night. The war raging between rival drug gangs fighting for turf leaves innocent civilians caught in the nightly crossfire. Over four-thousand people were shot in Chicago so far this year.

Notice the long causal chain that ties this together. Bad public policy lead to business failure- to unemployment- to addiction and depression- to broken families- and finally to more gangs and violent crime. I wish you could break that viscous chain of events by passing more gun-prohibition laws. You can’t, but politicians need to deflect blame for their mistakes. They need a scapegoat. They passed 23 thousand gun control regulations so far, and still there is no peace.

Violence is concentrated rather than ubiquitous. Ask yourself why Chicago, Detroit, and Baltimore are dangerous, but San Jose, Henderson, Austin, and San Diego are not. More than half of the counties in the US will not have a single murder this year. A mere 2 percent of our counties produced more than half our murders.

Maybe it isn’t the guns, but the violent people we leave on our streets. In every city, the politicians and the powerful are protected with guns. It is the poor who are disarmed in the name of “gun-control”.


There is a real cost when gun prohibition fails. Sure, we see the body count every weekend from our failed blue cities. Beyond that is the tragedy of the honorable men and women we’ve thrown in prison as we feed the fantasy of gun-prohibition. It takes about a thousand dollars, over a year of waiting, and a week off work to get your carry permit in Chicago. If you’re a parent who was robbed and saw your children shot, then that is too long. Many people who couldn’t wait are arrested and thrown in prison for the non-violent crime of wanting to protect their families. How long should they have to wait to protect the people they love?

Support for the right to bear arms in public has come from unexpected quarter now that public defenders in both Chicago and New York have called for expanding and simplifying the permit process. To quote them,

“Embedded in the (US Supreme Court) justices’ inquiries- full of racially coded language and myths about “high-crime areas” and “muggings”- was a false assumption that police keep communities safe, and a dangerous distinction between “these people with illegal guns” (read: Black people living in cities) and “ordinary hardworking people” who have to commute home every night (read white people in the suburbs).”

Being a felon under President Trump was one thing when the Trump economy virtually eliminated black unemployment. It is phenomenally harder to be a black man who served time for a felony conviction now that the Biden economy has seen unemployment soar. Disfavored minorities and people with a criminal record find it much harder to find work today. They work they can find is part time and for lower wages. Some occupations with licensing requirements are barred to felons.

The Lords in power tell us it is all done for the public good.

That is what the nobles always tell the serfs.



“The Nation, Why Are Public Defenders Backing a Major Assault on Gun Control?


Gun Ownership versus Crime in the US 2000-2019

November 11, 2021

I’ve seen analysis that relates guns and crime. In particular, the data looks at the growing number of firearms in civilian hands in the United States. It compares gun ownership with the rate of violent crime across the country. Unfortunately, that data is a few years old. It is easy to get raw numbers, but it is very hard to get good data. This is what I found.

Rates of Crime-

The easiest information to get are the raw numbers of violent crimes committed in the United States each year. That data is collected in the same manner year after year. We use the rate of crime rather than the number of crimes since populations change over long decades. That is good, but it isn’t perfect.

That data tells us about the people who were arrested, charged, and convicted of a violent crime. The data on the number of victims is harder to get. A criminal can be charged with several violent crimes that he committed during a single violent act. In that sense, we’re asking the data to also give us some information about the severity of the crime.

For example, robbing several people at gunpoint is worse than robbing a single individual. Robbery and aggravated assault are worse than robbery alone. When we look at the data, it is hard to tell if we’re seeing fewer incidents of criminal activity, crimes of less severity, or if prosecutors are simply bargaining away more charges. Each is a factor and I don’t know how to re-normalize the data and correct for those effects over decades.

That is the bad news. Fortunately, we can still use the crime data to reliably see large trends over the long-term. The good news is that it looks like the rate of violent crime is going down.

Gun Ownership-

It is harder to get reliable data on gun ownership in the US. Many of us are reluctant to answer questions about the guns we own, or don’t own. Consider if you would tell a stranger on the phone if you had guns in your home, or if your family was disarmed. There are valid reasons to be cautious with either answer. Also, times change. With online surveys becoming prevalent, we are now reluctant to answer questions and have our data harvested and sold to politicians and online marketers.

We have other sources of information. Many states require a background check when a firearm is sold. The federal government also collects data on the number of background checks it runs. As you might expect, that data is imperfect as well.

Half of the states let citizens use their concealed carry permits to buy a gun since that carry permit shows the buyer has recently passed an FBI background check. That means the number of National Instant Background Checks, NICS checks for short, undercounts the number of firearms transactions. What isn’t well known is that a single background check can cover multiple sales. A firearms seller could transfer an entire firearms collection to a buyer at one time with a single NICS check performed by the FBI. That further undercounts the number of guns sold as recorded in the NICS system.

What we don’t know is how many of these guns are new guns moving into civilian ownership. In theory, a million gun-sales-a-year could mean that two people traded a single firearm back and forth a million times. That is an absurd example and most of us hold our firearms for decades if not for a lifetime. I mention that example simply to show that each NICS transaction does not necessarily indicate a new forearm entering civilian ownership. We do know that the sale of domestically produced and imported firearms is at a record high and gun inventories are at a record low.

We have a number of sources to estimate firearms ownership. Some states register each firearms owner. One such state is California. California is one of the most difficult states in which to buy a gun. Many firearms models commonly owned in the rest of the Unites States are outlawed for civilians in California. Gun purchases are slow and cumbersome. We saw the number of gun owners in California more than double from 2008 to 2018 despite those obstacles. That amazing growth in new gun owners in an anti-gun state strongly contradicts the claim that gun ownership has remained flat across the United States.

The international small arms survey, the NICS data, state registration data, and several online surveys combine to bracket gun ownership in the United States to between 300 to 400 million firearms mostly owned by 80 to 100+ million adult firearms owners.

Again, we can use the annual NICS data to give us broad trends in the change of firearm ownership. More gun sales indicate that more individuals became gun owners.

Guns versus Crime


The violent crime rate fell by about 38 percent over two decades while the number of guns sold each year almost doubled. The implied number of gun owners also doubled. If anything, this data shows that firearms sales cause a decrease in violent crime.

Let’s be realistic. Life is more complex than two lines on a graph. A number of factors contribute to the rate of violent crime. That said, one of the factors that deter criminal activity is the behavior of armed victims.

I gave you a lot of thought and 1200 words. Please share them with a friend. RM



Adjusted NICS data provided by the National Shooting Sports Federation and their Public Affairs Director Mark Oliva.


The Narrow Life Experience of Supreme Court Justices

November 7, 2021

I was listening to the oral arguments in the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association versus Bruen. I found the judges on the US Supreme court both fascinating and frightening. To me, their questions showed the narrow life experiences of a supreme court judge. Before I commit the same error that these judges made, I must admit that the justices are not all the same, and their experiences are certainly different than mine.

Justices as of November, 2021

This particular legal case asks the court to decide if ordinary people can legally carry ordinary firearms in ordinary places. Time and again, the judges asked the petitioner’s counsel if he were asking that guns belong in extraordinary places. To take a few examples, the judge was implying that honest gun owners should be disarmed at schools, at public gatherings, on the subway, and at sporting events.

Lawyers want to restrict their arguments to the narrow question asked in the case. What I found fascinating were the judges’ assumptions.

The judge assumes that schools are safe and that guns should be outlawed there. I’ve studied our history and I know that schools are dangerous places where innocent children have been attacked. My experience may be unusual since I’ve worked to make schools safer with programs that trained school staff to be first responders, to stop an attack and treat the injured unto police and EMTs arrive.

My experience may be unusual since I know co-eds who were raped as they walked home from class late at night. They were disarmed because the campus was a “gun free zone”. No, the campus wasn’t a “gun free zone” to the rapist who brought his gun. It sounds as if the justices think that laws enforce themselves and that criminals obey our laws.

That isn’t my experience. My friends have the painful history to prove it. Evidently, that history and what we learned from it isn’t obvious to some supreme court judges.

One judge asked if the state could outlaw concealed carry at public gatherings like Time Square on New Years eve, or at bars and restaurants where alcohol is served. Again, I heard the question as a confession by the judges.

The judge thinks that restaurants and bars are made safe by ink on paper. If we’re going to outlaw guns, then wouldn’t bars be safer if we also outlawed carrying keys in a bar so we wouldn’t drive while intoxicated? I’m afraid the judge would say that we should outlaw keys in bars too. To me, it sounds as if the judge thinks we depend on laws to get home safely.

Map of crimes in and around Times Square, New York

Do the judges really think that police have made Time Square a safe place for me and my family? I don’t believe that for a minute! Fortunately, ordinary people like us developed our own solutions that are both more sophisticated and more tailored to our specific needs than the crude tool of law. My experience, while limited, is that bars and restaurants are made safe by the designated driver who is carrying both her keys in her pocket and a firearm on her hip. It is she who protects her friends who might imbibe. When my friends go to places like Times Square, they are kept safe by men and women who are looking outward to spot trouble before it reaches them.

For the judges, what is out of sight is out of mind. For example, they ask if we should be allowed to carry at sporting events. They claim that getting wanded at a turnstile makes us safe. I remember where unarmed fans were beaten to the ground and brain-damaged by gangs at the stadium. Clearly the state did not make those locations safe for the common man. Our safety is primarily our concern rather than the state’s concern.

Going to an extreme example, if a town putts up a sign that says, “no guns allowed”, is that enough protection so we should be compelled to give up our right of armed defense? Regardless of what we say, I observe that a plastic sign isn’t enough protection so that judges, politicians, and their security teams decide to go unarmed.

At the other extreme, we’ve seen mass murder occur where there were both police and metal detectors providing security as you entered a fairgrounds. Despite those precautions, the murderer simply walked away from the security checkpoint and crawled under the fence. The city delivered security theater rather than a real defense. In fact, we see fewer injured victims and injured bystanders when armed civilians defend themselves. I’m left wondering why the judges didn’t understand that history when they asked their questions.

This is pure projection on my part, but I was left wondering if judges were asking where they could go to get away from those dangerous gun owners. They speak as if they are oblivious to the reality of armed defense in the USA.

Clearly, my experience is different than theirs. So is yours. I’ve been in a room with hundreds of armed men and women. That isn’t some exotic training site, but an ordinary class at a school that taught armed defense to civilians. I’ve been on a convention floor with tens of thousands of armed men and women who were at that convention with their families. That is simply an NRA annual meeting. Even those rather ordinary situations are outside the judges’ experience.

I want to put this at a personal level. The judges said that open carry was a substitute for concealed carry so that ordinary people could exercise armed defense. Would the judges apply those rules to themselves and their family? The people who guard the judges are not routinely limited to open carry, and for good reasons. Their security staff carries everywhere the law allows. They are not restricted to carry when a defined threat is made against a particular justice at a particular time and place.

If judges are extraordinary, then so is every college co-ed. Who is assaulted more often, a judge or a co-ed?

I thought the judges exhibited a profound lack of empathy for the common man or woman. Would they require that their relatives be restricted to open carry and denied all other forms of defense?

Like many of us, the judges don’t know what they don’t know. Perhaps they only know what they see on the news. Then again, I suspect that you have seen and done many things the judges don’t even know exist.

There is wisdom in humility.

I gave you a thousand words. Please share them with a friend.


Crime in Times Square- “

Transcript- “

Audio- “

Republican Winsome Sears claims Virginia lt. governor win

November 4, 2021

The media told us that Republicans in Virginia were racist, but the Republicans elected Sears at Lt. Governor. Hmm. Someone is lying to us.

S​ears noted her history-making achievement to make a plea for racial unity.​

“There are some who want to divide, but we must not let that happen,” she said. “We have had a black president elected not once but twice and here I am, living proof.”

Source: Republican Winsome Sears claims Virginia lt. governor win

Socialism Fails Faster than Expected

November 3, 2021

The failures of Socialism took a lot less time than I thought. Sadly, we’re already there. Today, fewer people are working. Store shelves show fewer items at higher prices. Inflation is up while real wages are down. Those are the classic signs of socialism. Despite what your college professor told you, socialism means you need government permission to buy and sell. You need government permission to speak. Socialism means you need to please a politician rather than pleasing your customers or yourself. Today, people are less optimistic about their future as the government’s lies become more frequent and more obvious. Here are a few of the examples I’ve seen, but I suspect you have examples of your own.

Politicians keep telling us that they are spending our money on things we really need and can’t easily get for ourselves. That often means we taxes to pay for police and public utilities.

In Deep Blue city after Deep Blue city, the mayors and city councils defunded the police. Rather than give us our taxes back, these politicians spent the money they took from the police budget and spent it on “community organizers” who would prevent crime. Instead of giving us lower crime, we saw criminal activity surge upward with homicide increasing by 30 to 100 percent in many Democrat controlled cities. Rather than give us our tax money back, these politicians spent our tax money on 24-7-365 personal security teams for themselves and their families. In Chicago, the police expanded a station close to Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s house that has been dubbed “Fort Lorrie”. Rioters can loot Chicago’s magic mile, but you can’t protest in Mayor Lightfoot’s neighborhood.

There is nothing so urgent as a politician with a special interest to pay off. In Dixmoor, Illinois, the ancient city water system breaks on a regular basis. The taxes that were supposed to pay for a new water system are long spent on other projects. The old and rusted water system breaks time after time, and only the excuses are new.

I thought it would take longer for political corruption to make cities unlivable, but Illinois has a head start on the rest of the US when it comes go government corruption.

California decriminalized the sales of marijuana. Then, the Socialist politicians licensed and regulated the dispensaries. Rather than being set by supply and demand, the price of marijuana is set by the state at $280 per ounce. There is also a 8.5 percent state sales tax, a 10 percent business tax, and local sales taxes to pay. Many cannabis users found it simpler to buy from unlicensed, and often gang related drug sellers. I didn’t think it was possible, but California’s Socialist politicians managed to make it easier to deal with drug gangs than deal with a business trying to operate legally in California.

I thought it would take longer for the legal drug market to collapse, but I underestimated the Socialist politicians in California.

California ports unload a lot of goods shipped from China. California politicians wanted a larger cut of that traffic. California politicians required that trucks must be relatively new to legally haul freight from the ports. They also said that all diesel trucks will soon be outlawed in favor of electric vehicles. Truck drivers must also be unionized. The response was entirely predictable.

Truck drivers stayed home. Trucking firms quit investing in new equipment that would soon become illegal to operate in California. The longshoremen’s union held the ports hostage since they had a monopoly on west coast ports. Some ports report over a half-million containers waiting to move as the ports operate below capacity.

Rather than voting for regulations that benefit the public interest, these politicians voted for the regulations that got them the largest campaign contributions from entrenched unions. That is how socialism works. Fortunately we’ve seen container ships divert to ports on the Gulf of Mexico so they could unload in Texas and Florida, but there is a good chance that shelves will be understocked for Christmas. The few good that make it onto the shelves will sell for higher prices.

Socialism always ends in empty shelves and worthless money, but I thought it would take longer to wreck the US economy. Unfortunately, the assault on our freedom doesn’t stop there.

President Biden appointed Merrick Garland as US Attorney General. We were once told that Garland was a moderate when President Obama nominated him to the US Supreme Court. Now, we see another side of Attorney General Garland. Garland told the FBI to investigate parents who protested critical race theory being taught in their schools. When we strip away the obfuscations, these parents are guilty of wrong think and must be punished so that other parents are intimidated to fall in line. The liberals who once championed free speech are now attacking anyone who dares to speak out. So much for the myth of speaking truth to power. I hope that these parents are successful and that the FBI is recorded and embarrassed.

Sadly, the US news media will continue to excuse these government failures. Fortunately, we have eyes of our own. What have you seen?

I gave you 800 words. Please comment and share them with a friend. RM

What We Can Learn About Guns from Actor Alec Baldwin

October 30, 2021

Actor Alec Baldwin has said that ordinary law-abiding civilians shouldn’t have guns because guns are too dangerous. Alec Baldwin recently shot and killed Halyna Hutchins while Hutchins stood behind the camera on a move set. Hutchins was the director of photography for a movie where Baldwin was both acting and also producing. The film’s director, Joel Souza, was standing behind Hutchins and he was also injured by the bullet Baldwin fired. Souza fortunately survived. We will discover many things as the investigation of this incident unfolds. No matter what we uncover later, there are things we already know with certainty. The investigation will uncover a string of errors and abuses. Several people broke a long chain of safety measures.

The people who contributed to this avoidable death are neither stupid nor maliciously indifferent. On the contrary. They would not deliberately break those safety rules if they knew their decisions would result in death and injury, yet that is exactly what they did. Rather than think that we would never make mistakes like they made, let’s consider how we might make the excuses they made that killed Halyna Hutchins. There are millions of new gun owners in the United States who are learning to live with firearms in their home and on their body. Here is what we can learn from this incident on a movie set that will make us safer at home today.

Like automobiles and motorcycles, firearms are unforgiving tools. We have a few hundred negligent homicides with guns every year. Guns are also lifesaving tools, and we have over a million examples of armed defense by civilians each year. We defend ourselves with a firearm tens-of-thousands of times for each negligent accident. That ratio isn’t luck, but rather the residue of both training and conscious effort. The gun culture is portrayed by Hollywood as violent, but in fact the gun culture I know is obsessed with staying safe and acting responsibly. We have lived with firearms for hundreds of years. Over those centuries, we’ve learned rules and procedures to safely live with guns.

Most new gun owners learn the four safety rules and they deserve our attention again today.

  • Treat every firearm as if it is loaded unless you immediately checked its condition and know it is empty or inoperable.
  • Keep your gun pointed in the safest direction.
  • Keep your finger off the trigger until you’ve made the decision to shoot and your gun is pointed at your intended target.
  • Know what is in front and beyond your target.

Please notice that these rules form layers of safely. You can inadvertently violate one of them for a moment, and yet no one gets injured. You might suffer embarrassment if you break one of the rules but that is vastly preferable to hurting someone.

A movie set is a dangerous place because things are not always what they seem. They have rubber guns on the set to use during rehearsal. They have inoperable guns to use during a scene and these guns look exactly like real guns. For some reason I don’t understand, they also had real guns on the set. These guns would accept live ammunition in the chamber. They can fire a live round down the barrel. Members of the cast or crew had used those real guns that morning when they went shooting for fun with live ammunition. Early reports said that live ammunition was stored in the same area and mixed with blank rounds. In hindsight, that contributed to a series of avoidable mistakes. Ordinary gun owners like us can make similar errors if we don’t learn from other people’s mistakes.

Gun owners often empty their firearms and use their guns for “dry practice”. They use dry practice to get better at presenting their firearm from a holster. They use dry practice to refine the way they press the trigger. The protocols for dry practice require that we remove all ammunition from the practice room. We put a barrel block into the firing chamber so the gun can’t accept any ammunition. During dry practice, we aim at a designated target that is in front of a backstop that will stop a bullet. We say outload that “I’ve checked that the gun is empty, and I’m starting dry practice.” When we’re done, we say, “I’m done with dry practice and the gun is hot.”

Maybe we can’t keep the practice room free of live ammunition because other people keep walking through the area, and they might be armed. Maybe we don’t have a way to block the barrel and keep a bullet from being loaded into the practice gun. Maybe we don’t have a designated target surface that will stop a bullet. Maybe other people keep walking through the room and might get between us and the backstop. If any one of those things can happen, then we don’t have the necessary environment to practice safely. We don’t practice unless we can do it safely.

It isn’t that we think we’ll never make mistakes; it is that we think we will make mistakes and we ensure that mistakes will be small ones.

Notice again that the dry practice rules form layers of safety. When we dry practice, we checked that the guns are empty and there shouldn’t be any ammunition in the room. If there is, then we’ve modified the gun so it won’t accept ammunition into the chamber. If there were somehow a live round in the chamber, we don’t point the “practice gun” at other people. If we somehow had a negligent discharge, then we’re shooting at a target that is consciously placed in front of a surface that will safely absorb a bullet. That is what the obsession with safety is like in the gun culture in armed America.

I have pointed a rubber gun at an instructor while he taught me how to hold onto my gun as someone was trying to take the gun from me. I have had a rubber gun pointed at me while I was being trained in how to take a gun away from someone during an attack. Maybe an empty gun would have worked, but we were certain that a rubber gun would be safe.

When we wanted to practice a “quick draw” scenario, my practice partner and I stood side by side while both of us aimed a “dry practice” gun at a mirror. That mirror was in front of a bookcase and a brick wall. Neither of us were willing to point an “empty” gun at each other because that would remove a layer of safety. We took the extra effort of using a mirror so we could retain that extra margin.

New gun owners get a lot of practice with their guns. They perform a magazine check and a chamber check to verify that their gun is loaded when they are on the firing line at a shooting range. They perform the same checks to ensure that their gun is unloaded when they leave the firing line or the practice area. When they carry concealed, they perform those checks as they put their gun on in the morning and check again when they store their firearm. We call it a “gun culture” because there are so many seemingly small practices that ordinary people incorporate into their lives so they can safely live with a gun day in and day out.

There are similar rules that evolved over time for using firearms in a movie. This production company didn’t follow those rules even though they were using unionized employees on set. They thought the rules did not apply to them this time. Enough people had that attitude until they eventually eroded through the layers of safety. Later, courts will decide who was criminally and civilly liable in this case.

For now, we can learn a lot from the death of Hutchins and the wounding of Souza. All of us, and particularly new gun owners, need to learn and follow best practice. We try to obey those gun-safety rules perfectly, but we know we’re not perfect. We need to remain humble and design our activities so that we can recover from our mistakes without loss of life. The gun culture knows how to do that. The sooner our millions of new gun owners learn how to safely live with a gun, the safer all of us will be.

We all make mistakes. Plan for them and learn how to make them small mistakes.

I gave you a thousand words. Please share them with a friend. RM

Oregon appeals courts reverses decision to throw out firearm age discrimination lawsuit | 1170 KPUG-AM

October 19, 2021

The appeals court said the lower court must consider the case of age discrimination. Another small step towards freedom. RM

The appeals court pointed out that Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18 and sent the case back to the circuit court.

Source: Oregon appeals courts reverses decision to throw out firearm age discrimination lawsuit | 1170 KPUG-AM

What the US Supreme Court Won’t do for Our Right to Bear Arms

October 15, 2021

State legislators denied the ordinary person the right to bear arms in New York. That decision was upheld in state and lower courts. In New York City, the “privilege” to defend yourself with a firearm in public is only given to a select few. You need not apply unless you are an ex-law enforcement officer, a judge, a politicians, or an elite celebrity. That privilege is paid for with political power or campaign donations. Remember that the bill of rights is designed to limit the actions of government. Big government politicians turned that on its head so they could sell our rights back to a select few of us at exorbitant prices. Now, the US Supreme court will decide if the second amendment is a real right or only a forgettable footnote in the bill of rights.

State Flag of New York

The Supreme Court’s decision won’t change the laws in New York, let alone change the similar laws in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. The court decision, at most, might say that the New York law is unconstitutional and infringes on the right to bear arms. The ruling might give guidance on the level of scrutiny to use when judges decide carry-permit cases in the lower courts. There is no guarantee that the New York state legislature will follow the spirit of the decision. The law they write might have to be litigated again if it also infringes on the right of ordinary citizens to bear arms. That court fight takes years if not decades.

The constitution does not enforce itself. At best, an expansive reading of the right to bear arms by the Supreme Court will allow advocates to bring suit in other states. They can challenge existing laws one at a time. Our reading of the decision may indicate that laws in New Jersey are unconstitutional, but our opinion doesn’t matter. It is the opinion of judges at the district, appellate and circuit level that matters. We’ve already seen these judges ignore Supreme Court cases that support the right to bear arms like Heller and McDonald. At best, a favorable ruling might give us another tool in our appeals, but our rights are not secure.

The New York legislature might take parts of the most objectionable laws from other states and claim that their new permitting scheme satisfy the court’s ruling. The legislature has already returned criminals to the streets of our inner cities. Through expensive fees and bureaucratic delays, they might again deny ordinary citizens the right of armed defense in public in the name of “public safety” and “protecting vulnerable minorities”. The people most at risk from violent crime are poor minority women in our inner cities. They could again be disarmed by progressive politicians, by activist judges, and by a complicit press.

Even a favorable inclined supreme court only takes a fraction of one percent of the cases that are submitted for review. This case is another step to protect our right to bear arms, but it is not the last step. We’ve seen activist judges and politicians ignore the law before. I expect them to do so again.


“Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end.
 But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

Winston Churchill


I gave you 500 words. Please share them with a friend.

Politicians and News Media Present Misleading Claims About Armed Texans

October 12, 2021

It has been a month since Texans enjoyed carrying a concealed firearm in public without a permit. At the beginning of September they joined tens of millions of us who already had permit-less carry. Nothing much happened in Texas. A few more honest citizens defended themselves.

That isn’t what some politicians and law enforcement officers predicted. They said we would see extraordinary levels of violence in the streets after we let our neighbors carry in public. The media never examined those extravagant claims. Now, we can do what the news media failed to do.

Houston Mayor Sylvester issued another press release about how dangerous honest gun owners can be unless they have a government license to carry concealed.

“Under this (permit-less carry) bill, even a law-abiding citizen can become a danger.. They could become a danger to themselves and others due to mishandling a deadly weapon.. This flawed new law will have a harmful impact inside our neighborhoods and on our streets. Unregulated guns aggravate our public safety problems.”

We can look at the news to see if the honest citizens of Houston who are legally allowed to own guns suddenly acted irresponsibly after this law took effect. I looked, and I didn’t see the holocaust the mayor predicted. In contrast, I can find many stories where criminals continued to break the law, but that is what criminals have always done. The mayor owes the honest gun owners in Houston an apology. The news media also owes us an apology for not checking the mayor’s story.

Dallas police chief Eddie Garcia said that law abiding gun owners should only be allowed to carry concealed in public if they pass a state mandated training course. Remember that the open carry of a handgun without a license was, and remains, perfectly legal in Texas. Chief Garcia is saying that ordinary gun owners who were open carrying their personal firearm without a license would suddenly become monsters after they cover their holster with a piece of cloth. I don’t believe in magic shirts, but evidently some police chiefs do.

Chief Garcia also said his officers couldn’t tell the good guys from the bad guys without a piece of paper issued by the state. I can only conclude that there is a training issue with the once-great Dallas PD. Constitutional carry is already the law of the land in 20 other states. Law enforcement officers in those states learned to base their actions on people’s behavior.

Speaking personally, I want people to get their carry license and continue training, but the policemen I know considered any stranger as a potential threat, license or no license. I suspect that the chief already knew that, but the chief assumed the reporters wouldn’t embarrass the chief with obvious facts. That says a lot about the chiefs reputation, and the reputation of the news reporters too.

The Austin interim police chief Joseph Chacon said that crime was rising to historic levels. Chacon is right, yet the chief wanted more honest citizens disarmed unless they get a permission slip from the state before they exercised their right of self-defense. Let’s be honest. Law enforcement officers are not interchangeable. Sheriffs are elected by the voters in their county, while Police Chiefs are appointed by politicians. The chief doesn’t have a political opinion of his own. He represents the political opinion of his boss. To be more precise, the chief’s opinion reflects the political leaning of the mayor’s campaign donors.

We have not seen a surge in violence perpetrated by legal gun owners in Texas. I don’t expect to see one because that isn’t what happened in other states after they adopted constitutional carry.

We have seen crime increase after big-city prosecutors let criminals walk away. That trend started before and continued after Texas adopted permit-less carry. Perhaps because of that political failing, we’ve seen more citizens protecting themselves and their families with a firearm, and doing a good job of it.

I asked a few firearms instructors in Texas if they noticed any trends after constitutional carry took effect. The number of people in their licensing classes went up and down slightly, but they saw a large increase in the number of people who wanted training in armed defense. I’m not surprised because we’ve seen this before in other states.

That is what I’d do if I was a new gun owner in Texas. That is what you’d do, and it turns out that our neighbors did too.

Now we have to ask why the news media couldn’t figure that out.


I gave you 700 words and a lot of thought. Please share them with a friend. RM

Elite Media Can’t Stop Lying About Guns in America

October 4, 2021

The mainstream media lies to us. They feed us propaganda. They don’t want us to know that gun ownership is widespread and that armed defense is common. I was at a conference for minor-media this weekend. There, an associate talked about being turned away from most of his local news stations because “we don’t run pro-gun stories. No self-defense.” Let me show you where the propaganda starts at the top.

Dr. John Lott looked at the five largest newspapers in the US. They ran 1 self-defense story for every 270 stories of criminal activity with a gun. (more here)

The good news, and there is some good news, is that we know better. We have data that comes from outside the media bubble. We caught major US newspapers lying to us. This time, we can actually measure the amount of media distortion.

We use a firearm for defense far more often than the thugs use guns during a crime. We legally defend ourselves about four times more often than a criminal uses a gun to threaten or injure us (467 thousand criminal incidents vs 1.4-2.3 million defensive gun uses). 

We can quantify the media exaggeration. Honest reporting would tell us when we were attacked and also tell us when we defended ourselves. That isn’t what we get from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, or the Wall Street Journal. Each time it occurs, these major US newspapers were over a thousand times more likely to run a story of victimization than defense.

Look at this another way. If the news media reported a single gun-article a day and in proportion to real events, then they would report about honest citizens using a gun for defense Monday through Thursday, and run a single story about the criminal misuse of a firearm on Friday. That isn’t what they do. If they ran a single story about an armed defender then the biased media doesn’t mention self-defense for the next three months. Distortions of that magnitude can’t be an accident. That censorship is the result of deliberate editorial policy.

This is serious. This biased reporting distorts public perception of violence and defense. The media wants us to believe that armed defense is uncommon. It twists public policy, and it isn’t an accident. Media propaganda isn’t a fault, but a deliberate feature that was bought and paid for.

Anti-gun billionaires paid millions of dollars to twist the news. They ran “educational” conferences for the media on how to report self-defense as “gun violence”. They also pay propagandists to recommend movie and TV scripts that distort the truth about civilian self-defense.

You can prove it to yourself. We defend ourselves more often than the police, and ordinary citizens make fewer mistakes with a gun than the police. So, when was the last time you saw an honest portrayal of armed defense on the TV cop dramas where an ordinary person used a firearm responsibly? I couldn’t find a single one.

Media apologists have said that self-defense isn’t news. I disagree. The biased media buries armed defense stories even in incidents where armed citizens stopped mass murder. Again, the media was too busy lying about us and our neighbors to report the truth.

I’m reminded of the Chinese immigrant who said he never watched the news when he was in China because he knew the news was filled with lies. Again, let me close by sharing some good news. We’re walking away from the lying media. CNN lost half its viewers in the last year.

Find real news and listen past the lies.

I gave you 500 words. Please share them with friend. RM

Judge rules DC liable for wrongful arrests under overturned gun ban | TheHill

October 1, 2021

It is illegal to demand the impossible, but will DC pay up? RM

“The District fails to address the key, undisputed fact in this case. There were no actions that the plaintiffs could have taken during the time period in question that would have allowed them to carry a gun for self-defense in the District of Columbia. In sum, plaintiffs were arrested, detained, and had their guns seized under a gun-control regime that completely banned carrying handguns in public. That fact is undisputed.”

Source: Judge rules DC liable for wrongful arrests under overturned gun ban | TheHill

There Are Far More Defensive Gun Uses Than Murders. Here’s Why You Rarely Hear of Them. | Investigative Reports |

September 28, 2021

Many Americans know that guns take innocent lives every year. The news media never told us that firearms save many more. RM

Source: There Are Far More Defensive Gun Uses Than Murders. Here’s Why You Rarely Hear of Them. | Investigative Reports |

Guns are Used Responsibly in the United States

September 11, 2021

The most effective lie is the lie by omission. Tell part of the truth but not all of it. This propaganda technique works particularly well with an audience eager to believe the lie.

The US mass media lies to us a lot, in exactly this way: They feed us selected facts without proving their true context.

I follow the news about armed defense. I notice the things that are so consistently not said that the omissions must be deliberate. In this article, I will present the most accurate facts I can find. I list the sources where I got those facts. I give you my opinion about what those facts mean in full context. I want you to be able to make up your own mind about guns, and the media that reports on them.

Let us first look at how firearms are used.

Shooting for fun-
The most common use of a firearm is recreation: training, practice, competition, and hunting. The industry trade group for the shooting sports is the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The NSSF estimates there will be 12 billion firearms cartridges sold in the US civilian market in 2021. That seems like a lot of ammunition at 32 million cartridges used a day for fun. From another perspective, it is only 36 cartridges per person in an entire year. New gun owners are having trouble finding enough ammunition to take classes and practice.

Guns in the US-
Ammunition lasts for decades. Firearms are equally persistent if they are maintained. We have about 434 million firearms in civilian hands. The reported numbers vary, but when people show their sources, that is the best number I’ve seen. Think about that number when someone says they are going to “round up all the guns,” and laugh at them.

Living with a gun-
About 140 million of us (42 percent) live with a gun in our home. Gun owners are everywhere and in every lifestyle. Firearms fit many purposes. Like shoes, the gun owner has to find a gun that fits her body and her intended use. Most guns are seldom if ever used and sit in storage day after day.

Citizens carry concealed-
The laws about carrying concealed vary widely from state to state. A few states only let politicians, judges and retired law enforcement officers carry a firearm in public. The majority of states require a license and charge hefty fees before ordinary citizens can carry concealed. In contrast, 21 states have constitutional carry. In those states, citizens may carry in public without a permit, though the particular details vary from state to state.

Not every adult will exercise their right to carry a gun, even when it relatively cheap to do so. A few years ago, I estimated that about 10 percent of the population would carry if we adopted permit-less carry laws. About 20 million adults already have their carry permits. Concealed carry is common rather than rare. We would know if citizens with guns were inherently dangerous given that there are such a large number of legal guns on the street. We’ll talk about their remarkable safety record in a moment.

Self-defense incidents-
Armed citizens defend themselves at home, at work, and in pubic. Government numbers vary depending on which report you read. Reports vary from a low of 500 thousand to a high of 3 million cases of armed defense each year. I use 1.5 million as the best average. These estimates on the frequency of armed defense include numerous reports from the CDC (United States Center for Disease Control). Note how infrequently the news media covers stories of citizen self-defense.

Most armed self-defense incidents end with no shots fired. Criminals avoid armed victims. Most criminals stop and run away when an armed citizen simply presents his or her gun,

As I studied it, the question of armed defense was harder to answer than I thought. Part of that confusion is that we’re not sure about the question. Was it an example of armed defense if the defender shoots but misses her attacker? Is it armed defense if the robber runs away when he merely sees that grandma has a gun? Was it the gun pointed at him, the gun in her hand, or the gun on the wall that made the robber run away from grandma? In each of these scenarios, the presence of the firearm deterred the criminal. But not all of these scenarios will be included in the reporting of “crimes prevented by an armed defender.”

Criminal assaults-
There were over 1.2 million reported cases of violent crime in the United States in 2019. Those are cases of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. 800 thousand of those violent crimes were attacks with a deadly weapon. Of all those violent crimes, only 8 percent were committed with a firearm. The rest of the time criminals used another weapon or use fists and feet. About 140 thousand of the violent crimes were violent sexual assaults. Rape makes up about 11 percent of violent crime.

You might notice that the number of self-defense incidents is slightly larger than the number of reported criminal assaults. That is because of the tendency to overreport some things and underreport others. The criminal might have intended to kick down your door, hit you, and take your purse. That crime didn’t happen when you turned around with a gun in your hand as the robber ran up to you. An incident like that might get reported as a defensive use of a firearm, but not as an actual crime. We report what happened rather than what might have happened. In addition, some crimes, especially sexual assaults, are not reported to the police.

Armed defense of sexual assault- Ordinary citizens use a firearm to stop sexual assault about 150 thousand times a year. The number may be higher because, as I said, many sexual assaults are not reported. Unfortunately, some women are raped when they are disarmed in so called “gun-free” zones. I know several of these women who have been brave enough to tell their stories. These locations were not “gun-free” when the rapist brought his gun. Even if the rapist does not have a gun, the victims were at greater risk because they were disarmed.

There were about 47 thousand suicides in 2019. Almost exactly half of them were with a firearm. (24 thousand) The rate of suicide does not appear to be correlated with restrictions on firearms.

Gun laws and regulations-
The US Bureau of Alcohol Tabaco and Firearms collects and distributes collections of our firearm laws. We have over 23 thousand firearms laws and regulations so far. We should have achieved a peaceful paradise if ink on paper stopped violent criminals from using guns. We’re always told that the next gun-control law will be the one that finally works. Criminals don’t buy their guns at gun stores or gun shows.

There were 10 thousand cases where one person killed another with a firearm. That includes all types of guns. A handgun was used 6,300 times, though more than 3000 incidents are marked as “firearm unknown”. The vast majority of these incidents are drug gangs fighting over territory. We have to look at drug prohibition if we want to reduce these murders.

Crimes of passion-
There were about 3 thousand deaths where one person not connected with a drug gang killed another person using a firearm. Most were murders rather than accidents. Most of those deaths involve drugs and alcohol in that either the attacker or the defender was intoxicated. We have to talk about recidivism and addiction if we want to reduce the number of these deaths.

Accidental deaths by a firearm-
The US CDC recorded 486 accidental deaths involving a firearm. In both adults and teens, there is often an uncertainty between an accidental death and a suicide. Accidental deaths from a firearm are extremely rare, about four accidental deaths every three days. Each death is a tragedy, but only 1-in-350 accidental deaths involved a firearm.

Lethal self-defense by honest citizens-
Citizens used a firearm to stop criminal activity about four thousand times a day. They shot and killed the criminal 344 times in the entire year of 2019, less than once a day. As already notice, 140 million families live with a gun in the home, yet only 1-in-400,000 of them legally used that firearm in lethal self-defense today. The other 399,999 guns in family homes were used for deterrence.

Lethal use of a firearm by a law enforcement officer while on duty-
Law enforcement officers shot and killed 340 criminals. That may seem like a large number but consider that there are about 700 thousand law enforcement officers in the US. I think that is the full-time equivalent number of sworn officers who have arrest powers. Only one officer in two thousand shot and killed a criminal.

Law-abidingness of law enforcement officers-
Police officers are about 37 times more law abiding than the average citizen. That is probably a conservative estimate since officers are frequently accused of breaking the law as they arrest criminal offenders.

Nonviolence of licensed concealed carry permit holder-
Where we have data, we’ve found that people with their concealed carry license are the most law abiding and non-violent segment of society we can find anywhere. Your neighbors who legally carry concealed in public are from 10 to 17 times more law abiding and nonviolent than the police. Different states give us different data, and the data is not consistent on how each violation is considered. For example, some concealed carry holders will lose their carry permit if they have a ticket for driving while intoxicated. I wish more states would record information like that.

Who makes mistakes-
Compared to the police, civilians with a gun were five times less likely to shoot innocent bystanders. That makes sense given the different goals of police and civilians. The civilian wants to get away from danger while the police officer has to move toward it and control the scene. Also, the civilian knows things the policeman doesn’t know. You know who belongs in your home at a glance. The policeman doesn’t know that and figuring it out takes some time. The claim that civilians shoot indiscriminately is propaganda fueled by TV cop shows. The reality is that your neighbors who own guns care about every shot they fire.

Resistance is essential-
Women were two-and-a-half times less likely to be injured if they resist their attacker with a firearm than if they do not resist. Men were also less likely to be injured if they resisted with a firearm, but the difference was smaller. That data describes the immediate injuries during the attack. I suspect the psychological injury due to victimization is smaller for those who resist, but I do not have reliable data to support that claim.

That is a lot of information. It tells me that gun owners are remarkably law abiding and non-violent. With surprisingly few exceptions, our gun owning neighbors act the way we want them to act. They save lives thousands of times a day because they are armed and resisted their attackers. We need more people like them. That truth doesn’t match what we see on TV dramas. We spend more time with drama than studying real life. Art imitates life, but not well enough to guide our decisions.

I gave you a lot of thought and almost two thousand words. Please comment and share them with a friend. RM

Ammo supply- “
US population- “
Guns in the US- “
Calculated rate of concealed carry- “
Armed defense- “
Violent Crime- “,compared%20with%20the%202010%20estimate.
Suicide- “
Homicide- “
Accidents- “
Safety of permit holders and police- “
Number of police- “

I Guess They Were Wrong About Conservatives

August 24, 2021

I remember when the Biden Administration said that right wing extremists were the largest threat the US faced. Who knew that homeschooled Christian children who grew up and joined the US military threatened the very foundation of American democracy.

When I look at the collapse of US foreign and military policy in Afghanistan, I guess the Biden Administration was wrong. It wasn’t those conservative kids who murdered foreign aid workers or thousands of their countrymen. There are greater threats in the world than political conservatives from the United States. That revelation clearly shocked our democrat elites.

Afghan men and women, boys and girls, will suffer for decades for the mistakes made by elite democrats in the US.

So will we.


More Excuses from Democrat Politicians for Violence in their Cities

August 24, 2021

I said that Democrats needed someone or something to blame. They provided more examples even as I was writing my article.

The Marxist district attorney of San Francisco Chase Boudin blamed home made firearms called ghost guns for the ferocious rise of crime in San Francisco. That implies that SF criminals couldn’t get guns before and could only get ghost guns now. Maybe it is the fact that crime goes unprosecuted in San Francisco, and that led to an increase in crime. What a shocking idea.. at least to Chase Boudin. Maybe the voters of San Francisco should have selected a DA who had prosecuted crime at some time in his career.  Again, just throwing that idea out for consideration.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed lack of gun control in Mississippi and Indiana for the tragic increase in criminal violence inside Chicago. Did her honor consider that only honest citizens obey gun laws. Criminals don’t. To be precise, only 2 percent of the criminals jailed in Chicago on gun charges bought their guns through legal channels. The rest of the criminals bought their guns from other criminals or from friends who don’t have a criminal record. Gun control in Chicago, Illinois failed to stop crime, yet Mayor Lightfoot needs a scapegoat. She blames other states for their lack of gun control laws. Lightfoot (and also the Chicago news media) didn’t mention that, somehow, Mississippi and Indiana, the states she blames, are less violent than Chicago. Perhaps the real problem lies in Chicago rather than in Indianapolis or Jackson.

Former New York governor Andrew Cuomo said the increase in gun sales across the country caused more crime in New York State. Could the governor be right? We have seen a broad increase in crime in 2020 and 2021, but crime increased at a far greater rate in New York than in other states.  In broad terms, we saw crime drop in half while gun ownership doubled over the last two decades. Why had those guns produced peace while recent guns produced crime?

Let me think. Did something change suddenly two years ago that caused the increase in violence? I wonder what it could be.  How about throwing a hundred million people out of work, opening our borders to drug gangs, and imported millions of immigrants who will take low paying jobs from US citizens. Maybe it was ordering the police to take a hands off approach to crime.

If there are always criminals around just waiting to get their hands on guns, then why don’t those guns cause crime in other states? I think the reason is that releasing convicted criminals from jail due to Covid put more criminals on the streets. Sentencing and bail reform also put more criminals back on the streets. I noticed that the New York Attorney General failed to tell us that the vast majority of violent crimes don’t involve a criminal with a gun. The cut-and-paste media ran with the AG’s excuses.

The problem isn’t that guns are particularly easy to get in certain locations. Guns are easy for criminals to get everywhere. No, the deeper problem is that crime pays in San Francisco, in Chicago, and in New York.

Civilization is fragile. Most changes don’t work. It is far easier to make things worse than to make things better. In this case, voters got the government reforms they asked for.. good and hard. As I said in the earlier article, now these Democrat politicians need a political excuse to hide behind.

Department of Excuses- Politicians give us the same wrong answers about guns

August 22, 2021

Some politicians want to confiscate guns from civilians. I might be talking about what happened half a century ago in Cuba. Gun confiscation happened again a decade ago in Venezuela. It happened again last week when the Taliban took control of Afghanistan. The excuses are the same, and the results are more government violence and oppression. Today in the United States, the excuses are too glaring to ignore.

The gun grabbers in the USA today are funded by a few billionaires.. billionaires who have their own private security teams. Armed security teams. They say we need instant background checks so criminals don’t get guns. What they work so hard to ignore is that criminals don’t buy their guns legally. Criminals don’t go to gun shows or to gun stores to get their crime guns. Only honest gun owners buy them there, and then wait for a background check. Criminals don’t have to wait 10 days after the background check either the way honest gun owners wait in some states. Criminals ignore the one-gun-a-month mandates too. Only honest citizens obey those laws, so who exactly are these gun control laws trying to control?

Criminals buy their guns on the street. These crime guns are either stolen or bought for cash from someone who doesn’t have a criminal record. The average crime gun recovered by the police was stolen a decade ago. How is that possible?

Criminals break our gun laws the same way they break our other laws. Drug gangs move thousands of tons of drugs across our open border every year. They move millions of illegal immigrants all across the country. Compared to that, moving a few pounds of plastic, steel, brass and lead is trivial. Somehow, reporters who believe in gun control think that ink on paper keeps guns out of the hands of criminals. At the same time, they ignore that criminals and billions of dollars of contraband move freely in every city. 

It must be hard work for gun-control advocates to remain blind to the obvious.

The national instant background check system looked at 40 million transactions last year where honest gun owners asked permission to buy a gun. Out of those 40 million transactions, there were 300,000 people who were prevented from buying a firearm. Out of those 300 thousand objections, there were 2 thousand prosecutions. The rest, the 298 thousand citizens who were flagged, were either falsely accused by the government or were criminals who were not prosecuted. Neither option is good news. Out of those 2 thousand prosecutions, there were 44 convictions. Every honest gun owner was delayed to achieve 44 criminal convictions.

Out of the 40 million, we had the ¾ of a percent that were delayed, which gave us ⅔ of  a percent who were prosecuted, which yielded the 2.2 percent who were actually convicted. That is about one conviction out of a million background checks. We’d find criminals faster if we dialed random numbers on the phone.

With a system this broken, what are background checks really designed to do?

Background checks and waiting periods are designed to discourage honest gun owners. That costs us both tax dollars and it costs lives. What the advocates of gun control don’t tell you is that most violent crime doesn’t involve a gun. A firearm is only used by violent criminals about 8% of the time. Removing guns from honest people won’t stop these strong-arm criminals at all. In fact, gun-control disarms the honest people who are the innocent victims of violent crime, the honest people who use firearms for self-defense. When gun-control fails this badly, we have to wonder if disarming innocent people is an inadvertent fault or if it was an intended feature all along.

For a moment, ignore what you’ve seen in the movies. In the United States, firearms are almost always used morally. The numbers vary depending on the report, but honest citizens use a firearm for self-defense between a half-million and three million times a year. Honest citizens use a firearm in self defense far more often than criminals use a firearm in a crime. We think about 70 thousand of those self-defense cases stopped sexual assault each year. Gun control advocates want those victims disarmed too.

Disarming the victim happens more often than we think. Victims of domestic abuse can’t get a firearm for protection in several Democrat controlled states. They can’t get permits to carry a firearm for self-defense in public. The results are predictably tragic, but the people who disarmed those victims escape the blame they deserve. Gun control claims they might save one life, but they refuse to count the many lives they cost.

What the gun grabbers won’t tell you is that we don’t have to press the trigger in the vast majority of self-defense cases. When you think about it for a minute, that is the same result we see with law enforcement officers, and for the same reason. Criminals don’t want to get shot. Criminals turn around when they see an armed officer, and when they see that grandma has a gun.

I’ve looked at the government statistics on crimes and accidents. A fraction of a percent of our accidental deaths are from a firearm. We are thousands of times more likely to use a firearm in self-defense than to be a victim of a violent criminal who uses a gun. If we are approached by that armed criminal, then our odds of surviving unhurt are much better if we’re armed. Passing more gun-control disarms many more of the victims than it disarms criminals.

Since criminals don’t obey our gun laws, gun control laws are an excuse to disarm honest people who obey the law. We’ve already sacrificed our freedoms for decades at the altar of background checks. It is time we let honest gun owners go free.

I think the political reasons for gun control are sinister and that politicians apply these dangerous laws on purpose. They want minorities and poor people disarmed. In particular, they want minority urban women disarmed and vulnerable so they depend on politicians for their safety. Politicians need us to feel afraid.

Stop and Frisk in New York City- Image from ABC News

Democrat politicians say that gun control makes us safer, but it isn’t safer for young black men when they are stopped and frisked by police on the streets of New York. It isn’t safer when these young men are convicted of carrying a gun without a license, a license they have no chance of getting unless they have political connections. It isn’t safer for us when these young men try to live their lives with a criminal record for the non-violent offence of trying to defend themselves and their family. It isn’t safer for the boy scout who is arrested for having a pocket knife, or for the businessman who has a miniature pocket knife on his key chain in New York City.

If gun-control makes us safer, then we have to ask “Safer for whom?” Safer for us, or safer for the billionaires who fund gun control?

We saw crime rise last year despite the tens of thousands of gun-control regulations politicians already passed. Is anyone surprised that bad things happened when politicians told a hundred million people to stay home? Unemployment soared when we were forced out of work. Depression and anxiety increased from coast to coast. Addiction and suicide rose through the roof. As expected, violent crime grows when you make it illegal for honest people to live inside the law.

The situation was worse than that. We turned criminals out of prison because of the flu. We also told the police to let crime play-out and then to simply file a report. Arm-length policing and bail reform left more violent criminals on the street. Those criminals had fewer opportunities for honest work and returned to their life of crime.

Politicians imposed horrible political policies last year and we all suffered for it. Violent crime increased by 50%, and almost doubled in some democrat controlled cities. If there is an epidemic of violence then Democrat politicians were the super-spreaders of this epidemic.

A few weekends ago, Chicago had 11 people murdered and an additional 56 people shot. That is about half the amount of violence Chicago saw over the 4th of July weekend where 19 people were murdered and an additional 104 people were wounded by gunfire. With violence like that in the news, Democrat politicians are desperate to deflect criticism from their failed political policies.

Chicago’s violent streets

Predictably, Democrat politicians and their media spokesmen blamed honest gun owners for the spike in violent crime. They didn’t tell you that gun owners with a concealed carry license are the most law abiding and non-violent group of people we can find on earth. Despite what we see in the news, most people are honest, and concealed carry holders are extremely so. The vast majority of us are honest and non-violent even in the worst parts of our most corrupt and violent cities.

Fortunately, there is some good news for peace. Just last year we had over five million honest citizens become gun owners for the first time. The good news is that many of them were women and minorities.

I gave you over a thousand words. Please share them with a friend and comment. RM

Crazy Murderers, Insane Politicians, and Frustrated Voters

August 10, 2021

They get days and days of press coverage. We looked at their pictures on the TV and in the magazines. We quickly noticed that something seemed off about them. If you’re like me, that was your first impression of mass murderers. It turns out that our first impressions were right. New research said that the vast majority of mass murderers have severe and untreated mental health problems. Those findings come from a study that looked at mass murderers in the United States over the last 35 years. The proportions are staggering. Equally staggering are the political manipulations that delay treatment.

We had clues. I remember that the murderer at Sandy Hook Elementary School was in the process of losing his legal rights and becoming a ward of his parents because of his severe mental health problems. The murderer at the Tucson supermarket was probably a borderline schizophrenic.. and his mom knew it. The murderer who attacked a movie theater in Aurora Colorado was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and mailed threatening letters to his therapist. The murderer who attacked Virginia Tech was a paranoid schizophrenic. The murderer at the Washington, DC Navy Yard was hearing voices and believed the government was sending him secret messages that only he could hear. The murderer at Parkland, Florida had been reassigned to six different schools in the last three years and was recommended for involuntary treatment in a residential facility because of his violent threats. Those anecdotes are mostly from memory, and while the pattern seems obvious, a number of anecdotes is not the same as real data.

Fortunately, someone did the hard work to give us real information. They looked back at the medical records of the 115 mass murderers since 1985. As you would expect, most of the murderers died during their attacks. Surprisingly, 35 of them survived. Of the murderers who survived their attacks, 33 of the 35, or almost 95 percent, had signs and symptoms of severe and untreated mental health problems. Diagnosis included schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, delusional disorder, personality disorders, and substance-related disorders.

The researchers also looked at a random subset of the murderers who died during their attacks. Out of that sample, 75 percent were severely mentally ill. All were untreated.

To have some context, we should compare that level of illness with the population at large. The average person in the United States has about a one-in-five chance (20%) of suffering from a mental illness to some extent this year. That could be mild depression, anxiety, or insomnia. One in 20 of us (5%) are expected to have a severe form of mental illness this year. That makes mass murderers 15 to 18 times more likely to have a severe mental illness than the average citizen. I’d call that a clue.

It is important to keep this new study in perspective. Most violent individuals are not mentally ill. In contrast, almost all mass murderers are. Most of the people who are mentally ill are not violent. The few mentally ill who might be violent are much less so when they are treated. The reasons are fairly simple.

Turning down the visions and the voices helps the mentally ill cope with the demands of life. Treatment shields them from the despair of living in an unpredictable and unmanageable world. Treatment gives them hope.

Unfortunately, there isn’t much hope for the rest of us. Republican Senators proposed an increase in mental health funding after the shocking mass murder at Sandy Hook, Connecticut. Democrats controlled the US Senate at that time and killed the increase.

That isn’t unusual. Politicians often want a political issue to remain in play rather than solve it. Politicians can collect political donations as they cry about the problem. At the same time, politicians will blame the problem on their political opponents. If you doubt me, then please consider that we’ve had mass murder blamed on everything from global warming to guns.

If we want to be safer then we’re going to have to fund mental health treatment. We did it at one time. We can do it again. We can remove the stigma of treatment. In the meantime, we should expect more of the same; the same horrible murders and the same horrible politicians making excuses.

Real solutions are hard and complicated, while political posturing is easy and simple. Since the news media won’t do it for us, we’ll have to see through the political craziness on our own.

I gave you 700 words and a lot of thought. Please share them with a friend and leave a comment. RM

Californians’ faith in gun control slips in new poll – Los Angeles Times

August 3, 2021

Amid a surge in shootings this year, a majority of California voters say that they believe gun control laws are effective in reducing violent crime, but confidence in them has slipped, according to a new UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times.


The decline in confidence in gun laws is a response to what people are seeing in their communities, said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll.

Source: Californians’ faith in gun control slips in new poll – Los Angeles Times

Record Coral Cover Of Great Barrier Reef Shames Climate Alarmists, Media – Climate Change Dispatch

July 28, 2021

How will scientists and journalists pay their mortgage if the world is healthy? RM

The annual data on coral cover for the Great Barrier Reef, produced by the Australian Institute of Marine Science, was released on Monday showing the amount of coral on the reef is at record high levels.

The only disaster is the quality assurance at the science organizations.

Source: Record Coral Cover Of Great Barrier Reef Shames Climate Alarmists, Media – Climate Change Dispatch

Saving Our School Children from Dangerous Judges in Ohio

July 21, 2021

We do a lot to protect our children. We learn as new threats come along. The news media has bombarded us with messages saying that mass murder is common and increasing. Ordinary people like us feel a growing need to protect our families. That makes sense to me, but I’ve met some wonderful men and women who go further and put their lives on the line to save other people’s children. I listened to school staff who volunteered to protect their students. In their words, these teachers raised their hands and volunteered so they could protect “their kids”. That commitment and compassion is as serious as anything I’ve seen. 

I wish you were there with me because my heart leapt when I saw these ordinary people take training so they could rush forward  and stop an attack at their school. They train themselves to put their body between our children and a murderer’s bullet. These amazing school staff and church staff care more about the lives of their students than their own lives. We are wonderfully rich that these ordinary heroes, our neighbors, care so much about our kids. Until recently, we got it right that these teachers may protect our kids the same way we would protect them if we were there. That changed when a few supreme court justices in Ohio disarmed the defenders. Now, we have to fix that. Heaven help them if these children are hurt.

Let’s put school safety into perspective. Mass murderers look for easy targets. They deliberately attack vulnerable people in locations where the intended victims are disarmed and unprotected. Schools and churches are common targets because these are seen as gun-free zones. In Ohio, they took significant steps to eliminate these gun free zones.

There are more than 1-and-a-half-million students in Ohio schools. When you add them up, there are about a hundred thousand schoolteachers in Ohio. After the horrific attacks on the staff and the students in the elementary school in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, thousands of teachers in Ohio volunteered, under then current Ohio Law to protect their students. They wanted to stop the murderer until the police arrived and took over. These volunteers wanted to stop the bleeding until emergency medical personnel arrived to take their place. That is inspiring.

Ohio voters also elected thousands of school board members. School boards get input from millions of parents. Those school boards listened to local parents and addressed the issue of protecting students. Hundreds of school boards in Ohio then worked with their sheriffs to put a safety plan in place. Together, they screened and trained volunteer staff to be armed first responders and to provide life saving critical trauma care. I’m inspired that thousands of people volunteer to protect our kids every day, not their kids, our kids.

The attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School happened over 8 years ago. Since then, the program in Ohio has accumulated over 2-million hours of real-world experience with these volunteer first responders. The program spread across 200 school districts in Ohio alone. The program did not stop at the Ohio border, the program was adopted in several other states. In Ohio, these trained first responders performed extremely well. until four justices made it illegal.

Ohio State Flag

Politics is a real consideration, and elections have consequences. Unfortunately, there were considerable forces arrayed against the low information voter. Anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg made large political donations to get anti-gun judges elected. Money talks, and Bloomberg got the judges and the results he wanted in Ohio. These justices said that school staff who were armed needed to first pass through a police academy before they could protect their students at school. That seems so odd since these same school staff members are permitted to protect those same students every other hour of the day as legal concealed carry license holders in Ohio.

The Ohio Senate passed several bills to remove the legal ambiguity the justices introduced. They confirmed that school boards could authorize selected school staff members to be first responders without going through four-months of police training. After being examined by their school board and sheriff, these trained volunteer school staff members could go armed as they worked. They could provide emergency trauma care without first being licensed as an emergency medical technician or a paramedic. Does that make sense?

You don’t have to be a trained firefighter to use a fire extinguisher in your home. You shouldn’t have to pass mandatory firefighting training to use a fire extinguisher where you work, either. You shouldn’t require EMT training to apply a tourniquet. Imposing that training puts us at greater risk rather than making us safer. The reason is simple. School janitors and cafeteria workers have done a fine job protecting children without first passing a course on high-performance driving in pursuit of a fleeing suspect as taught in police academies. We need more volunteers who will help, not fewer.

We need the many volunteers we have rather than a few fantasy-defenders the state won’t fund.
Save the fantasy heroes for the comic books.

There is a temptation for legislators to add restrictions on school safety programs. Their amendments let politicians issue a press release, but it doesn’t show that the politicians actually care about our children. School boards and school administrators do care, and that is why they have been working so hard with local law enforcement and others to find the safest and most effective ways to protect their students and staff.

One of these ways is through the FASTER Saves Lives program. (Faculty & Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response) The program was designed by the same people who were paid to look at the problems encountered by school resource officers. As part of their job, they routinely collect real world results from across the country. They accumulated centuries of experience in the field and decades of experience in its analysis. That was how the program to train school staff started, but it has evolved every year as they learn more.

I’ve taken this training. Beware the legislator who wants to hang a requirement on the program so he can “feel better” about it. This legislator probably has not been through the existing training. He, or she, hasn’t studied the results of the graduates who are now first responders in the classroom. He has not interviewed the school board members across Ohio who are responsible for our children’s safety.

Before you modify an existing program, make sure that you first do no harm.

The Ohio Senate clarified the law to allow volunteer first responders. Now, the Ohio House has to follow suit. Unfortunately, modifications by well-meaning legislators are far more likely to cause harm than to do good. They are more likely to leave our children at greater risk. Let the local school boards continue to exercise their authority and get the law out of their way.

Let me give you an example of a theoretical problem that has real world ramifications. Some critics say that these volunteer defenders might be shot by responding police officers because the defenders are not wearing a uniform. That sounds like a valid concern, until you consider that a uniform also shows the attacker who to shoot first.

As you’d expect, the people who live with that problem have already considered it. One volunteer told me, “We train with local police officers all the time. Maybe I’ll get shot by a cop that  I don’t know, who comes rushing in to help. That’s OK. At least my kids will be safe by the time the police get here.”

I wish our Ohio representatives were as dedicated as these school volunteers. Ohio House Bill 99 restores the ability of school boards to approve armed volunteer staff in their schools. Your phone calls can help the representatives do the right thing before our children get hurt.

I gave you 1300 words and a lot of thought. Please leave a comment and share this article with a friend. RM

4th Cir. Panel Affirms Second Amendment Rights of 18-to-20-Year-Olds | Libertarian Hub

July 13, 2021


We first find that 18-year-olds possess Second Amendment rights…

..So we hold that the challenged federal laws and regulations are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Despite the weighty interest in reducing crime and violence, we refuse to relegate either the Second Amendment or 18- to 20-year-olds to a second-class status….

Source: 4th Cir. Panel Affirms Second Amendment RIghts of 18-to-20-Year-Olds | Libertarian Hub

Chicago’s most violent weekend of 2021: 104 shot, 19 of them killed. 13 kids among the wounded – Chicago Sun-Times

July 12, 2021

Chicago Mayor Lightfoot says violence is going down. The streets say something else. RM

In the deadliest and most violent weekend this year in Chicago, over 100 people were shot over the long Fourth of July weekend, 19 of them killed. Among the wounded were 13 children and two Chicago police supervisors. Five of the kids were shot within nine hours Sunday evening through early Monday.

Both the number of fatal shootings and the number of shootings overall are highs for 2021, according to a Chicago Sun-Times database of shootings.

Source: Chicago’s most violent weekend of 2021: 104 shot, 19 of them killed. 13 kids among the wounded – Chicago Sun-Times

Charter school granted waiver allowing staff to carry concealed firearms

July 12, 2021

The school (near Colorado Springs) requested a security waiver that would give its administrators the ability to supervise armed staff carrying concealed firearms on campus.

Source: Charter school granted waiver allowing staff to carry concealed firearms

Walgreens Shuts Down 17 Bay Area Stores, Target Closing Early Amid Constant Thefts – The Police Tribune

July 6, 2021

Elections have consequences.. even in the Bay Area. RM

Target announced Friday that it will be closing six of its San Francisco locations four hours earlier going forward in order to cut down on what has become rampant shoplifting.

Walgreens made a dramatic move and closed 17 stores of its Bay Area store after stealing got out of control.

Source: Walgreens Shuts Down 17 Bay Area Stores, Target Closing Early Amid Constant Thefts – The Police Tribune

Guns and Proportion- data on violence from 2019

July 1, 2021

I want to put violence in perspective. Let’s start with a common set of facts before we argue about their significance. I saw an infographic about firearms from 2013 and I wanted to update it. 2019 is the last year where I could find complete data from both the US Department of Justice and the US Center for Disease Control. I want to put those facts into perspective so we see the real picture. This is what I found.

Accounting for everything

-We had 39,707 deaths from firearms in 2019. Over 61 percent were suicides. (24,380)

-That means firearms were used in 15 thousand homicides, a death where one person kills another. Murder doesn’t happen everywhere with equal frequency. The most recent data of murder at a county level is from 2014, more than half of our counties won’t have a murder at all. In contrast, more than half of the murders are concentrated into 2 percent of our counties.

-That means almost all of the US has solved its violence problem.. with a few exceptions. Note that many of these non-violent counties are typically considered to have high rates of gun ownership.

Map of murder by county from CPRC, but that data is from 2014.

-We have laws against it, but criminals commit over a million violent crimes each year. We have over 23 thousand firearms regulations, but criminals used a gun to commit murder over 12 thousand times a year.

-Across the entire United States, that leaves us with all of 3,065 homicides with a gun that were not gang related. For perspective, that is about the same number of people who died from asthma or obesity.

-Of those 3 thousand deaths, 340 homicides were the justified use of lethal force by a police officer. 344 homicides were attributed to civilian gun owners using a gun in legally justified self-defense.

-There were a total of 438 accidental deaths involving a firearm. Of those accidental deaths, 248 resulted in the death of a child under 14 years of age. Unfortunately, we don’t know the age of the person who pulled the trigger in these firearms accidents.

-Let’s put those accidents in perspective. There were a total of 173,040 accidental deaths in the US that year. Compared to all the accidental deaths, about one-in-400 is from a firearm. (395) Overdose deaths from drugs and narcotics are almost 70 times more common than fatal firearms accidents. (68.0)

-Ordinary citizens use a gun for self-defense about 2 million times a year. Out of that number, over a hundred thousand sexual assaults are stopped by armed defenders. (140,000) Fortunately, those defenders seldom have to press the trigger to stop their assault. When they do have to fire their gun, most of their attackers survive being shot by a handgun.

-About 1-in-ten adults have their permits to legally carry a concealed firearm in public. The fraction ranges from zero in Hawaii, to about 50% of adults in some rural counties in Pennsylvania.

-About one-in-100 adults will use a firearm in self-defense each year. (97) These gun owners seldom press the trigger.

-We are about a thousand times more likely to use a gun for self-defense than to be the innocent victim who is murdered in the criminal use of a firearm. (1,021)

-We are about 8 thousand times more likely to use a gun in self-defense than for that gun to accidently kill a child. (8,065)

-Firearms owners in the US who have their concealed carry permits are as law abiding and non-violent as any group we can find in any country.

All this paints a pretty clear picture. It tells me we need more honest citizens to get their carry permits. You might disagree, but now we can have that discussion.

There is more we need to know to build a realistic picture of violence in the United States. For perspective, there were-
462 murders in New York City last year
348 murders in Chicago last year
335 murders in Baltimore last year
262 murders in Saint Louis last year, and
239 murders in Los Angeles county last year.
When combined, these five cities had a total of 1,646 murders in 2019. That is more than half of the non-gang homicides in the entire US.

I don’t think we have a gun problem after looking at the numbers. We have a failed-city problem, and the US news media would never admit that.

I gave you a lot of thought and 700 words. Please share them with a friend.
This article grew from a conversation with Bill Frady at Lock-N-Load Radio. RM


Media Malpractice in 2021

June 27, 2021

We are living through several social experiments running at the same time. Unfortunately for us, the outcome is uncertain. We went from 3 TV channels and 4 radio stations to hundreds of media channels running 24 hours a day and seven days a week. In theory, the news media was supposed to inform us so we could be responsible members of a democracy. In fact, the media delivers click-bait sensationalism and 20+ minutes of commercials each hour. On top of that, we have a world of information in our pocket. That was supposed to leave us better informed. Instead, we’re fed corporate propaganda and told what we “need” to buy. I’ve watched the media create the false impression that gun owners in the United States are dangerous. Those media inconsistencies are easy to find.

One obvious example is that the MSM calls a gun a “patrol rifle” or a “personal defense weapon” when a government employee carries it, but they call the same piece of plastic, aluminum, and steel an assault weapon if it is in my wife’s hands. We’re told that a gun is completely ineffective to affect government behavior, and yet the same gun is “much too dangerous” to be left in the hands of honest civilians. It seems the media, and some government officials, wants it both ways.

Amber Kunau on the range

Amber Kunau on the range

The media’s lies extend beyond the hardware and include the nature of gun owners themselves. Yes, the media lies to us about who owns guns in the United States. I think I know why. The media stereotyped gun owners for years. They call us old-white-rednecks, yet most new gun owners are women and minorities. For obvious political reasons, the media doesn’t want us to know what today’s gun owners look like. Times change, and the media doesn’t want minority women to know that they are the fastest growing segment of the gun owning population. In 2020 and 2021, more minority women are curious about guns as they see their friends become gun owners and take training. That is called a preference cascade. The media lies to us so we won’t know what is possible for us.

Look at it from this perspective. Lots of us want to protect ourselves and our family. We’ve also heard that guns can be an effective tool for self-defense. Many people who grew up outside Armed America don’t know what training they need nor what equipment to buy. No one wants to embarrass themselves by asking foolish questions. We don’t want to fail, and we don’t want to be the only person who admits they have something to learn. We want reassurance that owning a firearm is both useful and easy to do. We want to know that people like us have succeeded in protecting their families and their businesses.

More minority women are adopting armed defense now that they see that their friends have already done so. For its part, the mainstream news media wants to hide how diverse and commonplace Armed America really is. In fact, far more people participate in hunting and the shooting sports than play golf. I wish the media bias stopped there.

Quality firearms instruction

Mass media pummels us with horrific images after a mass murder. They seldom show us the mass murders that were stopped by armed civilians. The media never shows us the good news to the same extent as the bad. One reason is that the media has to sell outrage to capture our attention. The truth is too dull, and outrage is the only way we will sit through 20 minutes of advertisements an hour.

The media tells us about the robbery at the convenience store. The media seldom shows us the story of the armed store clerk who chased away the two robbers late at night by himself. The media should give us a sense of proportion. Instead, the media feeds us sensationalized headlines. Each year, we defend ourselves millions of times with a firearm while dozens of us become the victim in a mass murder. You’d never know that from the media coverage. The media doesn’t want us to know that most robbers would rather run than get shot. That story doesn’t fit the biased narrative that the media is trying to sell.

Media bias against honest gun owners is fueled by both the preferences of the advertisers and by the political bias of the news editors. We can blame a failure of imagination on their part. They can’t recognize when guns save lives. Our social elites simply can’t imagine defending themselves, so they are blind to it. Self-defense never happens according to their view of the world. When it comes to personal safety, that is what they pay the private security guards at their condo to take care of. That is why their office has a security guard at the front door. If you wanted protection, then you’d do what they do and live where they live.. or so they think.

Since they can’t imagine protecting themselves, they think guns ought to be outlawed. They can’t admit that licensed gun owners who concealed carry are more law abiding and non-violent than the police. It is outside their experience, and we might as well tell them that gun owners are from the moon.

Before we gun owners feel special, the elites don’t know people who own a pickup truck either. The news is corrupted by the personal and corporate bias of the news organizations. That would be of academic interest, except the media’s bias is getting our children killed.

The media elites ignore that mass murders usually occur where guns are banned. Mass murderers deliberately attack us where you and I are disarmed. We are disarmed in “gun-free” zones because we obey the law. From the media point of view, more disarmed civilians mean more stories of mass murder and more commercials for auto insurance. What is worse is that there were over 80 copycat murder plots after the mass murder at the high school in Columbine, Colorado.

These murderers said, in effect,

“I want to have may face and my name in the news. I want everyone to know who I was.
“I want the same multi-million dollar publicity campaign that the media gave the last mass murderer.”

and the media was only too eager to give them what they wanted.

We had to coin a new term to describe this media phenomenon; it is called “celebrity murder-suicide”. The media lies to make money and they lie to feel good about themselves, when in fact, they help drive the mass murder that gets us killed.


Next time we’ll look at the way the news media scrupulously ignores the lives that guns save here in the USA. That is costing us lives as well.

I gave you a thousand words. Please share them with a friend. RM
This article grew out of a conversation with Dean Rieck on Keep and Bear Radio.

Armed Citizen Stops Mass Murder- citizens save lives in May, 2021

June 19, 2021

It was only last month when an ordinary citizen stopped a mass murderer, but you probably didn’t see that story covered for days in the newspapers and on the TV. Ordinary armed citizens like you make a difference, and here is what the mainstream media didn’t tell you.

-A mass murder was defined as four victims of an armed attacker.  I continue to use that definition. These attackers kill over a dozen victims when the unarmed victims must wait for the police to rescue them. In contrast, armed attackers are only able to kill a few people when an armed citizen is there to resist them. That is the cruel calculus of distance and time.

Last month, a young man attacked his apartment building with a rifle. At first, the attacker called for the tenants to come outside. Then, the attacker demanded people leave and he shot at the building. Fortunately, one of the tenants in the apartment complex recognized the sound of the gunshots. This defender looked out through the curtains and saw the attacker holding a rifle. The defender had a gun of his own and shot the attacker. The attacker’s attempt at mass murder was stopped after one elderly lady was murdered.

Each instance is different, but we have seen strong differences between the outcomes depending on if the victims are armed or unarmed. The media doesn’t report this fact, but armed victims shoot back and fewer people die. Armed defenders save lives.

armed citizens save lives


I gave you 200 words. Please share them and leave a comment. RM

AR-15 Ban is Unconstitutional- A Legal Decision we can Understand

June 7, 2021

In a 94 page decision, Judge Roger T. Benitez said California’s ban on AR-style rifles is unconstitutional. Read the judge’s decision yourself since he wrote in language that even a journalist can understand. At best I can summarize a few of my favorite parts. The judge said-

The AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment.. the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the firearms protected under Heller, and Miller, yet, the State of California makes it a crime to have an AR15.

When a citizen complains that the government is infringing, then it is the government that must carry the burden of justifying its restriction of Second Amendment rights.

..that a civilian rifle has design features similar to a military rifle does not detract from its constitutional protection, it actually enhances a firearm’s constitutional protection for militia readiness. The Court finds that the prohibited features do not change an AR-15 rifle from a benign weapon into an “incredibly effective killing machine.”

This Court therefore declares the California statutes to be unconstitutional.


..the “assault weapon” epithet is a misnomer. Like all guns, these prohibited guns are dangerous weapons that can be used for ill or for good. They could just as well be called “home defense rifles” or “anti-crime guns.”

In 1989, when the California assault weapons ban was written, most judicial thinking about the Second Amendment was incorrect. Judicial recognition of an individual right to keep and bear arms would only come later with the Heller decision in 2008 and the McDonald decision in 2010.

This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection. The banned “assault weapons” are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles. This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes.

The news media persuades us that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts do not support this, and facts matter. Assault rifles were not the predominant type of weapon used in crimes.. handguns were..

The Federal Bureau of Investigation shows that killing by knife attack is far more common than murder by a rifle. In California in particular, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by any kind of rifle. A Californian is three times more likely to be murdered by an attacker’s bare hands, fists, or feet, than by his rifle.. The same pattern can be observed across the nation.

The state says that the banned features of an assault rifle make the gun more accurate. It is not clear that a less accurate rifle would reduce the number of victims in a mass shooting. A less accurate rifle may very well result in different victims, but not necessarily fewer victims. On the other hand, in the self-defense context, which seems to be far more common, taking accurate shots at attackers is vitally important for the innocent victim.

In California, mere possession of a banned rifle that is commonplace and perfectly legal under federal law and in forty-four other states will land you in prison, will result in the loss of your rights including likely the right to vote, and probably will cause you irreparable monetary and reputational damages, as well as your personal liberty.

Over the last three decades, 19,797,000 modern rifles have been manufactured or imported into the United States. There are twice as many modern rifles in circulation than there are Ford F-150 pickup trucks. pass intermediate scrutiny, the assault weapons ban must address a real harm and alleviate the harm in a material way. The evidence described so far proves that the “harm” of an assault rifle being used in a mass shooting is an infinitesimally rare event.

In 1989, California’s Legislature predicted an assault weapons ban would eliminate or reduce mass shootings. It has not turned out that way. As discussed later, even the State’s evidence demonstrates that mass shootings with assault weapons continue to occur at the same average rate as before the ban. No case has held that intermediate scrutiny permits a state to impinge on the Second Amendment right by continuing to employ a known failed experiment.

Because firearm possession for the defense of home, self, and family is at the core of the Second Amendment right. Without question, there is clear evidence that AR-15 rifles are and have been used for self-defense.

California’s ban punishes persons who choose modern rifles for home defense. ..if modern rifles are misused in crime (even disproportionately), then the government must deal with those wrongful acts directly; it may not deal with the problem by suppressing the rights of law-abiding citizens to have modern rifles for lawful uses.

The states expert included the number of events in which no shots were fired in its calculation of an “average,” thus, the expert inaccurately reduces the average number of shots needed to defend oneself during a home intrusion. The expert’s opinion about the number of shots fired in self-defense is entitled to little weight and fails the scientific method.

(I would add that the most likely number of shot fired in armed self defense is zero, but that doesn’t mean you should carry an empty gun or that the state should restrict our magazines to zero rounds.)RM

..for 266,560 homeowners each year, either no firearm was at hand or it was not enough to prevent a violent attack. Are the lives of home invasion victims worth less than the lives of mass shooting victims?

The Constitution does not force citizens to arm themselves for their own protection. it does protect the liberty and freedom of those who choose to do so.

Government is not free to impose its own new policy choices on American citizens where Constitutional rights are concerned. The Second Amendment takes certain policy choices and removes them beyond the realm of permissible state action. California may certainly conceive of a policy that a modern rifle is dangerous in the hands of a criminal, and that therefore it is good public policy to keep modern rifles out of the hands of every citizen. The Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.

The California Attorney General has already appealed the judge’s decision.

I gave you a thousand words out of 94 pages. Please share them with a friend.
What part of the decision did you like the best? RM

%d bloggers like this: