Stabbed In The Back Again

Eight years of Obama brought no new gun control at the federal level. Three years of President Trump has brought an unconstitutional ban on bumpstocks, no Hearing Protection Act, no national reciprocity, and now a call for more gun control in the wake of the murders in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.

We cannot let those killed in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, die in vain. Likewise for those so seriously wounded. We can never forget them, and those many who came before them. Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 5, 2019

If he thinks that Democrats will trade gun control for funding a "the wall", he is sadly mistaken. They will do a bait and switch saying they will support "the wall" after passing red flag laws and universal background checks (and other gun control) but then do nothing about funding the wall.

Right now I don't give a big rat's ass about a wall along the border that would have marginal effectiveness. I do care about any denigration of the Second Amendment and gun rights.

By the way, all indications are that virtually every mass murderer in the last 10 years has gone through a NICS check. These bills would do nothing to have prevented them from obtaining the firearm in question.

About Those Mail Bombs Sent To Clinton, Obama, CNN, Etc.

First off, while I heartily disagree with most anything Bill or Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama say, I condemn most forcefully whomever sent them - and others - what appear to be mail bombs. This is not how we do things in a republic.

I'm sure whomever sent those will be found quickly and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

A picture of the bomb sent to former CIA Director John Brennan in care of CNN is shown below:

I'm not a bomb expert but it looks to be a pipe bomb using galvanized pipe to hold the explosive.

Given this and assuming it is a six inch piece of one inch pipe, I'd guesstimate it weighs at the minimum 13.5 ounces. Add in the weight of the explosive, detonator, and packaging and you are at about one pound. The postage was paid for with stamps

Why does this matter?

It matters because of USPS postal regulations which state:

If your mailpiece weighs more than 13 oz and you’re using postage stamps, take it to a Post Office retail counter to mail it. If put in your mailbox for pickup service, the carrier will leave it. If dropped in a blue collection box or lobby location, it will be returned to you.

Moreover, if you look at that picture you will notice that the stamps are not cancelled with a postmark. That might be the failure of the post office or it might indicate that this device never was in the USPS mail system to begin with and was someone dropped off at CNN.

I'm not going to get into conspiracy theories and suggest that the perpetrator was actually engaging in a false flag attack. I'll leave that to Alex Jones. I prefer to wait until we know just who was behind this. Regardless of who they are, I hope they spend many, many years behind bars.

Gun Control Never Sleeps

While President Obama is taking a valedictory tour of Europe, his minions in the Justice Department are still hard at work trying to establish his gun control legacy. The National Institute of Justice released their final baseline specifications that outline the minimums required for a "smart gun" (sic) if it is to be used by law enforcement. Their efforts on this were in response to a Presidential Memorandum that President Obama issued to the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice in January 2016 ordering them to promote "smart gun" technology.

The new release from DOJ is below:

November 16, 2016

For more than two decades, the federal government and the private sector have grappled with a basic question of firearm engineering:  Can modern technology make guns safer—or “smarter”—without sacrificing the reliability, durability and accuracy that owners expect from their firearms?

In January 2016, as part of the administration’s ongoing efforts to combat gun violence, President Obama directed the Departments of Justice (DOJ), Homeland Security (DHS) and Defense (DOD) to answer that question.  Three months later, in April 2016, the three agencies submitted a report to the president outlining a multi-pronged strategy to expand and encourage the development of advanced gun safety technology.  Today, the Administration is taking a significant step forward to implement that strategy: by releasing a final version of “baseline specifications” that outlines, for the first time, a detailed description of the minimum technical requirements that law enforcement agencies expect from smart gun technology.  

The baseline specifications were drafted by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) – DOJ’s research, development and evaluation agency – in partnership with a team of firearms experts at DOJ and DHS.  Throughout the development process, NIJ sought input from a wide range of stakeholders, including federal, state and local law enforcement, firearms manufacturers and technology experts.  Among other steps, in July 2016, NIJ published a draft version of the specifications in the Federal Register and invited feedback during a 60-day public comment period.  In addition, in August 2016, NIJ hosted a two-day conference in Washington, D.C., with representatives from law enforcement agencies to discuss smart gun technology and review the draft document.

As the April 2016 report to the president made clear, this project was designed to spur the growth of enhanced gun safety technology—and not to mandate that any particular individual or law enforcement agency adopt the technology once developed.  These voluntary specifications serve several purposes:  they provide clear guidance to potential manufacturers about what government purchasers require in their firearms; they serve as a standard against which existing technology can be measured, making it possible to identify what research and development gaps remains; and they allow federal, state and local governments to demonstrate that demand for smart guns may exist—if certain operational requirements are met.  By engaging law enforcement experts in this process, NIJ has produced a final document that both reflects the exacting demands of law enforcement officers and advances the goal of expediting the real-world deployment of smart gun technology.

The final 25 page report can be found here.

Take this as a reminder that we need to remain hypervigilant in the waning days of the Obama Administration. The only reason that this popped up on my radar is that I got an email from the Brady Campaign applauding this move (and asking for money).

Come the afternoon of January 20, 2017, this is one of the many Executive Orders and Memorandum that needs to be discarded. Let the market forces decide whether or not to proceed with so-called smart gun technology and get government out of it. Moreover, we need to work in the states to repeal those laws that mandate the sale of such firearms.

Commutations And Felons In Possession

It is within the power of the President of the United States to both commute sentences and grant pardons. President Obama used that power on Wednesday to commute the sentences of 214 individuals. This was the greatest number of commutations at a single time.

These commutations are being portrayed as being for mainly "nonviolent drug offenses". President Obama went on Facebook to argue that our drug laws are too harsh and that Congress needs to institute sentencing reform.

But this is a country that believes in second chances. So we've got to make sure that our criminal justice system works for everyone. We've got to make sure that it keeps our streets safe while also making sure that an entire class of people like Sherman (Chester) isn't relegated to a life on the margins.

The impression given is that many of those who had their sentences commuted were convicted of having relatively small amounts of drugs. How the Obama Administration defines "small" is open to debate.

Would you consider five kilograms of cocaine a small amount given the approximate street value per kilo is around $30,000? At least 15 of those convicted had this much or more in their possession when arrested. Of course it would be hard to top Ralph Casas of North Miami Beach who was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute over 9,445 kilograms of cocaine.

What does get me is that not all of these are "non-violent felons". Jazz Shaw at Hotair.com points out that about a fourth of those who had their sentences commuted were also convicted of crimes involving firearms.

Basically one in four of the commuted sentences were for gun charges. First of all, when you’re packing heat as part of your drug dealing business you’re not exactly projecting the image of the non-violent criminal, but that’s hardly the point here. We’re being lectured on a daily basis by Barack Obama and his Democratic allies about the need to shut down the flow of weapons, end gun violence and every other catch phrase you can imagine which involves limiting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding gun owners. We are also assured of the need to curb the power of “the gun lobby.” In response, conservatives regularly point out that we might want to enforce the gun laws we already have on the books first and deal with the actual criminals who are trafficking in illegal guns. (Which are used in the vast majority of gun crimes in this country.)

Going through the list - and I may have missed some - I found 25 convicted felons in possession of a firearm. For some reason I don't think these guys went through a NICS check. I know for sure that Kenneth Lee Kelley of Westville, OK didn't go through a NICS check because he was convicted of not only two counts of being a felon in possession but also for having a stolen firearm. Nor did Ervin Darnell Worthy of Akron, OH who had a firearm with a altered serial number.

Joshua Boyer of Tampa, FL takes the prize for most interesting firearms offense. He was convicted of having possession of a firearm that was not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. If I were to speculate, Mr. Boyer was emulating Jack Miller of US v. Miller fame in that he had a sawed off shotgun. He may, of course, had a full-auto firearm or a silencer.

Frankly, I really am not that sympathetic to junkies who ruin their lives by their choices. I am at the point where legalizing all drugs is starting to make some sense given the militarization of the police, overuse of SWAT teams, etc. However, knowing that junkies will do anything for their next fix including killing you or me for the change in our pockets, I am not that sure that commuting the sentences of those who facilitate drug use is the correct thing to do if we want to "keep our streets safe." I don't necessarily know the correct thing to do but commuting the sentences of many of these felons doesn't quite sit right with me.

Single Issue Voting

I used to be against single issue voting as I thought politicians should be evaluated on the totality of their views and positions. It was one of the reasons that back in the 80s I dropped my yearly membership in the NRA for a while. I think the rise of voters who only voted based upon abortion was part of that decision. I was trying to be somewhat logically consistent.

However, I've come to appreciate how a candidate's position on gun rights is indicative of how he or she may vote on other issues of interest to me. Michael Bane has made this point many a time on his podcast and has argued the efficacy of it in electing like-minded politicians. A candidate who supports gun rights tends to be liberty minded and that is what I want.

Now it seems the President is in agreement with me (and Michael) on this and urging single issue voting on the matter of gun rights. Of course, his position is diametrically opposite of mine.

His Press Secretary Josh Earnest made this clear in a press briefing on Friday.

Q Can I ask about the President’s campaign pledge in his New York Times editorial (on gun control)?

MR. EARNEST: Please do. (Laughter.)

Q Yes. I’m just kind of wondering if you can put some parameters on that -- what a candidate would have to do or not do for the President -- or I guess what a candidate would have to do or not for the President to say I’m not going to vote for you, I’m not going to campaign for you, I’m not going to fundraise for you. And also how he would kind of extricate his actions with the DNC or the DSCC or whoever else in that.

snip

Q What about somebody like Heidi Heitkamp, who was a big vote for you guys on TPA, and the President made a big point of saying, I’m going to go out and campaign and raise money for these people who put their neck out?

MR. EARNEST: Well, look, there is no denying the fact that I think that when it comes to most issues, the President agrees with Senator Heitkamp on them, particularly when it comes to a whole range of economic issues and national security issues -- that there are a lot of reasons for them to be on the same page. But what the President made clear in that op-ed is that when it comes to this issue, he’s prepared to be a single-issue voter. And he hopes that other people will, too.

And he’s hopeful that that will have an impact on the kinds of decisions that Democrats and Republicans make on this issue in the future when they’re serving in the United States Congress and when they’re called to vote on them.

Whether Democrat voters pay attention to his advice is another matter. As rare as it might be, I wonder whether they would vote for an anti-gun, pro-life, pro-fracking, pro-coal, and climate warming denier or some combination of those so long as the candidate in question is anti-gun. For some reason I doubt it. The interest groups supporting abortion, the environment, etc. seem to be much stronger than either the Brady Campaign or Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors. Moreover, for most Democrat voters, I think abortion, women's rights, and the environment would be considered more of a core belief than gun control which is more peripheral to these voters.

Overall, I think this works out in our favor especially if we can get Gun Culture 1.0 to get on board with Gun Culture 2.0 in protecting our gun rights. We need to do more outreach to those in Gun Culture 1.0 so we don't hear "I'm a hunter but no one needs (fill in the blank)" anymore. Unifying both cultures behind candidates who support gun rights will be the key to winning in 2016 and to keeping our rights in the face of the President and "nasty little fascist" billionaires like Mike Bloomberg. Now we just have to do it.

The Empty Chair Makes An Empty Gesture With The Empty Chair

Sometimes the headline just writes itself.

So it is with the announcement that President Barack "Empty Chair" Obama will leave an empty chair in the First Lady's box at the State of the Union Address. The empty chair is help vacant for the victims of gun violence (sic).

A Vacant Seat for the Victims of Gun Violence

Last week, the President took a series of commonsense steps to help reduce gun violence in America and make our communities safer.

We leave one seat empty in the First Lady’s State of the Union Guest Box for the victims of gun violence who no longer have a voice – because they need the rest of us to speak for them. To tell their stories. To honor their memory. To support the Americans whose lives have been forever changed by the terrible ripple effect of gun violence – survivors who’ve had to learn to live with a disability, or without the love of their life. To remind every single one of our representatives that it’s their responsibility to do something about this.

To see what an empty gesture that this is, let's drill down through the numbers. The gun prohibitionists at Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors tell us that 88 people die daily due to "gun violence" (sic). Using their own numbers, this includes a daily average of 55 people who commit suicide using a firearm. This is disingenuous as it blames the instrument for their deaths. We don't talk about intentional overdose violence or Golden Gate Bridge violence or subway violence but all are a means by which people have killed themselves. Realistically we should be more concerned with the why of suicide than the how but then that wouldn't fit the narrative.

After you take out the 55 people a day who commit suicide using a gun, you are left with 33 deaths per day. Of these, still using Everytown's averages, about 2 daily are due to unintentional injuries and undetermined circumstances. That leaves 31 homicides per day and here is where it gets interesting.

During 2013, according to the CDC, there were 11,208 homicides that involved a firearm. Breaking it down by race and ethnicity, you find that non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 56.8% of homicide victims, non-Hispanic whites for 25% of homicide victims, and those of Hispanic ethnicity for 15.6% of homicide victims. Asians, American Indians, Pacific Islanders, and "other" only were victims in 2.6% of homicides.

Current census statistics show that non-Hispanic blacks are only 12.4% of the total US population with those of Hispanic ethnicity making up another 17.1%. Non-Hispanic whites account for 62.6% of the population. So while Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks make up only 29.5% of the US population, they account for 72.4% of homicide victims.

Given that non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics make up the great majority of homicide victims, I had to speculate about the age distribution. The CDC 2013 aggregate statistics didn't give this info but their WONDER database did allow for searches by race and age groups.

Whites showed a fairly even distribution with tails for the young and elderly. The 25-29 age group was the peak age group for homicides among whites at 12% of white homicides. Murder victims between the ages of 15 and 34 account for 38.8% of all white murder victims. Keep that number in mind.

Hispanics and non-Hispanic black murder numbers were skewed younger and less evenly distributed by age. Hispanic murder victims between the ages of 15 and 34 accounted for 68.6% of all Hispanics murdered. The peak age group was between 20 and 24 with 24.1% of all Hispanic murder victims. Non-Hispanic blacks showed similar results. 71.9% of black murder victims were between the ages of 15 and 34 with the peak age group being the same 20 to 24 years of age as Hispanics. That age group accounted for 25.9% of black murder victims.

I am not a criminologist but even common sense (a word beloved by President Obama) would indicate that gang and drug-related crime is behind the significant concentration of deaths among younger blacks and Hispanics. Efforts concentrated on suppressing gangs combined with a more realistic policy on drugs would have a greater impact on reducing so-called gun violence (sic) than any of the gun control efforts that President Obama is seeking. However, given the unholy alliance in cities like Chicago between gangs and the Democrat machine, I doubt anything will be done to suppress the gangs. It is far easier to demonize guns and legal gun owners than it is to attack the root causes of either suicide or homicides.

Tweet Of The Day

Our problem as mere peons is that we just don't have the mental wherewithal to comprehend the sheer genius of President Barack Hussain Obama. Fortunately, the Iowahawk explains it for us.

Obama proposes gun control => gun sales skyrocket => murders go down #seeitworks

— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) January 5, 2016

NSSF Response To Obama's Executive Actions

Like the NRA, the National Shooting Sports Foundation issued a response to President Obama's Executive Actions on gun control. Their response is a bit more detailed than the NRA response and they note that they will be issuing more responses as the days go by. They bring up a good point about making the shipper - not the recipient dealer - responsible for reporting guns lost or stolen in transit.

NSSF Statement: "Executive Actions to Reduce Gun Violence and make Our Communities Safer"

We all share the goal of reducing the intentional misuse of guns and enhancing the safety of our communities. As the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) will carefully review all aspects of the executive actions that President Obama announced today. Much remains to be spelled out. In the interim we have some initial reactions:

• We support further resources being allocated to staffing and increasing operational hours for the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to make the system more efficient and responsive.
• We represent Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs). The criteria for what will constitute being "engaged in the business" going forward needs considerable clarification and raises questions about enforceability.
• The number of firearms lost or stolen while in transit to or from FFLs is less than 0.15 percent of the number manufactured and imported in a given year. In these rare occurrences, FFLs already actively participate in ATF's long-standing voluntary reporting program and FFLs and common carriers work closely with ATF to investigate them. Proposals to make a shipping FFL responsible for tracking and reporting firearms no longer in their inventories, after the legal title has been transferred to the purchaser, are misdirected, as the receiving FFL is in the best position to know if it receives its shipment.
• We have long called for the effective enforcement of the numerous laws already on the books regarding the criminal misuse of firearms and would encourage the administration to carry through on this directive.
• NSSF has been working actively since early 2013 through our FixNICS initiative to encourage states to report all appropriate adjudicated mental health records to NICS and has succeeded in getting legislation passed in more than a dozen states. We welcome the administration's attention to this issue.
• With regard to the development of "smart-gun" technology, the industry has never opposed its development. How additional government research into this technology would advance it is unclear. Law enforcement agencies and consumers themselves will have to make the determination whether acquisition of firearms with this technology "would be consistent with operational needs," as the White House itself states. We would continue to oppose mandates for this technology, particularly since there are well proven existing methods to secure firearms, and firearms accidents are at historic low levels.

NSSF will have additional responses in the days, weeks and months ahead, especially as federal departments and agencies begin the work of carrying out the executive orders.

NRA Response To Obama's Executive Actions

While the gun prohibitionists are declaring victory due to President Obama's Executive Actions - and who knew it would take so little to satisfy their demands - gun rights groups have also responded. They don't have such sanguine expectations that these "tweaks" will do much to combat either terrorism or crime.

Below is the response of NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox which is followed by a just released video of Wayne LaPierre speaking on background checks.

Fairfax, Va. – The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement on Tuesday regarding President Barack Obama's Executive Gun Control Order:

Once again, President Obama has chosen to engage in political rhetoric, instead of offering meaningful solutions to our nation's pressing problems. Today's event also represents an ongoing attempt to distract attention away from his lack of a coherent strategy to keep the American people safe from terrorist attack.

The American people do not need more emotional, condescending lectures that are completely devoid of facts. The men and women of the National Rifle Association take a back seat to no one when it comes to keeping our communities safe. But the fact is that President Obama's proposals would not have prevented any of the horrific events he mentioned. The timing of this announcement, in the eighth and final year of his presidency, demonstrates not only political exploitation but a fundamental lack of seriousness.

The proposed executive actions are ripe for abuse by the Obama Administration, which has made no secret of its contempt for the Second Amendment. The NRA will continue to fight to protect the fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed under our Constitution. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be harassed or intimidated for engaging in lawful, constitutionally-protected activity – nor will we allow them to become scapegoats for President Obama's failed policies.

NRA News released this video of Wayne LaPierre speaking about the deficiencies of the current background checks. As he says, you don't need to cast a bigger net - just one with smaller holes.

What To Expect Tomorrow From Obama

This afternoon President Obama met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, BATFE Deputy Directory Tom Brandon, and FBI Director James Comey to discuss his plans for more gun control. About an hour ago, the White House released a "Fact Sheet" outlining his Executive Actions. The full document can be read here.

Here are the highlights as I've summarized them.

1.   Expanding the definition of who will be considered a dealer in firearms. Key factors that will be considered is if you advertise on the Internet, have formal business cards, rent tables at gun shows, and the number of firearms sold.


2.   BATFE will finalize Rule 41-P which will force background checks and chief law enforcement officer checkoffs on trusts and corporations.


3.   Expanding the NICS operating hours to 24/7, hiring of 230 new personnel, and notification to local law enforcement when a prohibited person attempts to purchase a firearm. 


4.   Attorney General Lynch will urge the states to submit complete criminal histories.


5.   Federal prosecutors will be urged to "continue to focus on smart and effective enforcement of our gun laws."


6.   BATFE will be budgeted for 200 more Special Agents and Industry Investigators in FY2017.


7.   BATFE will establish an Internet Investigation Center to track illegal online firearms trafficking.


8.   BATFE will devote $4 million to enhance the National Integrated Ballistics Information Network. 


9.   FFLs must notify BATFE if firearms are lost or stolen in shipment.


10.   US Attorneys will be encouraged to "renew domestic violence outreach efforts".


11.   $500 million to increase access to mental health treatment.


12.   Social Security Administration will begin reporting recipients who have a financial guardian to the NICS system.


13. Depart of Health and Human Services will instruct states that HIPAA doesn't apply when reporting mental health issues.


14. DOD, Justice, and Homeland Security will conduct or sponsor smart gun research.


15. All other departments are instructed to review the availability of smart gun technology on a regular basis and promote it.

Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned has his take on these Executive Actions. He finds it a less ambitious and bold than he was expecting.

UPDATE: Charles Cooke at National Review has an excellent analysis on these gun control moves by Obama.

Further, he will have set no meaningful precedents whatsoever. In other words: Even if he wins this round, he will have done precisely nothing of merit — except perhaps to have pleased his base and to have convinced the most ignorant parts of the electorate that he has finally stuck his finger into the NRA’s eye. Were these serious measures, I would be squealing. Instead, I’m amused. These are the dampest of squibs.

Read the whole thing. It is worth a few minutes your time.

New Year's Resolutions

Given that Hillary Clinton thinks the National Rifle Association is one of the enemies that she is most proud of, it is good to see the NRA punching back twice as hard.  Their New Year's video pokes fun at her support from Bloomberg as well as her obvious disdain for the Second Amendment and by extension the US Constitution.




I think it is smart for the NRA to start switching their focus from Obama to Clinton. While Obama can still make mischief as he is signaling with his weekly address, he is a lame duck. Short of appointing another Supreme Court justice, he can't hurt us too badly. Hillary, on the other hand, given four years in office would be a disaster for gun owners.

UPDATE: Interestingly enough, the NRA's video is catching some traction with the news media. In our local station's (WLOS Asheville) reports on the gun control moves by Obama, this video is mentioned each and every time. I heard about it at 5pm, 5:30pm, 6pm, and 11pm.

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.

Quote Of The Day

The quote of the day has nothing to do with gun rights but everything to do with our feckless (and anti-gun) president. It is from Prof. Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute. Kagan was formerly a professor of military history at West Point.

There was no meaningful al Qaeda presence in Afghanistan when Barack Obama took office. There will likely be al Qaeda strategic bases there when he leaves. That is failure by any standard.

Frustrated Is Good; Stymied Is Even Better

The BBC's North America editor Jon Sopel was given an exclusive interview with President Obama. In that interview, Mr. Obama said:

"If you ask me where has been the one area where I feel that I've been most frustrated and most stymied, it is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on Earth in which, we do not have sufficient common-sense gun safety laws, even in the face of repeated mass killings," Obama said. "If you look at the number of Americans killed since 9/11 by terrorism, it's less than 100. If you look at the number that have been killed by gun violence, it's in the tens of thousands."

I am proud to say that I have supported organizations and legislators who have helped stymie his assault on the Second Amendment. I know Mr. Obama thinks nothing of abrogating the rights of Americans by using his "pen and a phone". When he mentions in the video below that he has 18 months to work on "gun violence" (sic), I take him at his word and am willing to fight him every step of the way. Nothing he has proposed or will propose is "common sense".

What I Missed Last Week

Last week in St. Louis was spent at the hospital with my mother-in-law. As a result, I didn't get to comment on some of the issues that came up last week. It is too late to comment on everything that happened but I'd like to mention a couple of things in the "Never Let A Tragedy Go To Waste" category.

First up is the abuse of the funeral of Rev. Clementa Pinckney by President Obama for political purposes. To me a eulogy should be a discussion of the deceased's life. It should be used to let others know how much the deceased loved his or her family. It should be used to point out the deceased's accomplishments in life. It should be used to discuss the goodness of the deceased.

By all accounts, Clementa Pinckney was a good and pious man who loved his family and his church community. He was also an accomplished man in that he was elected to the South Carolina State Senate at the young age of 23. While he might have been a politician, he didn't deserve having the President of the United States turn his funeral into a political attack on guns and the Confederate flag.

For too long, we’ve been blind to the unique mayhem that gun violence inflicts upon this nation. (Applause.) Sporadically, our eyes are open: When eight of our brothers and sisters are cut down in a church basement, 12 in a movie theater, 26 in an elementary school. But I hope we also see the 30 precious lives cut short by gun violence in this country every single day; the countless more whose lives are forever changed -- the survivors crippled, the children traumatized and fearful every day as they walk to school, the husband who will never feel his wife’s warm touch, the entire communities whose grief overflows every time they have to watch what happened to them happen to some other place.

The vast majority of Americans -- the majority of gun owners -- want to do something about this. We see that now. (Applause.) And I'm convinced that by acknowledging the pain and loss of others, even as we respect the traditions and ways of life that make up this beloved country -- by making the moral choice to change, we express God’s grace. (Applause.)

The second broader issue is the Confederate flag or, more correctly, the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. To some it is a symbol of slavery and racism. To others it is a symbol of their Southern heritage for which their forefathers fought and died.

My great-great-grandfather Alexander Clay "Sandy" Morgan was a private in Co. K, 34th North Carolina Infantry along with his brothers Anderson and Eli. They both grew up in the northern part of Montgomery County, North Carolina and had enlisted (or more likely were drafted) in March 1863. Their regiment was part of the second wave of troops involved in the ill-fate Pickett's Charge at the Battle of Gettysburg. Sandy and Anderson survived the war while their brother Eli is reported to have died as a prisoner of war at Point Lookout, Maryland.

My Grandfather Richardson's biological father, William Thomas Brewer, reportedly served in the Confederate Navy according to my cousin and family historian Rev. Van Thomas. I am sure there are more relatives that served the Confederacy if I dig deeper.

I have never owned a Confederate flag of any sort. I just haven't. My mom was a New Yorker whose ancestors didn't even arrive to this country until after the Civil War (or War of Northern Aggression). As my influence on these things came from my mother, familial ties to the Confederacy were just not emphasized.

Just as important, even though I had ancestors who served in the Confederate Army, the section of North Carolina from which they came was highly anti-slavery and anti-secessionist. This section of the Piedmont is referred to as the Quaker Belt by historians and tended to have many Southern Unionists. My grandfather was a staunch Republican and I surmise his political beliefs were tied to this anti-slavery, Southern Unionist core of thought in southern Randolph and northern Montgomery Counties.

Should the Confederate flag fly over a statehouse? No, that should be the US flag and the state flag. However, should a Confederate flag fly over a Confederate war memorial or over a historic site? Absolutely, positively yes. It is a reminder of our history both good and bad. As the philosopher George Santayana wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

I am sick to death of political correctness, talk of micro-aggressions, and other such nonsense. I am at the point where I'd fly the Confederate flag just out of spite even though I've never even owned one in the past.

Perhaps it was just as well that my focus last week was on my mother-in-law and not this stuff.

The Difference Two Years Make

It is interesting the difference two years make. I'm listening to a rebroadcast of President Obama's State of the Union Speech. I was interested to see if he was going to call for more gun control. Reading through the speech and then doing word searches I can find no mention of guns, firearms, background checks, or Newtown. The only mention of crime has to do with the incarceration rate.

By contrast, the 2013 State of the Union Speech contains eight instances where Obama mentioned guns or gun violence (sic). He called for more background checks as well as restrictions on firearms and standard capacity magazines.

I don't know whether it is because there is a Republican Senate and House who (generally) are pro-gun rights or because its just not sexy enough for him to bother with anymore. He's still hung up on "climate change"and "rising oceans". And, of course, it is for "the children".

Oh, well, you can't have everything.

UPDATE: I was wrong. He did mention Newtown and Tucson but in the context of grieving with families just as he grieved with dead miners in West Virginia.

What Would Milo Think?

My best friend was a Cuban-American.

I first met Emilio Rodriguez in grad school at UNC-Chapel Hill in 1979. We were both students in the political science doctoral program. He in International Relations and me in Public Administration and Public Policy. He went on to get his PhD from Carolina while I got a wife and no degree. In fact, he was the one who introduced me to my late first wife Rosanne.

Milo went on to teach at the University of South Alabama, the American College of Switzerland, and finally at Mount Saint Mary's University in Emmitsburg, Maryland where he made an indelible mark on his students. He was leading a semester trip abroad in 2008 to Ireland  when he passed away from complications related to his kidney and pancreas transplant. Even now as I write this I am getting a lump in my throat and my eyes are moist.

Milo with his wife Amy, son John, and daughter in law Michelle.

While Milo was born in New Orleans to a Cuban dad and American mom, he spent much of his youth before the Cuban Revolution living in Havana. He had no love for Castro and the Communists.

Photo by Burt Glinn, Magnum Photos

I will always remember the stories Milo told about what it was like when the Communists came to power. The story that always resonated with me was about how they took his toy trains when he was an eight year old. They took them because Milo's family wasn't part of the proletariat.

What kind of people take a kid's toy trains in the name of La Revolución.

Now that Barack Obama has unilaterally re-established diplomatic relations with Cuba, I wonder what Milo would think. Milo was a pro-military, pro-gun kinda-liberal college professor who grew up in Miami and Madrid. He enjoyed Duke basketball, good cigars, good Scotch and cognac, military re-enacting, and girl watching. He may have said it was time or he may have said, "hell, no!". And frankly, I'll never know. As for me, I'm trending towards the "hell, no!" response so long as any Castro is alive and in power.

It's Not A Tradition; It's A Civil Right

Yesterday marked the first anniversary of the Navy Yard murders. Calling it merely a "shooting" serves to focus on the tool while mitigating the evil intent of the murderer.

To mark the anniversary, President Obama released the following short statement:

One year ago, our dedicated military and civilian personnel at the Washington Navy Yard were targeted in an unspeakable act of violence that took the lives of 12 American patriots. As we remember men and women taken from us so senselessly, we keep close their family and friends, stand with the survivors who continue to heal and pay tribute to the first responders who acted with skill and bravery. At the same time, we continue to improve security at our country’s bases and installations to protect our military and civilian personnel who help keep us safe. One year ago, 12 Americans went to work to protect and strengthen the country they loved. Today, we must do the same – rejecting atrocities like these as the new normal and renewing our call for common-sense reforms that respect our traditions while reducing the gun violence that shatters too many American families every day.

First, let me point out, that keeping our military bases and installations gun-free zones protect no one. They only serve to provide an easier working environment for deranged psychopaths.

Next, using the anniversary of the murders of Navy personnel to call for more gun control - "common-sense reforms" - is nothing more than blood dancing. Just like the children murdered at the school in Newtown, the 12 civilian personnel who died appear to be nothing more than debating points to be used by the White House in its quest for more and more gun control.

Finally, the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms is not a tradition. It is a Constitutional amendment that recognized a pre-existing civil right. And as the Supreme Court affirmed in the Heller decision, it is an individual right. Saying that you want to "respect our traditions" conjures up the image of men and boys in a deer camp clad in red and black plaid wool coats and toting Winchester 94s and Marlin 336s. To refer to it as a tradition denigrates what are essential civil and human rights - the right to self-defense and the right to overthrow a tyrannical government. The right to keep and bear arms helps to assure both of those rights.

Like Your Relatively Inexpensive Wolf Or Silver Bear Or Tula Ammo?

David Codrea has an interesting column up this morning in the National Gun Rights Examiner. Given that it is fairly obvious by now that Putin has sent Russian troops into Crimea which is part of Ukraine, what sort of response will the Obama Administration come up with short of sending troops?

How about doing something to screw US gun owners that would also hit the Russians in the pocket book? In other words, a win-win in their minds.

“I had a fellow tell me this morning that he was completely unconcerned about the Ukraine situation, believing that Obama would take the ‘Chamberlain way out’ of confrontation,” Mike Vanderboegh related this morning on his Sipsey Street Irregulars blog.

“No he won't,” Vanderboegh replied, “he'll take the Clinton way out -- do nothing about the larger issue but he'll cut off our access to Russian ammunition just like Clinton cut off our access to inexpensive Chinese ammo in the 90s, to ‘punish them for human rights violations.’"

With foreign imports growing to accommodate the already stretched supply of ammunition that has domestic manufacturers running operations around the clock, such a move would not only send an easy and immediate signal that would meet with “progressive” political and media approval, it would also continue with a long-established tactic of the “gun control” movement: punishing peaceable gun owners for something they are not responsible for.

Sure you can get 7.62x39 ammo from other countries including the US. However, checking the prices at LuckyGunner.com and elsewhere, US made ammo will cost you 3-5 times as much while most non-Russian, non-US made 7.62x39 will still cost 2-3 times as much. The only exception is the Romanian made, Century International imported "Red Army" brand of ammo.

I'm not trying to start a run on ammo but think we need to be aware and consider what the Obama Administration might do in the Ukranian situation. I think David and Mike are on to something here.

The Obligatory "Gun Violence" Reference In Obama's SOTU Speech

I guess it would be too much to ask to hope that President Obama might concentrate primarily on national security, economic growth, and jobs growth in tonight's State of the Union speech. The obligatory reference to so-called gun violence (sic) along with a pledge to keep pushing gun control with or without the aid of Congress.

From the speech:

Citizenship means standing up for the lives that gun violence steals from us each day. I have seen the courage of parents, students, pastors, and police officers all over this country who say “we are not afraid,” and I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress, to help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters, shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook.

The British paper The Guardian notes, however, that it seems the First Lady has somewhat shifted her focus from gun control issues. The point out that she had four invitees last year post-Newtown to push the issues. This year the sole invitee representing "gun violence" is the school bookkeeper from Atlanta who talked a school shooter into giving up the gun.

From four invitees in 2013, the number of guests of the first lady invited this year to spotlight the problem of gun violence in the US is one. She is Antoinette Tuff, a bookkeeper from Georgia credited with preventing a shooting at an elementary school in an Atlanta suburb by talking the would-be shooter out of it.

Otherwise, the makeup of Michelle Obama’s viewing box for Tuesday night’s speech is largely unchanged from a year ago. Among her 22 guests (Jill Biden and Valerie Jarrett aside) are small businesses' proprietors and employees, overachieving students, young immigrants, beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act and a wounded veteran.

President Barack Obama ended his 2013 State of the Union speech with an emotional call for Congress to vote on new gun legislation. Underscoring the point was the presence in the first lady’s visitor box of the parents of a Chicago teenager killed in gun violence; a police lieutenant who was shot 15 times when he responded to the mass shooting at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin; and a teacher at Sandy Hook elementary in Newtown, Connecticut.

Let's hope this is a harbinger of things to come.

UPDATE: Here is a link to a video clip of Obama and this part of his State of the Union address. I'm linking because it is an auto-play video.