We Don’t Know Much But We Are Going To Call For More Gun Control

I got an email today from North Carolinians Against Gun Violence (sic), a wholly owned subsidiary of Everytown, regarding the murders on the campus of UNC-Charlotte yesterday. The email epitomizes their “call to action” strategy even when we know next to nothing about the murderer, the victims, etc.

Yesterday, two people lost their lives and four were injured by a mass shooter at UNC Charlotte. North Carolinians Against Gun Violence mourns with their families, friends, and communities.

“Every shooting is a human tragedy and my prayers are with the victims and their families,” said Becky Ceartas, Executive Director of North Carolinians Against Gun Violence. “Today’s awful events are yet another urgent call to action to prevent this from happening again.”

While this story is still developing and we do not have much information about the shooter, including how he got his gun, we do know that certain gun reforms need to happen in our state. Specifically, we need to keep our college campuses and K-12 schools free of guns, retain our background check system on all handgun sales (pistol purchase permitting system), and preserve our concealed-carry weapons permitting system.

“We ask North Carolinians to join us in mourning those lost in this horrific act. And we ask North Carolinians to act with us to help prevent this from happening again,” said Ceartas.

For those that are not North Carolinians you might not know that university campuses are officially gun-free zones. North Carolina General Statute § 14-269.2. deals with this and makes it a Class I felony to carry openly or concealed any firearm on campus. Firing the gun is a Class F felony.

I have written extensively about the racist roots of the North Carolina’s pistol purchase permit system. It was instituted in 1919 as a means to keep African-Americans and especially those that were veterans returning from World War I disarmed. I can think of few other laws that were conceived in racism that still command the devotion and loyalty of progressives as do gun control laws.

About the only things about this heinous crime is the shooter’s name, his age (22), that he was a former UNC-C student, his victim’s names and ages, and that he was taken alive. We don’t know how the murderer obtained his firearm, his motive, or virtually anything else other than a statement from his grandfather that said he’d never shown any interest in firearms before and one from campus police saying he wasn’t on their radar.

So you have two murders (illegal), four attempted murders (illegal), and a total disregard for state law on carrying on campus (illegal) but yet we need to act so as to “prevent this from happening again.” Other than legalizing campus carry which is anathema to NCGV, I don’t see how any new law is going to prevent such crimes. Can you?

Democrats Love Symbolism…When Abridging Your Rights

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.

“I want gun control and I hope to God nobody else sends me any more prayers.”

The above quote comes from Susan Orfanos. She was the mother of Telemachus Orfanos who was one of the victims in the multiple murders committed at the Borderline Bar in Thousand Oaks, California. It was reported on the CBS Evening News for Friday, November 9th.

“He didn’t come home last night,” said his mother, Susan. “I don’t want prayers. I don’t want thoughts. I want gun control and I hope to God nobody else sends me any more prayers. I want gun control. No more guns.”

The link to the story includes the video interview with her and a friend of the murderer.

I can excuse the bitter words of a distraught mother who lost a son. However, I have also gotten emails from both the Brady Campaign and the cult of personality known as Giffords calling for more gun control and asking for donations.

Excuse me but these murders happened in the gun control paradise known as California. Giffords Law Center rates the state an “A”. It is the only state in the Union rated this high. Even New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts only get A minuses. In the last Brady Campaign rankings I can find from 2015, California was the number one state in terms of adopting the gun control measures they wanted.

Red Flag laws?


Highly restrictive may issue concealed carry?


Ban on open carry?


Waiting periods?


Assault weapon (sic) bans?


Magazine size restrictions?


Purchase of ammunition only through licensed dealers?


Background check to buy ammo?


Ban carry in establishments that serve alcohol?


The state has every thing that the gun prohibitionists have been calling for to supposedly stop “gun violence” and “mass shootings” and yet it failed. When a murderer is determined to commit evil deeds the weapon really almost becomes irrelevant. It could just as easily have been an attack using a knife as in Melbourne, Australia on Friday. Even worse might have been an arson attack where an exit was illegally locked or blocked. Some of the worst night club fires in the US and the rest of the world have been due to arson.

My point is that there is little that can be done to stop the initial attack even with the most restrictive of laws. Evil people will do what evil people will do.

That said, there are a number of things that might have lessened the toll. For example, if the six off-duty cops there had been allowed to carry in the Borderline Bar, they could have responded with deadly force to stop the murders. Or, for example, as Greg Ellifritz points out, the murderer posted to Facebook and Instagram during the attack which was an opportunity to attack the murderer when he was distracted. While it might have been illegal in California, in many states you can carry in a place that serves alcohol so long as you don’t drink. This would be the place for Designated Defenders as suggested by Massad Ayoob.

I’m not sure how to prevent all mass violence events. I do think Malcolm Gladwell is on to something with his theory of threshholds where each event begets a larger and worse event. Media publicity doesn’t help. I’m not saying that it shouldn’t be reported but restraint and discretion should be exercised. For a start, do like many bloggers and academics have pledged: don’t report the killer’s name. As the No Notoriety campaign suggests focus on the victims and not the killer.

It would be a start. In the meantime, be alert and be careful where you go.

If You Get The Outdoor Channel…

If you subscribe to the Outdoor Channel (or have a friend who does), you will want to see the Best Defense tonight. It will feature their mass casualty event reenactment modeled on the Paris music hall terrorist attack. The goal was to find ways for you to survive such an event.

I don’t have the Outdoor Channel but I understand that the show will eventually be rebroadcast on their new My Outdoor TV (Shooting Gallery Online) digital network.

From Michael Bane:

CO — The two scariest words in the English language are “what it?”
There have been a dozen terror attacks in the United States in 2016;
“what if” you or your family are trapped in the worst case you can
producers of THE BEST DEFENSE, Michael Bane and Jeff Murray, decided to
tackle that question head on in a compelling, and terrifying, special
premiering on OUTDOOR CHANNEL at 8:00 PM ET Wednesday, September 28,
encoring November 2 (Time to be announced).
if’ is a simple question with a hellish answer,” said Bane. “Literally
days before the San Bernardino attacks, Jeff and I began discussing an
idea to create the most realistic terrorist attack simulation possible,
then use the tools we’ve developed in THE BEST DEFENSE over multiple
seasons to help people survive.”   
producers’ number one goal was to create a scenario so realistic that
it was hard to turn away. Working from the basics of the Paris concert
hall attacks, Bane and Murray reached out to both law enforcement and
military counterterrorism experts and trainers who studied mass casualty
events, THE BEST DEFENSE training team of Mike Seeklander and Michael
Janich, paramedics specializing in first response and even renowned
mental health experts to build the scenario and capture as much as
possible the reality of being trapped in a mass casualty attack.
made the decision to use FX to make the scenario more realistic,” Bane
said. “We were lucky enough to have the help of the Larimer County (CO)
SWAT team and local paramedics. The Mass Casualty Event is certainly the
most complex sim I’ve ever been involved with.”
film team headed by award-winning documentarian Brandon Green shot the
whole event in ultra-high resolution 4K. Green worked with the FX team
to make every shot fired as realistic as possible.
this is the most ‘vetted’ scenario we could build. Every move, every
action taken is based in reality and run through some of the most
knowledgeable experts in the world,” Bane said. “Even the crowd reaction
is based on cutting edge research from Dr. William Aprill…as each
‘extra’ arrived, that person was given a card explaining how he or she
should react when the attack started. We were lucky enough to have
Michael Janich’s highly trained cadre of martial arts experts to create
an even more realistic sim. In fact, our main ‘terrorist’ served in the
Israeli Defense Force as a sniper and Master Breacher, and is an expert
in counterterrorism techniques.” 
experts, in addition to the TBD Team of Seeklander and Janich, include
Ken Hackathorn, considered one of the top firearms trainers in the
world; Gabe Suarez, probably the most experienced trainer in studying
and dissecting mass casualty events and teaching civilian response; Dr.
Dan Olesnicky, SWAT team physician, a first responder in terrorist
events and one of the leading trainers of tactical medicine; Dr. William
Aprill of Aprill Risk Consulting, considered the national expert on
criminal and terrorist mindset; former SEAL Jimmy Graham, who also
served as Lead Instructor for elite Federal Government Protective
details in high risk environments and presently heads up the Active
Shooter Response Training Center in the Denver area.
team is tremendously proud of this effort, and we thank OUTDOOR CHANNEL
for putting this information in front of so many people,” Bane said.
“Since we began planning for this special, there have been 12 terrorism
events in the United States and literally one a day around the world. We
believe this information is critical, and we hope our viewers never
have to use it.”

I Didn’t Know That ISIS Had Attacked Paris, Maine

Sometimes you just have to shake your head in wonder about the things that come out of the mouth of Barack Obama. The video clip below is a case in point.

Obama made these comments while in Paris, France. You know where on November 13th, eight ISIS terrorists killed 132 people in a set of coordinated shootings across the City of Lights.

I’m guessing he must have confused Paris, France with Paris, Maine. The former is the French capital while the later is a small town in western foothills region of Maine near Sebago Lake.

Likewise, he must have confused the Norway where 69 were killed and 110 wounded at a youth camp in 2011 with Norway, Maine. I mean, it is right next door to Paris, Maine. Besides that area of Maine has a slew of summer camps for kids. Any reasonable person could see how he got confused by this especially since Denmark, Maine is just about 25 miles away.

January 20, 2016 cannot get here soon enough.

Do Mag Bans Reduce Casualties In Mass Shootings?

Bans on standard capacity magazines, that is, magazines with a capacity over 10 rounds, are supposed to have an impact on the number of casualties in mass shootings. The question is do they?

The simple answer is no.

As David Yamane reports in his Gun Culture 2.0 blog, criminologist Gary Kleck presented research at the recent American Society of Criminologists annual meeting that studied this question. Kleck’s research looked at mass shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded. He went with six because that is the capacity of most revolvers and thus no standard capacity magazine would have been needed.

Even with this restrictive definition of a mass shooting, Kleck found that large capacity magazines – defined as holding over 10 rounds – were used in only 21 of the 88 incidents (24%). So, in 76% of the incidents, a large-capacity magazine ban would have made no difference in any event.

Kleck then goes on to analyze further the 21 incidents in which a large-capacity magazine was used. In every case, the shooters carried either multiple guns or multiple magazines. Therefore, even without a large-capacity magazine, the shooters could easily switch guns or magazines.

Kleck also marshals evidence to show that the rate of fire of most mass shooters is so slow that having to change guns or magazines more frequently would not diminish their casualty counts.

The bottom line to Kleck’s research, as David notes, is that it isn’t the tool but the desire of the evil doer to kill as many people as possible.  However, this conflicts with the desire of politicians and gun prohibitionists to “do something”.

From The New York Times, No Less.

This report is from the New York Times regarding the school shooter in Oregon. It is about the source of his weapons as confirmed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

In all, the gunman had owned 14 firearms, said Celinez Nunez, an agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, including one he had traded in. The Douglas County Sheriff’s Department said the gunman took five handguns and a rifle to Umpqua Community College on Thursday morning, and had two pistols, four rifles and a shotgun in his apartment.

“All 14 have been traced to a federal firearms dealer,” some bought by the gunman and others by members of his family, said Ms. Nunez, the assistant special agent in charge of the Seattle field office. “They were all purchased legally.”

As AWR Hawkins of Breitbart said at the recent Gun Rights Policy Conference, “It is harder to find a mass shooter who didn’t go through a background check than one that did.”

To illustrate that point, Hawkins listed a number of these murderers that did pass background checks in a column today in Breitbart.

About The Perceived Increase In Mass Shootings

James Alan Fox is the Lipman Family Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy at Northeastern University. He is a columnist for the Boston Globe and is a strong proponent of gun control. In a column from this past August Fox examined the trends in mass shootings. Despite the perception that they are on the increase, Fox acknowledges that they aren’t in his Boston Globe column.

There is one not-so-tiny flaw in all of these theories for the
increase in mass shootings. And that is that mass shootings have not
increased in number or in overall body count, at least not over the past
several decades.

Based on data extracted from official police reports to the FBI, the
figure below shows annual incident, offender and victim tallies for gun
homicides in which at least four people were murdered. Over the
thirty-year time frame, an average of about 20 mass murders have
occurred annually in the United States with an average death toll of
about 100 per year.

Mass Shootings 1980-2010.jpg

Without minimizing the pain and suffering of the hundreds of who have
been victimized in seneless attacks, the facts say clearly that the has
been no increase in mass killings, and certainly no epidemic.
Occasionally, we have witnessed short-term spikes with several shootings
clustering close together in time.

So the next time a gun prohibitionist says that mass shootings are on the increase, point them to the data which refutes it.

H/T Dave Kopel

Michelle Malkin On The Post-Newtown Witch Hunt

Michelle Malkin had an interesting commentary today regarding the witch hunt that this being conducted by the gun prohibitionists and their friends in politics, academia, and the media.

She concludes:

So, it’s come to this: Advocating beheadings, beatings and the mass
murder of peaceful Americans to pay for the sins of a soulless madman.
But because the advocates of violence fashion themselves champions of
non-violence and because they inhabit the hallowed worlds of Hollywood,
academia and the Democratic Party, it’s acceptable?

Blood-lusting hate speech must not get a pass just because it comes out of the mouths of the protected anti-gun class.

The website Legal Insurrection has more on U. of Rhode Island history professor Erik Loomis’ violent eliminationist rhetoric