Mark Kelly

Uncategorized

Mark Kelly Is The Worst Kind Of Politician

October 8, 2020 by

There are two types of anti-gun politicians. On the one hand you have Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke. He is forthright when he says he plans to fuck us over. He doesn’t dissemble, he doesn’t say he respects the Second Amendment, and he says outright he’s coming for our semi-automatic firearms.

Then there is Mark Kelly who is running for the US Senate as a Democrat against Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) in Arizona. Despite being the co-founder of the Cult of Personality Known as Giffords, formerly called Americans for Responsible Solutions, he has stayed rather quiet about his anti-gun views in his Senate race.

Listen to what he says about the Second Amendment in his debate Tuesday with Sen. McSally.

Fast forward to 1:20:33 in the video. The moderator says that people first heard of Kelly as the voice of gun control and then asks why he hasn’t raised the issue on the campaign trail. After making some comments about the 30mm cannon in McSally’s A-10, he goes on to say he is a great supporter of the Second Amendment.

Beyond that obvious lie, he then states he got his first firearm as a gift from his father just as he finished flight training in the Navy. He says it was a 9mm Glock and that he carried throughout his military career.

According to both Wikipedia and his official NASA biography, he got his wings in December 1987. Glocks had just recently started to be imported to the United States so it might be conceivable that Kelly’s father did give him a first generation Glock 17. However, the number imported was rather small. Imports did not begin in earnest until 1988 with the Gen 2 G-17 which had a metal serial number plate at the request of BATFE.

When asked why he didn’t speak about gun control more, he starts to dissemble and say people were more interested in talking about drug prices and healthcare.

O’Rourke may be a loon but at least he is an honest loon. Kelly, by contrast, has used his wife’s tragic shooting as his path to fame and power. He is the female version of former Rep. Carolyn McCarthy. The difference is that McCarthy at least would come at you head on unlike Kelly who is trying to keep gun control in the shadows until he can stab you in the back.

Uncategorized

Democrats Love Symbolism…When Abridging Your Rights

January 6, 2019 by

Tuesday, January 8th is the eight anniversary of when then-Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was shot at an event in Tucson. The killer obtained his Glock at a licensed gun shop after going through a FBI-run NICS check. Keep that in mind for later. At the time, the shootings were blamed on “insurrectionist ideology“, “weak” gun laws, and the lack of a permanent BATFE director among other things. Just like with the Parkland murders, the failure of school officials and the local sheriff contributed to the shootings and not the lack of a background check.

Thus, it should be no surprise that on Tuesday, a bill will be introduced by House Democrats that will mandate universal background checks. Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly have been pushing universal background checks for years. They sent this out earlier today – along with the requisite beg for money to abridge your rights.

Here’s some news I think you’ll be quite happy to hear:

This Tuesday, January 8, Democrats in the House of Representatives will introduce bipartisan universal background checks legislation.

We fought to elect this Congress — one that will stand up to the gun lobby — and right away, they are delivering. The bill is H.R. 8, a symbolic action that will mark the 8th anniversary of the shooting in Tucson. It is also testament to all of our work moving the needle on this issue.

Gabby will be there for the announcement and we’ll be ready to fight to get this thing passed.

But you know the gun lobby, they won’t go down without a fight, especially on this issue. So we have to ask:

Can you make a $3 donation to Giffords PAC? We’ll put it right to work in the fight to pass universal background checks.

This is a big deal, and we’ll have a lot more soon. But right now, we’re gearing up for what’s sure to be a tough fight on this issue. So thanks for chipping in.

All my best,

Mark Kelly

My guess that the only thing bipartisan about this bill will be one or two RINOs like Rep. Peter King (R-NY) as a co-sponsor.

According to Politico, the bill will be number H.R. 8 to commemorate the date. The bill will be introduced by Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

“Since the shooting at Sandy Hook, the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force has been fighting for a chance to pass legislation that will help save lives,” Thompson said in a statement. “Finally, with our new majority that ran on helping to prevent gun violence, we will introduce a bipartisan, universal background checks bill. We will hold hearings, we will have a vote, and this legislation will finally pass the House.”


“In communities across America, courageous survivors, families and young advocates are showing outstanding courage and persistence in demanding an end to the horrific scourge of gun violence in our nation,” Pelosi said in a statement. “It is an honor to join Congressman Mike Thompson and former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords to answer their call by taking the first step to pass commonsense background checks – which 97 percent of the American people support.”

Notice those supposed poll numbers in support of “commonsense background checks”. According to Pelosi, it is 97%. Was this supposed to be a gift to Threepers as the stalwart 3% that oppose this legislation? Why it was only yesterday it seems that Bloomberg, Giffords, and the rest of the gun control industry were saying it was a mere 90%.

So-called universal background checks are a solution in search of a problem. Criminals will continue to obtain firearms and the expectation that they will go through a NICS check is ludicrous. Moreover, as we have seen in the mass shootings which the news media and the gun control industry seem to feed on, the firearms were obtained from legitimate sources after a background check by the Federal Bureau of Investigation was completed. Finally, a law such as this is unenforceable absent a total registration of the 300-600 million firearms thought to exist in the United States.

Uncategorized

Making Gun Control A Cult Of Personality

October 18, 2017 by 4 Comments

First there was the National Council to Control Handguns which became Handgun Control, Inc. for the next 20 years. Eventually this morphed into the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. In making this name change in 2000, Handgun Control, Inc. did two things. This helped to soften their image from control to merely prevention. Just as importantly, by deciding to rename the organization after Jim and Sarah Brady, HCI was aiming to make sympathetic figures the face of gun control.

Now that the Bradys have passed away, gun control needs to regain its cult of personality. Mike Bloomberg is not sympathetic nor is home-wrecking, socially and politically ambitious Shannon Watts. However, Gabby Giffords does make a sympathetic figure.

Playing up this cult of personality was the announcement today that Americans for Responsible Solutions will now just be called Giffords. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (sic) which used to be known as the Legal Center Against Violence will now be the Giffords Law Center. Finally, their PAC will be known as Giffords PAC. Giffords is also now subtitled, “Courage to fight gun violence.”(sic)

From their press release:

“Addressing a problem that almost took my life will be the cause of my life,” said Congresswoman Gabby Giffords upon the announcement of her namesake gun violence prevention organization. “I’ve seen great courage when my life was on the line. But I’ve also seen great courage as we’ve fought to save lives from gun violence. Every day I meet brave Americans who are standing with me in the fight for a safer future—from law enforcement officers and military veterans, to parents, community leaders, and concerned voters. When we stand together, stand up for our children, and use the full power of our voices and votes, I know that we can make change happen.”

“When people think of Gabby, they think of courage, determination, and grit—and it’s exactly those characteristics Americans need to channel in order for us to save lives from gun violence and make our communities safer,” said Captain Mark Kelly, co-founder of Giffords. “When Gabby and I began this journey, we knew this wouldn’t be an easy fight. The gun lobby has been selling a message of fear to the American public for years. It’s used its money to scare lawmakers into following its extreme ideology—and it’s made talking about guns culturally divisive, despite the fact that the majority of gun owners support stronger gun laws. A safer America requires changing that dynamic. We need more people to show the courage to stand up for what’s right and we need more elected officials to show the courage to take action.”

It is probably a smart move on the part of these gun prohibitionists to reemphasize Gabby Giffords as the face of their organization. She is a sympathetic (and pathetic) figure who survived an assassination attempt in the prime of her life and seems to have regained some of what she lost from her injuries.

With the renaming of the organization, the image of Gabby Giffords will always be more important than the reality. The image is that of the courageous survivor who fought back and is now leading the fight against “gun violence” (sic). The reality is that we don’t really know what level of mental capacity she retains given her servere brain injuries and that she very well could be more of a puppet than an actual leader. As for her husband Mark Kelly, the image he wants the world to see is that of a devoted husband caring for his grievously wounded spouse and seeking to protect others from what happened to her. However, when I look at the reality of today’s Mark Kelly, words like “puppet master”, “leech”, and the male equivalent of “gold digger” come to mind. Obviously, I don’t think much of him as he seems to have abandoned the oath he took as an officer to support and defend the Constitution in favor of political and monetary gains.

It will be interesting to how well gun control uses the cult of personality to make political gains. Time will tell.

Uncategorized

Here, Let Me Rewrite That For You

May 18, 2017 by 2 Comments

Imagine you recently got this email. It came from either the buggy-whip manufacturer’s association or Earth First. Either way, they were anti-automobile because cars don’t fit their agenda. In other words, while they are being chauffeured around in stretch limos, they don’t want the roads crowded with the likes of you.

Here’s the email:

For the first time in a decade, auto sales are down in the United States.

So it’s no wonder deregulating mufflers is at the top of the automobile manufacturers lobby’s agenda. They need to find new ways to make money, regardless of the cost to our communities, and making this policy priority a legislative reality would mean big business for auto manufacturers.

But here’s the dangerous truth: if mufflers were deregulated and sold without any oversight, they could be sold without background checks. And when that happens, they can easily get into the hands of dangerous people. That puts us all at risk, because mufflers make it more difficult for law enforcement to locate speeders, and easier for criminals to quietly escape.

But it appears Congress may move forward on the deregulation of mufflers anyway. But before they do, we have a chance to make our voices heard:

Sign our petition calling on Congress to REJECT any legislation that would deregulate the sale of automobile mufflers.

Automobile mufflers can cost anywhere from a couple hundred dollars to up to $2,500 for the most expensive muffler sold by Quiet Cars. This is big business.

But the profits to a few manufacturers will never be as important as the safety of our communities across the country. That’s why making your voice heard is so important.

You are probably thinking that mufflers are a good thing and you’d be right. Among other things they reduce noise pollution. You won’t be woken up in the middle of your afternoon nap anymore when an unmuffled car drives by your house.

Of course, the real email from Mark Kelly aka Mr. Gabby Giffords of Americans for Responsible Solutions (sic) is talking about silencers and suppressors for firearms. My rewriting of his email was to show just how ridiculousness of his position. I could go on but I think you get it.

Uncategorized

Ideologues Versus Science

March 31, 2017 by 2 Comments

There is currently a battle going on between anti-science ideologues and those committed to a health-related change in the laws based upon science. You have doctors, public health advocates, and civil rights advocates on one side and you have the New York Times and anti-health prohibitionists on the other side. I am talking about the battle between those for and opposed to the Hearing Protection Act of 2017.

The New York Times weighed in the battle with an absurd editorial entitled “Echoes of Gunfire Hurt Tender N.R.A. Ears”. As per their usual, they conflated the number of deaths attributed to the use of a firearm to include intentional deaths (suicides), they misrepresented the intent of Congress for adding suppressors to the National Firearms Act, and they created a strawman by insisting the public would be at risk because “ShotSpotters” would not be able to hear gunfire.

The annual tally of 30,000-plus gun deaths accounts for just a tiny fraction of the total shots fired, most of which miss their targets but terrorize neighborhoods. Amid the lethal cacophony, the police in more than 90 cities here and abroad seek to reach the scene of the latest gun troubles more quickly by using an audio detection system called ShotSpotter, which triangulates the sound of gunfire onto computer maps. Police officers in major cities hail these precise early alarms of where the latest shooting is.

Yet despite these advances, the National Rifle Association argues, self-servingly, that noisy guns are a public health hazard. With the help of supporters like President Trump’s son Donald Jr., a gun hobbyist, it wants to roll back an 80-year-old federal law that tightly controls the sale of firearm silencers. Immune to irony, the N.R.A.’s congressional friends have introduced a measure called the Hearing Protection Act, which contends that the sound of gunfire is hard on the ears of gun owners.

“What about the rest of us?” the nation’s unarmed majority might well ask. When it comes to public health, the noisier a gun is, the better the chances for innocent bystanders to hit the ground and for police officers to apprehend the shooter.

I guess reading the Washington Post is beneath the editorial board of the New York Times. The Post reported only four days earlier that the CEO of ShotSpotter said their devices had detected suppressed gunfire in the past and would be able to detect it in the future with some fine-tuning.

Then there is Mark Kelly aka Mr. Gabby Giffords of Americans for Responsible Solutions (sic) who has been leading the charge against suppressors.

From a fundraising email:

One of those bills would lift restrictions on the sale of firearm silencers.

Now, I don’t want to give the impression that firearm silencers work like you see them in the movies — where someone fires a gun and it wouldn’t wake a person sleeping in the same room.

But silencers do suppress sound and light when a weapon is discharged, and that makes them attractive accessories for criminals who want to conceal their crimes.

Attractive accessories for criminals? Really? Actually, criminals want to scare the shit out of you with the noise of a firearm report because it tends to make victims more compliant.

You would think someone who had been around jet engines like Kelly would have an appreciation for the damage that loud noises do to hearing. I know I do because every day for me is like a hot summer night in Mississippi where the crickets, cicadas, and tree frogs keep up an incessant noise. That is what tinnitus sounds like to sufferers like me.

On the rational, scientific side of this debate are groups like Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership. They have just released a position paper in favor of suppressors to prevent hearing loss. The four primary authors of the paper are all board-certified physicians specializing in otolaryngology or ear, nose, and throat issues. The following is from their executive summary of the paper:

Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) is a real public health problem:

The causal relationship between loud noise exposure and irreversible hearing loss has long been
recognized by medicine and the U.S. government.

NIHL is permanent and untreatable. Prevention is the only possible intervention.


Demonstrable need:

NIHL is the most prevalent service-connected disability among Veterans.

Per the CDC, 15% of adults aged 18 and over (or nearly 38 million American) have hearing problems.

Over 100 million Americans who own guns are at risk for gunshot-induced NIHL. Auditory injuries are
sustained by bystanders the same as by shooters.

Nearly all gunshots exceed the noise threshold for instant damage to the hearing cells of the inner ear.
And their explosive blast generates 1,000 times the force on the eardrum than the noise itself.


Benefit of suppressors:

Muzzle blast sound levels from most firearms range from 140 to over 170 decibels. 120 decibels is
considered the maximum safe level for short exposures (the intensity of a car horn 3 feet away). Ear
plugs and/or ear muffs only reduce noise by 20-30 decibels.

Evidence supporting the need for greater use of firearms suppressors comes from the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communicative Disorders, the
Centers for Disease Control, as well as academic and military research.

Muzzle-mounted suppressors are vastly superior to ear protectors, providing 50% greater noise reduction.
Only suppressors can make most modern firearms safe for hearing, as noise at gun ranges routinely
reaches 160 decibels.

I would urge readers to study the position paper issued by Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership. It provides great graphics and is extensively sourced. Moreover, unlike most doctor’s handwriting, it is both readable and understandable!

Our first suppressor arrived this week after a wait of over three-fourths of a year. As I said in that post, can you think of any other consumer product for the health and safety of both the purchaser and the general public for which you have to ask the government for permission to take possession of it on top of paying $200 for the privilege? It is time for Congress to act on the established science of hearing loss and pass the Hearing Protection Act.

Uncategorized

Is This The Best They Can Do?

January 18, 2017 by 3 Comments

Now that the Hearing Protection Act has been introduced in both the House and the Senate the wailing and gnashing of teeth is beginning to be heard from the gun prohibitionists. Just today I received the following in my email from the Space Cowboy aka Mr. Gabby Giffords aka Mark Kelly of the Americans for Responsible Solutions.

John –

With Donald Trump set to take office in just three days, the gun lobby
and their allies in Congress have set their sights on a pair of bills
that will make our communities far less safe from gun violence.
One of those bills would lift restrictions on the sale of firearm silencers.
Now, I don’t want to give the impression that firearm silencers work
like you see them in the movies — where someone fires a gun and it
wouldn’t wake a person sleeping in the same room.
But silencers do suppress sound and light when a weapon is
discharged, and that makes them attractive accessories for criminals who
want to conceal their crimes.
Before Trump takes office, it’s important we lay down a marker on this issue.
The gun lobby will tell you that this legislation is designed to
protect people’s hearing, but the truth is that it’s a massive financial
giveaway to the corporations who manufacture and sell firearm
silencers. The safety of our communities is more important than the
manufacturers’ bottom lines.
Thank you for adding your name.
Mark Kelly
Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC

You want to say, “Really, Mark? Is this the best you can come up with?” A suppressor suppresses sound and light and thus make them attractive accessories for criminals. Flash suppressors for rifles are legal in most states and do not require any license, permit, fee, or registration.

The same could be said for common items like bed pillows, oil filters, 2-liter Coke bottles, and potatoes. All of these common items could be used by thugs, murderers, and criminals to muffle the sound of the firearm and possibly reduce its flash.

Having reported on hundreds of defensive gun uses on the Polite Society Podcast I have yet to come across mention of a criminal having a suppressor in his or her possession while committing an assault, robbery, home invasion, or murder. Indeed, more often than not, these miscreants use the loud sound of a firearm discharge to attempt to cow their victims. They aren’t worried about the police because most times they anticipate being gone by the time the police arrive.

What Kelly is not saying is that treating silencers and suppressors like ordinary firearms still requires a NICS check as they are going to be transferred by FFLs. You would still have to fill out a Form 4473 and felons, drug abusers, those convicted of domestic violence, etc. would still be prohibited from purchasing and possessing a suppressor. While I might want a suppressor to be sold like replacement mufflers for a lawnmower at Ace Hardware, these bills are a good first step in an effort to reduce noise pollution and protect the hearing of hunters and shooters.

Uncategorized

Hyperbole And Lies

April 7, 2016 by 6 Comments

We have come to expect both hyperbole and lies from the gun prohibitionists. The email I received today from Mr. Gabby Giffords (aka Capt. Mark Kelly, USN (Ret)) of Americans for Responsible Solutions contained both. The letter was advocating the addition of people on the so-called terrorist watch list to the NICS banned list.

Kelly’s lie was particularly egregious but not surprising.

Just a few years ago, al-Qaeda encouraged potential terrorists to to take advantage of loopholes in our laws, saying “America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?”

While this is a quote attributed to al-Qaeda, no effort was made to correct it. Just as I learned in catechism classes, there are sins of commission and sins of omission. This was a sin of omission as he knew full well that fully automatic firearms are covered under the National Firearms Act, that they are highly regulated, and that the supply of new firearms is constrained by the Hughes Act.

By repeating the lies of terrorists, he was trying to sow fear in the minds of the uninformed. He then blames the evil “gun lobby” for blocking efforts to expand the NICS banned list which conflates those of us who oppose using the terrorist watch list with terrorist themselves.

The reason Mark Kelly has to use lies and hyperbole is that his argument is weak. If he had a good argument, he could just state the facts. Since he doesn’t, he can’t.

Uncategorized

If This Holds Up, It Will Be A Big Slap In The Face To Gabby Giffords And ARS (Updated)

November 10, 2014 by 3 Comments

Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly have a lot invested in keeping her old Arizona seat Democratic. It is currently held by Rep. Ron Barber (D-AZ) who was Giffords’ congressional district director. He was wounded in the same attack that injured Giffords.

Giffords and her gun control organization Americans for Responsible Solutions have poured approximately $2 million into the district for ads attacking Col. Martha McSally USAF (Ret). McSally lost to Barber for the same seat in 2012. According to the latest Federal Elections Commission reports, they put in over $500,000 in the first half of October alone.

Americans for Responsible Solutions had been running the ad below which was inaccurate. They removed it 24 hours before it was supposed to go off the air. Politico ran a full story on Giffords’ and ARS’ misleading attacks on McSally. They claimed it was because McSally reversed her position on stalkers and guns.

Thus, it has to be a big slap in the face to Gabby, Mark, and Americans for Responsible Solutions to see McSally leading Barber by 36 votes with the ballots from Cochise County yet to be counted.

Technical problems with voting machines in Cochise County have delayed results in the region’s most-watched race, but it could bode well for GOP challenger Martha McSally.

She and Democrat Ron Barber, the incumbent, were separated by only 36 votes, according to the latest totals this morning.

However, Cochise County tallies are missing and McSally was expected to have another strong showing in the county she won in 2012 by 59 percent to 41 percent.

 McSally currently has 78,785 votes to Barber’s 78,749 with 49 precincts uncounted.

If things go the way that they should, McSally will win this race. Assuming that happens, it will be amusing to see how Giffords and Kelly and their henchmen at Americans for Responsible Solutions spin the result. There is just no way to do it without looking foolish.

UPDATE: According to the official Arizona Secretary of State election returns, Martha McSally is leading  Rep. Ron Barber by 2,078 votes with all precincts reporting. The final unofficial tally is 90,345 votes for McSally and 88,267 votes for Barber.

No word yet from Giffords. Barber’s camp released a statement that they are waiting for the early ballots to be counted and won’t concede until then. There is no time stamp on their statement so I don’t know if it was before or after McSally took a 2,000 vote lead.

UPDATE II: Even with more early and provisional ballots having been counted, Martha McSally still maintains a slight lead over Rep. Ron Barber (D-AZ). It now stands at a 363 vote lead with McSally having won 98,918 votes and Barber 98,555. This reminds me in a way of when Al Franken first won over Norm Coleman in Minnesota. It was not declared over until enough votes had been found to put the Democrat in the lead.

The Tucson Daily Star reports that Barber has sent out a fundraising appeal for a recount. They report this is unusual because the state would pay for any recount. As it is, unless the margin drops to 200 votes, a recount is not ordered.

UPDATE III: Martha McSally maintains a 341 vote lead going into Monday. There are still reported to be 9,000 provisional ballots left to be counted in Pima County.

The McSally campaign has threatened a lawsuit to stop the counting of those ballots that don’t have the required signature from an election official. Barber’s campaign officials are calling this an effort “to disenfranchise” voters. I guess what the Barber folks really object to is having their ballot box stuffing called out.

I just hope that McSally isn’t “Al Franken’ed” by Arizona election officials. The good news is that Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Uncategorized

Costing The Anti’s Some Money

September 13, 2014 by 26 Comments

I got an email the other day from Mark Kelly (aka Mr. Gabby Giffords) offering me a copy of the new book that he and Giffords just wrote.

Gabby and Mark wrote a new book that’s coming out at the end of this month. It’s called Enough, and it’s about why they are working to keep America safe from gun violence.


We know that some people might contribute less than the book costs, and that’s OK.

 I took them at their word. While I tried to contribute what the book was worth – $0.01 – it wouldn’t let me. However, it did let me contribute a mere buck.

The way I figure it the cost of postage using Media Mail is at least $2.69. The book which has a MSRP of $25 and is selling for $18.63 on Amazon must cost them at least $5 a copy.

Thus, for an investment of $1, I’m costing Americans for Responsible Solutions a minimum of  $7.69. That is a net $6.69 that can’t be used to take away my civil rights.

Now I’m not suggesting you do this but if you’d like to take them up on their offer, go here. You’ll end up costing them some money and you’ll be able to keep an eye on what the anti’s are up to.

UPDATE: As a commenter below has mentioned, it now takes a $25 or more donation to get the book. At that price, they can keep it.

Thanks for your interest in supporting Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC. This promotion has ended at this time. However, you can still receive a copy of Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly’s book Enough with a donation of $25 or more on this page.

Nonetheless, it reads as if those of us who “donated” a buck will still get the book.

Take this as a reminder that our opponents may be misguided, misinformed, and malcontents but they aren’t stupid. I’m guessing, though I have no proof, that they woke up to the number of low donations that they started getting.

Uncategorized

Sean Meets Gabby And Mark

July 8, 2013 by 4 Comments

Actually that is a misleading headline as Sean Sorrentino wasn’t one of the 14 hand-picked “gun owners” chosen to sit down for a “discussion” with Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly in a Raleigh BBQ restaurant.

He tells me that he did get to see them…from a distance as they exited the side door of the restaurant surrounded by “a phalanx”. Hmmm.

Sean has an excellent after-action report of the Giffords-Kelly whirlwind visit to Raleigh and the media’s reaction to it. The headlines are not quite what Americans for Responsible Solutions would have liked.

Sean and the rest of his hastily assembled group of friends did a great job yesterday. It shows what real grassroots action looks like.