Skip to content

Cleveland Administrators Let Four Masked, Armed Thugs Into School…To ‘Protect’ Them From Police [VIDEO] – The Truth About Guns

October 25, 2022

Four masked, openly-armed black teens rolled up in front of a Cleveland high school in three stolen cars. They approached the school in an effort to evade capture by police who were hot on their heels.

What do the school’s administration do when faced with four masked armed individuals? Two assistant principals over-ruled the school security officer and let the armed thugs into the first set of secure doors “to protect the suspects from the police.”

Source: Cleveland Administrators Let Four Masked, Armed Thugs Into School…To ‘Protect’ Them From Police [VIDEO] – The Truth About Guns

Good Guys Save Lives, but the FBI Can’t See Them

October 24, 2022

A stunning new report from Dr. John Lott at the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) says there have been “massive errors” in the FBI’s reports on attempted mass murderers. It also says that armed citizens are amazing, though the FBI seems to have a strong bias against counting attacks that were stopped by ordinary citizens. Dr. Lott identified 360 “active shooter incidents” between 2014-2021, though he admits he probably missed several more. In that data he found 124 times where an ordinary armed citizen stopped the attacks. Over that same time period, the FBI identified only 252 active shooter incidents, and they could only find 11 examples that were stopped by armed citizens.

In some cases, the FBI classified armed parishioners in church as security guards rather than as armed citizens. In my mind, a security guard is a licensed and paid position, and these armed men and women were not paid to attend services.

Those differences are important. Lott found that “some 34%” of the active shooter incidents were stopped by armed citizens, not the 4% cited by the FBl.” This is significant because these FBI reports are often republished as truth in the mainstream media.

Lott admitts that he excluded another 24 cases because the armed civilians stopped the armed attack before the murderer fired his gun. Isn’t that the best case outcome?

Church security?

The media and gun control advocates seem concerned with the worst possible outcomes when civilians defend themselves. Yes, there is always the possibility that a bystander could be injured, but we have yet to see an armed citizen shoot an innocent bystander. In contrast, we know that the police have accidentally shot and killed the armed defender at least once. That’s not something that happens very often because the police usually arrive long after the shooting is over. Usually, the murderer is either dead or gone before the police arrive.

In contrast, a Fox News report recalled the incident earlier this year at the Greenwood Mall in Indiana. That is where legally-armed 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken successfully stopped a would-be mass murderer just seconds after the killer opened fire in the mall food court area. At a distance estimated to be 40 yards, Dicken began firing ten rounds of which eight hit the attacker, fatally wounding him. Dicken was hailed as a hero by Greenwood Police Chief James Ison.

Security guard or church violunteers?

What we really want to know is how effective armed defenders are when we exclude “gun free zones” where honest citizens are disarmed by law. There, the results are amazing.

When they are allowed to go armed, ordinary citizens stopped mass murder 51 percent of the time.

That explains why murderers choose gun free zones. It explains why anti-gun politicans want more gun free-zones. It might also explain why the politicized FBI won’t report the data honestly.


I cribbed this from another news outlet when I was reporting the news last night. I lost the original source, so please drop me a note if you recognize the ariticle. RM


Ask Your Schools About Their Safety Plan

October 3, 2022

Yesterday I drove back from the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Dallas, Texas. I was asked for the most significant event I saw in my second amendment activities. That is hard to say.

Seeing Otis McDonald has to be near the top. Otis was a black army veteran who lived in Chicago and wanted to be able to carry a firearm for personal protection. His legal case made it to the US Supreme Court. Mr McDonald made all of us safer.

Seeing a FASTER class is a very close second. FASTER is the program that trains school volunteers to be first responders. School has started again after the summer break so parent-teacher conferences are coming up. Perhaps you could interview your school and ask them some simple questions.

Sure, teachers know how to teach. That doesn’t mean that school staff know how to protect your kids from physical harm. You probably know some things that they don’t know. Why not give them a hand so they can learn. You are allowed to ask questions of the school principal and of the school board as a parent, or even as a concerned neighbor.

  1.  Has our school ever had a vulnerability assessment done and what were the results?
  2. Does our school include local law enforcement and emergency responders in crisis planning and training?
  3. When was their emergency operations/crisis management plan last reviewed and when was their last training exercise?
  4. What types of drills are conducted at our school and how often are the drills?
  5. Are all exterior doors of our school locked during instructional hours?
  6. Are all visitors to our school required to check in with the main office?
  7. Are students and staff trained on how to identify and report suspicious or concerning behaviors/comments?
  8. Does our school have a behavioral threat assessment team?
  9. If there is an emergency, how and when are parents/guardians notified?
  10. Do we have designated security personnel assigned to our school? If so, are they armed or unarmed?


Students know what to do in a fire drill. They should know what to do in a
security drill too. If we won’t bother to ask those simple questions, then how
can we say we care about our kids’ safety in school?


I forgot where I saw this list, but most of it isn’t mine. Please leave me a link in the comments if you find the source. I couldn’t find it. RM

Texas Applies to Build Molten Salt Nuclear by 2025 |

September 2, 2022

For perspective, this reactor produces about 1300hp as heat. That is the equivalent thermal load of a 400 shaft-horsepower piston engine. It is warm enough to require cooling but not a significant size for power production. It is small enough to have large margins as they remove decay heat. The researchers can learn about fission product plating, radiation-induced material fatigue, and cooling loop corrosion. The next step is in-situ coolant reprocessing. RM

“Abilene Christian University (ACU) has applied to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a construction licence for a molten salt research reactor (MSRR), to be built on its campus in Abilene, Texas, as part of the Nuclear Energy eXperimental Testing (NEXT) laboratory. ​ACU plans for the MSRR to achieve criticality by December 2025.”

Source: Texas Applies to Build Molten Salt Nuclear by 2025 |

How Will You Power Your Electric Car Without Electricity?

September 1, 2022

Politicians always have excuses. It is never their fault when their plans fail. Though now retired, I was an engineer for four decades. I learned that excuses don’t count. You may have excellent reasons for why things failed but the responsibility always rests with you. That explains why I’m worried about our current energy policy. We need more than an artful fantasy to fuel our future because people’s lives are at stake. Energy is in almost every action we take. Energy is in every product we make. Raising the price of energy makes everything more expensive. Expensive energy makes everyone poorer. Energy keeps us alive hour to hour.

I’ve helped power a city. I’ve also lived in a town that was without power. When the lights went out, we couldn’t pump water. We couldn’t treat sewage. We couldn’t pump gasoline at the gas station and we couldn’t pump natural gas to power our stoves. We also couldn’t run refrigerators in our stores or light our stores so people could shop for groceries. Our cell phone towers stopped working after a few days. Our local hospitals were able to transfer patients to working hospitals a few hours away. We couldn’t process credit card transactions. Cash was king, at least while my cash lasted. Automated teller machines don’t work without power.

Many of my neighbors moved into their campers and recreational vehicles. That was brilliant. It worked for a few days and then my neighbors left to find power, water, and a sewage dump site. I was without power for almost a month. Some waited longer. Many people left town. Some never returned. Now imagine that we impose that sort of energy-deprivation on an entire nation.

Democrats said they want to cut off all oil, gas, and coal production. A small step would be building enough nuclear powerplants to provide the electricity we need today. We will need even more nuclear plants to provide the electricity we need in the future to charge our electric cars, our electric trucks, and our electric trains. That doesn’t explain how we’d power our hand tools or power our jet aircraft. How would we power our farm equipment, our barges, our fishing boats, and our ships. “Going green” doesn’t answer how we’ll make asphalt and concrete. Sure, the Romans made concrete over a thousand years ago, but will Californians be able to make concrete next year?

Activists said that green power would be cheap. It isn’t. Wind and solar are intermittent sources of power. That means we need central-station power plants spinning all the time so these plants can take over when the sun goes behind a cloud or the wind drops. Even if green energy was free, the fact that it is unreliable makes it expensive. We have to pay for the big powerplants even if we don’t use them every minute.

Green energy is expensive because the price of fuel is only a fraction of our power bill. The rest of our power bill doesn’t go away as long as we want power on demand. We pay for the generating plants because we want to be comfortably warm in the winter and cool in the summer. We want to cook our food even on a calm and cloudy day. We want our kitchen refrigerator to preserve our food all the time, and not just when the wind blows.

We will need a larger power grid to go green. Electric cars are powered by a remote powerplant. The electric car’s battery is like a gasoline powered car’s fuel tank. The electric vehicle is no greener thant the powerplant that charges it.

All of those homes powered by oil or natural gas are supposed to switch to electric heating and cooling. All the gasoline and diesel cars, trucks, and buses are supposed to be electrified. All the power that used to come from fossil fuels must now flow down the electric power lines instead. The grid has to be big enough to recharge all the snowplows on the darkest winter night while we heat our homes. Yes, we will need a much larger power grid.

It is better to put the necessary utilities in place before we need them rather than to sit in the dark. Right now, green energy can’t power the lawn mowers that cut the grass in the park. Green energy can’t power the tow truck that recovers your electric car when it breaks down or runs out of charge. California announced that gasoline-powered cars would be outlawed in a few years. Within days, California regulators told us not to plug in our electric vehicles because their power grid was failing.

How would we make steel and aluminum in this green future since those materials take huge amounts of energy? It is no easier to shut down an aluminum mill than to shut down a semi-conductor factory or a hospital, and equally devastating. How would we make rubber, plastic, and glass? Those are all made with fossil fuels. We can’t make them through solar power and wind power. We couldn’t even recycle those materials using solar and wind power.

So far the answer has been that we will have to buy the things we need from China.. and that China will soon own the United States. An answer that dooms our country isn’t really an answer at all. It is a secret suicide pact. I won’t sign it and neither should you.

I think I know how we got such a bad energy plan. Everything sounds easy if you’ve never built anything.. or if your standards are low enough. Green energy sounds wonderfully simple if all you’ve done is play on your laptop. If you actually know how real things are made, then you know that everything is hard. Even the napkins on my table are a miracle. Now compare the simple napkin to the wonderful bedside instrumentation in the local hospital. Those instruments allow nurses to continuously monitor many patients. We don’t have enough medial staff to unplug the hospital. Power saves lives every minute.

That is obvious when you stop and think about it. Think about what else happens when we don’t have enough electricity. The unknowable complexity of the real world is why revolutions fail and progress comes in hard-fought incremental change with many wrong turns along the way.

There are a lot of moving parts that have to be in place before the US will have an environmentally sustainable economy. We can’t recycle wind turbines or solar cells today. Someday we might recycle lithium batteries here in the US. We can’t do that now. It is important that those products and processes are in place before we reduce production of oil and natural gas. We should never shut them down. People who claim we should turn off fossil fuels are dangerous fools or lying conmen.

So far “going green” has been a lot of poorly planned political promises. We voted for higher prices, but millions of us only read the campaign headlines and ignored the fine print. Those details matter. Democrats voted to shut down modern industry before there was something in place to replace it. Using only wind and solar isn’t a formula for sustainability but for unilateral surrender to bankruptcy and the collapse of modern civilization.

Ask yourself if that is an accidental fault or if it is a tragic feature that was designed into the Biden green agenda from the start. Democrat politicians have shut down domestic oil and natural gas while they took bribes from overseas oil and gas producers to import oil. They claimed to protect us from “global warming” and rising sea level. At the same time, leading Democrats bought multimillion dollar homes on the beach. Look at their actions and tell me if Democrat politicians are working for my children’s future or for China’s future.

You are smart enough and know enough to figure things out for yourself.


I am feeling a little better and can now write slowly. Thank you for your patience. RM


Unplug your cars-

Making portland cement-

Obama’s beach houses-

Biden Claims Mass Shootings Tripled After ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Ended

August 31, 2022

Biden lied again. Is anyone surprised? RM

“The new mass-shooting database shows that there were 31 mass shootings in the decade before the 1994 law, 31 in the 10 years the law was in force (Sept. 13, 1994 to Sept. 12, 2004) and 47 in the 10 years after it expired. As noted, some of that increase stems from population growth.”

The claim that mass shootings “tripled” after the “assault weapons” ban expired is mostly false. There was a modest increase in such shootings, but the expiration of the ban does not seem to be causal in that rise.

Source: Biden Claims Mass Shootings Tripled After ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Ended

What the Mainstream Media Doesn’t Tell Us About Guns

August 24, 2022

It’s hard to fool an honest man or woman who wants to know the truth. Unfortunately, many of us depend on the media to bring us much of our news, and lying to us — or withholding key parts of the story — today makes it easier to fool us tomorrow.

Most of us feel horrible when we see news stories about violent crime. Beyond the emotional shock of the story, though, we are seldom told what the story means. Is that newsworthy event a common problem or is it rare? Are there good solutions that make us safer most of the time?

Besides the violence shown in movies and TV dramas, it’s almost as if the news deliberately keeps us in the dark about real violence and its causes. We can’t make good choices unless we have perspective. For a minute, let’s shed some light on the reality of armed citizens and guns

We’re told that guns cause crime. That’s odd because a lot of criminals didn’t seem to have gotten the memo. Only one out of twelve violent crimes are committed with a firearm. If someone says they need to disarm honest people in order to stop violent crime, they are going to leave about 92 percent of those violent crimes untouched. No wonder gun control laws don’t make us any safer.

If guns cause crime, then honest gun owners haven’t gotten the message either. Ordinary citizens like us own a lot of guns. About 40 percent of Americans live with a gun in our homes and we own hundreds of millions of firearms that are never used in crimes.

These are the guns you never seem to hear about. The news media don’t want to admit that firearms are ordinary tools that a huge portion of Americans lawfully own and use on a daily basis.

Gun ownership makes a significant difference in our lives. The news media almost never mention it beyond discreet instances, but armed self-defense by lawful gun owners is incredibly common. We use firearms in legally justified self-defense about 4500 times a day.

Report after report from academic researchers to the US Centers for Disease Control have reported the same thing. Those self-defense events are as significant as an ordinary citizen being in the right place at the right time to stop a mass murder to something as common as a neighbor scaring away an intruder who broke in through her back door.

Before anyone says that breaking-and-entering is insignificant, remember that two-thirds of sexual assaults begin with a home invasion. Millions of us use a firearm to protect ourselves and those we love each year, most of the time without ever pulling a trigger.

We’re told — by all the smartest people — that if our neighbors are armed then they would turn the world into the wild west with indiscriminate shootings on the streets every day. Yet that isn’t what we see. The fact is that our neighbors are armed and have been for decades.

We know that about 20 million of us have concealed carry permits and half of the states don’t require a permit to carry a concealed firearm in public. About 17 million adults — about one in twelve of us — are armed in public every day.

Where we have records, we find that these armed citizens are more law-abiding than the police. They are also less likely to shoot the wrong person than the the typical cop on the beat. That’s another seldom-reported fact that doesn’t play well when your message is that only highly trained police officers should own and carry guns

We are told that armed citizens are all too eager to engage in gunfights like something out of the OK Corral. We have to remember, though, that Hollywood dramas aren’t real. The truth is our armed neighbors are wonderfully reluctant to take a life. Lawful gun owners face millions of criminals a year yet they kill only a few hundred dangerous attackers in order to save themselves and other innocent lives.

In a strange coincidence, armed citizens and the police use lethal force to kill attackers almost exactly the same number of times each year. The great news is that criminals don’t want to be shot and they tend to run away about 80 percent of the time when they meet resistance from an armed victim. Our neighbors tend to stop shooting as soon as that happens. They then call the police and ask for help.

We’re told that we have to do something to stop the “epidemic of gun-violence” that is sweeping our country today. We are not told the murder rate was falling to a two decade low until the Covid lockdowns threw people out of work. But news media don’t mention that violence is highly localized and that most counties won’t have a single murder this year.

The breathless politicians don’t mention that violence is largely confined to our failed big cities. Or that two percent of our counties will account for half the murders in the United States.

Politicians use firearms and civilian gun ownership as excuses to paper over their failed policies and unkept political promises. But the mainstream media never mentions that. And they usually help them promote that narrative because they agree that Americans shouldn’t be allowed to own guns

Most of us would never use a firearm in commission of a crime. If “gun violence” is an epidemic, then most of us are immune to it. The epidemic is misnamed and its virulence highly exaggerated. It is, in fact, criminals who spread violence, not honest gun owners.

We’re told that more gun control laws will stop these criminals from unlawfully using their illegally possessed guns. That almost makes sense the first time you hear it. Then you think about it for a few seconds and realize that gun control is a very old idea that’s failed time and time again.

We already have over 23,000 firearms regulations on the books in this country — another thing you won’t hear about in the news — and criminals break those laws every minute of every day. One of the reasons that gun control laws don’t work is that gun control only disarms law-abiding good guys, leaving the bad guys who break those laws pretty much alone. We have yet to see a county, a state, or a country make itself peaceful by disarming the good guys.

And fewer lawful gun owners will result in fewer instances of lawful defensive gun uses. That means more people victimized by criminals without the ability to defend themselves. When was the last time you heard about that outcome of more gun control laws in a news report?

It takes perspective to make good decisions. We need the news media to tell us about the lives that we save as well as the lives that criminals take with firearms. We need to know the whole story to understand if gun owner licensing, mandatory waiting periods, or “assault weapons” bans would do any good. Will criminals obey “gun-free” zones or submit to background checks? Is a person who is having a mental health crisis still at risk after we take away her guns with “red flag” laws?

Life is more complex than a Hollywood movie. Fortunately, the facts are out there. I’ve shared a few of them today. As we learn more about the whole story, we recognize when the news media is only telling us only half the truth.


I am feeling a little better so I started to write. RM


“We have too many guns”- “

“One out of a dozen violent crimes were committed with a firearm”- “

“Four-in-ten have a gun in the home”- “

“Millions of us carry concealed every day”- “

“More law abiding than the police”- “

“Epidemic of gun violence”- “

Violence is concentrated”- “

We’re Smarter Than Our Politicians.. and we need to be

August 11, 2022

We want police officers to protect our children at school. Most of us take that for granted. Now that we think about it, the firearms instructor who taught the police officer, is that instructor qualified to protect our children too? What about the instructor’s instructor? In theory, all of them are qualified to protect our kids. In some states they are allowed to, but in some states they are not.

We make deals with our conscience all the time. We bend the rules to make things better. That came to mind when I read that school staff are disarmed by law in North Carolina. I winced as I read about it. We trust teachers with our children’s future, both with their development over time and their physical safety today. When strange things happen at school, we expect the school staff to act as a parent would act. Maybe my view of teachers is biased because most of the teachers I’ve met are not the sort to hide behind bureaucratic rules, though I’ve met a few of those. You probably have too.

I shoot, so I’ve met many teachers who own guns. I’ve competed against teachers and school administrators in competitive shooting events. I’ve met teachers who were also firearms instructors and gun-store owners. I know school teachers who are so accomplished that they train and certify other firearms instructors. Great teachers are going to teach.

Maybe that is why I laugh when I hear someone say ‘It is too dangerous to allow school staff to be armed, and that we should leave school defense to the police.’ I wonder if they really know what they are saying.

It was a teacher, a firearms instructor, who first taught the police officer what to do with a gun. The police officer on campus, the School Resource Officer, has to qualify at the shooting range once a year, maybe twice a year at the most. If they have trouble qualifying, then the SRO might go to the range to practice. The instructor who works at the range probably shoots better than most police officers. In all honesty, I’m sure I would have trouble shooting well if I only did it once a year. The SRO might even see a firearms instructor to take a lesson. There is always more to learn.

It is ridiculous that the same person who teaches the School Resource Officer how to handle a firearm isn’t considered safe enough to handle a gun at school, but somehow the SRO is. I’m sure that some of the school staff used to be police officers. Maybe they are reserve deputies now. If you have not studied public violence then it is easy to imagine all kinds of things that aren’t so.

We know that best practice to protect our children at school is to combine some armed school staff and an armed SRO. Is that a surprise?

About one-out-of-a-dozen adults carry concealed on any given day. That means the person near you at the lunch counter could be carrying concealed. In some states, the teacher at your school can carry concealed everywhere else.. but not at school where he works. That doesn’t make sense if we’re really worried about protecting our children from crazy-men who want to murder them.

It sounds as if we want to protect our kids but we should first wait a quarter hour for the police to arrive. That doesn’t work.

I’ve heard people object that school teachers should be disarmed because they might want to kill the children. If you think that a teacher who plans to commit mass murder is going to be stopped by a plastic “No-Guns-Allowed” sign then you’re not thinking clearly. Some people simply can’t imagine that guns in school makes us safer. I think they need a better imagination. Would a politician be safer if we disarmed his security detail? I’ve never met a single politician who thought so.

Laws reflect the thinking at the time. What our politicians should have said is that they would like school staff to be trained before they go armed. I think we should leave school safety up to the local school board. The board is in the right place to hear the parents in their district. What fits one school doesn’t necessarily work at the next one.

That leads me back to bending the rules. Suppose you are a School Resource Officer in North Carolina. You take your job seriously. You train with firearms and you compete on your own time. You notice the firearms instructor who is working at the shooting match. They work at your school. You see them every week in their classroom.

You talk to them after the shooting match,

“You can’t bring firearms to school. I keep my competition guns in the trunk of my cruiser. In case anything happens, here is a spare set of keys to the car.”

The teacher thinks for a minute and then replies,

“There is a spare medical kit in the desk drawer in my classroom. That drawer is unlocked, but here are the keys to my classroom.. in case anything happens.”

We make informal arrangements based on trust all the time. I wasn’t there so I can’t prove that a conversation like this ever happened. We’d be a fool to think it didn’t. Fortunately, we’re smarter than our politicians. We need to be.


I gave you my best 900 words. Please share them with a friend.
I’ve been sick for the last month. I’m only now well enough to write. Thank you for your patience. RM


One out of a dozen are armed.

Armed teachers save lives.

Armed Citizen Defends His Family in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

August 10, 2022

From a news story two weeks ago-

You are jolted awake when you hear a crashing sound at 4 in the morning. You assume it is your niece who lives with you and you shout to ask if she is alright. She says it wasn’t her. You get up and see a stranger sitting at your kitchen table. You rush back to your bedroom and grab your gun. Your niece comes out of her room and you ask her who this is. She says she doesn’t know. The stranger gets up and moves toward you. You shoot him. He falls down and says that hurts. You stop shooting and call 911.

You put your gun away when the police arrive. EMS takes your attacker to the hospital. You give a statement to the police. You say you tried not to shoot but the attacker advanced on you before they arrived. You and the police look at your broken front door. Your attacker is charged with breaking and entering, and with public intoxication.

You are not charged.


Let’s look at what this defender did well. To start, it’s impressive when a defender wakes up at 4am and keep his wits about him. I like that this homeowner’s doors were locked and that he was armed. I like that our defender was concerned for the safety of his niece. He defended himself when the attacker moved close enough to grab him. He stopped shooting when the attacker stopped advancing. The defender called 911 and asked for help. He stayed at the scene. He gave a brief statement to the police. I assume his niece also gave a statement to the police, but the news article doesn’t mention her. That makes me think the niece might have been under 21 years of age.

These news articles are incomplete, but it sounds like the homeowner left his bedroom unarmed and then had to rush back to his bedroom to get his gun. If we’re going to investigate a problem then we should be prepared to find one. Also, the intoxicated intruder moved toward the homeowner. What could we do if the intruder moved toward our niece? We are certainly not going to shoot in her direction. That means we need a plan.

Hindsight is always perfect. We want to have a plan with the adults who live in our home. It sounds like the niece was in her late teens or early 20s, so maybe she could have been armed. One option is for both occupants of the home to lock their bedroom doors, and grab their guns. Both of them would stay in their rooms and call 911. Maybe they could work together. The homeowner could move to his niece’s room, lock her door, and then she will call 911. Whatever you decide for your plan, we want to stay away from any intruders if we can.

While we’re making plans, how about spending $7 and putting a larger strike plate in your door casing. Given the increases we’ve seen in home invasions, that is money well spent. Also, the defender spoke with the news media. I don’t recommend that.

Millions of us bought a firearm in the last few years. Now we’re learning how to protect ourselves. Most of us start by taking a class in basic firearms safety and marksmanship. That is where we’ll learn how to operate our firearm safely. The class will also talk about the ususal methods of safely storing and accessing your gun when you need it. These classes start to teach about the Legal-Use-of-Lethal-Force and how to make a 911 call. As you progress through your firearms training, look for home defense classes. Eventually, you’ll want to take some team-classes that can help you work with a partner to execute a safety plan. That is where we learn to give a brief statement to the police.

The good news is that we can protecting our family today. We don’t need a carry permit to have a firearm at home. We can have a home safety plan even in states or counties that won’t issue concealed carry permits.

Look at ways you can harden your home, and at places you can stage tools. If you and your wife are going to run to your kids room, then why not put a spare phone and flashlight there. Could you put a mirror in a hallway corner so you can see into your house?

Now, what tools you use, including firearms, and how they are accessed may vary from state to state, so be sure to learn and understand the laws in your area.

Thank you for taking care of you and those you love.

I used this story in the latest episode of Self Defense Gun Stories.

Repost- 34 states have a path for teachers to carry firearms. Should N.C. be next?

August 9, 2022

Arming school staff members is a trend picking up steam, particularly in more rural areas, where police are too far away to stop the violence and save the injured.  “They are their own first responders,” said Laura Carno of FASTER Colorado. “Rural school districts are the early adopters because they are often 30 minutes or more from law enforcement.”

FASTER Colorado offers intensive firearms and medical training for school staff members. Carno, the executive director, estimates that there are about 5,000-armed school staff on campuses across the country, but knowing exactly how many and where they are is kept very private.

In the most recent state budget, school safety will receive an additional recurring $15 million for the School Resource Officer Grant program, specifically for elementary and middle schools, and an additional $32 million for School Safety Grants to support students in crisis, school safety training, and safety equipment in schools.  However, those resources may only be one piece of a complex plan to ensure that schools are ready to save lives if the unimaginable school violence happens in N.C.

Read it all here- 34 states have a path for teachers to carry firearms. Should N.C. be next?

Repost- PERSPECTIVE: Armed heroes on campus | Opinion |

August 7, 2022

From my friend Laura Carno. 

Laura Carno of FASTER Colorado

“Would it surprise you to know that schools in 37 of Colorado’s 178 school districts have armed school employees to protect the children? Would it surprise you to know that those employees are not School Resource Officers (SROs) or full-time security guards? Instead, they are principals, coaches, janitors, teachers, school nurses and secretaries.

“The policy of public schools arming select employees is a growing practice, but it certainly isn’t new. Colorado has had a law for 18 years that allows school boards, and charter school boards, to designate a policy of armed school staff.”

Read it all here: PERSPECTIVE: Armed heroes on campus | Opinion |

NOAA has a Fever and Can’t Measure the Temperature Outside

July 29, 2022

Anthony Watts and the Heartland Institute showed that the NOAA has a fever and can’t measure the temperature outside. Anthony is a meteorologist. He surveyed the local weather recording stations years ago. He found that most were poorly maintained or mislocated. Those problems gave the stations inaccurate readings of the outside air temperature. Good data matters.

Now, Watts and the Heartland Institute reported on a larger investigation. We might have global warming but we can’t tell from the station data. Not even close.

Read it here at Breitbart and here is the original PDF report from Watts.

Guest Host on the SAF Daily Bullet with Craig DeLuz

July 27, 2022

Paul Lathrop couldn’t host his Daily Bullet podcast yesterday. I jumped in to help a friend. Paul and Craig are great to work with. RM

Guest on the Loaded Mic with Dan Wos

July 26, 2022

Dan Wos and I talk about the gun-free zones in Washington DC. Give us a listen-

Keep and Bear Radio- Elisjsha Dicken- Say the Defender’s Name

July 26, 2022

I was on Keep and Bear Radio with Dean Rieck. We talked about the 22 year old man who stopped mass murder in an Indiana shopping mall. What Elishsha did wasn’t something exotic from the movies. It was not a move from “The Matrix” or “John Wick”.

What Elisha has is will and skill. It is courage and simple marksmanship. That hardly makes the news though it happens time after time. Give us a listen from their website.

Thank you, Dean Rieck for inviting me on your show.


How Hard is it to Stop Mass Murder?

July 18, 2022

It made the news today. A mass murderer opened fire in a food-court. The murderer was armed with a rifle. He killed three people before he was stopped by a 22-year-old who was carrying a handgun. All this took place in a mall south of Indianapolis, Indiana. Those are the facts, but most people don’t know what the facts mean. Was a young man stopping a mass murderer a matter of luck or was it the expected outcome that experts anticipated? How does this make sense?

Two-sided combat is a nightmare no matter how you are armed. A plastic sign at the mall said no weapons allowed. That sign gives the police authority to arrest gang members when the gangs gather at the mall. A plastic sign does not stop a mass murderer. The murderer failed the victim-selection process when the armed defender recognized what was happening and decided to intervene.

A dozen lives

Mass murderers go to “gun free” zones so they can engage in one-sided combat. They will kill about 14 people if we wait for the police to arrive and stop the attack.

If there is an armed citizen there, then the murderer is stopped after he has killed 2 to 3 people. Armed citizens who intervene are almost always successful in stopping the attack. The armed citizen in this incident stopped the attack in less than 15 seconds. The reason is obvious when you think about it.

We don’t have eyes in the back of our head. That means we are always vulnerable to being attacked from behind. In practice, our “blind spot” is much larger than that. Using a firearm means we have to focus our attention on our target. That blinds us to almost everything else. I’ve felt my perceptions narrow when I was in force-on-force training. You’ve felt the same thing happen to you.

We don’t notice a friend approaching us when we’re deep in conversation. We were busy doing something else and never saw the person walk up to us. That “blind spot” is how a defender with a handgun stops an attacker armed with a rifle. I bet the attacker never saw the defender. That is simply the perceptual dynamics of armed combat in an open area.

We don’t know what we don’t know. If you’ve never done it, then the simple act of shooting a firearm seems like an unbelievable thing to do. You soon find out that almost anyone can make the gun go bang. Hitting your intended target is harder. At first you’re happy to put your shots on a piece of paper at 5 yards. Later you’ll find out that some people can hit a target the size of a quarter at 75 feet.. time after time. That isn’t a secret, but you wouldn’t know it unless you study shooters.

Millions of people carry a loaded firearm concealed on their body in public every day. You don’t know how many people are armed because you can’t see concealed carry. National averages are about one-out-a-dozen adults are armed in public.

You might imagine that having armed individuals next to you is dangerous. Instead, it is one of the safest environments we have. To proove my point, I remember standing within a few feet of the son of a presidential candidate. I stepped back so he could talk to one of the vendors. I was armed and so were about 15-thousand other people walking around in that convention center. I don’t know how the Secret Service felt about that.

One of the things that unarmed citizens might imagine is that people suffer uncontrollable impulses to shoot someone. I’ve never felt that. I imagine that I would not want to carry a firearm if I acted that impulsively. Do you fear that you’ll swerve your car into oncoming traffic? Is that why you don’t drive?

People learn to shoot. They learn to carry concealed. They can learn to move with a gun and to fight with a gun. They also learn to walk toward the sound of gunfire. I’ve worked with armed school staff in training exercises. They moved toward the sounds of gunfire time after time.

Please keep an open mind about what our neighbors can accomplish.


Armed Civilian Stops Mass Murder in Indiana Mall

July 18, 2022

Thank you for carrying every day. Armed civilians save a million lives a year, yet Democrats say we will be safer if we are disarmed like citizens in Mexico and China.

That doesn’t make sense to me, but anti-gun billionaires get the politicians they pay for.

Those Stubborn Facts About Democrats and Inflation

July 18, 2022

The Biden administration is spinning the news as fast and as hard as they can. They said that inflation is caused by Covid. They blamed Vladimir Putin for high energy prices. The Biden Administration also blamed the supply chain problems they caused for the higher prices we are all trying to pay. If you only surfed headlines then you might believe their spin. A few seconds of research on your phone is all it takes to show they lying.

Inflation in some other countries is a few percent while it is probably over 10 percent here in the USA. Every country in the world faced Covid. Every country in the world faces the decreases supply of natural gas and food caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Most countries had to deal with disrupted shipping. Their economy moved on with small interruptions if the country managed those problems.

That is not what we saw here in the USA under the Biden Administration. Biden made those problems worse. Hong Kong has to import oil. So does Switzerland. Both depend on international trade for their economy. Both of them dealt with Covid 19. Both countries have inflation rates under 3 percent. That means that inflation can’t be caused by Covid, by Putin, or by the delays in international shipping. Look up international rates of inflation on your phone and you can prove it for yourself.

The Democrats killed our jobs during Covid and then shut down oil production here in the USA. They spent money they didn’t have on their political friends. That means the money in our wallets is worth less day after day. Democrat politicians made political choices that badly damaged our economy. They then acted surprised and tried to defect the blame for what they did.

Ignorance, indifference, and cowardice is a dangerous combination in a politician, but democrats vote for it time after time. It only takes a few seconds of research to uncover their lies. No wonder we don’t believe Democrat politicians or the news media who lie for them.

~_~_ I gave you 400 words and the best insight I have. If that was useful for you, then please share this post with a friend. RM

What the News Media Gets Wrong About Guns and Armed Defense

July 14, 2022

We know that the news media distorts our view of the world. We see it every day in the way the mainstream media selects and edits their stories. I’m sure you see unusual things in the news that I miss. That is because each of us sees this media distortion most clearly in the individual subjects we know best. For the last decade, I’ve studied what our neighbors do with guns. I see where the news media dangerously twists the truth about armed defense. As ordinary citizens, we need to know more about the world than to be simply fed a copy of the police report after a crime. In fact, ordinary citizens keep their families safe every day but the media sells us a different story. Here is what the mainstream media won’t say.

Evil exists. We face real dangers. The world is simply not the way we want it to be. On average, someone in our family will be the victim of a violent crime during our lifetime. Merciless criminals use force to take what they want and the police are not there to stop them. It is not safe to be defenseless, not even at home. To begin, we face about 30 thousand home-invasion robberies a year, and two thirds of sexual assaults begin with a home invasion. Being unable or unwilling to defend the people we love is not a virtue. Those truths sound obvious to me, but they are absent from our contemporary news.

The media wildly over-reported stories where we were victims of violent crime. At the same time, the media horribly under-reported the many stories where we successfully defended ourselves. It is almost as if the news media didn’t want us to know that we faced dangers and saved lives.

Violence is sometimes the best answer. Your armed neighbor faced an unfair fight when three thugs broke into her home late at night and tried to rob her. She wasn’t out for vengeance or revenge when she grabbed her gun. She didn’t use a gun because she wanted to be famous, but so she wouldn’t be seriously injured or killed. She defended herself with a firearm until the criminals ran away. Our neighbor grabbed her gun so she could safely call 911 and get help on the way.

Time and again we saw our neighbors use the threat of deadly force to defend themselves. That is the real pattern of armed defense that is repeated.. and unreported.. thousands of times a day. If the media presented the truth, then we’d know that we defend ourselves with a firearm over a million times a year. That works out to over 45-hundred cases of justified armed defense a day here in the United States. That is real news and somehow we don’t hear it from news media. We’d know that if the media reported the facts.

Armed defense is common. Our neighbors did a remarkably good job of defending themselves and their family. Firearms accidents by legal gun owners were wonderfully rare. Times have changed, and half of new gun owners are women. The bad guys ran away when they realized our neighbor wasn’t the unarmed victim the robbers hoped to find. Our neighbors didn’t shoot very often because the threat seldom rose to the level where it demanded the use of lethal force. When they were forced to shoot, then the good guys usually stoped shooting as soon as they could.

Together, we’ve faced over a million violent crimes a year. Despite that threat, armed citizens were forced to shoot and kill only a few hundred criminals each year, virtually the same number that the police were forced to kill. That is an amazing tribute to our character under very difficult circumstances.

We are wonderfully reluctant to take a life if there is any alternative. We also know who belongs in our home. That explains why armed citizens shoot the wrong person much less often that the police do. Since armed defense happens every day, you and I would know facts like these if the media actually reported the news.

Media distortion is dangerous. Because of biased reporting, we think that mass-murder is common and that armed defense is rare. In fact, the reverse is true. We thought our armed neighbor was a danger when she was in fact an armed savior. That truth has real world consequences. Since armed defense is so frequent, it is unbelievably hard to restrict the use of firearms without doing more harm than good. Gun-control laws disarmed the victims of crime rather than disarming the perpetrators. That puts all of us at risk. Media bias costs lives, but not everywhere.

Most counties in the US did not have a single murder all year. Most criminal violence is localized to our failed cities. We see criminal violence explode where we’ve robbed young men of their future. We’d know that if the media didn’t spin their stories to fit their political agenda. Media bias cost the lives of young urban men.

The truth is out there and we have alternatives to the mass media. We can do our own reporting. We must do it because the mainstream US news media failed us so badly.


I gave you 1000 words. Please share them with a friend.

I was traveling out of the country and it is good to be back. RM


Trust in the news media- “

Frequency of home-invasion robbery- “

Statistics on media distortion of armed defense vs criminal use of a firearm- “

Firearms accidents in perspective- “

Many new gun buyers are women- “

Frequency of armed defense from US National Firearms Survey- “

Justified homicide by law enforcement in 2019- “

Justified homicide by private citizens in 2019- “

Injury to the wrong person during an armed defense- “

Licensed concealed carry holders have few firearms accidents- “

Murder is localized to a few counties in the US- “

Repost- Fatherless Homes Linked to Mental Illness, Mass Shootings: Author Warren Farrell

July 12, 2022

I’ve met Warren Farrell several times. He thinks long and hard before he speaks. RM

“All six of those mass school shootings that have killed more than 10 people have been done by boys, and all six of them have been done by boys who have been ‘dad deprived,’ from Sandy Hook right on through to the Texas shooting.” WF

Source: Fatherless Homes Linked to Mental Illness, Mass Shootings: Author Warren Farrell

How Angela Merkel’s green agenda caused the economic collapse of Germany | Washington Examiner

July 9, 2022

It turns out that peace through weakness is a failed national and economic security strategy. If Merkel was the “Chancellor of the Free World,” why is it that today’s world is not safer?

It is not cleaner.

It is not freer.

And it is not a more prosperous place.

In short, every major decision she made regarding global affairs made the world more dangerous, less free, and less prosperous. She was to Germany what Biden has been to the U.S. — a complete and dismal failure.

Source: How Angela Merkel’s green agenda caused the economic collapse of Germany | Washington Examiner

Repost- Scholars Strategy Network: The racist roots of gun control are still with us today

July 6, 2022

“..this “bipartisan” policy is likely to continue the status quo racism in the criminal legal system without structurally addressing gun violence prevention. And many people will continue to be murdered.”

Source: Scholars Strategy Network: The racist roots of gun control –

Ed Monk Analyzes Effective Protection in Our Schools

July 3, 2022

Ed Monk has studied three important subjects. He studied mass murderers. He studied how to stop mass murderers. He studied our excuses, how we ignore best practice to stop mass murderers.

Mass murder will stop when the pain of innocent victims overcomes our desire to ignore the ugly problem. I beg you to give Ed a listen.

Link to the Youtube video- “

Repost- Carry ban on D.C. Metro challenged in federal court

July 1, 2022

“..firearms were prohibited on the Metro trains, even in Virginia, where the gun laws are much better than Washington, D.C. and Maryland, which are also served by the Metro Transit Authority. Now that ban is being challenged in federal court, with four gun owners filing suit on Thursday in an attempt to undo that restriction, which they say is contrary to the history and tradition of the right to bear arms in self-defense.

Source: Carry ban on D.C. Metro challenged in federal court – Bearing Arms

Progress and Magic are Different

June 30, 2022

There are two ways to change the world. One way assumes that magic is real. The other way assumes that people will do what is best for them. We’re facing that test today in the United States. In the case of magic, then the king issues a command and the world is supposed to bend to his will. Fossile fuels are bad so we’ll issue government regulation that make energy fantastically expensive. That makes us all poorer since energy is in everything we do. Somehow that is supposed to make our lives better.

Great, you’ve made everyone worse off but at least you get to feel virtuous about it. Or do you?

A justified sacrifice assumes that the goal is not only worth the suffering, but that the suffering is unavoidable. What if we could make the world cleaner without increasing humans suffering and making our children poorer? If that is true then the suffering is nothing more than a perverse form of masochistic virtue signaling.

If clean energy is desirable, then get out of the way of clean energy. The only countries that have a green and modern economy have massive investments in nuclear power. France and Russia are obvious examples. Spain and Germany invested heavily in solar power, and their power isn’t green at all. They have expensive electricity and they are dependent on other countries for their electricity and natural gas.

Nuclear and hydro power have low carbon emissions. In contrast to France and Russia, the US shut down its nuclear program and tore down some of its dams. I can only conclude that some people are so desperate for virtue that they want us to suffer so they can feel significant. I’d rather they bleed themselves on their own time and leave the rest of us alone.

France developed nuclear power so they could avoid the instability of the OPEC oil market and develop France’s industrial base at the same time. Russia developed nuclear power so they could export electricity, oil, natural gas and export coal in order to get hard currency.

What you might not know is that shutting down the US nuclear industry cost lives as we substituted more dangerous and less healthy forms of energy for nuclear power. If that comes as a surprise then ask yourself why the US news outlets never told you that nuclear was safer than wind.

The reason that no one will build a nuclear plant in the US today isn’t because of the engineering risk of an accident, but because of the political risk of regulation. A utility can’t afford to build a plant and then have the government change its regulations in the middle of the project.

It is interesting how we got here. The US government was first going to reprocess commercial nuclear fuel. Then it was going to store that fuel instead of reprocessing it. It has done neither.

We could buy our nuclear fuel from France because we’ve outlawed innovation in the name of safety here in the US. We now have a perfectly safe and non-existent source of power. We pay more for everything and don’t have a clean environment to show for it.

Magic words are not enough to make the world a better place. If you want electric cars then you need cheap electricity. You don’t need to regulate fossile fuels at all. Make cheap electricity and people will flock to electric cars. Depending on expensive wind and expensive solar to charge your expensive electric car is depending on magic words.

That doesn’t make the world better no matter how good it makes you feel.


What Should We Do When the Police and Politicians Leave Our Kids to Die?

June 29, 2022

We will see policemen stand still during a violent attack when they should move forward to protect our children. It has happened many times before. It will happen again. What should we do if we are there? Those are difficult decisions, but we have no options if we’re harmless and helpless. We have choices to make if we’re dangerous and capable. Perhaps you’re armed. Maybe you know some first aid and trauma care. So, what should you do if a violent murderer comes to your community?

We will freeze if we don’t have a plan. That is the natural response when we are thrown into a surprising situation. To make matters worse, this scene only offers us bad options. It is uncomfortable to look at it. Let’s think about it now because it would be worse to act impulsively or to freeze in shock. If we consider our choices now then we can recognize a situation and know what to do when the police and politicians fail us.

Suppose we see a mass-murder unfold at our church or our school. The police are not defending innocent victims. How bad can this situation get and what should we do?

  • The police don’t respond so we maneuver around the police. We engage and stop the bad guy. We call for help and begin emergency medical treatment and evacuation.
  • We maneuver around the police and we stop the bad guy. We are wounded or killed.
  • We maneuver around the police. We stop the bad guy but we injure innocent victims.
  • We maneuver around the police and we fail to stop the bad guy. We are wounded or killed.
  • We maneuver around the police. We fail to stop the bad guy and we injure innocent victims.
  • The police attack us so we have to fight our way through the police. The police injure or kill us and other first responders.
  • The police attack us so we have to deliberately incapacitate the police so that other first responders can stop the threat and treat the innocent victims.

Obviously it is better if the police and civilians respond with best practice in an emergency. Best practice is for the first armed responder to close with and stop the murderer. There is no guarantee that the police will act that way. In addition, politicians might do what is best for them but not best for us or our children.

So how should we think about this? One option is to do nothing and leave innocent children to die. Before we choose to do that, let me offer you another perspective. I learned something important from armed school volunteers.

They knew that moving toward the sound of gunfire was dangerous. They knew that the situation would probably be resolved before the police arrived. They also knew that a policeman they didn’t know might respond to the scene. These teachers knew they might get shot by an officer who was unfamiliar with the school and its staff. These teachers accepted that they might not see their children again.

They accepted that they might be killed because they knew their students and friends would be safe. They knew that an immediate defense might be imperfect, but it was the best option to save innocent lives. They were going to move toward the sound of gunfire and the results don’t have to be perfect as long as their kids are safe.

All of us are like them in some small way. We too might face imperfect options. In fact, we do that all the time. We want to recognize that now so we don’t hesitate later.

Maybe you have to face a mass murderer or a petulant politician. Thank all of you for your decision to move forward. 


I gave you 600 words and a piece of my heart. Please share them with a friend. RM


Examples where the police waited while victims died- “Report by the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission- “

Texas DPS preliminary statement on Uvalde school attack- “

The programs to train volunteer school staff-



New This Week on Shooting USA – FASTER Saves Lives

June 28, 2022

ShootingUSA is re-running their report on FASTER Saves Lives. The FASTER program is intensive training for Volunteer School Teachers and Staff. The training exceeds the qualification to carry concealed in schools. FASTER has now trained more than 3,000 Teachers, Staff, and Administrators who are now carrying in nearly 300 school districts across the country.

Training First Responders in Schools

The broadcast airs on the Outdoor Channel Wednesday night at 9pm Eastern time, and rebroadcast at 9pm Pacific time.

The producers at Shooting USA also offer a non-commercial copy of the update series to school administrators wanting to present to the program to their local school board.

Image from Shooting USA.

Funding Fantasy and Ignoring Evil as we Protect Our Students

June 28, 2022

Our schools are attacked by disgruntled students and former students. Our schools are also attacked by outsiders who select the school so they can murder innocent victims. We have had armed staff protecting our schools for years. We’ve learned from their vast experience so we know how to protect our children. The latest act from congress, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, doesn’t do that. In fact, it prohibits it, and that tells us everything.

We’d like it if every child developed a fully formed conscience. That isn’t the real world. I’ve met neglected children who were raised by parents who were physically or mentally ill. I’ve met children who were raised a neglectful addict. Some people who lack a conscience are made. That experience can turn healthy children into violent sociopaths. Mental health treatment will help some of them. The Safer Communities Act does a little to help them.

Some people who lack a conscience are born. About 3-in-a-hundred of us are psychopaths and lack empathy and sympathy with other people. Some of them are also narcissists who think the world owes them more attention. Mental health treatment doesn’t change their propensity towards violence.

The Safer Communities Act can’t change the human condition. We are broken, and some of us much more so than others.

The problem of evil has always been with us. Yes, we want to help children so they don’t want to murder their classmates. That does not solve the larger problem of protecting our schools. What should we do with the evil in the world that wants to kill our kids?

We have several-million-man-hours of experience with armed school staff who volunteered to be first responders. They trained to stop a violent threat and stop the bleeding until outside help arrives. We have never had a child killed in school by an outside attack when these defenders were there.

We have also seen what happens when the school is disarmed. We saw the police wait outside at the high school in Parkland, Florida. We again saw the police wait outside as children were being murdered in Uvalde, Texas. We’ve seen similar carnage in attacks on a gun-free zone away from school where the victims had to wait for the police to save them.

Thank god that we have dedicated police officers on campus protecting our children every day. These officers tell us that too many students will die if we wait for outside help to stop an attacker. The Safer Communities Act ignores their advice. The Safer Communities Act explicitly prohibits funding to arm or to train armed school staff. That tells us everything about the legislation and the politicians who proposed it.

These politicians need public violence so they can hold a press conference and appear concerned. Expressing that faux-concern is more important to the politicians than really protecting our kids.

One way to stop narcisists from attacking our schools is to stop electing them to public office. Until then, work with your local school board.


I gave you 500 words. I hope you found them useful. If so, then share them with a friend. RM


The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.pdf- “

Report by the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission- “

Texas DPS preliminary statement on Uvalde school attack- “

Timeline of the attack at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida- “

Safer Communities Act Prohibition on spending-

‘‘Subtitle D—Amendment on ESEA Funding

(7) for the provision to any person of a dangerous weapon,
as defined in section 930(g)(2) of title 18, United States Code,
or training in the use of a dangerous weapon.’’.

One Unconstitutional Law Implicates Many Gun-Control Regulations

June 26, 2022

Laws can be interpreted many ways. We seek guidance from the court to know what is legal and what is not. The US Supreme Court has largely ignored the right to bear arms compared to the number of decisions the court has rendered in other areas. We don’t have enough decisions to draw a clear map of where our rights begin and end. The court recently issued an opinion on the right to bear arms in public. This case redefined the legal landscape and gave us a few rules to go by. Let’s look at the unanswered questions to see if we may draw further conclusions.

The recent ruling said that states may require carry permits, but they must issue them to ordinary people who are not criminals. Ordinary people must be able to carry a personal firearm in ordinary places where people congregate. Licensing cannot be excessively delayed or expensive.

Now we want to apply this ruling to other situations. We first look to the text of the Bill of Rights. Based on the text, are the actions in question covered by the Second Amendment. When in doubt as to the scope or applicability, we then consider the history of use when the Bill of Rights was ratified. We are to draw analogies from that period to the present day.

There are no tiered level of examination or scrutiny. If the law in question materially limits the right to bear arms then, with remarkably few exceptions, the law is an infringement on the right to bear arms and unconstitutional.

  • The court said that the second amendment is a full right. We do not yet know how to treat the victims who were unjustly prosecuted under these unconstitutional laws. A handfull of Democrat controlled states charged about a hundred thousand people with the non-violent crime of carrying a firearm without a permit that the state refused to issue to them. Most of these victims were black and brown young men. How do we make the victims whole again after the state took their fortunes and years of their lives in prison?
  • If the right to bear arms in public is a full right, then why do I need to seek dozens of permits to exercise that right as I travel from state to state? We did not have to do so in the 1790s.
  • There was no general prohibition outlawing the bearing of arms in churches when the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified. State laws that limit the bearing of arms in churches today are an infringement and unconstitutional.
  • There were no widespread and broadly applied state laws restricting the right to bear arms in taverns and inns. State laws that limit the right to bear arms as we travel and eat today are an infringement on the right to bear arms and unconstitutional.
  • There were no widespread and broadly enforced laws in the 1790s requiring that firearms be stored in an inoperable condition. Those laws today are an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
  • There were no general prohibitions restricting the right to bear arms on ferries, barges, and stages, the cutting-edge of mass transportation at the time. State laws restricting law-abiding citizens from carrying in a parking lot, on a subway, bus, ferry, or train today are an unconstitutional infringement on our rights.
  • There were no general prohibitions against carrying arms at a horserace or at a public amphitheater. Those were the stadiums of their day. Today, state laws restricting law-abiding citizens from carrying their personal firearms at a stadium that receives public funds are an infringement and unconstitutional.
  • In the 1790s, there were no laws outlawing the bearing of arms in hospitals. Denying a doctor, nurse, technician, staff-member, or a visitor their right of self-defense is an infringement on the right to bear arms.
  • The laws of the 1790s did not create a two-tiered system of rights where politicians, judges, and other government officials were allowed to carry a firearm in public but ordinary citizens were disarmed. The exceptions may be inside a prison or jail, a courtroom, or inside the statehouse when the legislature is in session. Disarming citizens who are out in public, while politicians are free to go armed, is an infringement of the right to bear arms.
  • Citizens of the 1790s did not face broad legal prohibitions from bearing personal firearms that met or exceeded the performance of arms born by the military forces or law enforcement agents of that day. We must either restrict our military and police to use only the man-portable weapons we allow civilians to carry today, or we must allow civilians to carry weapons used by our military and police. Anything else is an infringement.
  • According to this Supreme Court, the right to keep and bear arms is an enumerated right and not a lessor right than any other. That means our right to bear arms cannot be removed without due process in a court of law. Gun owners are assumed innocent until proven guilty and have the right to face their accuser. The accused has the right to be represented by a qualified lawyer. If necessary, the state must promptly provide that lawyer in the form of a public defender. Like any other right, false accusations and malicious prosecution can result in a suit for damages.
  • A sheriff of the 1790s knew the criminals in his county. Today, a policeman can check my license,  my vehicle registration, and my legal status in seconds from the roadside. We can process an ID and credit card from around the world equally quickly for a few cents. That means it should take no more than a minute to perform a background check and it should cost pennies at most. Once we have done one background check to own a firearm, then repeated background checks when we want to buy ammunition, secure a carry permit, or to buy another firearm, are an abuse of the right to bear arms.

Look at this cursory list. Now consider how these rights must be defended in dozens of states. I am clearly not a lawyer but there is still a lot of work to do in the courts. Also, I am fallible. There may have been widely enforced firearms laws from the 1790s that I missed. Please share new sources of historical information with me as you find them.

I’ve asked some men who far are smarter than I am to give me their opinion on this topic. I will let you know what they say. In the meantime, I gave you the best 1,000 words I have. Please share them with a friend. RM

US Supreme Court Delivers Concealed Carry Permit Case

June 23, 2022

Justice Thomas wrote the opinion. 6-3 decision. 135 pages and I’m reading it now. May issue carry schemes are not consistent with the US constitution.

Let the lawsuits begin.

NYSRPA v Bruen

%d bloggers like this: