Skip to content

On the Radio the week of June 16th, 2019

June 19, 2019

I’ve been busy writing and doing some radio interviews.

To begin the week, I was on Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk on Sunday afternoon. Tom has used a number of my articles this year. It was nice of him to ask me onto his show to talk about the victims of gun control and gun free zones.

Sunday night I spoke with my friends Rob Campbell and Amanda Suffecool on their Eye on the Target Radio show.  Again we talked about the good people disarmed by gun control. That episode show will appear in their podcast archive later this week.

I was on Paul Lathrop’s Polite Society Podcast on Monday Night for a few hours. I’m a regular member of the cast. We covered this week’s politics and guns.

Tuesday morning I released the weekly episode of my own podcast, Self Defense Gun Stories. This week I had Robyn Street with me as co-host. It takes about a half-day of work to produce a 20 minute podcast.

Tuesday night I was on Bill Frady’s Lock-N-Load Radio show for almost an hour. We talked about what we need the NRA to do. I’m a regular guest on Bill’s show.

I may have retired from my day job again last week, yet I have plenty to do.


Repost from DRGO: Self-Selection: An Overlooked Factor in the Gun Debate

June 18, 2019

People employ their common sense.. and it works. RM

I’ve learned that people generally know when they are not suited (for the responsibility of gun ownership.) The biggest reason we don’t have an astronomical rate of gun deaths is simple: people generally choose the best option for their own circumstances without orders from the nanny state.   This “self-selection” contradicts the idea that we need to be micro-managed for our own safety.”

Source: Self-Selection: An Overlooked Factor in the Gun Debate – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership

What are the essential functions of the NRA

June 17, 2019

NRA Logo

Who protects the right to keep and bear arms? The National Rifle Association says it does, but the NRA does a great many things. Some of those activities are far removed from protecting the right of armed defense. That is both obvious and expected. Old organizations do things that made sense at one time, but might not make sense today. Let’s look at what the NRA does now. What is essential and what is superfluous to the right to keep and bear arms? Remember that the right to keep and bear arms goes away if an essential activity goes away. An activity isn’t essential if other people do it.. and if they do it better. What does the NRA need to do, and what activities were simply nice to have?

What does the National Rifle Association do that is essential
to the right to keep and bear arms?

The NRA was founded in 1871 to promote rifle marksmanship. It wasn’t until 1975 that the association officially recognized the political threats on the right to keep and bear arms. That is when the NRA formed the Institute for Legislative action, the NRA-ILA. That change was forced on the NRA by its members and a dissident group of directors. The NRA leadership was none too happy about it then. The NRA-ILA is still a step child.

The NRA and its members work against government infringements on the right to keep and bear arms. They lobby for pro-rights laws. The organization frequently asks their members to call their representatives at the local, state, and federal level. With over 5 million members, the NRA can generate citizen involvement. The power of the NRA comes from its members.

What else does the NRA do?

The NRA carries a large number of historical activities that are not essential. For example, there was a time when it was hard to judge your shooting ability. To solve that problem, you could get a numbered target from the NRA, shoot it, and then mail your target to the NRA for scoring. The USA has has changed a lot in 148 since the NRA was founded. The NRA continues to sponsor postal matches, though few of us live in remote areas where our only connection with the outside world is through our mailbox.

You can get instruction from the NRA on shooting black powder firearms. You can also get instruction on hunter safety and reloading your own ammunition. The NRA continues to sponsor shooting competitions that use antique firearm and modern firearms shot using antique methods. The NRA has five firearms museums which are nice to have but are not essential to the right to keep and bear arms. A 33 thousand acre shooting facility in New Mexico is not essential.

Can the NRA change with the times?

Only lately has the NRA changed its approach and recognized that armed America has changed. We’re more interested in personal protection than target shooting or hunting. There are more than 20 million individuals licensed to carry a concealed firearm in public. Millions more of us carry concealed in states that do not require a license. In contrast, there are only 5 million NRA members. Until 2007, ordinary citizens went to a non-NRA class to learn to carry concealed. Many states refer to NRA educational materials when the states require training to obtain a carry license. NRA training is far from cutting edge. Lots of organizations have excellent training programs for firearms safety and concealed carry instruction.

The NRA is also involved with training law enforcement to use firearms. These training organizations are nice to have but they are not essential to defend the right to keep and bear arms.

These non-essential activities cost the NRA more than money. These distractions are also costly in terms of time and attention.

What about state and local chapters of the NRA?

State and local chapters of the NRA often have to wait for Fairfax to reach a decision. Local chapters can’t wait weeks while the NRA approves having a local sheriff speak. Unfortunately, the NRA state affiliates are often ineffective relative to other state 2A lobbying groups. I’ve never heard of a state organization losing its NRA affiliation to a more active and effective state organization. That should happen, but it doesn’t.

I’ve worked at NRA sponsored events. I’m an NRA life member. I know several NRA board of directors. I admire their integrity and dedication. I want the NRA to regain the trust of its members and focus on the work that only the NRA can do. I think the board wants that too. The current management of the NRA may not.


House Bill Calls for Repeal of ‘Gun-Free School Zones Act’ – Liberty Park Press

June 14, 2019

Murderers kill us in so called gun-free zones. Let’s take our schools off the list. RM

“Legislation that would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act, which was sponsored by then-Sen. Joe Biden and former Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI), has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY), and even though it is not likely to advance, it’s a signal that something needs to change.”

Read it all here- House Bill Calls for Repeal of ‘Gun-Free School Zones Act’ – Liberty Park Press

For Your Own Safety — DBC

June 13, 2019

My friend David Cole talking about “gun free” zones.-

“The only ones made safer by policies like these are the managers and the organizations which employ them. As I have written before, these policies are meant to protect the organization from liability, rather than the lives of the human beings who work there.”

Source: For Your Own Safety — DBC

Book Review- “Strategies and Standards for Defensive Handgun Training”

June 13, 2019

How do you teach something you can’t think about?

I read this book and then got to meet the authors at their home range in central Texas. That was good luck, or perhaps fortune favors the prepared. The book is a collection of essays and it is easy to read chapter at a time. Some of the material seems like it was written earlier, while other chapter were prepared specifically for this book. The book is written for firearms instructors, range operators who set training curricula, and for serious students who want to understand armed defense and how to learn it. It does an excellent job at presenting new material and focusing our attention on what we thought we knew.

Why is this interesting?
Training people to use lethal tools in self-defense involves strong emotions and serious consequences. Much of our training methodology is carried over from the institutional training given to the military and law enforcement. That isn’t the best way to teach the material because it isn’t he best way for students to learn. You can argue that our experts in the firearms training industry have held back the instruction of self-defense almost as much as they have advanced it. Karl Rehn and John Daub peal another layer off the onion of established methods and get us closer to the truth about effective firearms instruction.

Who is the intended audience for this book?
I assumed that serious instructors have studied the field of instruction. I was wrong. It is easy to keep teaching what you were taught because of institutional bias. It is seductively easy for us to say to ourselves, “That is how I was taught, and it worked for me,” when in fact, firearms instruction doesn’t work very well for most students. I am deeply grateful to Mister Rehn and Mister Daub for their willingness to look carefully at how we were taught and how we learn. The book has application for both instructors teaching new students and for experienced competitors who want to perform at the highest levels.

What is the key content?
In a single sentence, the book describes the conflict with trying to teach unconscious self-defense. In my opinion, the fundamental problem of firearms instruction is that armed defense looks too easy. The new student asks someone who shoots at the Grand Master level, “Can you teach me to do that?” All masters make their art look simple, when that deceptive simplicity is built upon years of practice acquired minutes at a time.

Compare our expectations in a firearms class to our expectation of other activities. We won’t learn to play piano or perform gymnastics in a day, in a weekend, or in a week. The truth is that we learn a huge number of foundational skills before we can perform competently with a firearm, let alone perform at the fluid level of a Grand Master. Most students will not submit to the discipline of building their skills step at a time and forming a solid foundation.

The firearms instruction industry sells weekend or week-long wonder courses where we’re taught by an extraordinary shooter. That total-immersion approach is partially justified by the fact that most students will only take a few classes in their lifetime. The instructor is desperately trying to expose the student of self-defense to all he needs to know to save his life. Karl and John remind us to take our time as we try to go faster. Practice often, and then measure our progress.

How well does the book accomplish its goals?
I recommend this book. The authors walk us through their journey. They describe the problems they see and the solutions they propose. They wonder what a firearms trainer should do to both teach responsibly and to remain in business. How do we reach the mass of people who will never be competitors and who nonetheless need the skills of armed defense? How can we measure the critical skills of self-defense?

Without giving away secrets, we can not defend ourselves with conscious thought under stress. We need our defensive skills to be as automatic as tying our shoes or singing “Happy Birthday”. The authors bring their background in competition to evaluate the degree of automaticity we’ve learned. They compare a wide range of shooting drills and rank the performance of each one.

Buy this book if you’re a serious student and want to structure your training program. Buy this book if you’re a casual student and want to evaluate the instruction you’ve received and to choose your next instructor.

The way we teach armed self-defense is evolving rapidly. The last chapter isn’t written.

Amazon- “Strategies and Standards for Defensive Handgun Training”

Also, follow Karl and John at the KR Training Blog and sign up for their newsletter.


The Failure of Gun Control in Virginia Beach

June 11, 2019
Gun-control failed again in Virginia Beach, and it failed big. A disgruntled city employee quit his job and then came back to kill 11 of his coworkers. The news media and gun-prohibitionists called for more more gun-control while ignoring all the failed gun-control regulations that were in place. These gun-prohibitions didn’t keep us safe in Virginia Beach. Why would new laws work any better?
-The murderer passed a required background check. The background checks, which looks backwards, failed to predict future behavior. Background checks never find new criminals.
-Local preemption means that cities can write their own gun laws that are more restrictive than state law. Virginia Beach did that and it failed to stop this murderer. In fact, it enabled the attack.
-Virginia Beach declared its municipal building as a “gun-free” zone. The city did not post armed guards after they disarmed their employees. We know that murderers prefer “gun-free” zones for their attacks because these zones disarm the intended victims. We also know Virginia Beach city employees wanted to go armed at work for their own safety.
-Concealed carry licensing didn’t disarm the murderer. All the criminal histories and fingerprint requirements failed to identify this murderer or stop him, but these gun-prohibitions might have disarmed his victims.
-We already regulate noise suppressors on firearms, but that didn’t disarm the murderer. Both the victims and the responding officers heard the gunshots.
-There was an extraordinarily rapid police response, but electronic key-card access on the municipal building kept police outside while people died inside. Security doors keep out both the bad guys and the good guys.
-The elevated stairway/entrance prevented a terrorist from crashing a vehicle into the main hallway of the municipal building. The stairway also kept first responders from breaking down the doors.
-As expected, no more innocent victims were shot once the murderer faced armed opposition. A good guy with a gun stopped the bad guy with a gun. Does that surprise anyone?
The 23 thousand firearms regulations we already have in place failed us. They did not stop this murderer and they will not stop the next one. Democrat politicians proposed more of the same ideas that failed so badly in Virginia Beach. That passes for leadership among the advocates of gun control.
Stop voting for failure.

I gave you 400 words. Please share them with a friend. RM

The Surprising Forces Behind Mass Murder in the US

June 10, 2019

After the recent shooting in Virginia Beach, Democrat politicians said US gun owners were causing mass murder. Biased journalists said the same thing, and both of them are fantastically wrong. The real mass murderers are the people who claim to be for “gun safety”. The results are shocking once you look at the data and once you uncover a few facts. Unfortunately, our biased media is spewing spin rather than truth.

Do guns save lives?

Honest citizens defend themselves thousands of times every day. That isn’t rhetorical hyperbole, but hard statistics. We defend ourselves about every 30 seconds. Honest and law-abiding gun owners use their firearms for defense about about a hundred times an hour, about 2800 times a day.

These honest citizens used their personal firearm to rescue themselves until the police arrived. You don’t see it in the news because these gun owners are exactly like you and me; they are wonderfully reluctant to press the trigger. Criminals almost always run away from armed victims just as the criminals run away when they meet armed police officers. Like police officers, the people who carry a legally concealed firearm in public are shockingly law abiding.

Armed defense doesn’t happen on every street every night, but it happens millions of times a year here in the US.

Disarming the good guys doesn’t stop the bad guys

Gun-control disarms these honest citizens who obey the law. Gun-control means that a young college student is disarmed as she walks to her apartment late at night. Gun-control means an elderly man can’t defend himself as he walks across the parking lot on a rainy afternoon. These honest citizens are disarmed by the high costs and burdensome regulations that politicians impose on gun owners. They are disarmed by bureaucrats who impose “gun-free” zones. Criminals never choose a fair fight. They gang up on isolated victims. Disarmed citizens are easy prey.

  • In Virginia Beach, the gun-control politicians disarmed the good guys. Plastic signs don’t stop bad guys. Search your memory and you’ll find that our “gun-free”offices, movie theaters, restaurants, schools and churches are where murderers go to kill us.
  • Gun-control advocates disarm honest US citizens by demanding higher fees and longer hours to get a concealed carry permit. The bad guys don’t bother with permits.
  • Gun-control politicians have disarmed the good guys who want to carry their firearm as they cross state lines. Some states don’t honor the permit from another state.  The bad guys love more disarmed victims.

I’ll simplify the problem if you still have doubts. About ten million honest citizens didn’t get their concealed carry permits because of high fees and burdensome training requirements. Many more were disarmed by arcane gun laws. At the same time, criminals committed almost 300 thousand aggravated assaults and murders last year.

We have 23 thousand gun-control regulations today. Those laws are disarming the good guys who obey the law and they don’t disarm the bad guys who ignore the law. The good guys are your armed neighbors. They are hundreds of times more likely to save a life with their firearm than to have an accident with one. Criminal assault happens every day. That means every “gun-control” law is more likely to make the good guys vulnerable than it is to disarm the bad guys.

Does gun control actually stop crime,
or make us disarmed victims?

Listen to the people who want to prohibit legal gun ownership. Judge them by what they do rather than what they say. Gun-control produced thousands of additional victims every year, though the apologists deny it. The victims are our neighbors. Tens of thousands of them are needlessly assaulted every year.

These are the people who are promoting violence across America.

They are-

  • Gun-control politicians, and the political hacks who support them.
  • The Federal Trade Commission and its Operation Choke Point that threatened banks and credit card companies who did business with the firearms industry
  • Corporations like the Bank of America, and Citibank who refused to do business with the firearms industry
  • Companies like PayPal who refused to process credit transactions for legal firearms and ammunition
  • and a company like Sales Force Software that shut down accounts with the firearms industry

Disarming an honest citizen puts all of us at risk. Armed America saves lives, while gun-control advocates cost them. Listen to the news if you think violent crime doesn’t exist. Listen to Self Defense Gun Stories if you think self-defense doesn’t happen every day.

We need more good guys. Be one of them.

I gave you 800 words. Please use them. RM


“Any Study of Gun Violence Should Include how Guns Save Lives” 

“DRAMATIC REVELATION: The day of the Virginia Beach shooting one of the victims considered taking a gun to work over concerns about a colleague, but didn’t because of gun-free zone”

“Virginia Governor proposes more gun control legislation”

Why Self Defense Training Matters

June 6, 2019

Fear and panic are hard to understand. Our natural assumption is that the same thinking-mind we’re using now will be available if we’re attacked. In fact, our memories are jumbled when we’re frightened. Words escape us and we can’t think clearly. That happens to us when we face a lethal threat. Fortunately, we remember how to act even though we forget how to think. That is why firearms and self-defense training is critically important. Let’s contrast two recent example of armed self-defense. An attack at home showed the benefits of a planned response, while an attack on the street showed the benefit of recent training.

You only have the solutions you planned and practiced.

The first example comes Kaufman County, Texas.

You are a woman home alone. It is almost ten in the morning when you hear someone banging on your front door. You don’t recognize the visitor, so you don’t open the door.* A minute later you hear someone trying to get into your house through the back door. That seems suspicious, so you retreat to a back room in your home.* You get your gun*, hide in a closet*, and call 911. You’re talking to the police when the intruder opens the closet door. You shoot him several times.

The police arrive minutes later.

You can’t think and make plans as someone is breaking into your home. You can perform the actions you planned and practiced. Let’s give this woman credit for her safety plan.

*She planned to lock her doors and windows. She planned to keep the door closed and to talk to strangers through the door. She planned to retreat to a back room rather than confront an intruder. She planned to have a firearm for self-defense. She planned to get the police on their way before an intruder even made it into your home. She planned to protect herself if she were confronted.

This attacker had twelve prior felony convictions. Some criminals want what to take what we have. This criminal searched out and confronted the female homeowner.. and may have wanted to take more. Have you practiced running away from danger?

Train early. Train often.

You’ll only have the responses you practiced.

Our second example comes from Chicago, Illinois.

You are walking to your car with your 5 year old son. That is when a man across the alley starts yelling at you for no reason. It is four in the afternoon. The man across the alley has a gun in his hand. You step back, pulling your 5 year old behind you.* That’s when the criminal starts shooting at both of you.

You have your Illinois concealed carry license.* You’re armed* and you’re well trained.* You present your gun from its holster.* You shoot the criminal until he stops shooting at you and your son.* You rush your son to your vehicle and hand him to your friend. You check to make sure your son is uninjured.* Then you call police while keeping your eyes on the bad guy.*

There is a difference between knowing what to do in the calm of the evening, and being able to act under extreme stress. The part of your brain that recites lists stops working when we’re attacked. Fortunately, this defender was well trained.

*This defender made all the legal preparations to go armed in public. He practiced carrying a concealed firearm. He trained to step between his loved ones and an attacker. He practiced presenting his firearm and shooting accurately. By coincidence, the defender was on his way home from a multi-day defensive firearms class and had recently fired thousands of shots in training. He also trained to stop firing when the threat stopped. He practiced moving his loved ones to safety. His training included interactions with the police.

This attacker was a convicted felon and gang member. It was illegal for the attacker to have a gun. Have you taken the training and secured the permits to carry your self-defense tools in public?

I want you to have a plan to retreat. I also want you to defend your life when you can’t retreat. I want you to protect you and the people you love.

Please plan on it. Please practice it.

I write and talk about self-defense every week. These events were discussed on episode 154 of Self-Defense Gun Stories. Links at the podcast page.

Disputed Facts in the Gun Debate

May 30, 2019

The gun debate is difficult for many reasons. It is often an emotional issue. Unfortunately, there isn’t one gun debate, but perhaps dozens of “gun debates.” Even the questions that seem simple are difficult to answer well.

Difficult questions about our guns

  • Are guns too easy to get?
  • Does a firearm in your home put you at greater risk?
  • How often do ordinary citizens defend themselves with a firearm?

A simple answer is easy to find.. and often wrong. There are questions hidden within questions as we look for the truth.

Is the US violent because of civilian gun ownership?

For some people, the gun issue is one of appearance. Many legal residents own guns here in the USA. We also see lots of news coverage when innocent people are shot. We don’t read about the violence in other countries, so we assume that other countries are peaceful. We put these facts together and conclude that guns cause violent crime here in the US.

It turns out that our news is biased in favor of reporting local violent crime. Other countries have violent crime also, but you have to look to find it. What is unusual, is that only a few cities in the USA cause most of our murders. To be precise, two percent of our counties have 51 percent of our murders. 54 percent of our counties have no murders at all.

The stereotypical gun owners is a rural farmer, but it is our failed inner cities where we see the most violence. The myths about gun owners are not real. Bad governance causes violent crime, not guns.

Are guns too easy to get?

You might think it is easy to get a gun if you’ve never gone through the process of buying one. There are 23 thousand firearms regulations. Honest gun owners follow every one of them. Most of these restrictions have no effect on violent crime. The reason is that 99 percent of criminals get their firearms illegally. Passing another gun law doesn’t change the behavior of criminals, and criminals are the ones who commit violent crime.

If you think it is easy for an honest citizen to buy a gun, then I encourage you to try and buy one in California or New Jersey. Criminals don’t have to wait for a 10 day waiting period or a one-gun-a month delay. It can take you months to buy a gun legally, while a criminal gets a new gun in an hour on the street. Gun laws don’t stop criminal behavior.

Does a firearm in your home put you at greater risk, or does it make you safer?

There are hidden layers to that simple question. Most criminals run away when they find out you’re at home. Most criminals run away when they see the homeowner or shop owner has a gun for self-defense. Was that an example of armed self-defense even if gun owner never pressed the trigger?

It turns out that criminals behave toward us the same way they behave toward the police. Like us, the police will touch their firearm dozens of times yet never have to press the trigger as they face a violent encounter. The policeman thinks things would have gone very differently if he were unarmed. Likewise, criminals behave differently when they have unarmed victims.

Many homeowners don’t report that they had a gun in their hand when the criminal ran away. Most law enforcement agencies don’t keep statistics on civilian self-defense. That means it is hard to get solid data when guns save lives.

We also have dirty data when it comes to firearms accidents. Did a child find an improperly stored firearm and hurt someone? We want to keep our guns away from our children and unauthorized strangers.

Unfortunately, we get confusing reports after an accident involving a firearm. Was the gun improperly stored by the legal gun owner, or was the gun stuffed under the couch cushions by a criminal who was visiting his girlfriend for the night? Did children find the gang’s gun that was hidden under the front steps? Was the unauthorized person who got the gun your 4 year old who found it in the dresser drawer, or a 19 year old burglar who smashed his way into your house and used a pry bar to open your lock box? The data is often confusing since both are described as negligent discharge of a firearm by an unauthorized minor. We don’t want to lump these events together since the cure for each is dramatically different.

How often do ordinary citizens defend themselves with a firearm?

From the best data that I can find, self-defense is rare and accidental injuries with a legally owned firearm are extremely rare. Most “injuries” with a firearm are suicide by middle-age white men. For perspective, about one-out-of-5-million children will find and misuse an improperly stored firearm this year. About one-out-of-200 of us will use a firearm to legally defend ourselves or another innocent party. That means your legally owned gun makes you safer. With a little education, some training, and safe storage, your gun makes you much safer.

I wish I had short and simple answers to the gun debate. I chose to give you the best truth I have even though it took a little longer.


Murders in US very concentrated: 54% of US counties in 2014 had zero murders, 2% of counties have 51% of the murders

A Second Look at a Controversial Study About Defensive Gun Use

Suicide Statistics


Please leave a comment and share this article with a friend. RM

Link: Police Response Time – Why You Should Own Guns

May 29, 2019

Kevin Murphy wrote this article about calling for help. The results confirm what we’ve long suspected. The police can not defend you.

Give Kevin a read. RM

“Suppose one is considering whether he/she should get a gun for home defense. Disregarding all other factors such as 2A supporter and fun of shooting sports, one crucial determinant is how fast and reliable the cops could come to his/her emergency call.

“Many scientific studies (and common sense) tell us that the shorter the police response time, the higher arrest rate, safety and satisfaction.

“In this article, I’ll be digging into data of police response time, factors that lengthen/shorten police response time, average time criminal took to complete a crime and lastly, is buying a gun for self and home defense a good idea.

“As the old saying goes, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.”

Source: Police Response Time – Why You Should Own Guns

Do Guns in Your Home Make You Safer?

May 22, 2019

Does a gun in your home make you safer, or does it put your family in greater danger? That is a great question, but we don’t have easy answers. There are risks if you have a gun and risks if you don’t. To further complicate the question, your situation is different than mine. You have to weigh both sides to know if you’re safer being armed.

We’ve seen new parents sell their guns because they had children in their home. We’ve also seen new parents purchase firearms because they had irreplaceable lives to protect. Some of the news articles that report on the decision to go armed are extremely misleading, so I’d ask you to read very carefully. Here are some obvious questions that measure your possible risk and your possible reward for owning a gun.

Do you face a risk of violent assault? If you have zero-risk of violent attack, then there is no benefit of having any defensive tools with you. Nor is there any benefit for learning how to defend yourself and your family. This situation would apply to you if you are a researcher in the middle of the desolate antarctic. Also, you wouldn’t be safer with a gun if you’re living on the space station. Out there, you won’t face any problems that a firearm could solve.

A more down to earth answer is that most of us face some risk. The FBI says that more than one-out-of-four of us will be victims of violent crime during our lifetime. I think of it this way. On average, you or your family will be victimized. Your chances of being attacked are much higher if you live in Baltimore and your relatives are druggies. In contrast, you’re much less likely to be attacked if you live a quiet life in Bismarck, North Dakota. Your chances are never zero. I’ve met people who were violently attacked for no good reason. Fortunately, they were armed. Having a gun saved their lives.

You probably don’t need to worry about physical protection if you already have paid professionals guarding your house. This would apply to high-ranking politicians or celebrities who purchased a full time security detail. There is very little you can contribute to your own physical security at home that they have not already done for you.

That isn’t how most of us live. When it comes to our families, most of us have to provide our own protection. Even then, it doesn’t make sense to incur the cost and the risk of a personal firearm in the home until we take simple precautions. I’m thinking of things like locking our doors and our windows. Improving the physical safety of your home with good locks, screws and safety film is much cheaper than having a gun and taking firearms training. A locked door and safety glass can keep a bad person away from the people you love.

That brings us to the heart of the discussion. A gun is an inanimate object. It doesn’t prevent bad things from happening. A firearm can be a useful tool of self-rescue if you’re attacked. A gun buys us time until the police arrive. That assumes you know how to use your gun. We’ve learned a lot during our centuries of experience living with firearms. Armed defense is simple, but not easy.

Earning the advantages of armed defense takes work. It requires both training and practice. A firearm is only part of a larger personal safety plan. Does your family know what to do if someone breaks into your home? What if your family is attacked on your driveway or front steps? While you can hope to be lucky in your violent encounter, we find that people who educate themselves and then train have better outcomes. The more you practice the luckier you get.

Buying a gun won’t make you safer. Safety depends on knowing when and how to use your firearm. Buying a gun and storing it carelessly might put you at greater risk than not having one at all. Safety isn’t something a firearm delivers to you. Safety is the result of using your knowledge and your tools to protect your family. A gun is just another tool.

I can’t know your situation. We know you’re hundreds of times more likely to protect yourself with a firearm than to have an accident with one. That shows that most people have learned to operate a firearm carefully and to reap the rewards of an armed defense. I record examples every day where people used a gun to save their lives. You can build a safety plan for you and your family. A firearm can make your family safer, but it needs your help.

I gave you almost 800 words and a few drops of good advise. Please share them with a friend. RM




Guns Ownership is a Dangerous Virtue.. and we need to defend it

May 14, 2019

Free speech is dangerous. The right to petition our government and to own guns is dangerous. Those rights are particularly threatening to entrenched politicians and the special interest they represent. Besides being dangerous, those rights are also the safest way to organize a society. It is time we defended them, not because they are safe, but because they are virtues.

Virtues are how we do good things. Defending your community, the right to bear arms in public, is how you ensure public safety when the police aren’t there. The police are rarely there when you’re attacked by a criminal. We’ve lost much of our right to bear arms. We surrendered it to “public safety”. The right to bear arms was never meant to be convenient for politicians.

Your gun might be “safer” if it was under lock and key. It is also less useful that way. You can’t use your gun to protect yourself and your family if it takes you minutes to put to use. We forget that. We forget that in your hands, guns save lives. Making firearms “safer” and less accessible means we save fewer lives.

I see that every day. I study self-defense week after week, year after year. I also study the statistics of armed defense. I report the stories where ordinary people like you stopped a violent assault. You saved your life. You also saved the lives of your family and other innocent parties. I see it. Unfortunately, you can’t protect the people you love once you’ve made your tools of self-defense “safe”.

Like the police, you will probably never need to press the trigger. Unlike the police who see violence every day, your family will probably see violence once in your lifetime. That is what the FBI statistics tell us. There are about 70 million families in the USA, so the numbers add up. We defend ourselves about once every 30 seconds.

You protect yourself when you go buy groceries and when you fill up your car with gas. You protect yourself at work and at home. You protect yourself on your way to the gym, to school and to church. When the attack is over and you’ve defended yourself and others, then you call the police. That is what good people do. The police show up minutes later and take a report. The fact that you go armed, that you have your self-defense tools with you, that makes all of us safer. Thank you.

About 20 million of us have permits to carry a concealed weapon in public. That is about one-in-ten adults. The number of us carrying in public increases to about one-in-five adults when the government gets out of the way. Government fees and licensing requirements disarmed about half of us. That is bad. Disarming the good guys makes us less safe.

Gun-control disarms us by inches. As we’ve seen in the news, there is no such thing as a “gun-free” zone. Politicians said that honest people should be disarmed so that only criminals would be the only ones with guns. Politicians don’t want your gun to be too big or too small, too old or too new.. except for their bodyguards, of course. Politicians want you disarmed. For many reasons, disarming you is safer for them.

Being disarmed is not safer for you and me. Good women with guns and good men with guns make their families safer and their communities safer. You can’t be a force for good if you don’t have your self-defense tools, and the training to use them.

I have to address a comforting myth about owning a gun. The average defense takes place in seconds. That isn’t enough time for you run to your gun safe, get your ammunition that you stored separately, load a magazine, and protect your family or your employees. Time yourself.* You’ll see that I’m right. A gun you can’t use is dangerous.

We defend ourselves a million times a year with a firearm. We also have thousands of firearms accidents each year. Criminals put their guns under the front steps. Thugs leave their guns under the couch cushions in their girlfriends house. That is where children find them and where children get hurt. I want you to own your firearms responsibly, but I also want you to keep them accessible so you can use your “rescue tools” when you need them. For many of us, that means you carry your gun on your body and then put it in a small, quick-access, gun vault. That is careful storage of a dangerous tool. That is what good men and good women do. I thank you.

I mean you, the average citizen of the USA. I want you to exercise your rights. I want you to have dangerous freedom because I trust you. You have more common sense and honesty than the politicians paraded before us on the news. I trust your wisdom and your motives far more than I trust theirs.

*- I asked my listeners to get their guns from “safe storage”. It takes them over half a minute to access a “safe” gun.

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



Gun Control Failed Again in Denver- mass murderers don’t obey the law

May 13, 2019

I shouldn’t have to remind the media of the obvious, but mass murderers break the law. The 17 and 18 year old murderers broke many laws, both before and during their attack at the STEM School in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. This is important because it means that passing more restrictive laws won’t stop the next mass murderers since they too are willing to break the law. We have to wonder why we have these gun laws when they fail all the time. I hope that is glaringly obvious, but let me explain it to those who have doubts.

The two attackers smashed their way into a locked gun cabinet to steal the guns they used. Yes, safe storage laws failed to stop mass murder. This is the rule rather than the exception, since virtually all criminals get their guns illegally. Why do we have safe-storage requirements if they don’t stop criminals and mass murderers?

It is illegal for a 17 year old be in possession of a handgun. There are exceptions if the teens are accompanied by the gun owners and taking part in prescribed activities. I checked the law in Colorado, and mass murder is not one of the approved exceptions. That means that putting more age restrictions on law abiding gun owners won’t stop mass murderers. That shouldn’t come as a surprise since those laws didn’t stop other criminal either.

The murderers took their illegally possessed handguns guns into the 1000 foot gun-free-school-zone that is around school property. They murderers took their guns onto school grounds when they drove into the parking lot. They also took their guns into school buildings. Each of those acts was illegal for them to do. Gun control laws didn’t stop mass murderers any better than the laws stop ordinary criminals from breaking the law.

The murderers hid their guns as they entered the campus. That is illegal without a concealed carry license. Criminals and mass murderers are not willing to sit through classes and pay fees to get a carry permit. Our gun laws stop law-abiding people from carrying guns, but law-abiding people were never the problem in the first place.

The two attackers committed several counts of aggravated assault and battery. They committed murder and several counts of attempted murder. You don’t care about breaking lessor laws when you intend to commit mass murder. Who thought that murderers would obey our gun laws?


These mass murderers stole the guns they used, so they never bothered to apply for a background check. Mandatory purchase-waiting-periods don’t stop murderers. Mandatory safety classes before a gun purchase don’t stop murderers. One-gun-a-month restrictions don’t stop murderers either because murderers don’t buy their guns from gun shops. Only law-abiding gun owners do that. Why do we think mass murderers and criminals will start obeying these laws in the future?

We have to ask the obvious question since these gun-control laws don’t work. Were these laws designed to stop murderers, or to disarm the law abiding? We’ve seen these laws fail time after time. Given that history of failure, I can’t believe the politicians who call for more gun control today.

Some people obey the law and some people break it.
Which type is disarmed by gun control?

Licensed concealed carry holders are the most law abiding and non-violent people on the planet. Gun control politicians want them disarmed and kept out of schools. Our children are too important to be used as pawns by politicians.


I gave you 500 words. Please leave a comment and share this article with a friend. RM

How to Skew the Debate and Get More Kids Killed

May 10, 2019

How should we protect our children at school?

Asking skewed and inappropriate questions leads to inappropriate answers as we work to protect our children. We’ve seen special interests, including government officials, do exactly that. That dishonest inquiry furthers their agenda, rather than ours. Protecting our children is too important a problem to leave to politicians.

Most of us learned something important as we reached adolescence; the answer you got depended on how you asked the question. That is certainly true when we read skewed questions about defending our kids.

I’ve read headlines like these-

Should we give guns to teachers?

Do more guns really belong in schools?

Or worse,

“Do we want the new kindergarten teacher to look like this?”

Is this the new kindergarten teacher?

What do real solutions look like as we work to protect our children in school? Here is a more moderate perspective on protecting our kids.

I’ve taken the training required for armed teachers. I took the armed defense and medical training over several years. I’ve also spoken to staff members who volunteered to be first responders at their school. I met dozens of educators who came from at least a half dozen states. I saw the approved training programs used in both Ohio and Colorado. I also listened to the experts who determined what first responders need to know.

The first point is that our children deserve protection. It is the government’s duty to return our children to us the way they received them. We already protect our politicians and their children. We also protect our children at home. Our kids deserve similar protection at school.

The next perspective is that violent attacks on our schools are rare; school attacks are horrific, but unlikely. That means we shouldn’t go overboard and impose costly solutions to solve improbable problems. Putting little Johnny in an armored box creates more problems than it solves.

Protecting our students isn’t a new problem. We’ve faced it and solved it for years. It has been 19 years since the attack at Columbine High School. It has been six years since the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary. We’ve qualified, trained, and tested thousands of volunteer school staff to be first responders in that time. We accumulated thousands of semesters of experience with armed first responders in our schools. The volunteer staff I met are exactly the sort of people I want to protect my children.

You didn’t notice these armed defenders on campus because we don’t want you to see them. An armed man wearing a uniform on campus acts as a visible deterrent.. until the moment he isn’t. The uniformed school resource officer is often the first target of an attack. Alternatively, the attackers simply wait until the SRO is off campus.

Trained volunteers have significant advantages over uniformed police. Unlike the police, these volunteers are anonymous. Any adult staff member could be an armed defender. An attacker doesn’t know who is and who isn’t an armed and trained first responder. Unfortunately, we’ve seen School Resource Officers run away from an attack. We have not seen trained volunteers do that.

Many defenders are better than fewer. Quantity has a quality of its own. It is better to have two adequate defenders on each hallway than to have a super-ninja at the other end of campus. The closer the first responders are to the problem, the sooner the threat will end and we can treat the injured. We can train the volunteers in a school district for the price of a single school resource officer.

We now have classes for medical first responders in our school. Lots of school staff can be trained to stop bleeding and make sure the injured are still breathing when EMTs reach them. Oddly enough, some teachers unions wanted to fire school staff who receive trauma training. That shows the politics I talked about earlier. We can’t afford it.

Less is more when it comes to training. The people who set the curriculum for first responders in our schools know what they are doing. They have decades of experience working with law enforcement agencies across the country. They have a very good idea of what first responders need, and what they don’t.

Beware a politician who says that first responders “need” weeks or months of training. If they need that much time, then they are either the wrong candidate or they are being trained for the wrong job. I’ve seen what these volunteer defenders can do after 30 hours of training, and they are very impressive. Imposing inappropriate training requirements means more of our children will die.

I understand the concern we have for our kids safety. I hope this helps us ask the right questions. I think this is a more real perspective, and our children deserve that clarity.

I gave you 700 words. Please share them with a friend. RM


School Shootings- Plastic Signs and Synthetic Emotions

May 8, 2019

Two armed murderers entered a school south of Denver yesterday.  I’m sure that a number of special interests will place the blame for these attacks. They never let an atrocity go to waste. I’ve seen everything from global warming to the political party in office used as a scapegoat to promote assorted causes. I want to be careful about what we know, what is probably true, and what we should expect. One thing we know is that this attack doesn’t come as a surprise.

One of the murderers was a trans-sexual female who preferred to be called a boy. The other murderer was an 18 year old male. Preliminary reports indicate the male student felt bullied. Both murderers used handguns to attack students and staff.

We can speculate about their motive. If they were at all like the vast majority of mass murderers in recent years, these murderers counted on the mass media to turn them into instant celebrities. If our media treats these murders as they treated earlier murderers, then the attackers will receive a billion dollars of free publicity. Time after time, that media promotional campaign pays for the next narcissistic murderer who wants to see his name in the news.

That isn’t speculation; it is a conclusion reached by both psychological research and by investigating previous mass murderers. This media campaign earns the news organization big bucks by delivering new viewers. It is paid for with the blood of our children.

We know that the police response at this Highlands Ranch school was extraordinary. The police arrived in a few minutes. In those two minutes, these murderers shot eight people and one of them died. Some of the victims remain at risk. The usual response time is more than 5 minutes.

That brings us to the reality that most parents want to evade. Even two minutes is too long to wait for help. Any armed individual can shoot many people if the murderer is unopposed for several minutes.

That isn’t because of the particular characteristics of the weapon that makes the attack so deadly, but the fact that the murderers were attacking victims who could neither run to safety nor fight back. As we’ve seen before, the murderers carefully chose their victims and the location of the attack. The murderers wanted easy victims and that is what we delivered. We consciously chose to protect our children with plastic signs that said no-guns allowed.


I’ve trained with school staff who volunteered to be armed first responders. They trained to stop an armed threat and to stop the bleeding until EMTs arrive. I took this training in central Colorado alongside teachers from Colorado. As far as I know, none of my classmates were from the Highlands School District where the attack occurred. The teachers I met were passionate about saving lives. I suspect that there are many school staff in the Highlands district who feel the same way as the teachers I saw.

Like many other school districts, the school staff with whom I trained were there because their school board and school superintendents decided to protect their students. These volunteer school staff were not willing to wait as their students were murdered. They were not willing to blame someone else, when instead, they could protect their students and save lives until police and EMTs arrived.

Every mass murder is unique, but each ones follows a general pattern. We have never seen a plastic “no-gun sign” stop a mass murderer. In contrast, we have yet to see a murderer attack a school where armed school staff were present. Earlier I’d claimed that plastic signs are ineffective, but the plastic sign that says “armed staff” seems to work so far. We have accumulated millions of school days with armed staff on campus. So far they have been both safe and effective.

Staff May be Armed

That shouldn’t surprise anyone. We wouldn’t turn off the fire alarms, remove fire extinguishers and first aid boxes at our schools and replace them with a plastic sign that says “No Fire Allowed”. That would be ridiculous, yet we did that when it came to protecting our children from violence on campus.

We expect adults at the scene to be first responders until professionals arrive. We expect adults to stop small fires and treat injuries if they can.. even if it doesn’t say that in their union contract. In my experience, teachers are protectors who want to take care of “their kids.”

Our luck won’t last. At some point, an attacker will choose a school with armed staff. You and I pray that never happens. Thank god there are a few teachers who pray they are there in time to stop the murderer. I thank them every day. More school staff wish they could be defenders. I know this because I’ve met many of them and they told me so.

I’ve listened to law enforcement officials from across the country who want school staff to be trained and armed. Law enforcement officers see violence every day. I suspect that makes many of us uncomfortable. Rather than take the advice of professionals who deal with violence, we want to pretend that violence doesn’t exist. We want to pretend that a sign will keep us safe and keep our children safe.

It wasn’t the plastic “no-guns” sign that failed in Highland, but the adults who believed it. We can fix that tomorrow.. and we should.

I gave you 900 words and a piece of my heart. Please share them with a friend. RM


Political Lies and the Aging Revolution

May 8, 2019

The Venezuelan government is murdering its people. The government took over education and now the schools are closed. The government took over the Venezuelan oil industry and now there is no oil or gas. The government took over hospitals and the power grid, and patients die in the dark. The government took over the news media, and now the Venezuelan people only receive propaganda.. on the rare occasion when there is power to run their radios and TVs. How is this possible?

The Venezuelan government said they would protect the people. The government confiscated private guns.. and then gave guns to gangs of thugs loyal to the Venezuelan government. Now, the Venezuelan military and its Cuban advisors shoot unarmed civilians. The army uses their armored cars to run over protesters.

I could shake my head and feel superior.. except US politicians today say to us the same things that Chavez and Maduro said years ago. This isn’t the slippery slope of politics leading good men to political corruption. This is a well worn path of Socialist lies. Do you recognize these campaign talking-points.. and the subsequent excuses? Have you been paying attention?


  • We need to make education free to everyone.
  • So everyone feels included on campus, we need to impose a few common sense restrictions on free speech.
  • Conservative speech is violence.
  • The student body has to reflect our country’s new future. Conservative ideals are outmoded in their insistence on morality and truth.. said the Socialist candidates.

Energy Policy-

  • The county is finally independent of foreign sources of oil and gas.. so Socialists propose eliminating fossil fuels and taking over the oil companies.
  • These new restrictions on energy will soon payoff in lower healthcare costs and greater employment as we retool our economy.
  • These economic ups-and-downs happen to everyone. We have a few shovel ready projects that will get the economy rolling again.
  • Fossil and nuclear power plants are unsustainable. Besides, you should walk more.
  • Of course government officials can use cars even when you can’t.. said the Socialist politician everywhere.

Open Borders-

  • Heaven doesn’t have borders.
  • Immigrants only take the jobs our citizens won’t do.
  • Those are not criminals since you really can’t compare the justice system in one country to the justice system in another country.
  • Didn’t you listen? Of course illegal immigrants have the right to vote and go on welfare.. said the Socialists candidates.

Health Care-

  • Everyone deserves free health care.
  • Illegal immigrants have the right to social security benefits. Sign up right here where you register to vote.
  • Your medical care is now provided by the same people who run the DMV and Social Security. They will determine when you’re eligible for treatment. Just take a number and wait.
  • Of course government officials can have their own healthcare system.. said the Socialist candidates everywhere.

Economic Freedom-

  • How can you protest paying taxes when some people are still in need?
  • We need to control rents since people can no longer afford their own homes.
  • Taxes need to increase so we can meet government pensions because breaking our promises would be unfair to workers.
  • We’re not trying to control you. We only need you to file this certificate so we can plan for the changing economy.
  • Everything that is not permitted is not allowed.. said the Socialists politicians.

Armed Defense-

  • I’m a gun owner too. We’d never take your guns.
  • Rape is not a violent crime, so guns and pepper spray are not allowed on campus. Disarming you is for your own good.
  • Safety comes first. That is why anyone can demand you be disarmed so that someone else feels safe.
  • You must be a terrible shot if you need an AR rifle for defense. The police will protect you and only government employees should be armed.. with AR rifles of course.
  • Anyone who doesn’t turn in their guns is a violent revolutionary and should be jailed or shot for the public good.. said the Socialists politicians everywhere.

These quotes are straight from the campaign speeches of our current crop of Socialists candidates.. and from the news coverage of the Venezuelan “revolution”.  They overlap, and I can’t tell where one ends and the other begins.

It turns out that our Socialist candidates are not as modern and cutting edge as they claim. Their campaign proposals are the same old something-for-nothing promises that lured people to socialism before. I’m hearing the same old “revolution” wrapped in well-worn lies. Those lies don’t age well.

They call it a political “campaign” for a reason. Will the same old lies work this time?

I gave you 700 words. Please share them with a friend. RM

The Truth of Socialism on the Little Screen

May 1, 2019

We know socialism fails. The question remains if citizens will believe the lying politicians and vote for socialism anyway. The media won’t tell you these truths, so here is the truth about socialism laid bare before us in Venezuela.

-Venezuela was one of the world’s largest oil producers with enormous oil reserves. (1999)

World Oil Reserves- OPEC 2017


-When legislators determine what can be bought and sold, the first thing to be purchased are legislators.. and voters.

Chavez wins again 2010. Granted new powers


-Free speech and the rule of law are a threat to government power.

Judge Arrested After Ruling Against Socialists New York Times- 2010


-A government disarms its populace so the rich and powerful can do things they couldn’t do to armed citizens. (2012)

Hint- If both parties in the exchange didn’t agree, then it wasn’t capitalism. Socialism is imposed at the point of a gun.

Venezuelan Government Destroys Private Arms


-Modern infrastructure is constantly under repair. A society can’t survive when politicians steal supplies for the water supply, electrical supply, the local hospital, and oil production. (2012)

Venezuelan Oil Production Falls by 60 Percent

-Democratic Socialism includes shooting and running over protesters. The government does not need to listen when they are armed and citizens are disarmed. 2014

Beauty Queen Among Protestors Killed by Police (2014)


Protestors Killed by Venezuelan Police (2017)


Venezuelan Police Run Over Protestors with Armored Car (2019)



-You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out of it.


What did I give you if a picture is worth a thousand words? RM

No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money: SCOTUS To New York City – Motion Denied

April 30, 2019

The city of New York has terrible gun laws. Those laws infringe on the rights of honest citizens. The city was sued and the lawsuit appealed to the US Supreme court. The city said, ‘Fine, we’ll change our laws so there is no case.’ The US Supreme court disagreed and said there is a case as long as the infringements continue. RM

From my friend John Richardson- “The City of New York had filed a motion to hold the briefing schedule in NY State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York in abeyance. Their argument was that since the NYPD were proposing to modify regulations on transport for those with premises permits that the briefing schedule should be suspended. In other words, we say we are going to change the regulations in question which might moot the case so don’t make us go to all the work necessary to respond to the plaintiffs.”

Source: No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money: SCOTUS To New York City – Motion Denied

Kamala Harris owns a handgun. That’s unacceptable for a 2020 Democrat.

April 27, 2019

Democrat gun owners not wanted.. even as candidates. RM

“When it comes to gun ownership in America, presidential aspirant Kamala Harris has shot herself in the foot.”

Source: Kamala Harris owns a handgun. That’s unacceptable for a 2020 Democrat.

Gun Control..and Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

April 26, 2019

I listened to Florida legislators argue why school staff should be disarmed. I shook my head because their foolishness was so strong. This is the time when legislators need commons sense.. even if we have to give it to them good and hard.

Their arguments sound like this.

  • We should protect our students with plastic no-guns signs since you can’t prove that a teacher won’t go crazy and shoot people.
  • Any gun at school could go off, so how can you guarantee the safety of students and staff?
  • Teachers are not trained Navy SEALs so they shouldn’t be allowed to have guns around our children.
  • It is too expensive to hire Navy SEALS to protect our children, so let’s do nothing. And besides, we shouldn’t allow Navy SEALS in our schools if they have guns.

In short, the reason we should leave our children unprotected is that improbable things will happen, and bad solutions are worse than what we have now. That means we should leave our children at risk or do something irrelevant that the politicians want to do anyway.

I’m not convinced by these false choices. The choice isn’t between the perfect solution that we have now, or giving every teacher a gun. Perfection isn’t an option.

The choice isn’t between replacing all our teacher with combat veterans in armor, or hiding behind plastic signs.

These false alternatives ignore our real world experience. Protecting our students isn’t something we could do, but something we’ve already done in dozens of states. We have thousands of school staff going to school every day. They bring their gun and their medical kit with them to work the same way they carry them as they go shopping and out to dinner.

You don’t see the armed defenders around you, so you assume they don’t exist. Let me assure you. They are there.

The police say they can’t get to the violence in time to stop the murders. So what are we going to do to save lives until the police arrive? We face a simple choice. The next time a murderer comes to school, do we want trained school staff who are at the scene to be armed or disarmed?

This isn’t a self-defense problem; it is a psychological problem we have recognizing violence. Dr. William April described our problem this way,

“To properly plan for violence,
you must first admit and accept
that the world is not as it ought to be.”

Recognizing evil is easy to say, but it is psychologically quite difficult to do. The sad fact is that some people would rather look the other way and let our kids get killed than admit that some people are violent. These idealists do more than put themselves at risk: they put all of us at risk if they force us to adopt their blindness.

The question for us today is if Florida legislators will recognize this imperfect reality. Will we allow politicians to play political games in front of the press.. or will we apply enough political pressure that Florida legislators protect our children the same way they protect themselves at work?

Yes, Florida legislators can bring their guns to work. If an armed defense is good enough for the legislators, then it is good enough for our children too.

I gave you 500 words. Please leave a comment and share the article with a friend. RM

Socialist Lies, Both Foreign and Domestic

April 25, 2019

Senior Democrat politicians said Trump colluded with the Russians. They were not alone. These politicians were joined by senior Democrat party officials and by their political operatives in the news media. They said it was horrible that a politician would invite a foreign government to influence our politics. The Democrats then turned around and adopted the worst parts of totalitarianism and claimed it was a virtue.

The Mueller investigation said that the Trump-Russia scandal was a lie. Not only was there insufficient grounds for prosecution, but there wasn’t any evidence. Trump wasn’t involved with the russians.

Think about that. The criminal gangs trying to control our government are not from Ukraine, but from right here at home. That perspective illuminates Democrat candidate’s campaign promises in a whole new light.

In one breath the Democrats said ‘We’re ‘ ‘Mericans’ and we don’t need no communist government telling us what to do. We wants our freedom.’

  • Then candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren said government should control all higher education. Perhaps the Senator resented that celebrities bribed colleges rather than politicians to get their kids into elite schools.
  • Candidate Senator Kamala Harris said government should control all health care. Because Obamacare did such a great job..and Senator Harris wants more campaign donations from big pharma.
  • Senator Cory Booker said government should be in control of all our personal security. Except for his, of course.
  • Senators Sanders, Klobuchar and Gillibrand said that government should ban fossil fuels and private cars so we’d all have to take the government provided trains. But government officials would be exempt due to their “special needs”.
  • They said we can’t allow foreign influence in the US..except they want to allow 16-year-old illegal aliens to vote.

These were not unplanned remarks the candidates made on the campaign trail. This isn’t a momentary lapse where politicians promises more than they can deliver. This is saying one thing and doing the opposite, time after time. We’ve grown accustomed to politicians’ lies and the mainstream media covering for them.

For years we’ve heard democrats say we should disarm honest citizens here in the US, while at the same time, they ran guns to Mexican drug-lords, and to terrorists from the Philippines to the middle east!

That is corruption on an enormous scale and it should shock us. Given all that, the greater attack on American democracy is what the Socialists supporters have applauded here at home. Socialists politicians said they want to weaponize government. They want to use the regulatory state to punish anyone who opposes them.

The message isn’t one of hope for a better country, but a message of fear of government retaliation. They said they’d use government to come after their political enemies. Obama did it with the IRS and the FBI. They can close your business and bankrupt you without a trial.

It is the Chicago way-
‘Vote for use or lose your job and your family.’

Welcome, my Socialist comrades, to the great leap into the abyss. We’re supposed to hate the russian-big-government-communists, and we do, for good reason. We’re also supposed to love the all-american-big-government-communists who still call themselves socialists. Kleptocrats and aparachniks from Saint Petersburg, Russia are evil and self-serving, but we’re told that our corrupt politicians from Massachusetts, New Jersey, Arkansas and California are adorable. Except they aren’t.

‘Government is we need to make it massively bigger and more powerful.’

You know it and I know it. I’m tired of hearing it, and so are you. We’re smarter than they think, and won’t buy an ugly pig no matter how much lipstick the media puts on it.

No wonder the number of viewers at CNN has taken a dive month after month.

I gave you 600 words for free. Please leave a message and share this article with a friend. RM

GUN WATCH: Australian Museums’ Guns face Destruction

April 22, 2019

Politics is a blunt instrument at best. From my friend Dean Weingarten-

The most famous firearms manufacturer in Australia is the Lithgow Small Arms Factory. On the grounds of the existing factory site is the Lithgow Small Arms Factory Museum. The Museum is independently owned and operated, primarily by volunteers, as an independent trust on behalf of the City of Lithgow. Just a few weeks ago, the museum learned that 70 percent of its collection is at risk of being destroyed because of a thoughtless change in firearms law passed in 2017, specifically aimed at museums. Museums were not contacted about the change in the law. They had no input about it.

Source: GUN WATCH: Australian Museums’ Guns face Destruction

Fashionable Bigotry Against Gun Owners 2019

April 17, 2019

The campaign season has begun, and gun owners are the minority that it is socially acceptable to hate. Without exception, the Democrat candidates for president have demonized US gun owners. According to them, lawful gun owners are the real source of crime and violence in the US.

If you watch the news, gun owners are angry, fearful, rural, unsophisticated white men. Gun owners are mentally ill religious bigots who don’t care about children being shot. Now that all the right-thinking people on CNN agree, we can finally take steps to control military style automatic firearms in the US (as if the 23 thousand firearms regulations we already have didn’t exist.)

Those slanders go unquestioned by the mainstream media because those lies fit their bigoted stereotypes. Facts don’t matter because gun-owners are the minority we’re supposed to hate.

Why do gun owners receive so much hate from the media when slightly more than 60 percent of us say that gun ownership is looked at favorably in our community? These bigoted confession on the news tell us a great deal about the lives of today’s media, but they don’t tell us a thing about gun owners in the US.

This is what we’d know if facts mattered. 72 percent of adults in the US have fired a gun. 22 percent of women own a gun and 36 percent of gun owners are women. 40 percent of women live in a gun-owning household. 40 percent of the participants at “Friends of the NRA” events are women and 40 percent are minority members. The average age at the Friends of the NRA banquets is between 40 to 45. That isn’t what we were told on the news.

Two thirds of gun owners own more than one gun so gun ownership is widespread. In addition, 52 percent of non-gun owners said they are open to owning a gun in the future. 20 percent of gun owners identify as democrat or leaning democrat. 72 percent of us think that most people should be able to own a gun. The gun owners we know the most about are those with a permit to carry concealed. These gun owners are more law-abiding than the police.

Given these favorable demographics, why do we hear all the hate on gun owners from Democrat politicians?

Money talks. Stated more precisely, campaign donations influence political positions. Billionaire Michael Bloomberg promised to spend a hundred million dollars in campaign contributions for anti-gun politicians. Make that two hundred million. That is more than ten times the money spent by the NRA and its affiliates.

This anti-gun attitude makes sense once we think about it. The second amendment isn’t about pistols, rifles, shotguns, or even about cannons. The second amendment is about limiting government power. Billionaire Michael Bloomberg doesn’t like limiting government power, and neither do the other Socialists presidential candidates.

Now the slanders against gun owners make sense. Socialism isn’t power to the people; socialism gives power to socialist rulers. The people who support socialism view themselves as the rulers, not the ruled. That description fits the anti-gun candidates we’ve seen, and it fits our mainstream media today.

Thanks, but my family will keep our guns..and our freedom. How about you and yours?

Pew Research- Demographics of Gun Ownership
Pew Research- Gun Report 2017
SlowFacts blog- More Truth Leaks Out About Gun Control
Breitbart News- Bloomberg ups the Ante- pledges 100 million to secure no-gun congress
Washington Post- Democrat Candidates Embrace Gun Control 2019

I gave you 500 words for free. Please share this article with a friend. RM

Toxic Media and the Rights Restrictors

April 10, 2019

We live in the internet age where we have a world of information at our fingertips. The downside is that we’re flooded with details while we lose the larger truths. Our problem isn’t ignorance, but lack of perspective. Today, the media can shock us with something that is technically true, but intellectually meaningless. I want to show you two examples. One is boringly familiar while the other is virtually invisible to us because of media bias.

We continue to learn old truths. For example, there are countless articles written about what we should and should not eat. This isn’t an article on dietary consumption, but on intellectual consumption. From a technical perspective, we can now measure trace chemicals so accurately that we find minute amounts of harmful compounds everywhere. For instance, oranges contain natural carcinogens in their skin. So do other fruits and vegetables. We can also find “man made chemicals” in places untouched by man. All we have to do is look hard enough.

It is simple to write a shocking news article describing how we despoiled the earth and contaminated our food with toxic chemicals. Selling that cancer-scare story is trivially easy. The fact remains that we’re eating better then we ever have. We also know that eating sufficient fruits and vegetables helps reduce our cancer risk.. even though those same foods contain measurable quantities of chemicals known to cause cancer.

Sensational journalism is more dangerous than mislabeled food. It is easy to sell us a sensational lie about the food we eat and the world in which we live. That dishonest journalism makes us less safe rather than helping us to be healthier and live safer lives. A more reasoned perspective tells us if our food is healthy, but that reasoned perspective is exactly what is lacking in our intellectual diet of sensational news.

I showed you a general rule about our biases and the news. I chose an ordinary example like food-safety because it is familiar. We’ve been told to ‘eat our vegetables’ since we were children, yet we can still be convinced that vegetables are dangerous.

I want to apply that same critical perspective to another topic that recently flooded the media. Politicians and the news media collected headlines from around the world and fed us stories of “gun violence” and “mass murder”. Our reaction is predictable. We’re justifiably shocked at the murder of innocent people. We’re outraged when we see video of their bloody bodies. Almost universally, these stories then call for disarming honest citizens who haven’t hurt anyone. The journalists never tell us the rest of the story so we can see these atrocities in perspective.

When we look at the facts, the US is not a violent country. The media never mentions that detail because perspective won’t keep us watching through the commercials. For the most part, violence in the US is concentrated in a few failed US cities. If we exclude a few cities that have long been under Socialists control, then the US is rated among the safest countries in the world. Our relative non-violence is more remarkable given that there are a hundred million gun owners in the US and that these honest gun owners fire millions of shots a day for sport and training.

In contrast to the media hype, honest gun owners are part of the solution to stop violent criminals who misuse guns. On the occasion when armed citizens use their gun for self defense, the result is strikingly similar to what happens to police officers. The average armed citizen stops most assaults without firing a shot. Why didn’t the media tell us that?

Media bias hides the fact that guns save lives far more often than they cost them. This bias came to mind as I recently read a judge’s decision. This 9th circuit judge was so eloquent, that I’ll let him speak for himself.

Judge Roger T. Benitez said,

“Who has not heard about the Newtown, Connecticut, mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, or the one at a high school in Parkland, Florida? The media covers these events for days. But an individual victim gets little, if any, media attention, and the attention he or she gets is local and short-lived.

“That is why mass shootings can seem to be a common problem, but in fact, are exceedingly rare. At the same time robberies, rapes, and murders of individuals are common, but draw little public notice. Are the lives of these victims worth any less than those lost in a mass shooting? Would their deaths be any less tragic?”

The judge is right. Honest citizens use personal firearms to defend themselves and their families thousands of time every day. Unfortunately, that isn’t a story the media wants to tell.

Personal firearms stop crime,
but they don’t sell insurance and cosmetics very well.

This media bias comes at a cost. Our ignorance is desperately dangerous since it is easy to lie to us when we don’t know the truth about personal defense. Some politicians and anti-gun billionaires want to disarm honest citizens. They tell us that ordinary gun owners are the cause of violent crime. The media quotes these lies, and many of us don’t know the broader facts about civilian gun ownership.

It isn’t the NRA that is selling fear,
it is the gun-ban advocates.

We routinely collect reliable police reports from across the country. There isn’t an epidemic of criminals misusing guns. The lying news media wants us to believe that honest gun owners are the real threat and it simply isn’t true.

The news media should come with warning labels!

Caution- Contents under emotional pressure.
The following stories are deliberately distorted
to manipulate your emotions
and distort your thinking.

Some news sources will tell us the truth. Those authors are the ones you should trust. As with all our news, we have to scrub it thoroughly before we consume it. Trust but verify.

I gave you 900 words. Please leave a comment in return. RM

The Socialists Got What They Wanted..and the Republicans Gave it to Them

April 3, 2019

Government is more intrusive and more expensive than ever. Obama made law with his phone and his pen by issuing executive orders. Fortunately, President Trump has reversed many of these orders. Trump also restricted the federal bureaucracy.. when it was politically convenient to do so. Unfortunately, Trump also used the bureaucracy to do the dirty political work that legislators wanted to avoid. That leaves all of us at risk.

The latest example is the  firearm accessory called a bump stock. The murderer who killed 59 people at the concert in Las Vegas had a bump stock on some of his guns. Neither the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) nor the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) said that those bump-stock-equipped weapons were used in the attack, but the news media ran with the story of “deadly bump stocks.” That story became political reality.

House and Senate legislators caved to the media hype that bump stocks were the new public danger. The politicians did not want to confront media that bump stocks are range toys, amusements that are inherently inaccurate and unreliable.

That rational explanation takes too many words and is ineffective against the pictures of injured people the media throws up on the green screen behind the speaker. The legislators could have said that guns save lives, but that would require the politicians to swim against the media current of sensational murders. Reality wasn’t as powerful as media myths.. at least in the short run.

The legislators could have written new legislation and outlawed bump stocks. Republican legislators feared that such legislation would offend the hundred million gun owners in the US. They were also afraid of appearing “unresponsive” to the media generated gun-scare. The legislators wanted their political problem to go away so they could appear politically moderate. President Trump said he’d solve the political problem for them.

Trump told the bureaucrats in the BATFE to re-interpret their own regulations and outlaw bump stocks. Ignore the fact that bump stocks had been sold to half a million people. Ignore the fact that you can bump fire almost any weapon. Ignore the fact that the bump stock was a rigid piece of plastic, because according to the BATFE, the bump stock is now a machine gun. The problem isn’t with a piece of plastic, but with a bureaucracy that can now make up new laws at the whim of the party in power.

We are no longer a nation of laws where consequences are know in advance,
but a nation of interpretation where outcomes can be bought.

Trump let the bureaucracy rule. That is very problem we fought with Obama. Obama weaponized the IRS, the Department of Justice, the State Department, the EPA and the INS. Political conservatives were supposed to stop that. Instead, they let bureaucrats bend to the political winds rather than to the law as written. Cowardly Republicans just gave Socialists the keys to the kingdom.

I gave you 500 words. Please leave a comment. RM

Let me take this space to apologize to my frequent readers. I’ve been out of town for three of the last four weekends. I also picked up a part time job.

I have more time now so I can write again. There is plenty to talk about.



Socialists Want Self-Determination for Them, but Not for Us.

March 22, 2019

Who gets to tell you what to do? Someone will, but the amount of control is critically important. Matters of degree matter. Telling other people what they should do may be the inherent problem with democracy. At one extreme, control by outsiders is one of the basic criticisms of Imperialism. Should New York City tell someone in Coopersville, New York or Clymer, New York how to live? What do the people living in Los Angeles know about living in Needles, California or Pine Creek, California? The ideal of self-determination says that political decisions should be made at the lowest possible level. You know about the important problems near you as well as knowing the best solutions. Distant strangers know neither. The superiority of local decisions includes the decision of political affiliation.

Should South Lake Tahoe, California be able to become part of Nevada? Does Hermitage, Pennsylvania have more affiliation with Ohio, or with Philadelphia? This question grows more important as Socialists in big blue cities want to control more and more of our lives. Should the DC suburbs tell the people in Bristol, Virginia how to live, work and play?

Politicians avoid this question because it inevitably disturbs the status quo. Politicians say they are for change, but they have mastered the political system as it exists today. The last thing a politician wants to do is to consider a way to easily change the distribution of political power. Albany has no interest in giving up Plattsburgh, New York to Vermont.

You could argue that each of us can vote with our feet. That assumes that the existing government is fundamental and that the people who live there are subjects. I assume that the people are fundamental and that governmental borders are arbitrary and easy to re-draw. Let’s let Modoc county in the north east corner of California decide if it wants to be part of Oregon or Nevada. Let Clinton County in the north east corner of New York decide if it wants to be part of Vermont. Are they better represented by Albany or by Montpelier?

You could argue that we should set governmental boundaries lot by lot. For now, I’m interested in the way states abuse their citizens. County government is the next smaller representative body. It is a place to start.

Socialists talk about self-determination but not for county government. Socialists are an island nation, and conservatives are the ocean.

I gave you 400 works. Please share or comment.

Gun-Control the Courts Ignore

March 14, 2019

The power to regulate an activity is the power to infringe upon it. The power to tax is the power to destroy that activity. Unfortunately, state and federal judges seldom see an infringement when the government regulates and taxes gun owners.

Today, the state and federal government significantly restrict the guns you may purchase. Those restrictions grow every day. These prohibitions limit the model, year of manufacture, and the magazine capacity of the guns you can buy. Identical object may be legal or illegal depending on when and where you purchased them.. and there is no way for law enforcement to discriminate one from the other. Those rules apply to you, but not to some government employees. We have clear and convincing evidence that criminals don’t obey these laws. In addition, we know these gun prohibitions have no effect on the rate of crime or its severity. Judges ignore the obvious evidence and don’t see these restrictions as an infringement on your rights.

Some state governments require a government permission slip before you may touch a firearm. You have to prove you’re not a criminal, and pay for the privilege. The federal government mandates that you undergo a background check when you buy a firearm from a gunshop. A police officer performs a similar background check in a few seconds when he runs your driver’s license during a traffic stop. In contrast, some states take a year to perform a similar check. Delays matter. Vulnerable people who were clearly in jeopardy were murdered while waiting for a government permission slip to buy a gun for personal protection. Judges don’t see disarming a murder victim as an infringement. Criminals don’t buy their guns from legal dealers so these laws do nothing to disarm criminals.

Some states tax the guns you buy. They also impose a tax of time as they impose mandatory waiting periods before you can pick up the gun you bought. They also impose a tax of time as they limit the number of guns you may buy in a month. Some police departments impose their own limitation on how many guns you can buy in a year. In addition, there are taxes imposed when the states require mandatory training or safety class to buy a gun. Judges have not ruled these taxes to be an infringement on our right to own a firearm.

Some states want to go farther. They want to impose a yearly property tax on owning a firearm. They already tax ammunition and impose prohibitions on the type of ammunition you can own. Meanwhile, your local police may carry ammunition that is forbidden to you. We would be outraged at similar restrictions on voting or on free speech.

States impose requirements on how a gun may be stored. They prohibit your friend touching your gun. They effectively impose additional taxes the people who sell guns by imposing training, background check, and security requirements that exceed the requirements for some government insured banks. Does that sound like an infringement to you?

Some states tax you if you want to carry a firearm concealed on your own property or in public. They mandate hours of instruction for both the concealed carry students and for the concealed carry instructors. The additional bureaucratic delays of processing the application are another tax on your time. We know what a judge would say if it took hundreds of dollars and several months to obtain a voters identification card. It appears that judges can’t even spell infringement when examining the right of the citizens to bear arms.

Judges are agents of the government. They blindly assume the vague assertion that these restrictions are for “public safety.” The people who have a CC permit are the most law abiding and non-violent class of people on the planet.. period. Politicians might want to punish gun owners politically, but that punishment can never be justified as a public safety measure.

Put not your faith in judges.

I gave you 600 words for free. Please share them with a friend.

Salamanca Attack Murders 15 in Gun Free Mexico

March 12, 2019

The murderers arrived in three vans before dawn Saturday morning. Armed attackers came into the club and shot people on the dance floor. Fifteen people were murdered and an additional seven were injured. Mexican police have no suspects in custody. How did this atrocity happen?

Civilian gun ownership is effectively prohibited in Mexico. Criminals fear neither their victims nor law enforcement. Because of Mexican gun laws, the victims were disarmed, but the attackers armed themselves with illegal guns. Gun control failed again and made things worse in “gun-free” Mexico.

The reason is painfully obvious and widely ignored by Socialist politicians everywhere. Government doesn’t defend us. It can’t do so in Mexico and it can’t do so where you live. The police arrive after the crime has been committed, not during the attack and not before it. At best, government law enforcement can try to prosecute criminals for past crimes.

If the police can’t defend us, then who can? Government firearms prohibitions disarm the citizens who obey gun laws. So called “gun control” doesn’t disarm criminals because criminals break our laws, though politicians claim otherwise. The claim that gun control fails isn’t speculation; we have solid evidence that gun laws don’t disarm criminals or reduce crime in either the USA or in Mexico. None of them work, not background checks, not firearms registration, and not weapons bans. Criminals ignore those laws and criminals are the ones using guns in violent attacks like the one in Salamanca.

That failure doesn’t stop the spokesmen for gun-prohibition from proposing more gun-control. They claim that ink on paper keeps blood off the dance floor. We saw how well that works. Gun-free Mexico has a murder rate several times higher than the USA. At some point, I wonder if the gun-prohibition advocates are actually working for the criminals. That supposition has some credibility since more than 130 politicians were murdered in the six months leading up to Mexican elections last year. Criminals prefer disarmed victims.

Much of this violence in Mexico is caused by US drug prohibition. That is the same root cause of most of the murders here in the USA. Shame on the US for that. With Mexico voting for more government control under Socialism, I expect to see political violence increase since there is more power and wealth for politicians to control and gangs to fight over.

I can’t blame Mexico and Mexicans for foolish firearms prohibitions. Not when we have so many similar laws in the US.. and foolish people who believe them too.

I gave you 400 words for free. Please leave me a rating, a comment, and share this article with a friend. RM

Exclusive Video: Woman removed from gun control hearing for threatening to shoot lawmaker

March 11, 2019

Those anti-gun extremists are dangerous. RM

A gun control activist was reportedly kicked out of a hearing in Hartford, Connecticut today after threatening to shoot a number of people, including a lawmaker.“If I had a gun, I’d blow away Sampson and a large group of NRA,” said the text that led to to the woman’s removal from the hearing.

Source: Exclusive Video: Woman removed from gun control hearing for threatening to shoot lawmaker

%d bloggers like this: