Leatherneck Blogger

Posts Tagged ‘Crime

Terror in Northern California

leave a comment »

This is a very interesting quote from Tiffany Rodgers of Rancho Tehama, California. She was quoted in an article in the LA Times  written by Frank ShyongFrank ShyongJaclyn CosgroveJoseph Serna and Ruben Viveson November 14, 2017

I just want to make sure this town doesn’t get a bad name. Such a beautiful, remote community and this happens everywhere,” she said. “And I’m really hoping they don’t go for the gun violence portion of this, either, because it’s not a gun. I own guns. I take my kids shooting. It’s the person. And sometimes just bad things happen.

It’s not the gun, it’s not mental illness. It’s not anything, it’s just life, unfortunately.

What more needs to be said?

WaPo Writer: Why Were There No Calls for Gun Control at the CMA Awards?

with one comment

By Courtney O’Brien
November 10, 2017

Carrie Underwood delivered a beautiful, tear-filled tribute to the victims who were slain at last month’s mass shooting in Las Vegas during her gig co-hosting the Country Music Awards with Brad Paisley Wednesday night. During her emotional performance of the hymn “Softly and Tenderly,” the victims’ faces, 58 in all, were shown on the screen.

She and Paisley also gave a tribute to the Vegas victims, who were attending a country music festival when shots began raining down on them from the Mandalay Bay hotel, at the very top of the show, before proceeding with their monologue.

That’s all well and good, but the show could have used a bit more gun control rhetoric, according to Washington Post contributing music writer Chris Richards. Why didn’t the awards show use the opportunity to call for gun control, he wondered in his Friday op-ed. He was especially “disheartened” by Brad Paisley, who he said was “acquiescing to Nashville’s disengagement reflex” and encouraging fans to ignore the violence – at least that’s how he interpreted the song “Heaven South.”

And sure, nobody expected the CMAs to transform into a three-hour town hall discussion about the Second Amendment. But did anyone expect such monolithic quiet after such a catastrophic event? Apparently, the ghost of the Dixie Chicks’ career still haunts this town in terrifying ways. (In case you forgot, the colossally popular country trio spoke out against President George W. Bush at a concert in 2003 and were instantly boycotted by radio stations across the country, sending the entirety of mainstream country into a state of political paralysis that has lasted 14 years and counting.)

Now, a style of music that used to proudly address the real-life struggles of real-life Americans won’t go near the issue that everyone in our harried republic is struggling with. After last month’s massacre in Las Vegas, 26 more people were killed in a shooting inside a church in Texas — the setting of countless country songs. Yet, instead of singing about life in America, today’s country stars are singing about an apolitical no-place that doesn’t actually exist. I guess it’s called Heaven South, and apparently, you protect it by circling the wagons.

Perhaps a music awards show isn’t the best place to promote a political agenda. Other awards ceremonies have tried to offer their two cents on policy matters instead of sticking to their art, and are quickly criticized for it. Leave the politics for Washington, D.C.

Richards will be comforted to know that Democrats on Capitol Hill are pushing new gun control legislation. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA), along with dozens of her colleagues, introduced an assault weapons ban this week.

Very Good Advice

with 2 comments

The Dalai Lama, who said, “If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would make sense to have your own and shoot back.”

Upstate NY Church Posted this Warning Sign After Texas Shooting

with 2 comments

By Courtney O’Brien
November 10, 2017

A church in Mexico, NY is not taking chances after last weekend’s mass shooting at a Baptist church in Sutherland Springs, TX. The killer, who we’ve since learned escaped from a mental institution in 2012 and had a history of domestic abuse, shot and killed 26 churchgoers and wounded 20 others. The number of people killed amounted to about 4 percent of the small town’s population.

In light of the tragedy, the Lighthouse Mexico Church of God, located in upstate New York, has a warning for any one wanting to do harm to their congregation. The church has a sign outside its building which presumably lists Bible verses and encouraging words of faith most of the year. But, after Sunday’s massacre, it now reads, “We say it again, we are not a gun free zone.”

Pastor Ronald Russell explained that his church has allowed members to carry firearms since the 2015 shooting in Charleston, SC, when a white supremacist slain nine black church members at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. The shooting in Texas on Sunday just cemented their policy.

“Times are changing,” Russell told Spectrum News on Thursday. “It’s not the congregation, per se, but the leadership. People say ‘well, pastor, you’re talking about killing some,’ and I say ‘well, if I don’t protect my people, I’m being complicit.’ A shooting here, that’s not going to happen.”

In addition to its gun-friendly policy, the church also offers self defense courses for its congregants.

Other churches have taken similar steps after Sunday’s tragedy. In Michigan, the state Senate approved legislation this week to allow individuals to conceal carry handguns into churches, schools, and day care centers. Work had begun on the legislation before last weekend’s shooting in Texas, but the tragedy made the legislation “more timely than ever,” according to Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof, (R-West Olive).

The bill is now moving to the state House.

Trump Nominee Thinks It’s ‘Insane’ You Can Buy An AR-15

with 2 comments

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 9, 2017

When a president appoints someone to a post that requires congressional approval, the assumption tends to be that the nominee shares the president’s politics. This is especially true when someone is the mean, fascisty-racist dictator-in-waiting that the left assures people President Trump really is. After all, aren’t megalomaniacal madmen known for not tolerating any dissent, especially within the ranks?

Yet President Trump’s Department of Defense nominee said something that’s very much not something you expect from the Republican side.

President Donald Trump’s nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Dr. Dean Winslow, said Tuesday it is “insane” that a civilian can buy a semi-automatic weapon like the gun that [the Texas church shooter] used in the Texas church shooting.

Winslow made the comments in his confirmation hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“I may get in trouble with other members of the committee, just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can go out and buy a semi-automatic assault rifle like an AR-15, which apparently was the weapon that was used,” Winslow said.

Law enforcement have said [the killer] used Ruger AR-556, which is a variant of an AR-15.

The Pentagon declined to comment on Winslow’s remarks.

It’s insane?

Except for the fact that the man who appointed him appears to be fine with the idea, as are millions and millions of Americans. In fact, the AR-15 and its variants are the most popular rifle in the country. It’s not that way because people thinking owning them is insane. They find them enjoyable for plinking, valuable for hunting, viable for self-defense, or maybe they just want one because they think they’re cool. Who cares?

There’s absolutely nothing insane about it.

Though perhaps Winslow has fallen victim to the narrative overflowing from the media that fails to differentiate between the AR-15 and its variants and the M-4 in use by the military? Perhaps he thinks the notion that we can walk into a gun store and purchase a fully-automatic weapon insane, in which case, he’s right.

More specifically, the notion we can do that is what is insane, because we can’t. Those guns are so heavily restricted as to be nonexistent for most firearm enthusiasts who lack tens of thousands of dollars to spend on a single firearm. There are hoops to jump through before you can even think of forking over your hard-earned money to buy something you have no intention of hurting a soul with.

Luckily, Winslow is someone who, if confirmed, won’t be in any position to inhibit our right to keep and bear arms. He’ll be a bureaucrat within the Department of Defense, who doesn’t determine firearm policy for the civilian world. His comments are harmless, in and of themselves, but they’re worrying on another level.

After all, a Republican nominee voices opposition to the private ownership of AR-style rifles at a time when it feels like the GOP is more open to gun regulations? The president has made it clear that he opposes new regulations on guns, which is good, but I can see why some are concerned that the Republican party isn’t the friend to gun owners than many believed.

Two Church Shootings, Two Very Different Outcomes

with 2 comments

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 9, 2017

It got lost fairly quickly by the media. It was another church shooting, one now all but forgotten in the wake of Sutherland Springs, but initially lost in the aftermath of Las Vegas which happened a week later. There’s a saying in the news business: “If it bleeds, it leads.” Las Vegas certainly bled, and that meant we had far more to talk about than a church shooting in Tennessee.

The church was in Antioch, Tennessee. That’s where an armed man decided to kill everyone he could at the church.

How did it get lost amid two mass shootings and a terrorist attack in the six weeks since then?

There are two simple reasons, the first was a good guy with a gun in a position to stop the attack far sooner.

A man by the name of Caleb Engle was able to get to his gun and put a stop to the attack. As a result, he wasn’t able to kill as many people as the Sutherland Springs killer, not by any stretch of the imagination.

The other reason you’ve heard so little about it is because of the killer’s motivation. You see, what we had in Antioch was a racially motivated crime. The epitome of a hate crime. You see, the black shooter wanted to kill white people in retaliation for the racially motivated murder of people in a South Carolina church by an avowed white supremacist. The epitome of a hate crime.

As a result of that, lawmakers had little they could do. All the anti-gun narratives were useless. Anti-gun politicians couldn’t demonize the shooter for fear of being called racist–the chickens of identity politics coming home to roost–nor could they claim guns were horrible when the body count was so low precisely because of how an armed citizen ended the fight.

Less than six weeks later, we get Sutherland Springs. While Texas law does provide for CHL holders to carry inside of a church, there didn’t seem to be anyone carrying there. As a result, we get 26 dead and 20 more injured in a horrible tragedy.

Yes, there are very real differences between the two shootings. I get that. In fact, looking at the stories, it’s easy to consider it an “apples to oranges” comparison, but it’s not.

Engle was able to get his gun quickly and deploy it against the threat fast enough to minimize the loss of life. Stephen Willeford, the hero in the Texas shooting, wasn’t in a position to use his own AR-15 nearly as fast. He was across the street and forced to wait for the killer to exit the building.

We see that a quick, armed response is the best way to minimize the loss of life. Even if the armed citizen ultimately falls, he or she can provide valuable moments for others to escape and ultimately save lives, but we also see that an armed citizen can outright stop the fight. That’s what happened in Antioch, TN. That’s what happened when Jeanne Assam pulled her privately owned weapon on a shooter at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs back in 2007.

Two church shootings just six weeks apart, and we see a very different outcome. Anyone still believe that guns don’t save lives?

NYT Columnist Gets Torched For Pushing Gun Control Talking Points After NYC Terror Attack

with 2 comments

By Matt Vespa
November 1, 2017

Nicholas Kristof stepped on a rake last night—and it wasn’t pretty. The New York Times columnist decided to go there on gun control when it was wholly unnecessary to do so. On Tuesday, 29-year-old Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov drove a rented Home Depot pickup truck through a bike path in lower Manhattan and plowed through bystanders and cyclists. Eight people are dead, close to dozen more injured and you’re going to give New York a pat on the back for having strict gun laws. This was possibly in response to Saipov exiting his truck holding fake guns. He was obviously trying to commit suicide by cop, but martyrdom was denied; the NYPD shot him but he’s alive (via CBS News):

Police and witnesses say a man deliberately drove a rented truck onto a busy bicycle path near the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, killing eight people and injuring at least 12 others, then emerged from the vehicle screaming and brandishing imitation firearms before being shot by police. The suspect was wounded and taken into custody.

“This was an act of terror, and a particularly cowardly act of terror aimed at innocent civilians,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said about the attack — the deadliest act of terror in New York City since 9/11. He called it “a very painful day in our city.”

“Today there was a loss of innocent life in lower Manhattan,” NYPD commissioner James O’Neill said at a Tuesday press conference.

Law enforcement sources identified the suspect to CBS News as Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, a 29-year-old truck driver who has lived in Tampa, Florida, and New Jersey. He came to the U.S. in 2010 from Uzbekistan.

In the aftermath of the attack, Kristof tweeted, “The NYC terrorist had a pellet gun and a paintball gun. Good thing that in NYC he couldn’t buy assault rifles, or the toll would be higher.” Dude, are you kidding me? First, yes—let’s breathe a sigh of relief that he didn’t use a gun. It’s not like he used a motor vehicle or anything (my Lord). Second, terrorists and criminals don’t follow the law (obviously), and Saipov wasn’t from New York, so what does strict gun laws have anything do with this incident? Did Kristof even read the Associated Press or any other news report prior to sending this tone-deaf tweet? If he didn’t, then it’s still inexcusable. This was a terrorist attack; it’s not the time to hold a study hall on gun control, man. Kristof got torched—and rightfully so. And the liberal media wonders why they’re not trusted. You think Kristof would’ve stopped commenting on gun policy after his misfire on the Las Vegas shooting.

San Francisco 49ers Pledge $500,000 to Push Suppressor Ban, Other Gun Control Measures

with 2 comments

By Awr Hawkins
October 26, 2017

The push comes in the weeks after the Las Vegas attack. Suppressors were not used in that attack, but the 49ers are dedicated to banning the devices anyway.

According to ESPN, the 49ers presented the gun control pledge as part of creating a “more understanding and safer America.” The $500,000 will also be used to push a ban on bump stocks and armor-piercing bullets.

The ban on armor-piercing bullets is somewhat ambiguous, but appears similar to a ban which was unsuccessfully pushed by the Obama administration in 2015. The Obama-era actually targeted bullets that would have to be re-categorized as armor piercing in order to be banned.

On February 15, 2015, Breitbart News reported that the Obama-era push was directed toward M855 rounds for the AR-15. The rounds are fully legal under the auspices of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which bans handgun ammunition categorized as armor piercing. The Obama ATF attempted to apply the ban on handgun ammo to rifle ammo as well, even though the M855 round was one of the most popular AR-15 rounds for sporting purposes at the time. And it was precisely because of the round’s popularity that the NRA-ILA described the attempted ban as “a move clearly intended by the Obama administration to repress the acquisition, ownership, and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles.”

It appears the 49ers are ready to pick up where Obama left off, and they are joined by the Los Angeles Police Protective League, an LAPD union, in so doing. On October 26 Breitbart News reported that the Los Angeles Police Protective League is pushing for a ban on suppressors, armor-piercing ammunition, and bump stocks.

Suppressors are legal in over 40 states and are widely owned. Legislation to loosen the cumbersome acquisition process for the devices was shelved by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) two days after the Las Vegas attack, which happened to be one day after Hillary Clinton criticized suppressors.

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

Hypocritical radical Leftist Democrats

with one comment

Since when can the radical Leftist Democrats lecture the president on making politicizing statements concerning tragic events?

Within twenty-four hours of a mass shooting on October 1, 2017, in Las Vegas, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) was on the floor of the US Senate calling for legislation to usurp the “rights” of Americans “to bear arms” protected by the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights:



On November 1, 2017, Sayfullo Saipov (a Muslim Uzbekistan national immigrant) killed eight people and injured eleven more by running them down with a truck on a bike path in New York City.

Now, Charles Schumer believes that he has the moral authority to lecture the president for using a tragedy to politicize a terrorist event. I think NOT!



Where is your leadership, Charles Schumer! Why are you not calling for a review of Section 203 (c) (provides for a class of immigrants known as “diversity immigrants,” from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States) of Senator Edward Kennedy’s (D-MA) Immigration Act of 1990?

You can’t have it both ways!

HA! A Major Gun Advocacy Group Is More Popular Than The NFL

with one comment

By Beth Baumann
October 28, 2017

According to a new Fox News poll, the National Rifle Association is more popular than the National Football League. Shocker, right?

The Breakdown

The NFL’s favorability rating has dropped considerably over the last four years. In 2013, 64 percent had a positive view of the league. Fast forward to 2017 and that number has dropped 18 points to 46 percent.

“If the NFL were a political candidate, alarm bells would be going off in campaign headquarters,” said Democratic Pollster Chris Anderson who conducted the Fox News Poll with Republican Pollster Daron Shaw.

The poll confirms what the average American already knew: that conservative white men are more likely to disagree with football players kneeling in protest during the National Anthem. On the other hand, the poll also confirms that minority liberals are more likely than their counterparts to think that kneeling is an acceptable form of protest.

But even more surprising: the NRA is more popular than the NFL. 49 percent of those who were polled favored the gun rights group.

The Takeaway

There are two things that make America significantly different than other countries. For one, we love our sports, especially football. Sports are the one thing that everyone can come together over. It doesn’t matter what race, ethnicity or political background you come from. You can come together with your fellow man (or woman!) to cheer on your favorite sports teams.

But unlike other countries, we also feel the need to make everything — and I do mean everything — political. The days of having a beer and watching the game with your neighbor without fear of political talk are long gone.

And we have idiots like Colin Kaepernick to thank for that.

If it wasn’t for these hot shot, do-nothing multi-millionaire football players trying to turn a game into a stage for political discourse, this one segment of American culture would be unharmed. We would be able to put down our “conservative” and “liberal” labels for three hours while we watch our team duke it out.


%d bloggers like this: