Monday, 27 July

16:26

Report: IRS used donor lists to target taxpayers for audits [The Liberty Sphere]

The IRS scandal during which the taxing agency targeted conservative organizations for delays, harassment, and outright persecution has confirmed the charge that the IRS is a rogue, lawless, and corrupt organization. This fact was further confirmed by a report released last Friday by Judicial Watch (JW) that shows that the IRS used the donor lists of tax exempt, conservative organizations to decide which citizens it wished to target for audits. In other words, if you donated money to one of these organizations you probably would be audited.

JW indicated that it knew such records existed, but the IRS refused to release them. However, through the Freedom of Information Act JW forced the IRS to release the documents in question. The documents show that the IRS would focus its auditing power toward those who made donations to the tax exempt organizations in question.

In 2010, the Senate Finance Committee Chairman at the time, Max Baucus, D-Mont., wrote to the IRS Commissioner at the time, Douglas Shulman, stating that as a matter of IRS policy the tax exempt groups should be "surveyed." Shulman responded in a letter to Baucus in February of 2011 that within the year the IRS would begin a new program that would focus its efforts on the tax exempt organizations.

JW, however, states that the documents it received last Friday indicate that the new program was already being implemented in 2010, as soon as Shulman received the letter from Baucus. But by 2011 the new process was made the official policy of the IRS.

Although at first glance the information contained above seems to be no big deal, this turn of events represents blockbuster legal ramifications. The IRS began to levy a 35 percent gift tax on citizens who gave large donations to tax exempt organizations. However, the U.S. Supreme Court long ago had already declared that a gift tax of this nature is unconstitutional.

But the IRS began to levy such a tax and targeted for audits those persons who gave large donations to tax exempt groups. Going forward after the implementation of the policy, a key figure who shows up again is none other than Lois Lerner, who lied to Congress concerning her role in the IRS scandal which was designed to hamstring opponents of Barack Obama.

Interestingly, in spite of the fact that much of the information that is crucial to the scandal has been destroyed or withheld, the Acting IRS Commissioner at the time, Steven Miller, ordered that no more resources be spent investigating the audit issue and that the case be officially closed.

But as the nation now knows, this case is far from being closed. This, plus Hillary Clinton's Benghazi scandal at the State Dept., represent the scandal of all scandals that will haunt the candidate and countless personnel within the Obama administration in the foreseeable future and may serve to permanently taint the legacy of Barack Obama.

12:05

Blacks And Hispanics Are Lining Up For Their Concealed Carry Permits In Chicago | Matt Vespa [Gun News]

The Land of Lincoln was the last state to recognize concealed carry right in July of 2013 after the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the state's law banning the carrying of firearms in public was unconstitutional in December of 2012. In January of 2014 , the law allowing for concealed carry went into effect, and Chicago saw the lowest murder rate since 1958 .

11:00

Rick Perry vs. Bernie Sanders: More guns in movie theaters? [Gun News]

The recent shootings mean that the 2016 candidates are coming out with clearer positions on guns and gun control. How important is that to choosing a president? A police officer controls entry into a movie theatre where a man shot and killed filmgoers Thursday night in Lafayette, La.

08:57

What 2016ers said over the weekend [Gun News]

Over the weekend, the 2016 campaign trail was abuzz with presidential candidates pitching plans and engaging with voters and Sunday and Saturday had no shortage of news-making comments from 2016ers. And while they addressed a range of topics, in a range of formats, they had something in common: They were on defense.

07:57

Gun Control: Eating Steak with Teaspoons [Gun News]

President Obama told the BBC he's "stymied" because he's not gotten his way regarding gun control --yet. So, apparently we should just relinquish our guns during a Second Amendment burning ceremony on the National Lawn.

05:52

Letter: Candidate has wrong temperament for mayor [Gun News]

The mayor and city manager announced that more police officers will be on the streets and began presenting a brand new, collaborative effort called the Worcester Youth Violence Prevention Initiative. Although Gaffney had earlier in the week requested a report on the plan to address the uptick in gun violence, he reacted to the mayor's statement with nonconstructive sarcasm on Facebook: “Great news! There will be no more shootings in Worcester.

05:31

Flouting The Law, Some New Yorkers Won't Register Guns [NRA-ILA News]

New York state has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. Compliance with those laws is another matter.New York passed a broad package of gun regulations after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., despite the objections of hunters and gun rights advocates. Now it appears that many gun owners are refusing to comply with a key provision that requires the registration of so-called assault weapons.

05:30

Texans protest Obama’s latest gun control plan [NRA-ILA News]

Texans are firing back at a federal plan to prevent some Social Security beneficiaries from buying guns if they don’t or can’t manage their own financial affairs.Some say the proposal — which would have the Social Security Administration comply with procedures already in place to prevent gun sales to drug addicts, felons and more — is the latest move by President Barack Obama’s administration to restrict firearm use.

05:29

Johnson, Grassley Question State Department Gun Regulations [NRA-ILA News]

Senators Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Charles Grassley (R-IA), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry requesting details about the State Department’s proposed changes to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). The proposed regulations, as written, may require law-abiding citizens to procure “proper authorization” from the government before publicly speaking about firearms and other materials.

05:28

Australia: Lever-action shotgun to be banned by Prime Minister Tony Abbott [NRA-ILA News]

Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s dramatic intervention will stop 7000 Adler lever-action shotguns entering Australia. The imports will be suspended for at least six months, until the National Firearms Agreement review process is completed.

04:49

North Carolina: NRA-Supported Omnibus Bill May be Taken Up by Full Senate Today! [NRA-ILA News]

As previously reported, House Bill 562, the NRA-supported omnibus, pro-gun reform bill, was reported out of the Senate Judiciary II Committee last week on a voice vote with no changes.  The bill is now on the Senate Calendar, and could be voted on by the full Senate as early as today.

03:38

Why Israel will hit Iran after Obama's gone. [Sipsey Street Irregulars]

Yeah. If they have that much time.
See also: "Making Stuff Up."
The administration must believe it’s okay to make stuff up, that the American public doesn’t really care and would rather be tweeting about Sharknado. But if it’s such a good deal, why does it need to be kept out of the sunlight? The administration’s stealth, subterfuge, and lies have revealed one very big truth: It knows the deal won’t withstand the scrutiny of the American people and their representatives.

01:38

Fiat Chrysler faces record $105M over safety [Gun News]

The nation's vehicle safety agency is expected to slap Fiat Chrysler Automobiles with a record $105 million fine Monday for shortcomings in reporting defects and inadequate recall procedures, according to a source familiar with the consent agreement. As part of its deal with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration , Fiat Chrysler will also be required to buy back a limited number of vehicles, offer incentives for owners to participate in recall repairs, and be subject to independent monitoring to ensure its safety program continues to meet minimum standards, the source said.

Sunday, 26 July

21:28

Indiana woman commits suicide at gun range [Gun News]

An Indiana woman walked into a shooting range, rented a gun, and shot herself in the head. The apparent suicide happened Saturday afternoon at the Applied Ballistics range in Lafayette, Ind.

19:23

Coal train derails near Dallas suburb, no injuries [Gun News]

A Mansfield fire official says part of a coal train derailed near the Dallas-area suburb but no injuries were reported. Mansfield Assistant Fire Chief Michael Ross says there was no immediate determination of why 26 cars of the train came off the tracks Sunday.

15:18

Bernie Sanders Defends His Record On Guns [Gun News]

Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday called for lawmakers to find "common ground" on gun legislation amid the massacre in Lafayette, Louisiana, and dismissed criticism of his mixed record on gun control. "As a nation, we can't continue screaming at each other ... we'll have to find common ground," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

12:43

Like clockwork Obama team uses criminal shooting to push gun control [The Liberty Sphere]

Since I could not get the following article published, I am posting it right here on The Liberty Sphere. Thanks for reading, my friends.

Almost as soon as the smoke dispersed from the firearm used by the Louisiana shooter who killed two at a movie theater Thursday night, Barack Obama's team and some of his supporters were once again using a tragedy to push for gun control. Obama crony Rahm Emanuel once famously stated, "Never let a crisis go to waste." The Obama team took Rahm's statement to heart. Each time there is a shooting, the minions of the gun ban movement leap into action, inundating the news airwaves with the false meme that had there only been more gun control, the massacre would have never happened.

CNN's anchor reporters the night and morning following the Louisiana shooting wasted no time to chime in, stating that the nation needs to take a more serious look at the issue of gun control. As for Barack Obama himself, before the shooting had taken place he gave an interview with the BBC during his trip to Kenya during which he stated that the biggest frustration of his presidency is the inability to get anything done about gun violence and pass gun control legislation.

Once again, the footsoldiers of the progressive anti-gun movement would mandate that all citizens be deprived of the most effective means of self-defense in order to prevent a few criminals and emotionally unstable persons from getting them. Other than the fact that the U.S. Constitution specifically forbids such laws, this thinking throws all of the components of logic and common sense out the window.

Each year in America between 32,000 and 40,000 citizens on average are killed in car wrecks. Yet Americans continuously shy away from any suggestion that they give up their autos and opt instead for public transportation. Why? Americans like their freedom. They want to make their own choices and do their own thing apart from the watchful eye of government. And this fact is true although 40,000 will die behind the wheel. Most would say that it is up to the individual to remember, "Let the buyer beware." It is up to the individual to put into practice the commonsense measures that enhance the person's chances of staying out of car accidents, or, increase their chances of surviving if they are in such an accident.

So, why is there no push in Washington to ban cars and trucks? Using the logic of the anti-gun cabal, given that 40,000 citizens will die using these instruments of death, Americans should thus be prevented from owning, possessing, and using autos. The thinking of the progressives is all too clear -- if a tiny percentage get hurt or killed using instruments that tens of millions use, force those who use their guns and autos legally, carefully, and with appropriate caution, to give them up even if they are not guilty of any crime. Do not focus on punishing the perpetrators. Punish everyone even though they have never used their firearms or their autos in a haphazard or dangerous fashion.

The latest incident involving firearm abuse by a deranged psych case is no logical reason to deprive all citizens of the right to keep and bear arms. Most Americans are now smart enough to see through this deception that pushes an ominous agenda.

11:13

Christie rips gun rights activist [Gun News]

Chris Christie tore into a gun rights activist in an Iowa town hall on Saturday, defending his Second Amendment record and attacking a man who questioned him. Chris Christie tore into a gun rights activist who questioned his Second Amendment record in an Iowa town hall event Saturday night, displaying the fiery and confrontational style the New Jersey governor is known for.

10:35

Biased media: Compare how ABC’s George Stephanopoulos badgered Peter Schweizer with how he interviewed the preside [John Lott's Website]



Put aside that Stephanopoulos didn't acknowledge his donations to the Clinton Foundation when he interviewed Schweizer about the foundation.  Just compare the tone and badgering of Schweizer with how he was differential to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.

10:13

Women attend 'Sweatin' with Strong' camp at UT Austin [Gun News]

Around 1,000 women braved the heat Saturday afternoon to participate in Charlie Strong's Women's Clinic at DKR Stadium. "I am already sweating and I've done one drill and they have to wear the big uniforms and all the pads, I can't imagine," said Kate Nyquist.

09:51

Home invasion: some useless advice [Of Arms and the Law]

Here is advice from Simplisafe Security Sellers. Put a deadbolt lock on a closet and retreat there, then use your cellphone to call for help. I guess it never occurred to them that a modern closet door (and for that matter, most interior doors) are nothing but two very thin sheets of plywood that would be easily broken by a kick.

But don't grab a weapon, not even pepper spray! "They all sound like a good idea, but again, we don't know how the burglar will react to seeing an armed person." No, but we can probably predict how he will react to the impact of 1.25 ounces of 00 buck.

06:04

Magazine ranks AZ the best state for gun owners in 2015 [Gun News]

PHOENIX - Arizona has landed atop the list of Guns & Ammo Magazine's list for the best states for gun owners in 2015 . The rankings were released earlier this week.

05:57

Trying to recover from transitions. Adios to Hattiesburg. Also, saving the Republic is all well and good but you can't accomplish anything if you're dead. [Sipsey Street Irregulars]

This week has been filled with stresses and strains. I'm exhausted from the struggles of trying to protect my friends from their wife-beating arsonist son-in-law (successfully) and yesterday moving Zoe back to Birmingham from Hattiesburg to take another job (also successfully, although the exertions in the heat with a mattress and box springs that wanted to leap off the top of the GMC Jimmy in what turned out to be a seven hour trek darn near killed me). Today will be taken up with the rearrangements attendant upon that move in order to get her settled. Thus does the Vanderboegh family finally say "adios" to the college town of H'burg -- thank and praise the Lord. Not that we don't have Southern Miss to thank for a lot of blessings, but there is a darker side to most college towns, not the least of which is the present-day "party" culture. Hattiesburg also has a lot of town-gown conflicts/crimes that go deliberately unreported by both university and local press, exacerbated by the recent rising boil of racial animosity ("Black lives matter, but F you, honky mofo.")
These past two weeks have also convinced me that I must crank back on some of the work I have been doing with national groups and events and see to my health and my own family responsibilities, both of which I have abused terribly this past year or do. Saving the Republic is all well and good but you can't accomplish anything if you're dead. That is not to say that I will be ceasing my efforts at national armed civil disobedience (and the fun part, smuggling) but I am going to have to moderate some. The zombie apocalypse portends, and my own preparations to see to my family have been sorely neglected because of time, energy and especially monetary resources that have been spent on larger (but not necessarily more important) issues. Indeed, I have fallen down on my responsibilities to my own family. I must remedy that.
A big part of that is finishing Absolved, as I am unceasingly reminded by y'all. The black dog banished by the motivation of looming events, I have been working fitfully on it even throughout this hell week and also an essay wrapped around this T.R. Fehrenbach quote:
To make a war, sometimes it is necessary that everyone guess wrong. . . A war is made when a government believes that only through war, AND AT NO SERIOUS RISK TO ITSELF, it may gain its ends. (Emphasis supplied, MBV) -- This Kind of War, pp. 32-33.
I'll try to have more later. Now, just exactly where do I put the stuff from Hannah's old room and how do I find the the time and energy to crop back the jungle in the back yard? It is times like these that I realize that even the Founders likely had to remember to feed the dog, carry out the garbage and make sure the family horse was fed, watered and curry combed. Of course Sam Adams didn't worry about the bills -- he just didn't pay them. Not an option for me, I'm afraid.

04:13

Gee whiz. Only NOW are they starting to notice? [Sipsey Street Irregulars]

Flouting The Law, Some New Yorkers Won't Register Guns
New York state has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. Compliance with those laws is another matter. New York passed a broad package of gun regulations after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., despite the objections of hunters and gun rights advocates. Now it appears that many gun owners are refusing to comply with a key provision that requires the registration of so-called assault weapons.

01:49

MSNBC's Poll Shows Support for Carrying Guns in Public [Gun News]

In the wake of the theater shooting in Louisiana, the Chattanooga Jihadi attack on the U.S. military, and the church mass shooting in South Carolina, MSNBC might have thought that people would be against carrying guns in public. They sponsored an online poll .

Saturday, 25 July

21:34

Russell County Sheriff denied previous gun permit to alleged Louisiana gunman [Gun News]

Before John Russell Houser's face was plastered around the country after he took to a Louisiana theater, he was familiar to the Russell County Sheriff's Department years ago. "His background, it showed the arrest for arson and the report we had for domestic violence so we denied him a permit in '06," said Sheriff Taylor.

21:34

Shooting Industry Masters Charity Auction: Benelli Ultra Light 12 Gauge Shotgun [Gun News]

One hundred percent of the proceeds from this auction will go directly to the NSSF to help support and promote this very important national shooting program. You can directly help promote shooting to thousands of new shooters through your support on this important auction - and come away with a fine, custom handgun at the same time! The Ultra Light shotgun is an upland hunter's dream.

18:20

Texans protest Obamaa s latest gun control plan [Gun News]

Texans are firing back at a federal plan to prevent some Social Security beneficiaries from buying guns if they don't or can't manage their own financial affairs. Some say the proposal - which would have the Social Security Administration comply with procedures already in place to prevent gun sales to drug addicts, felons and more - is the latest move by President Barack Obama's administration to restrict firearm use.

17:20

Police: Woman rented a gun, used it to kill herself [Gun News]

Police: Woman rented a gun, used it to kill herself Police say a woman walked into a Lafayette gun store and shooting range, rented a gun and killed herself. Check out this story on jconline.com: http://on.jconline.com/1MP8aSL A woman died Saturday afternoon after police say she walked into a Lafayette gun store and shooting range, rented a handgun and killed herself.

Thursday, 23 July

16:58

Obama continues to ignore suffering of victim families [The Liberty Sphere]

"One by one they came to Washington, D.C. from across the country Monday to testify before Congress concerning the consequences of the failure of the Obama administration to enforce U,S, immigration law. Gut wrenching accounts of family members who were murdered in cold blood by illegal immigrants were recounted to senators and representatives, including the father of Kathryn (Kate) Steinle..."

Read it all.

06:39

Crime Prevention Research Center has two of the top 5 research papers on "Security and Safety" at the Social Science Research Network [John Lott's Website]

Click on screen shot to enlarge

I hope that people find these two papers of interest and download them to take a look (available here).  The more our research papers move up in rank, the more that it gets other academics to read them and interested in those research topics.  

Wednesday, 22 July

20:57

Report: two of the servicemen attacked in Chattanooga shot back [Of Arms and the Law]

Report here. I suppose that, as with any other law that demands people give up their right to defend themselves, some folks will choose to disobey the unreasonable demand.

20:31

Newly released IRS emails show that Obama adm targeted people who donated to conservative groups [John Lott's Website]

Well, now we can see why the Obama administration has fought so hard against releasing the IRS emails.  The Daily Caller correctly describes this as a "bombshell" admission.
. . . The emails, obtained by Judicial Watch, show that Obama’s IRS conspired to revive the “gift tax” — a tax on 501(c)(4) donors that had not been enforced since 1982 following a Supreme Court ruling that effectively invalidated it. Emails between IRS officials show that the agency referred to Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS while discussing how to enforce their new gift tax on donors.  
On April 20, 2011, IRS lawyer Lorraine Garder emailed a donor list for a nonprofit group to James Hogan, a manager in the IRS’ Chief Counsel’s office. Judicial Watch noted that the disclosure of the redacted group’s donor list occurred during the period in which officials were discussing Crossroads GPS. 
“Does Bob have information about any of the donors [to the group in question]?” Gardner wrote in an email to IRS Estate Gift and Policy Manager Lisa Piehl. 
Weeks later, on May 13, 2011 an IRS official whose name was redacted in the documents released to Judicial Watch emailed Gardner and made one of the most stunning admissions of the existence of the IRS conservative targeting program.
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a 501(c)(6) organization and may find itself under high scrutiny,” the official wrote. “One can only hope.” . . .

18:39

Target, or its attorneys, appear to be insane [Of Arms and the Law]

A mental case run into a Target, pursued by some bystanders (reasons for pursuit unstated). Mental case begins stabbing a teenage girl. One of the pursuers, Michael Turner, makes a flying tackle and drags the mental case off her. Now Target is suing Turner.

According to story, the mental case had stabbed a friend of Turner outside the store, and Turner and others pursued him inside.

My guess from the above stories: the teenager has sued Target, and target made a third-party claim against Turner and the other pursuers, claiming that were partially to blame because their initial pursuit of the mental case led to the stabbing. Good luck with the jury -- if it gets that far.

Hat tip to Alice Beard and Sixgun Sally....

11:54

Newest in the Philadelphia Inquirer: "For more Americans, owning a gun = safety" [John Lott's Website]

My newest piece in today's Philadelphia Inquirer starts this way:
Americans are increasingly convinced that owning a gun makes them safer.
A new Rasmussen poll found that an overwhelming margin of Americans (68 to 22 percent) “feel safer in a neighborhood where guns are allowed.” And a series of polls by Gallup, Pew Research Center, and ABC News/Washington Post show similar results. 
But it isn’t just what people say. They are clearly putting increased stock in self-defense. Since 2007, the number of concealed handgun permits has soared from 4.6 million to 12.8 million. A new study by the Crime Prevention Research Center finds that a record 1.7 million permits have been issued in just the past year. This is a 15.4 percent increase. 
While 5.2 percent of adults nationwide have a permit, in Pennsylvania it is almost 11 percent, ranking it fourth in the country. More than 1 million Pennsylvanians have permits.
In five states, more than 10 percent of adults now have concealed-carry permits. In some counties around the United States, including some in Pennsylvania, more than one in five adults is licensed to carry. In much of the country, someone among theatergoers or restaurant customers is likely to be legally carrying a permitted concealed handgun. 
But even these numbers don’t do full justice to the change that has taken place. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.

08:59

Robert Cottrol on the Black Experience [Of Arms and the Law]

At George Public Radio. He speaks with Philip Smith of the National African-American Gun Association.

Tuesday, 21 July

18:46

Evidence that Trump isn't a "straight shooter," that he tailors his outspokenness to fit his audience [John Lott's Website]

Donald Trump claims to be the true conservative in the Republican primary.

Trump in 2000: "The Republicans, especially those in Congress, are captives of their right wing."


-- Since 1990, for federal offices Trump has given $541,650 to Democrats and  $429,450 to Republicans.  it looks to be at least as lopsided for state offices.


-- A 2011 article in the Washington Post has this headline: "Trump’s donation history shows Democratic favoritism"

The Democratic recipients of Trump’s donations make up what looks like a Republican enemies list, including former senator Hillary Rodham Clinton(N.Y.), Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), Rep. Charles B. Rangel (N.Y.), Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and the late liberal lion Edward M. Kennedy(Mass.).  
The biggest recipient of all has been the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee of New York, which has taken in more than $125,000 from Trump and his companies. Overall, Trump has given nearly $600,000 to New York state campaigns, with more than two-thirds going to Democrats. . . .
Donations to Ted Kennedy?  John Kerry?  All those donations would seem hard for a true "conservative" to explain.

-- Trump has given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

-- Referring to his views on Obama in 2008, Trump said "I was his biggest cheerleader."  In 2009, Trump said that he would "hire" Obama.  That "he’s handled the tremendous mess he walked into very well.


When Trump was toying with running as an independent in 2000, he attacked conservatives and liberals.  He supports Democrats when it is in his interest and Republicans at other times.


He lauds Obama early during his presidency, but then when Trump was toying with running as a Republican in 2011 he goes after the nutty birther claims

Other notes on Trump are available here.



13:57

US House to consider cutting off funding from sanctuary cities [The Liberty Sphere]

"Several news organizations reported today that the U.S. House of Representatives will submit a bill this week that would block funding for so-called sanctuary cities. A similar bill is being formulated in the U.S. Senate."

Read the rest.

12:42

Newest piece at Fox News: "Older people need guns, too" [John Lott's Website]


72 year old woman uses gun to stop attackers
John Lott's newest piece at Fox News starts this way:
Have you ever thought of letting someone else manage your finances?  If President Obama has his way, Social Security recipients who have trouble managing their finances will be banned from buying a gun. 
If Social Security were to start classifying these people as “mentally defective,” some 4.2 million Social Security recipients could be affected – about 10 percent of all people 65 and older. 
But it is a real reach to say those who can’t manage their finances are a physical danger to themselves or others.  What is next?  Saying that people who can’t drive well or fail a math test should lose their right to self-defense? 
What about other rights?  If Obama finds people “mentally defective,” should they lose their right to vote?  Will they lose the right to make other decisions?
Having a gun is by far the safest way for people to protect themselves from criminals.  What is ignored is that older people, as well as women, who both tend to be weaker physically, benefit the most from owning a gun.   When a young man attacks an elderly person, the strength difference is enormous.  A gun is the only means an elderly person can realistically put up a defense. 
Everyday one can find news stories of elderly people defending themselves with guns.  On Sunday afternoon, a 70-year-old homeowner in Washington state rescued his roommate who was being attacked by an intruder.  Two days before that a retired veteran used his permitted concealed handgun to stop an armed robbery and protect others at a gas station in Georgia. 
Americans 65 and over make up over 14 percent of the US population, yet they seldom go out and kill people, accounting for only 3 percent of murders where the age of the murder is known and it is probably far less than that as unsolved murders disproportionately tend to involve young gangs. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.

Monday, 20 July

16:45

Social Security moves to ban certain recipients from owning guns [Of Arms and the Law]

The news has been out (and I too busy to blog it) that the VA is moving to report the names of certain pension recipients to NICS, so as to ban them from purchasing firearms -- and in legal effect, from possessing them, as well. The rationale is that those veteran-pensioners who receive payments thru a fiduciary (appointed because the pensioner was found incompetent to handle his or her financial affairs) comes within the GCA 68 ban.

Now, it's reported, the Social Security system is going to do the same for its pensioners who receive payments through a fiduciary.

This would certain curtail the number of mass shootings and drive-by homicides caused by our WWII vets and SSI recipients, except for the fact that it's hard to reduce zero.

To add to the mess, the reasoning must be that these people come within the 18 U.S.C. §922(d) ban on a person who has been "adjudicated as a mental defective." That's a term from the 1920s and 1930s, the heyday of progressivism ... and of eugenics. Its use appears to have faded out after the Nazis showed their method of dealing with the "mentally defective." Yet here it is in Federal law.

Sunday, 19 July

21:33

Citizen ire meets common sense in Tenn. killings [The Liberty Sphere]

"In the days since an emotionally unstable Islamic extremist killed four Marines and one Navy man, and wounded several others, the families of the victims, local citizens, and members of the U.S. military are increasingly expressing their ire at the federal government for policies that have failed to provide reasonable security in a world that is growing more dangerous by the day."

Read the rest

Saturday, 18 July

16:14

With the debate over whether soldiers should be armed, here is an Army veteran who knew exactly how to use a gun, may have saved a life [John Lott's Website]


From WALB in Georgia about an Army veteran with a concealed handgun permit who stopped an armed robbery and may have saved a life.  The event occurred in Sycamore, Georgia:
An Army veteran speaks, out after firing three shots at an armed robber in Sycamore. The store clerk says Don Rogers may have saved his life. 
Investigators left the gas station Friday afternoon, with glass was shattered earlier from  Rogers' shots. It's damage the clerk would take any day if it means his life was saved. . . .  
This Vietnam veteran was in this Sycamore gas station getting change for a 20 when his day took a bizarre turn. "I heard somebody say "put the money in the bag". So I looked up and I seen this gentleman holding a pistol on the clerk," said Rogers. . . .  
The gun-carrying veteran pulled his weapon on the robber. "And when I did, he looked over at me and turned my way and I fired a shot. And he grabbed his side and then I fired two more shots before he got out the door," said Rogers. 
Two of the shots hit 18-year old Devin Burton. Burton got into a car driven by, 17-year old Marleigh Agner, and the couple took off down Denham Road, but Burton's condition worsened so they stopped to call 911.  . . .

16:11

Immigration a top issue for 2016 presidential election [The Liberty Sphere]

"All of the signs point to the fact that the subject of immigration will be a top issue for the 2016 presidential election. Many erroneously cite Donald Trump as the instigator of voter ire regarding the failure of Barack Obama to enforce the law when it comes to those who enter and stay in the United States illegally. The facts, however, show a growing discontent bordering on rage on the part of most citizens toward immigration policy. That rage has been simmering beneath the surface for at least a decade. Trump merely tapped into the discontent that was already there among the citizenry."

Continue reading


10:26

Miss Texas explains why government shouldn't regulate CEO pay [John Lott's Website]



Here is a woman who understands first hand the returns to hard work.  And she makes that argument. One could also point out the importance of companies getting the best people working for them as well as the benefits to consumers from getting the best products.

What was very striking about this clip was overwhelmingly positive response from the audience.

Friday, 17 July

12:19

Marine killer inspired by global jihad [The Liberty Sphere]

"The latest information concerning the Marine killer in Chattanooga, Tenn. indicates strong, if not irrefutable, evidence that the killer was inspired and radicalized by the global jihad."

Read the rest

Thursday, 16 July

18:45

My latest piece at Fox News: "Chattanooga shootings: Why should we make it easy for killers to attack our military?" [John Lott's Website]

IMG_0343
John Lott's latest piece at Fox News starts this way:
Thursday saw yet another tragic attack in a gun-free zone.  Four Marines were murdered.  Others were injured. 
Watching the coverage on television Thursday, it was hard to ignore the gun-free zone sign on the front door of the recruiting station. It was surrounded by bullet holes. 
Army regulations are very clear stating that personnel cannot have firearms during their official duties.  Last year the Obama administration instituted interim rules that clearly prohibit privately owned weapons from all federally leased office and land, including recruiters’ offices. 
We trust soldiers to carry guns all the time when they are stationed in Iraq or Afghanistan, but somehow when they come home we no longer trust them. 
The Obama administration hasn’t learned anything from the massacres at Fort Hood in 2009 and 2014 or the Washington Navy Yard in 2013. 
After the Navy Yard shooting, the Obama administration focused solely on mental health issues.  Mental illness is important, but only about half the mass public shooters in the U.S. are meeting with mental illness experts and none of these killers was identified as a danger to others. 
But if the dangers from mental illness aren’t identified or if the cause turns out to be terrorism, what is the back up plan? 
With the exception of military police, military personnel are banned from having weapons on base, in federally leased buildings, or while they are carrying out official duties. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.

14:13

Bernie Sanders and the Second Amendment [Of Arms and the Law]

Sander's attitudes on gun control have the liberal/progressive commentators befuddled, or at least more befuddled than they generally are. The one explanation they can put up is that it's a posture to please his Vermont constituents. As the Christian Science Monitor puts it, "Why would a candidate who is staking his campaign on progressive reform be so soft on gun control? The simplest explanation, as my Middlebury colleague Bert Johnson argues, is that, like it or not, Bernie is representing the preferences of a good number of his Vermont constituents."

But that's a little hard to accept, given that when he was a youngster in 1972, and a leader of the Liberty Union Party, it adopted a very pro-gun plank.

"The party, while Sanders served on its executive committee, adopted a platform in 1972 that called for the "abolition of all laws which interfere with the Constitutional right of citizens to bear arms." This may suggest that Sanders's relatively permissive views on gun ownership, already the subject of much consternation among liberals, could be rooted in sincere principle--not simply in the practical realities of winning election in rural Vermont. While this position might irk the average Democrat, it could ultimately serve to broaden his appeal: Sanders has said he wants to forge a coalition that can "cross traditional liberal-conservative lines.""

I can see that. In fact, the true left (as opposed to liberal/progressive) opposition to gun control can be quite consistent. If you believe the present establishment is run by a corporate oligarchy, why would you want it to have a monopoly on arms? I have a friend, an attorney who's said that he is a socialist, and feels insulted to be called a liberal. He's thoroughly pro-2A, and loves to point out to liberals that when the wealthy elite call for disarming the working class, they always make sure to exempt private security guards, which are their own hired armies.

Wednesday, 15 July

22:38

Israel forms anti-Iranian nuke deal with Saudis [The Liberty Sphere]

"One of the biggest  shockers to emerge from the fallout of the newly signed nuclear agreement between the United States and Iran is the news, reported today, that Israel has formed an anti-nuke alliance with Saudi Arabia against Iran."

Read the rest....

17:01

Close the police loophole! [Of Arms and the Law]

A New York City police officer is busted for stealing other LEO's guns and selling them to a drug ring.

A Florida officer loses a submachine gun, an assault rifle, and two handguns, stolen from his car.

A California officer leaves loaded gun on motorcycle during school safety demonstration, and three students are injured.

A Pennsylvania officer is charged with reckless endangerment after a gun accident that killed a State Trooper.

A federal agent has a gun stolen, which an illegal alien uses to murder a girl, and the city responds by proposing ammunition record keeping on its one FFL.

A better answer: close the police loophole!

(Hat tip to Mark Moritz for the idea)

14:54

Actress Kelly Carlson: Speaks about how she got a gun when she was stalked [John Lott's Website]


This beautiful woman will get a few people to listen about guns.  From Fox News:
“Nip/Tuck” actress Kelly Carlson began training in Kali, a form of martial arts from the Philippines, when she was 19. But despite her extensive self-defense training, she found herself in a life-threatening scenario where her martial arts background wasn’t enough. 
"Owning a firearm...was life changing for me because women for sure, but even men too can be in a very, very vulnerable position with no options if you have intruders or any scenario where you're being dominated physically," Carlson told FOX411. "[A firearm] is the only equalizer you have." 
The 39-year-old revealed a person in her past began stalking her in 2012 and even hired people to break into her home and tap her phones. After several break-ins and being followed on the streets, she contacted law enforcement who were not sympathetic to her situation. 
“Law enforcement, they didn’t take me seriously. probably because I’m an actor but also because my situation was a little crazy,” she admitted. 
One good thing came out of the scary ordeal: Carlson met her husband Dan after hiring him to teach her counter-surveillance. . . .

Tuesday, 14 July

13:57

State Dept. withheld key Hillary emails from investigators into Benghazi scandal [The Liberty Sphere]

A spokesman for the House Select Committee on Benghazi told reporters today that the State Department withheld at least two crucial emails that are said to be at the center of the Benghazi scandal. U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three members of his security detail were murdered in cold blood by terrorists associated with al Qaeda.
Read it all
 

09:45

Robert Adams case [Of Arms and the Law]

Some background. He's New Mexico firearm collector and importer who had DHS pull a mega-raid on his house.

The Tenth Circuit just affirmed a District Court ruling suppressing the results of the search, on grounds of no probable cause. The claimed probable cause was that he bought some firearms in Canada, got the permit to import them, but only reported importing some of them. Yes... that and he'd occasionally gone to Canada, and on one occasion apparently drove back rather than flew. Yes...

UPDATE: well, this is interesting. Part of the probable cause claim related to Adams' supposed international travel, using data from DHS' Automated Targeting System. Turns out that that system (1) records airline reservations, and does not purge them if the person cancels the reservation and (2) has been exempted, at government request, from legal requirements that data be accurate and updated, since the government contended that even inaccurate and outdated "data" can give clues. And how much credence is a court supposed to place in data from that system?

05:33

Remarkable segment by Jesse Watters on Fox News trying to get answers from San Francisco City Officials [John Lott's Website]


The video is available here (see particularly at 2:54 into the video). The notion of keeping on deporting criminals who just return again to the US seems pretty irresponsible. Here is a thought: if you are an illegal alien who commits a crime, we put you in jail and then deport you.

05:11

Good for Marco Rubio and Rick Perry blasting Donald Trump's stupid comments [John Lott's Website]

Marco Rubio didn't hold anything back when he recently went after Donald Trump's comments:
Trump’s comments are not just offensive and inaccurate, but also divisive. Our next president needs to be someone who brings Americans together – not someone who continues to divide. Our broken immigration system is something that needs to be solved, and comments like this move us further from – not closer to – a solution. We need leaders who offer serious solutions to secure our border and fix our broken immigration system. . . .
Previously Rick Perry had similarly taken Trump to task (from the video here):
I don’t think he’s reflecting the Republican party with his statements about Mexicans. I think that was a huge error on his part.  And number 1 it is wrong. . . . He painted with a very broad brush and that is the problem. . . . Where he tried to say that Mexicans are bad people, they are rapists and murderers. . . .
Trump is more than just irresponsible on illegal immigration. Take what he says about trade is completely nuts. 
While I'm a Republican, right now, some in the Republican Party are working overtime to hand more power to President Obama.  These same people are turning their backs on the American workers and businesses. It's unbelievable.  
"I learned a long time ago, a bad deal is far worse than no deal at all.  And the Obama Trans-Pacific Partnership and fast-track are a bad, bad deal for American businesses, for workers, for taxpayers. It's a huge set of handouts for a few insiders that don't even care about our great, great America.  
Congress has to stand up and defeat this raw power grab. With the dismal Obama track record, why should a Republican Congress give him more power and gut the Constitution to do it? It's just crazy. Tell your congressmen and senators, vote no on fast-track.
This trade deal is a "bad deal for American businesses"?  Not allowing trade is a handout to specially favored companies that one allows to charge higher prices.  Can trade deals be set up to still protect certain companies from competition?  Sure, but when you have even more firms protected you have even more firms that are given special favors.  There is not a specific example in any of Trump's comments.

Other nutty Trump claims include his promise that he will be able to get the Mexicans to pay for the fence (see starting at 1:14 into video) or to get them to pay for the cost of illegals in the US.  On the nutty getting them to pay for the fence by taxing their products being put into the US, does Trump understand that would abrogate our treaties and also start a trade war?  It is just an irresponsible statement.

Trump also claims that Mexicans in the US actually commit crimes at a higher rate than others. As far as I can tell, he doesn't back up anything that he says.  

It isn't clear how conservatives will react to Trump's views on other issues.  He has said some reasonable things on guns, but he has also made statements that would concern many.
"It’s often argued that the American murder rate is high because guns are more available here than in other countries. Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed. The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions. . . . I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record." -- Donald Trump in his book The America We Deserve (2000).
While Trump owns a number of guns and describes himself as "a gun person," he either doesn't know much about guns or he is willing to make things up.  On so-called assault weapons, Trump noted "who needs them except criminals and police?"

From 2011 to this year, Trump also kept on forcefully pushing the crazy birther claim that Obama was actually born in Kenya (see here, hereherehere, and here).

The problem is that with so many Republican candidates in the race, someone can be doing very well with 14% of the vote.


Trump is also not someone to greatly respect private property rights.  He has an apparently long history of using the government's eminent domain power to take other people's property.

UPDATE: Note every group in the population contains rapists.  The question with Donald Trumps comments is whether illegal immigrants from Mexico commit rape at a higher rate than other groups in the population.  Here is Donald Trump's defense of his claim:
LEMON: I read [the stats], that’s about women being raped. It’s not about criminals coming across the border entering the country. 
TRUMP: Somebody’s doing the raping, Don. I mean, you know, somebody’s doing it. You say it’s women being raped. Well, who’s doing the raping? Well, how can you say such a thing?
Even if the evidence eventually supported Trump's claim, this is a very lame defense of it. 

02:41

Most telling quote about Iranian nuclear arms deal: Do you really want a treaty that depends on "goodwill" from both parties to work? [John Lott's Website]

Here is a quote from the very end of an article in the WSJ:
. . . observers warned that given the complexity of the agreement, which contains one main text and five detailed annexes and totals about 100 pages, the risks of disputes over implementation of terms could cause delays or even derail the deal. 
“The technical obstacles can be surpassed with goodwill and diligence, but political hurdles can turn into poison pills,” said Ali Vaez, senior Iran analyst at Crisis International, an international conflict resolution group. 
“Neither Iran nor the U.S. has ever implemented such a complex quid pro quo. . . .
How good is a deal that depends on the "goodwill" for the two parties involved to make sure that the treaty works? 

02:26

Mark Halperin: Hillary Clinton's idea of growth is through "big, New government programs," and I would add higher taxes [John Lott's Website]

Mark Halperin might not be very conservative, but he accurately describes Hillary's position that making government bigger is her program for growth.

Hillary Clinton's entire speech is available here.



Clinton keeps repeating "growth," "growth," and "growth," but it is a puzzle why someone things that higher tax rates will give an incentive for growth.  As to government spending, where does the money that the government is spending come from?  She seems unable to understand that government spending merely takes the money from others who would have spent the money someplace else.  Whether it is taxes or borrowing or printing up money, the government is taking money from others.

Monday, 13 July

20:53

IRS misses court ordered deadline yet again [The Liberty Sphere]

The IRS has missed once again a court ordered deadline today to turn over newly discovered Lois Lerner emails in the ongoing scandal in which the agency used its vast power to harass, prosecute, and attempt to jail members of conservative groups prior to the 2012 presidential election.   Read the rest.....

07:23

Newest piece at the Daily Caller: "Why Background Checks Couldn’t Stop Dylan Roof" [John Lott's Website]

FBI Director James Comey
John Lott's latest piece at the Daily Caller discusses the FBI's announcement that mistakes were made in the background check for his gun purchase. His piece starts this way:
The FBI says that the federal background check system for guns should have stopped Dylann Roof, the racist who killed nine black parishioners at a church in Charleston. 
This rips all of our hearts out,” says FBI Director James Comey, who blamed the mistake at least partially on improperly labeled paperwork. 
But the truth is more complicated. First, even a perfectly functioning background check system very likely wouldn’t have stopped Roof from getting a gun. Second, the current background check system is a much worse mess than Comey recognizes. 
With Roof planning his attack for at least six months, it seems hard to believe that he couldn’t have figured out some way of obtaining a gun. Indeed, he stole the gun that he used in this attack. 
The truth is, the databases the government uses to determine eligibility for gun purchases are rife with errors. Comey’s comments focus on one type of error, where someone who should have been prohibited from getting a gun wasn’t stopped. But a much more common error involves people who should have been able to buy guns but are stopped. 
This is the same problem experienced with the “No Fly” list. Remember the five times that the late Sen. Ted Kennedy was “initially denied” flights because his name was on the anti-terror “no fly” list? His name was just too similar to someone that we really did want to keep from flying. . . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.  What is at issue is Roof's answer to question e (click on the copy below of the 4473 form to enlarge).
ATF-FORM-4473-pg1

Sunday, 12 July

Saturday, 11 July

22:06

More on the Charleston killer [Of Arms and the Law]

Eugene Volokh thinks FBI director was wrong, the shooter actually wasn't a prohibited buyer. If so, it is interesting that our gun laws are so vague that even the Director of the FBI can't get them right.

The Gun Control Act's prohibited person category does have an ambiguity. It bars gun receipt and possession by those who are illicit users of controlled substances. But, except in those cases where the defendant is caught with both drugs and a gun at the same moment, this gets murky. Does he have to be using the drugs at the moment he possessed the gun?

12:49

IRS harassment of conservatives spreads to other agencies [The Liberty Sphere]

New information has come to light that the gargantuan scandal revolving around attempts by the IRS to thwart, delay, intimidate, and prosecute conservatives prior to the 2012 presidential election was not confined to the IRS. The bombshell updated information, reported by several news outlets and government watchdog groups this week, indicates that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI were also involved.

Read the rest.....

Friday, 10 July

11:41

FBI: we screwed up the background check on the Charleston church killer [Of Arms and the Law]

From ABC News. The story is somewhat off, tho, when it says the problem was that the check system did not note that he'd been caught with drugs:

"When Roof first tried to buy the weapon from a dealer on April 11, an FBI examiner spent several days determining whether the sale should be approved. The examiner missed Roof's previous admission to drug possession during an arrest, which under FBI guidelines should have barred him from buying a gun, according to Comey."

It was a delayed approval, so presumably the check turned up his arrest, and the examiner then had to figure out if it resulted on a prohibiting event. It turns out that it was a felony arrest for drug possession, and those charges were apparently still pending. A person under felony charges can continue to possess firearms, but cannot receive any additional ones. 18 U.S.C. §922(n) ("It shall be unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year to ... receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.") When the examiner followed up on the arrest, they should have found it was for a felony and the charges were still pending, and thus should have blocked the sale.

UPDATE: Bloomberg's Everytown is claiming that this proves the the waiting period for clearing up "delayed" cases should be longer. It concedes the dealer waited five days. How long does it take for the background examiner to call the prosecutor's office and ask if the case is still pending? The most logical conclusion is that someone dropped the ball, not that it would take many days to make one quick phone call.

Thursday, 09 July

19:03

You don't need no steenking permit in Maine [Of Arms and the Law]

Maine becomes latest State to allow concealed carry without a permit requirement. Note the law goes into effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns, which would mean an effective date sometimes in October.

Tuesday, 07 July

19:11

News you can use.... [Of Arms and the Law]

How to Survive a Zombie Apocalypse in North Dakota. A state full of guns, ammo, pickups and crude oil does have the advantage when there is a zombie outbreak.

Saturday, 04 July

13:58

Brady Campaign puffs smoke regarding fundraising [Of Arms and the Law]

Came across this by coincidence. The Sandy Hook massacre came on December 14, 2012. On January 14, 2013, Brady boasted that the incident had raised $5 million for it..

"The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has raised about $5 million since late December, a spokeswoman for the group told POLITICO.... The cash influx came from previous supporters upping their contributions, new donors and old supporters coming back, said Deborah DeShong Reed.
The $5 million haul is close to double what the group pulled in 2010, according to the most recent tax documents available. That year, their total revenue was $2.8 million."

But if you look at Brady's IRS Form 990 report, its total fundraising for 2012 was $4.8 million, and for 2013 was $4.2 million. (That's gross: net would be those figures minus fundraising expenses of $1 million and $800,000 respectively). So the surge in funding Brady claimed was in fact more than it brought in total for either year in question. And the 2013 claim was that the cash had come in "since late December (2012)," but in fact 2013 saw a fundraising decline of 13%.

00:11

Newest piece at Fox News: "Lynne Russell, ex-CNN anchor, and her husband are alive thanks to a gun" [John Lott's Website]

Lynne Russell Screen Shot
John Lott has a new piece at Fox News on Lynne Russell and her husband defending themselves with a gun.
Lynne Russell and her husband, Chuck de Caro, believe they would be dead if she hadn’t been carrying a gun. Late Wednesday night, Russell was forced at gunpoint from a motel parking lot into her room. The robber, not satisfied with merely taking her husband’s briefcase, started shooting at him. Fortunately, Russell had handed de Caro her purse, with her handgun inside it. De Caro shot the attacker, who later died at the hospital. 
This story made national news. ABC NewsNBC NewsFox NewsPeople Magazine and even such foreign publications as the UK Guardian newspaper mentioned that Russell, a CNN anchor from 1983 to 2001, and de Caro both had concealed handgun permits. 
We see these stories every day, some of the heroic actions caught on video and others where the criminal is killed, but you would never know it, because the national media continually ignore them. The case with Russell is an exception because she is a public figure. 
To illustrate how common such defense is, consider a few other cases that occurred over the last week where permitted concealed handguns stopped crimes: . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.

Thursday, 02 July

21:07

Gov Christie points to benefit of gun ownership by women, insight into Carol Bowne's views on guns for protection [John Lott's Website]

An article in the Courier-Post lays out not only Gov. Chris Christie's views on obtaining guns but also more insight into Carol Bowne's views.  She was the 39-year-old hairdresser who was fatally stabbed outside her Berlin Township home while awaiting the state's permission to buy a gun for protection from an ex-boyfriend.  From the Courier-Post:

The governor's actions drew a mixed response from Bowne's father, Sonny Ehly of Voorhees.
"It's too late now for my daughter. It's after the fact," said Ehly, who described himself as "angry, very very angry."
"But I hope for other people, they'll get justice," the father said. "If it helps another woman, or a man, that would be good."
"I'm behind the right to carry guns." . . .
Carol Browne's father surely believes that his daughter would have been much safer if she had been able to get a gun for protection.  It also sounds as if her father had strongly supported her effort to get a gun.  

These proposed rules still seem much too restrictive to me.

Under Christie's proposed changes, a request to buy or carry a gun would have to be resolved within 14 days if the applicant:
Is the victim of violence or threatened with violence or a deadly weapon, "and there is a substantial likelihood of another such incident in the foreseeable future."
Lives under a demonstrable threat, as evidenced by a restraining order against someone who poses the "substantial likelihood" of violence or a threat with a deadly weapon.

Tuesday, 30 June

22:59

Response to Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes' claims at "ArmedwithReaon" about my research [John Lott's Website]


Recently Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes claimed that defensive gun use was a myth.  Gary Kleck wrote a response where he noted that these authors were merely repeating earlier criticisms and ignored the responses that he and others have made to those critiques.

Well, DeFilippis and Hughes use the same approach in discussing my research (a screen shot of their original post is saved here).  Let's try to go through these points in order that they are presented:


-- Tim Lambert as a source.  Professor Jim Purtilo at the University of Maryland put up a post in 2004 that he has updated over the years that shows that Lambert has been caught falsifying evidence on multiple occasions and has otherwise been dishonest.  See:

-- Cherry picking surveys on gun ownership.
In an audacious display of cherry-picking, Lott argues that there were “more guns” between 1977 to 1992 by choosing to examine two seemingly arbitrary surveys on gun ownership, and then sloppily applying a formula he devised to correct for survey limitations. Since 1959, however, there have been at least 86 surveys examining gun ownership, and none of them show any clear trend establishing a rise in gun ownership. Differences between surveys appear to be dependent almost entirely on sampling errors, question wordings, and people’s willingness to answer questions honestly.
My paper with Mustard as well as my book looked at all the crime data available when those pieces were written and I updated that data with each successive updated edition of my book.  

-- Paper with David Mustard: crime data for all the counties and states in the US from 1977 to 1992.  
-- First edition of MGLC: crime data for all the counties and states in the US from 1977 to 1992 as well as up to 1994 for a comparison.  Literally hundreds of different factors that could impact crime rates were accounted for.
-- Second edition of MGLC: crime data for all the counties, cities, and states in the US from 1977 to 1996.  
-- Third edition of MGLC: crime data for all the counties and states in the US from 1977 to 2005.  

The regressions in those publications account for all the data available (all counties, all cities, all states for all the years the data is available), no cherry picking, and, following earlier work by William Alan Bartley and Mark Cohen, report all possible combination of these hundreds of control variables to show that the results are not sensitive to a particular specification.

The only survey discussion that I made in my first two editions of MGLC was for the 1988 and 1996 voter exit poll surveys.  Those two exit polls included a question on gun ownership.  The third edition of MGLC updates the data to include the 2004 exit poll survey.  The reason for using those large exit polls is that they can contain up to 32,000 people surveyed (though in other years it might only be about 3,600) and that allows one to breakdown the data on a state by state basis to see how gun ownership is changing across different states.  The GSS survey only has data for 600 to 800 observations at a time every two years.  Some other surveys may occasionally have up to 1,200 people, but those samples are just too small to make cross state comparisons.  So I wasn’t looking at these exit poll surveys to check general gun ownership rates for the whole US, but to look at the data for specific states.
However, we know this assertion is factually untenable, based on surveys showing that 5-11% of US adults already carried guns for self-protection before the implementation of concealed carry laws.
The surveys that DeFilippis and Hughes are referring to involve people carrying guns for any reason, including going hunting or simply moving guns between places (See the 
discussion in MGLC).  
It’s extremely unlikely, therefore, for the 1% of the population identified by Lott who obtained concealed carry permits after the passage of “shall-issue” laws to be responsible for all the crime decrease.
Again, I refer to the same discussion from MGLC as it shows that this 1% number is misleading and it also shows a simple numerical example regarding what would be required to get the expected reduction in crime.  This is part of a consistent pattern where DeFilippis and Hughes make no attempt to discuss the responses that I have already made on these issues.
On Hood and Neeley -- "zip codes with the highest violent crime before Texas passed its concealed carry law had the smallest number of new permits issued per capita."
I have a long discussion about why purely cross-sectional analysis is unreliable.  Regarding: "zip codes with the highest violent crime before Texas passed its concealed carry law had the smallest number of new permits issued per capita.”  Well, given that it cost $140 and 10 hours of training to get a permit, it isn’t very surprising to me that poor areas have both high crime rates and low permit rates.  As to cherry-picking, even if cross-sectional analysis was useful, somehow the authors have to explain why they picked one city in the entire US to look at.  In any case, I note this paper and respond to it in MGLC.

Note on the Dade county data.  

Dade county police records, which cataloged arrest and non-arrests incidents for permit holders in a five-year period, also disproves Lott’s point. This data showed unequivocally that defensive gun use by permit holders is extremely rare. In Dade county, for example, there were only 12 incidents of a concealed carry permit owner encountering a criminal, compared with 100,000 violent crimes occurring in that period. . . .
Anyone who has been following the debate on justifiable police homicides knows that the data is not very reliable.  The justifiable homicide data for civilians is even worse.
As Albert Alschuler explains in “Two Guns, Four Guns, Six Guns, More Guns: Does Arming the Public Reduce Crime,” Lott’s work is filled with bizarre results that are inconsistent with established facts in criminology. . . .
My responses to these claims can be found in MGLC (here and here), though DeFilippis and Hughes ignore my responses.
Dennis Hennigan writes, “the absence of an effect on robbery does much to destroy the theory that more law-abiding citizens carrying concealed guns in public deter crime.”
My response to this type of point is available here in MGLC.

Frank Zimring and Gordon Hawkins as well as Dan Black and Daniel Nagin are intertwined here.
Black and Nagin noticed that there were large variations in state-specific estimates for the effect of “shall-issue” laws on crime. For example, Lott’s findings indicated that right-to-carry laws caused “murders to decline in Florida, but increase in West Virginia. Assaults fall in Maine but increase in Pennsylvania.” In addition, “the magnitudes of the estimates are often implausibly large. The parameter estimates that RTC laws increased murders by 105 percent in West Virginia but reduced aggravated assaults by 67 percent in Maine. . . .
Again, DeFilippis and Hughes ignore that I have extensive discussions on this in both MGLC and a 1998 paper published in the Journal of Legal Studies.   


1) Note that even throwing out all counties with populations below 100,000 and Florida, still produced statistically significant drops in some violent crime categories.  They thus removed about 89 percent of the data in the study.  There are so many combinations of county sizes and states that could have been dropped from the sample -- for example, why not Georgia or Pennsylvania or Virginia or West Virginia or any of the other six states?  Why not drop counties with populations under 50,000?  Black and Nagin never really explain the combination that they pick.
2) More importantly, even when they drop out counties with fewer than 100,000 people as well as Florida, Black and Nagin still find statistically significant drops in aggravated assaults (significant at the 5% level) and robberies (significant at the 8% level) and no evidence that any type of violent crime increases.  Note that they also didn't report over all violent crime, and the reason that they don't report that is because even with their choices the drop in over all violent crime would have been statistically significant.
3) As to the increase in West Virginia, there was only one county in WV (Kanawha County) with more than 100,000 people in it.  What they showed is not that crime increased in WV (it fell over all), but that there was an increase in one type of violent crime in one county in WV.
4) DeFilippis and Hughes continually write about "Florida" being removed from the sample, but it is Florida as well as counties with fewer than 100,000 people.
5) If one is interested in my other responses, I suggest that people read both MGLC and the paper published in the Journal of Legal Studies.

Regarding  Ted Goertzel's comments, DeFilippis and Hughes plagiarize/copied his comments in their discussion of Dan Black and Nagin.  In general their approach is to copy, slightly rewrite other critiques, and then ignore what I have written in response.


DeFilippis and Hughes write: 

Within a year, two econometricians, Dan Black and Daniel Nagin validated this concern. By altering Lott’s statistical models with a couple of superficial modeling changes, or by re-running Lott’s own methods on a different grouping of the data, they were able to produce entirely different results.
Goertzel wrote:
Within a year, two determined econometricians, Dan Black and Daniel Nagin (1998) published a study showing that if they changed the statistical model a little bit, or applied it to different segments of the data, Lott and Mustard's findings disappeared. Black and Nagin found that when Florida was removed from the sample there was "no detectable impact of the right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape." They concluded that "inference based on the Lott and Mustard model is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy."
This is one time where DeFilippis and Hughes pretend that they are actually linking to what I wrote in response to Goertzel, but instead they misstate what I wrote and link back again to Goertzel.  My responses to Goertzel were similar to what I just note above in response to Black and Nagin.  

DeFilippis and Hughes claim "Lott’s response to Goetzl was to shrug him off, insisting that he had enough controls to account for the problem."  But that is not accurate.  I point out that I was also concerned that the sensitivity of specifications.  That is why I pointed to papers such as the one by Bartley and Cohen that provided tests of whether the results were indeed sensitive.


As to Ayres and Donohue's 2003 law review paper, DeFilippis and Hughes are just simply wrong about the facts.  They write:

"Fortunately, Lott’s data set ended in 1992, permitting researchers to test Lott’s own model with new data. Researchers Ian Ayres, from Yale Law School, and John Donohue, from Stanford Law School, did just this, and examined 14 additional jurisdictions between 1992 and 1996 that adopted concealed carry laws."
The 2nd edition of MGLC came out in 2000 and, as noted above, it had data through 1996.  I provided Ayres and Donohue with my data set and they added one year to the study, 1997.  That single year did not change the results.  While Ayres and Donohue also claimed that the my research had ended with 1992, anyone who checks the 2nd edition of the book or reads chapter 9 in the third edition will see that I had looked at data from 1977 to 1996.

The reply to Ayres and Donohue in the law review was by Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley.  I had helped them out and Whitley notes "We thank John Lott for his support, comments and discussion."  There were minor data errors in the additional years that they added from 1997 to 2000, but those errors didn't alter their main results that dealt with count data.  They had accidentally left 180 cell blank out of some 7 million cells.  Donohue has himself made much more serious data errors in his own work on this issue.  For example, he repeats the data for one county in Alaska 73 times, says that Kansas' right to carry law was passed in 1996 and not 2006, and made other errors.  I did co-author a corrected version of the Plassmann and Whitley paper that fixed the data errors and is available here.  But DeFilippis and Hughes can't even get it straight what paper I co-authored.


In any case, for those who want my response, you can read what I wrote in MGLC (the link only provides part of my discussion).



Again, talk about DeFilippis and Hughes cherry-picking, there are several ways of responding to the quotes by Kleck and Hemenway.

1) Note that Kleck has also said many positive things about my research. For example, see this quote: “John Lott has done the most extensive, thorough, and sophisticated study we have on the effects of loosening gun control laws. Regardless of whether one agrees with his conclusions, his work is mandatory reading for anyone who is open-minded and serious about the gun control issue. Especially fascinating is his account of the often unscrupulous reactions to his research by gun control advocates, academic critics, and the news media.” 

2) I have discussed Kleck's quote in MGLC (see attached file). 
3) The vast majority of peer reviewed research that looks at national data on crime rates supports my research (see table 2 here and also here).  
4)  There are a lot of prominent academics and people involved in law enforcement who have said positive things about my research.  I can list a few here, but I don't really see the point.

“John Lott documents how far ‘politically correct’ vested interests are willing to go to denigrate anyone who dares disagree with them.  Lott has done us all a service by his thorough thoughtful, scholarly approach to a highly controversial issue.”
— Milton Friedman, Nobel prize winning economist
“John Lott is a scholar’s scholar and a writer’s writer — and this book shows why.  That gun ownership might bring social benefits as well as costs is a story we do not often see in the press, and Lott here explains why.  With a blend of new data, evidence, and examples, he unpacks the bias against such stories in the media.”
— Mark Ramseyer, Harvard University
“For anyone with an open mind on either side of this subject this book will provide a thorough grounding. It is also likely to be the standard reference on the subject for years to come.”
—Stan Liebowitz, University of Texas at Dallas
“John Lott’s work to uncover the truth about the costs and benefits of guns in America is as valuable as it is provocative. Too much of today’s public debate over gun ownership and laws ignores the empirical evidence. Based on carefully proven facts, Professor Lott shatters the orthodox thinking about guns and debunks the most prominent myths about gun use that dominate the policy debate. For those who are convinced that the truth matters in formulating public policy and for anyone interested in the role of guns in our society, More Guns, Less Crime is must reading.” —Edwin Meese III, U.S. Attorney General, 1985–88
“More Guns, Less Crime is one of the most important books of our time. It provides thoroughly researched facts on a life-and-death subject that is too often discussed on the basis of unsubstantiated beliefs and hysterical emotions.”
—Thomas Sowell, Stanford University
“Armed with reams of statistics, John Lott has documented many surprising linkages between guns and crime. More Guns, Less Crime demonstrates
that what is at stake is not just the right to carry arms but rather our performance in controlling a diverse array of criminal behaviors. Perhaps most disturbing is Lott’s documentation of the role of the media and academic commentators in distorting research findings that they regard as politically incorrect.”
—W. Kip Viscusi, Cogan Professor of Law and Director of the Program on Empirical Legal Studies, Harvard Law School
“Until John Lott came along, the standard research paper on firearms and violence consisted of a longitudinal or cross-sectional study on a small and artfully selected data set with few meaningful statistical controls. Lott’s work, embracing all of the data that are relevant to his analysis, has created a new standard, which future scholarship in this area, in order to be credible, will have to live up to.”
—Dan Polsby, Kirkland & Ellis Professor of Law, Northwestern University
“His empirical analysis sets a standard that will be difficult to match. . . . This has got to be the most extensive empirical study of crime deterrence that has been done to date.”
—Public Choice

Up to this point in their list, I have tried to go through each of DeFilippis and Hughes' claims.  What should be clear is that I haven't skipped points and I have already answered these claims elsewhere and the same is true for their other assertions.  I would suggest that people get a copy of MGLC for issues up to 2010 and look at my later academic papers at the Social Science Research Network or the Crime Prevention Research Center website.  Regarding their attack on "The Vanishing Survey," they again completely ignore what I have already written on the issue.  Without any attempt to address any of the responses that I have already made to these points, DeFilippis and Hughes' is just a big waste of people's time.

For example, regarding Donohue's latest piece that DeFilippis and Hughes you can see discussions here, here, and here.

I will make one final point.  DeFilippis and Hughes incorrectly describe the National Research Council report.  Their report examined seemingly ever possible gun law that has been studied by academics, but the panel could not identify one single law that made a statistically significant difference.  They made the same response regarding right-to-carry, but unlike all the other laws studied the discussion on right-to-carry laws was the only one that drew a dissent by James Q. Wilson, who pointed out that all of the panel's own regressions found that right-to-carry regressions reduced murder rates.  In 15 years prior to that there had only been one other dissent.  Academics who don't sign on to a NRC report are not invited back to be on future panels.  That creates pressure for people not to dissent, but it also means that virtually all the reports indicate that they can't say anything matters.

Friday, 26 June

18:44

Liberty oriented citizens blast Supreme Court [The Liberty Sphere]

Two controversial decisions in two days yielded some harsh words from liberty oriented citizens today for the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS). A good example is that after reserving the harshest rhetoric of his long career for the court's decision on Obamacare yesterday, Justice Antonin Scalia obviously wasn't finished. Scalia continued his acerbic sarcasm today in reaction to the court's decision on gay marriage, stating that the decision reads like a fortune cookie.

Continue reading here.

Thursday, 25 June

22:59

Reaction to Obamacare ruling indicates deep discontent [The Liberty Sphere]

Reaction to the SCOTUS ruling Thursday on Obamacare was swift and scathing. Kentucky senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul, R-Ky., stated that "we have made a big mistake here." Gov. Scott Walker, R-Wis., who is also expected to become a presidential candidate, said that the court's decision means that Republicans and others who oppose the law must redouble their efforts to repeal and replace Obamacare. Even Supreme Court veteran Justice Antonin Scalia reserved the most vehement reaction of his entire career for his colleagues on the court whom he said ignored the rule of law. He sarcastically referred to the majority decision as SCOTUScare.

Continue reading here.

Wednesday, 24 June

20:13

Key senator says new gun control unlikely after Charleston shooting [The Liberty Sphere]

A key U.S. senator stated yesterday that despite calls for more gun control following the Charleston shooting, new measures that would place more restrictions on firearms are highly unlikely. Various and sundry gun control groups, including civil rights activists and some within Congress, always use shootings such as that which took place in Charleston, S.C. as an opportunity to blame the availability of guns is America as the single most important factor that leads deranged shooters to commit mass murder.

Continue reading here.

18:47

Newest piece in the New York Daily News: "The myth of American gun violence" [John Lott's Website]

Screen Shot 2015-06-24 at  Wednesday, June 24, 5.38 AM
John Lott's piece at the New York Daily News starts this way:
In the wake of the murders in Charleston, President Obama has made more exaggerations and false claims about gun violence in America. He made two public addresses this past week — one to the nation on Thursday and one to the U.S. Conference of Mayors on Friday. On both occasions, he gave distorted impressions of how rates of violence in America compare with those in the rest of the world. 
In his address to the nation, Obama claimed that, “We as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.” 
But Obama overlooks Norway, where Anders Behring Breivik used a gun to kill 67 people and wound 110 others. Still others were killed by bombs that Breivik detonated. Three of the six worst K-12 school shootings ever have occurred in Europe. Germany saw two of these — one in 2002 at Erfurt and another in 2009 at Winnenden. The combined death toll was 34. France and Belgium have both faced multiple terrorist attacks over the past year. 
After adjusting for America’s much larger population, we see that many European countries actually have higher rates of death in mass public shootings. 
Let’s look at such mass public shootings (four or more people killed, and not in the course of committing another crime) from 2009 to the present. To make a fair comparison with American shootings, I have excluded terrorist attacks that might be better classified as struggles over sovereignty, such as the 22 people killed in the Macedonian town of Kumanovo last month. 
Norway had the highest annual death rate, with two mass public shooting fatalities per million people. Macedonia had a rate of 0.38, Serbia 0.28, Slovakia 0.20, Finland 0.14, Belgium 0.14, and the Czech Republic 0.13. The U.S. comes in eighth with 0.095 mass public shooting fatalities per million people, with Austria close behind. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.
NYDN Most Shared

Tuesday, 23 June

18:57

Hillary's vulnerability increasingly clear [The Liberty Sphere]

From the start the Hillary Clinton campaign for the Democratic nomination for president has seemed to be odd at the very least. The most obvious characteristic for Clinton has been a shocking willingness to limit the access of reporters. Amid the complaints of these reporters, however, have been a few rare voices that notice a vulnerability in the candidate that has never been present in her previous campaigns.

Continue reading here.

18:28

Newest piece at Fox News: "Why Tom Brady may have a strong case for a lawsuit against the NFL" [John Lott's Website]

My newest piece at Fox News starts this way:
If a new study from the American Enterprise Institute is correct, the Patriots and their quarterback Tom Brady are going to sue the NFL for defamation in the so-called “Deflate gate” scandal.  The accusation that the Patriots had broken the rules during their playoff game earlier this year with the Indianapolis Colts permanently tarnished Tom Brady’s stellar football career, but it looks as the NFL hid importance evidence and misinterpreted what they did report. 
Brady not only looks set to win his appeal of the NFL’s four game suspension, but he has a good chance to win a defamation suit against the league. 
The NFL’s evidence against the Patriots seemed straightforward: when referees measured the air pressure at halftime, the eleven Patriot footballs had experienced a significantly larger air pressure drop than the four Colts balls that were measured.  Before the game, the referee had measured the air pressure in the footballs at 12.5 PSI (pounds per square inch) for the Patriots and 13.1 PSI for the Colts.  At half time, the Patriots had fallen to 11.3 PSI but only down to 12.53 for the Colts. 
The difference was statistically significant.  The pressure in the Patriot balls had fallen by more than those for the Colts.  Case closed, right?  Not so fast. . . .
The piece continues here

Monday, 22 June

16:41

IRS, State Dept. the most transparent in history? [The Liberty Sphere]

In 2008 prior to being elected President, Barack Obama pledged that his administration would be the most transparent in history. It turns out that the question is not whether or not it has lived up to Obama's pledge. Everyone knows it has not. The real question is how much closer to transparency the administration has become, if at all. If a new assessment provided by the Las Vegas Review-Journal today is any indication, the answer to that question is the only thing that is transparent.

Continue reading here.

Sunday, 21 June

21:46

Ronald Reagan carried a concealed handgun with him for 14 years [John Lott's Website]

From the Daily Caller:
One of President Ronald Reagan’s leading biographers says that Reagan carried a concealed handgun for about 14 years following his attempted assassination at the hands of John Hinckley Jr., confirming a recent claim made by author Brad Meltzer. 
Meltzer, a best-selling thriller writer, wrote in the New York Daily News over the weekend that he was told about Reagan’s heat-packing ways while researching an upcoming novel. While touring the headquarters of the Secret Service, Meltzer says one of the agents there mentioned that Reagan carried a revolver in his briefcase during his years as president. 
“Whatever you think of Reagan, you have to admit, he had a black belt in badassery,” Meltzer wrote. 
The Daily Caller News Foundation reached out to Craig Shirley, a notable Reagan biographer, who said that Meltzer’s claim is completely true and independently confirmed by his own research. . . .
What do you think?

What do you think?

What do you think?

19:08

Enemies of liberty tip their hand [The Liberty Sphere]

Conservatives, libertarians, and gun rights activists have long suspected that many elected representatives, political consultants, and even some religious leaders secretly push a nefarious agenda that directly attacks the liberties and rights of ordinary citizens. Today at least two of these persons tipped their hand, making comments that raised the eyebrows of even the most seasoned journalists.

Continue reading here.

Saturday, 20 June

17:53

Hillary/State Dept. under gun of federal court scrutiny [The Liberty Sphere]

Late last evening, Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch (JW), announced yet another victory in federal court for the government watchdog group. Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia announced that he is reopening the case concerning top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

Continue reading here.

14:24

Yet more evidence that these killers are deterred by people with guns: Charleston, South Carolina Church Shooter [John Lott's Website]

Dylann Roof
As I have previously pointed out how mass public shooting after mass public shooting keep occurring where guns are banned. Here is yet another case of these killers avoiding places where people with guns might be able to stop their killing spree. From the Associated Press:
Last week, while they were drinking in the back of Scriven's house, Roof blurted out his plan about carrying out a mass shooting at the College of Charleston.
"I don't think the church was his primary target because he told us he was going for the school," Scriven said Friday. "But I think he couldn't get into the school because of the security ... so I think he just settled for the church." . . .
Here is what the College of Charleston puts up regarding their armed officers.
Police officers responding to an active shooter are trained to proceed immediately to the area in which shots were last heard in order to stop the shooting as quickly as possible. The first responding officers may be in teams; they may be dressed in normal patrol uniforms, or they may be wearing external ballistic vests and Kevlar helmets or other tactical gear. The officers may be armed with rifles, shotguns or handguns. Do exactly as the officers instruct. The first responding officers will be focused on stopping the active shooter and creating a safe environment for medical assistance to be brought in to aid the injured. . . .
I have spoken recently about mass public shootings at the law school at the College of Charleston, and given that it was my topic, I checked out the security measures at the school.  There were no metal detectors present, just a reliance on armed campus security.
The media generally ignores that these attacks keep occurring where guns are banned, instead concentrating on how the killer obtained the gun or the weapon used. Yet, it is very hard to stop people who are planning these attacks over 6 months in advance from getting a weapon. Background checks and other "solutions" wouldn't stop these attacks that are being used to motivate the laws.
"His mom had taken the gun from him and somehow he went back and took it from her."
(We have previously noted that Greta's show on Fox News interviewed one of the killer's friends who had said that the killer had stolen the gun he used from his mom without her knowing it.)

14:20

Uber and Lyft prohibiting firearms for drivers, riders [John Lott's Website]

Uber
After an Uber driver in Chicago used his gun to stop a mass public shooting and save lives, the company is moving to ban guns in its cars?  Uber has posted the above policy note on its website.
We have adopted a no-firearms policy to ensure that both riders and drivers feel safe and comfortable on the platform. We made this policy change after assessing existing policies and carefully reviewing recent feedback from both riders and driver-partners.
Uber has learned nothing from all these attacks that keep occurring where guns are banned.
With 11.1 million concealed carry permit holders last year, that is a lot of potential customers that Uber and Lyft are turning down.

Friday, 19 June

18:44

Federal judge orders IRS to court [The Liberty Sphere]

In a late breaking development cited by Judicial Watch (JW), a federal judge has ordered the IRS to court. Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the IRS to appear before the court to answer for its delaying tactics and stonewalling. At issue is the ongoing Congressional investigation into the scandal during which the agency admitted it had delayed and at times harassed conservative and Tea Party groups that had sought tax exempt status prior to the 2012 election.

Continue reading here.

15:42

Something that you probably won't hear about regarding George Zimmerman [John Lott's Website]

Remember all the news coverage about George Zimmerman's supposed road rage behavior earlier this year?  Well, here is something that you aren't going to hear about very much (from Fox News):
A prosecutor on Thursday upgraded to attempted murder the most serious charge against a man accused of shooting into George Zimmerman's vehicle while they were driving down a busy road last month. 
State Attorney Phil Archer charged 36-year-old Matthew Apperson with attempted second-degree murder. Apperson had been charged earlier with aggravated assault and battery for firing a gun into Zimmerman's car during a traffic run-in last month on a busy road in an Orlando suburb. Zimmerman had minor injuries. 
Apperson also faces an aggravated assault charge and a charge of shooting into an occupied vehicle. 
"Our law enforcement community and the State Attorney's Office works vigorously to ensure people may travel our busy streets, going about their business, without fear," Archer said in a statement announcing the new charge. "Every resident and visitor to Seminole County deserves this freedom." . . .

Thursday, 18 June

18:22

Dems join Repubs in voting to repeal Obamacare [The Liberty Sphere]

The latest effort by House Republicans to repeal Obamacare garnered the support of 50 House Democrats. Even under the threat of a presidential veto, the Democrats opposed to the Affordable Care Act remained strong, with 46 adding their names to the bill that would dismantle key parts of the Obamacare law.

Continue reading here.

09:30

Newest piece at Fox News: "Gun-free zones an easy target for killers" [John Lott's Website]

Screen Shot 2015-06-18 at  Thursday, June 18, 12.21 PM
John Lott has a new op-ed at Fox News on the 
The horrible tragedy last night that left nine people dead at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., probably could have been avoided. Like so many other attacks, the massacre took place in a gun-free zone, a place where the general public was banned from having guns. The gun-free zone obviously didn’t stop the killer from bringing a gun into the church. 
Indeed, the circumstantial evidence is strong that these killers don’t attack randomly; they keep picking the few gun-free zones to do virtually all their attacks. 
For some reason, people who would never put up a “gun-free zone” sign in front of their own homes, put up such signs for other sensitive areas that we would like to protect. 
Time after time, we see that these killers tell us they pick soft targets. With just two exceptions, from at least 1950, all the mass public shootings have occurred in these gun-free zones. From last summer’s mass public killers in Santa Barbara and Canada, to the Aurora movie theater shooter, these killers made it abundantly clear in their diaries or on Facebook how they avoided targets where people with guns could stop them. 
And even when concealed handgun permit holders don’t deter the killers, the permit holders stop them. Just a couple of weeks ago, a mass public shooting at a liquor store in Conyers, Ga., was stopped by a concealed handgun permit holder. A couple of people had already been killed by the time the permit holder arrived, but according to Rockdale County Sheriff Eric Levett: 
"I believe that if Mr. Scott did not return fire at the suspect, then more of those customers would have [been] hit by a gun. It didn’t appear that he cared who he shot or where he was shooting until someone was shooting back at him. So, in my opinion, he saved other lives in that store." 
Yet, even though there was a video of this heroic action, the story got no national news coverage. Case after case occurs where concealed handgun permit holders stop what would have been mass shootings. While many don’t get news coverage because the permit holder prevents people from being killed, some, such as the recent Georgia case, still don’t get coverage even when there are dead bodies. 
These heroes just don’t stop attacks in small towns in Georgia. . . . .
Screen Shot 2015-06-18 at  Thursday, June 18, 12.13 PM
Screen Shot 2015-06-18 at  Thursday, June 18, 12.13 PM 1

Wednesday, 17 June

20:39

Judicial Watch makes next move in response to IRS stonewallling [The Liberty Sphere]

In compliance with a direct federal court order to explain why the IRS has not provided key emails in the IRS/Lois Lerner scandal, the agency stated on June 12, 2015 that it possesses the emails but that it has withheld them to make sure there are no duplicates. As the IRS knows full well, the intent of the Judicial Watch (JW) lawsuit which led to the court order is not merely to acknowledge that is has the emails but that it intends to release them.

Continue reading here.

Tuesday, 16 June

19:55

Judicial Watch issues statement on IRS emails [The Liberty Sphere]

In two late breaking developments today, Judicial Watch (JW) announced that the IRS has informed JW that it has the subpoenaed emails it requested on the Lois Lerner/IRS scandal and that the IRS has found over 400 new Lerner emails that the agency says it didn't know existed. Congressional investigators believe the emails are key in discovering the whole truth about the IRS scandal, but it took a direct court order with a deadline of June 12, 2015 to get the IRS to comply.
Continue reading here.


Monday, 15 June

17:39

IRS misses court-ordered deadline to turn over Lerner emails [The Liberty Sphere]

The IRS missed a court ordered June 12, 2015 deadline for turning over emails pertaining to the scandal in which the agency illegally harassed conservative, Tea Party, pro-Israeli, and Christian groups. The tactics were designed to thwart the groups' attempts to attain tax exempt status prior to the 2012 election. But liberal or so-called progressive groups were placed on the fast track. Read the rest here/

Friday, 12 June

20:33

Court ordered deadline for Lerner/IRS emails today [The Liberty Sphere]

The Examiner has learned that today represents a major deadline in an important Congressional investigation of the IRS scandal. On June 2, 2015 an order was issued by a federal court to provide a full account of the infamous Los Lerner emails which are at the center of a major scandal within the Obama administration.  Sworn testimony and other evidence show that the agency involved itself directly in a federal election by slapping groups opposed to Obama with audits and other tactics designed to derail such opposition prior to the 2012 presidential election. Read the rest here...

Clc

Monday, 01 June

17:04

Obama launches stealth attack on gun rights [The Liberty Sphere]

The Obama administration has made no secret about its intent to attack the gun rights of the American citizens. The tactic used by the Feds has become all too familiar. Congress is bypassed due to the fact that Obama doesn't have the votes to approve his assault on citizens' rights. Thus, the Administration has resorted to stealth methods using the executive order and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Click on this sentence to read the rest.


Feeds

FeedRSSLast fetchedNext fetched after
About Hunting / Shooting XML 16:16, Monday, 27 July 22:16, Monday, 27 July
Gun News XML 16:16, Monday, 27 July 22:16, Monday, 27 July
John Lott's Website XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 20:16, Monday, 27 July
NRA-ILA News XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 20:16, Monday, 27 July
Of Arms and the Law XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 20:16, Monday, 27 July
Sipsey Street Irregulars XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 20:16, Monday, 27 July
SonomaShooting.org XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 19:16, Monday, 27 July
The Liberty Sphere XML 17:16, Monday, 27 July 20:16, Monday, 27 July