Wil Wirtanen

Lott nails it again.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452437/bret-stephens-gun-article-lacks-logical-factual-support

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.

Wil Wirtanen

This is why we have a 2nd Amendment .

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/why_we_cannot_trust_the_fbi.html

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

Diane Feinstein, age 84, is running for the Senate again in 2018. This is a woman who was born in the year FDR was first sworn in as President!

Personally, I can't wait for the Democrats to nominate Joe Biden and Bernie Sandersin 2020. It will be the first All Muppets Balcony ticket!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Admittedly this is kind of "left field," but it's

I'm not saying this is the "new truth," I'm saying watch it and form your own opinion. Note: it's early enough that "bump stocks" didn't enter into the mix.

Jack Kemp replies:

Dana, the possibility of an Antifa operation funded by Soros - or something funded by ISIS - is believeable. Who goes to an open concert in front of a 43 story building with many locations to shoot down on the audience in times like these? The music may have been the type they listen to in Sheriff Andy Griffith's Mayberry but the times are very different.

Dana reploies:

I can't comment intelligently on the idea of going to outdoor concerts such as these, no matter what the venue. As you know, I don't "do" country music. But if this had been a 1960's jazz concert (in the 60's), featuring, perhaps, Dizzy Gillespie's group, or Cannonball Adderley's group, or the Woody Herman band, I'd have been there, paying no attention to a 43-story hotel in the background. Possibility of being shot from one of the rooms? Who the hell are you kidding, Sport?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

I leave further interpretations of the folly to this lesbian "Bishop" to the Christian readers and writers in this group
Jack
http://theresurgent.com/united-methodist-church-lesbian-bishop-goes-after-jesus/?mc_cid=69ba79bb94&mc_eid=fcf10112cd
United Methodist Church Lesbian Bishop Goes After Jesus
By Peter Heck | October 8, 2017, 11:45am | @peterheck


In another banner moment for the United Methodist Church in America, the woman they elevated to the pious level of "bishop” despite her open involvement in a lesbian partnership, has decided to remake Jesus in her own image and then market this false god to her flock.

Read it all.

This from Fay Voshell:

Better theologians than I have answered the question of Christ's eternality as coupled with his humanity.

The answer from all orthodox theologians who actually believe Christ's claims to be God Himself is that Jesus temporarily subordinated himself to the Father in order to accomplish our salvation. At no time was he, is he, will he be less than God. All that was "learned" during his incarnate state was known by him within his position in the Godhead from all eternity.

We humans mistake his immense condescension to us as his being like us in our time bound state and mortal thinking. Jesus took on human form but at no time every claimed anything less than equality with the Father. That is why the contemporary hierarchy considered him a blasphemer worthy of death.

The Methodist "bishop" sees Christ as merely human, and thus divorced from the Trinitarian Godhead. She sees him as a slightly different version of herself, and projects on to him her desire to see herself reflected in him, as having a faint stamp of LGBT divinity--sort of like a saint of the LGBT movement. She has made her own idol in her own image and worships it--not the Christ of the scriptures.

As C.S. Lewis wrote, Christ did not leave the option of being merely human open to us. Either he was as crazy as the man who believes he's a poached egg, or he really is the Son of God.

Here is the Lewis quote in full.

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him [that is, Christ]: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic–on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg–or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse…. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

a note from tim

Her view is openly heretical and completely extra-Biblical. Jesus forgave sexual sins always with the caveat - "Go and sin no more". He never said it was o.k. to violate the Old Testament prohibitions. In fact, He said "I have come not to change the law but to fulfill it." Try to twist it as you may you cannot make a square peg fit into a round hole. Forgiveness, which is what this dishonest woman is using, only works when there is repentence.

The Old Testament is clear on homosexuality being an abomination. So is the New. The fact is, Jesus did not evolve in His thinking any more than does God Almighty, because the two are one. Jesus forgave but did not excuse. People don't like that because it necessitates they change their behavior and they don't want to do that.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 682 words, total size 4 kb.

Wil Wirtanen

Some interesting Columbus Day facts:

https://townhall.com/columnists/jackkerwick/2017/10/09/columbus-the-west-and-the-myth-of-the-noble-savage-n2392389

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

Paul Driessen

It seems nearly everyone wants to advance sustainability principles. The problem is, no one really knows what they are. Real sustainability means responsible conservation and stewardship of natural resources. The public relations variety is mostly image-enhancing fluff. Politicized sustainability – the version that’s all the rage on college campuses and among government regulators – insists that we may meet the needs of current generations only to the extent that doing so "will not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs.”

The problem with this infinitely malleable definition is that it requires us to predict both unpredictable future technologies and their raw material demands. Even worse, we are supposed to protect those future needs even if it means ignoring or compromising the undeniable needs of current generations – including the needs and welfare of the most impoverished, politically powerless people on Earth today. That’s why this irrational, unworkable, environmentally destructive idea deserves to land in history’s trash bin.

Politicized sustainability threatens planet and people

It drives anti-fossil fuel agendas and threatens wildlife, jobs, and human health and welfare

Paul Driessen

Sustainability (sustainable development) is one of the hottest trends on college campuses, in the news media, in corporate boardrooms and with regulators. There are three different versions.

Real Sustainability involves thoughtful, caring, responsible, economical stewardship and conservation of land, water, energy, metallic, forest, wildlife and other natural resources. Responsible businesses, families and communities practice this kind of sustainability every day: polluting less, recycling where it makes sense, and using less energy, water and raw materials to manufacture the products we need.

Public Relations Sustainability mostly involves meaningless, superficial, unverifiable, image-enhancing assertions that a company is devoted to renewable fuels, corporate responsibility, environmental justice, reducing its carbon footprint – or sustainability. Its primary goal is garnering favorable press or appeasing radical environmental groups.

Politicized Sustainability is the untenable, even dangerous variety. It relies on ideological assertions and theoretical models as an alternative to actual outside-our-windows reality and evidence. Like "dangerous manmade climate change,” its real purpose is gaining greater agitator and government control over people’s energy use, lives, livelihoods, liberties and living standards. It reflects an abysmal understanding of basic energy, economic, resource extraction, manufacturing and human rights realities.

The most common definition is that "we may meet the needs of current generations” only to the extent that doing so "will not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs.”

Among other alleged human wrongdoing doing, Political Sustainability thus reflects the assertion that we are rapidly depleting finite resources. Therefore, we must reduce our current needs and wants in order to save those resources for future generations. At first blush, it sounds logical, and even ethical.

However, under sustainability precepts, we are supposed to predict future technologies – and ensure that today’s resource demands will not compromise the completely unpredictable energy and raw material requirements that those completely unpredictable future technologies will introduce. We are supposed to safeguard the assumed needs of future generations, even if it means ignoring or compromising the undeniable needs of current generations – including the needs, aspirations, health and welfare of the most impoverished, malnourished, disease-ravaged, energy-deprived, politically powerless people on Earth.

For thousands of years, mankind advanced at a snail’s pace. Then, as the modern fossil-fuel industrial era found its footing, progress picked up rapidly, until the speed of change became almost exponential. How today is anyone supposed to predict what might be in store ten, fifty or a hundred years from now?

Moreover, as we moved from flint to copper, to bronze, iron, steel and beyond, we didn’t do so because mankind had exhausted Earth’s supplies of flint, copper, tin and so forth. We did it because we innovated. We invented something better, more efficient, more practical. Each advance required different materials.

Who today can foresee what future technologies we will have … and what raw materials those future technologies will require? How we are supposed to ensure that future families can meet their needs, if we cannot possibly know what those needs will be?

Why then would we even think of empowering activists and governments to regulate today’s activities – based on wholly unpredictable future technologies, lifestyles, needs and resource demands? Why would we ignore or compromise the pressing needs of current generations, to meet those totally unpredictable future needs?

"Resource depletion” claims also fail to account for new technologies that increase energy and mineral reserves, reduce their costs – or decrease the need for certain raw materials: copper, for instance, because lightweight fiber optic cables made from silica (one of Earth’s most abundant minerals) can carry thousands of times more information than a huge bundle of copper wires that weigh 800 times more.

In 1887, when Wisconsin’s Hearthstone House became the world’s first home lit by hydroelectric power, no one could foresee how electricity would come to dominate, enhance and safeguard our lives in the myriad ways it does today. No one could envision the many ways we generate electricity today.

120 years later, no one predicted tiny cellular phones with superb digital cameras and more computing and networking power than a big 1990 desktop computer. No one expected that we would need so much cadmium, lithium, rare earth metals and other raw materials to manufacture thousands of wind turbines.

No one anticipated that new 4-D seismic, deepwater drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies would find and produce so much oil and natural gas that today we still have at least a century’s worth of these vital energy resources – which "experts” had just told us we would run out of in only a few more years.

And yet, we are still supposed to predict the future 50 or 100 years from now, safeguard the assumed needs of future generations, and ignore the clear needs of current generations. We are also supposed to presume that today’s essential natural resources have to last forever. In reality, they only have to last long enough for our creative intellects to discover real, actually workable replacements: new deposits, production techniques, raw material substitutes or technologies.

Of course, all of this is irrelevant to Politicized Sustainability dogma. That doctrine focuses on ridding the world of fossil fuels, regardless of any social, economic, environmental or human costs of doing so. And regardless of whether supposed alternatives really are eco-friendly and sustainable.

For example, mandated U.S. ethanol quotas eat up 40% of this nation’s corn, grown on over 36 million acres of cropland, to replace 10% of America’s gasoline. Corn ethanol also requires billions of gallons of water, and vast quantities of pesticides, fertilizers, tractor fuel and natural gas … to produce energy that drives up food prices, damages small engines, gets one-third fewer miles per gallon than gasoline – and during its entire production and use cycle emits just as much carbon dioxide as gasoline.

Imagine replacing 100% of US gasoline with corn ethanol. How would that in any way be sustainable?

Mandated, subsidized wind energy requires millions of acres for turbines and ultra-long transmission lines … and billions of tons of concrete, steel, copper, rare earth metals and fiberglass. The turbines’ subsonic noise and light flicker create chronic health problems for susceptible people living near them, and kill millions of birds and bats annually – to produce expensive, intermittent, unreliable electricity that must be backed up by dozens of fossil fuel generators or billions of (nonexistent) land- and resource-intensive battery arrays.

Meanwhile, American and Canadian companies are cutting down thousands of acres of forests and turning millions of trees into wood pellets that they truck to coastal ports and transport on oil-fueled cargo ships to England. There the pellets are hauled by truck and burned in place of coal, to generate electricity … so that England can meet its renewable fuel targets. How is this sustainable – or "climate friendly”?

Why not just build the fossil fuel power plants … mine for coal and frack for natural gas to fuel them – or build more nuclear power plants – and forget about the ethanol, wind turbines, wood pellets and other pseudo-renewable, pseudo-sustainable false alternatives … until something truly better comes along?

Meanwhile, more than 1.2 billion people still do not have electricity. Another 2 billion have electrical power only sporadically and unpredictably. Hundreds of millions get horribly sick, and five million die every year from lung and intestinal diseases that are due to breathing smoke from open fires … and not having refrigeration, clean water and safe, bacteria-free food.

As Steven Lyazi has noted, these people simply want to take their rightful, God-given places among Earth’s healthy and prosperous people. Instead, they’re being told "that wouldn’t be sustainable.” They’re being told they must be content with a few wind turbines near their villages and little solar panels on their huts – to charge cell phones, pump a little water, power a few light bulbs and operate tiny refrigerators.

Politicized Sustainability is irrational, unjust, inhumane, eco-imperialistic and environmentally destructive. It is especially harmful to the world’s poor. It’s time to rethink and overhaul this insanity.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death and other books on public policy.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1547 words, total size 11 kb.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

My wife was held hostage yesterday.

Oh, she wasn't grabbed by terrorists who threatened her life, but she was forced to waste a lot of time inside a grocery store because our Black Lives Matter/Hands up Don't Shoot crowd decided to invade a local shopping center and block traffic into and out of the stores. The Riverfront Times has the details:

"The protest began at Hampton Village at 4:30 p.m. but ended up marching to the nearby offices of the St. Louis Police Officers Association before concluding without incident around 7:20 p.m.

Protesters at one point blocked the intersection of Hampton and Chippewa, but unlike other recent actions, didn't draw a massive police response or any arrests."

end excerpt.

Much of the RFT article consists of a diatribe against the head of the Police Officers Association, Jeff Roorda. Protesters don't like him because he tries to protect police officers. They chanted:

"We know he's a racist and I don't mean sorta; y'all gotta fire that pig Jeff Roorda!"

Naturally no evidence is given to support the exhausted accusation of racism by radical leftists - they just hurl it about like confetti at a parade. And the RFT, a radical liberal magazine run by degenerates (you should read their classifieds) makes scurrilous accusations against Roorda. It's despicable.

But it is also despicable that the police keep allowing this to happen. We have laws on the books about blocking traffic, and yet they aren't enforced by the City and the rich white woman who managed to buy the Mayorship. In point of fact, these protests will continue until someone makes it their business to stop them. That means breaking them up as soon as they begin. Hampton Village is not public property, and the protesters had no right to invade the parking lot or block traffic. We have trespassing, disturbing the peace, jay walking, blocking traffic, and I have little doubt threatening innocent people. At one point a man tried to thread his car through the protesters and the police went after HIM rather than the scumbags causing the problems. It's an Alice in Wonderland approach.

So my wife was very late getting home and I suffered a diabetic blood sugar attack thanks to these jerks. What do they think they will accomplish with this? If I had any sympathy for them it would be over now. They no longer have a shred of claim to the moral high ground; they are just annoying people. It's time we start annoying them back.

Had I been there I would have joined the counter protesters. I certainly would have had some choice words to say to them. Somelthing like "grow up you babies!"

These are nothing but black racists, reverse discriminators who defend a career criminal simply because he was shot by a white police officer. No other reason. Then when the police stop patrolling their neighborhoods they scream racism! Which is it? Either the police do their jobs and protect black and white citizens or they stop doing it and leave the streets to the criminals. The BLM crowd doesn't know and doesn't care.

How much money has George Soros pumped into these protests?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 3 kb.

Helen Dyer forwards this. It is from Brad Wall, Premier of Saskatchewan.

Today is not a good day for Canada. It is not a good day for the federation. It is a very bad day for the west.


TransCanada made the decision to cancel Energy East – but make no mistake, the reasons for it fall at the feet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the federal government. They have been, at best, ambivalent about the project and then moved the goalposts at the last moment by asking the regulator to consider the impact of upstream greenhouse gas emissions.


Imagine if something like this was considered prior to the construction of auto assembly plants in Ontario or the factories that manufacture heavily subsidized jets in Quebec or the highways and rails that transport those products.

Former federal Liberal Cabinet Minister, and now Montreal Mayor, Denis Coderre cheers the cancellation of this pipeline. He who leads a city that, just 2 years ago, used a pipeline to dump 4.9 BILLION litres, or nearly 2,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools, of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence Seaway.

It is a good thing that Mr. Coderre’s hypocrisy needs no pipeline for conveyance, for it would need to be very large and could never get approved for construction.

When Coderre cheers for the end of this pipeline, he cheers for the imported oil we buy from Saudi Arabia, where women can now drive, but the public beheadings continue.

He is cheering against an energy sector in our country that employs thousands and has paid on average over the last 3 years $17 billion annually in taxes and royalties to Canadian governments.


$17 billion is enough to pay for 680 new schools, 1.8 million knee replacements and 4.25 million child care spaces. We have lost an opportunity to strengthen quality of life in Canada.


Beyond the immediate impact, there are other reasons to be concerned.

A new Liberal carbon tax, new Liberal tax changes for small business (that will hurt many in the energy sector and farmers), changes to the NEB applied only to this sector and not to others, and methane regulations that will not be mirrored south of the border, with whom we must compete for job creating investment dollars.

We have a company that committed more than a billion dollars to a project and made earnest efforts to address the concerns of the public and regulators. A company that made 700 changes to its plans as part of that response. Make no mistake, other companies' decisions to invest in Canada will be informed by this debacle.

The expectation of course from the federal government, and some powerful central Canadian interests, is that the west will just grin and bear this latest blow to our economy and our people.


That our taxpayers in Saskatchewan and Alberta will continue to send, without question, about $2.5 billion in equalization payments to help support Quebec that receives $11 billion in equalization per year and $1.4 billion to Ontario. All of this despite the fact that low energy prices have resulted in job losses and lower revenues for the last 4 years.

Something needs to change. For the west to continue on like this in our federal system is the equivalent of having Stockholm syndrome.


The decision by TransCanada to cancel the Energy East project was made because of a lack of interest and leadership – or worse, intentional decisions and policies of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government. He should answer for this. He needs to be held accountable for this.


His actions and his government's actions may well have some westerners wondering if this country really values western Canada, the resources we have, and the things we do to contribute to the national economy and to quality of life for all.

Brad Wall
Premier of Saskatchewan

Saskatchewan Party
http://www.saskparty.com/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 652 words, total size 4 kb.

Dana Mathewson

This article is from Newsweek, so perhaps not so credible. And apparently, U.S. "authorities" are dubious as well. Still, I figured I should pass it along.

The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) has published a new infographic detailing how the jihadists orchestrated the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history on Sunday night, despite serious doubts as to the group's involvement by authorities.

In the latest edition of ISIS's weekly Al-Naba online magazine, which was shared by its supporters Thursday on encrypted messaging app Telegram, the militant network provided more information intended to bolster its prior claims that assailant Stephen Paddock converted to Islam prior to killing 58 people and injuring hundreds more, when he opened fire on concertgoers from his 32nd floor room in the Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas with nearly two dozen weapons.

The new publication now specified that Paddock, who the group dubbed Abu Abdul Barr al-Amriki, had allegedly "converted to Islam six months ago" and provided a play-by-play of Sunday's bloodshed.

Article here: https://www.yahoo.com/news/isis-las-vegas-shooter-stephen-004312350.html

Between you and me, I share the authorities' skepticism. There's a tendency for ISIS and others of that crowd to claim responsibility for this sort of thing even if they had nothing to do with it, just to make it look as if their reach is longer than it really is. Plus, I believe that if Paddock truly had converted to Islam, we'd have heard about it before now, and from "the authorities."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

The Dr. Strangelove of the investing world, George Soros, is behind the NFL players national anthem protests  The player's union donated money to soros linked radicals.

According to Breitbart:

In tax documents recently releasedby 2ndVote, a conservative watchdog group, we learn that the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) made a donation of$5,000 in 2015 to the Center for Community Change Action, a George Soros funded and adamantly anti-Trump organization.

Yet, that just scratches the surface of the NFLPA’s dealings and donations to the extreme left.

In 2013 and 2015, the NFLPA also contributed to the AFL-CIO’s community affiliate, Working America. This group, according to Open Secrets, contributed $1 million to defeat President Trump during the 2016 election. However, the group’s anti-Trump activities were not limited to the election. According to the Washington Times, "Working America has since mobilized against the Republican tax-cut framework, denouncing it as the "Trump tax scam.”

End excerpt.

This despite the fact that most NFL players are quite well-todo and are actually more in line with their wealthy owners than with the radical unionists who are promoting socialism.  Socialism will hurt the players

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Gateway Pundit has some interesting stuff on [linl=http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/10/neighbors-marilou-danley-lying-moved-belongings-house-august/]Marilou Danley. She apparently moved out before police say she did.

Don't miss itl

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

Those are the big circular tanks the shooter hit twice without an explosion, tanks located at the edge of McCarran Int'l Airport. The city and hotel were lucky they didn't blow up. The Mandalay Bay was opened in 1999, six years after the first World Trade Center bombing. A bunch of state and federal government jerks allowed a high rise building overlooking potential fuel tank sites - or they allowed the fuel tanks to be installed there later (maybe even after 9/11/01). If I were a Las Vegas lawyer for one of the injured or deceased, I'd would be checking out a new condo for myself alongside a fancy golf course - or pricing a Rolls Royce.

See article and map

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

Selwyn Duke

Before the blood was even dry in Las Vegas, Democrats coast to coast were pushing gun control. Hillary Clinton led the charge, finding time between fainting spells to tweet "Our grief isn't enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.” (Translation: "Put your politics aside…and accept my politics! Oh, and my grief is never enough because I don’t feel any.”) But I guess, taking Rahm Emanuel’s counsel, leftists "never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

The waste, though, is that we’re even talking about this matter in a tragedy’s wake. But since the attacks have been launched, let’s discuss guns.

To use a twist on a Frédéric Bastiat line, the bad social analyst confines himself to thevisibleeffect; the good social analyst considers not just the effects that can be seen, but those largely invisible and those that must beforeseen. Events such as Sunday’s massacre by murderer Stephen Paddock cannot be missed; they’re horrible, headline-making tragedies.
Not easily seen are the results of a study by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, a liberal Democrat and lifelong ACLU member: he found that guns are used by good citizens 2.2 to 2.5 million times per year to deter crime.
Some dispute this statistic, but whether it’s 2.5 million, 2 million or 1 million isn’t the point. It’s that an untold number of innocent lives are saved because good citizens own guns. This couldn’t happen were firearms outlawed. But since outlaws don’t follow laws, many of them would still have guns and, perhaps, even more innocents would be lost each year.
Yet what currently is lost, on many anti-gun activists, is reality. We hear, for example, that the U.S. is uniquely violent and that countries with strict gun-control are safer. Untrue.

According to Index Mundi, the U.S.  HYPERLINK "http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings"
ranks only 99th on a list of 191 nations in intentional homicide rate — in the bottom 50 percent. Moreover, there is no correlation whatsoever between stricter gun-control laws and lower murder rates.

Countries such as Russia, Mexico and Brazil have far stricter gun laws than we do but also more homicide. Then, as Professor Thomas Sowell  HYPERLINK "https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/12/invincible-ignorance-12-12-18"
wrote in 2012, "Gun ownership has been three times as high in Switzerland as in Germany, but the Swiss have had lower murder rates. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership and low murder rates include Israel, New Zealand, and Finland.”

This phenomenon is apparent everywhere. Journalist Piers Morgan (who still has never accepted my challenge to a debate) loves to mention how his Great Britain has a lower murder rate than does the U.S. But the U.K. has always had a lower murder rate — even back when both nations had few gun-control laws — and the U.K.’s gun-crime rate is higher now than it was then. Moreover, states such as New Hampshire have lower homicide rates than does Britain despite having far higher gun-ownership rates.
Some further examples:

Vermont has approximately the same gun-ownership rate as Louisiana but one-eighth the murder rate.
Japan has strict gun laws and, on paper, the world’s fifth-lowest homicide rate (critics HYPERLINK

"http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/Japan-Gun-Control-and-People-Control.htm" \t "_blank" note that, owing to the application of different criteria, that country’s actual rate is double the reported one). Yet Japanese-descent Americans living in the U.S. — with relatively easy access to firearms — HYPERLINK "https://books.google.com/books?

id=QXeGX67ezSYC&pg=PA189&lpg=PA189&dq=japanese+american+homicide+rates+FBI&source=bl&ots=nVtUwofuJu&sig=gr9SKO-dwQcM_N4RWEk8yHA_p88&hl=en" \l "v=onepage&q=japanese%20american%20homicide%20rates%20FBI&f=false" \t "_blank" have a murder ratehalfthat of Japanese living in Japan.
As Dr. Sowell also informed, the rate of gun ownership "is higher in rural
areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.
People over 50 are  HYPERLINK "http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/"
more likely to own guns than those under 50, but the latter have a higher murder rate

So if there’s no correlation between gun-control/ownership and murder rates, what is the correlation?
Demographics.

As Sowell also tells us, it’s not the guns — it’s the people.

Generally speaking, places with demographics like South Africa’s have murder rates like South Africa’s. Places with demographics like Britain’s have murder rates like Britain’s. This isn’t as politically correct to talk about as slamming guns is, but reality doesn’t exist to be fashionable.

The U.S. already has more than 22,000 gun-control laws, yet every tragic shooting is exploited by gun-grabbing demagogues who, generally fooling themselves as much as others, never articulate a vision, their end game. Will Utopia be realized with the next 5,000 guns law? The next 10,000? 50,000? 100,000? Actually, in their heart of hearts, the anti-gun crowd wants only one more: that dictating the seizure of all guns.
This is always denied, but just finish the "progressive” progression here. If every tragedy were followed by more anti-gun laws, would we not end up incrementally where leftists deny they want to go suddenly?

If anti-gun laws are a good idea now, they’ll also be a good idea later, when the emotion surrounding Las Vegas has subsided. But since facts and reason aren’t on the leftists’ side, they’re left to appeal to emotion — and that’s most easily done when blood is still on the ground.
 HYPERLINK "mailto:selwynduk
e@optonline.net" Contact Selwyn Duke,  HYPERLINK "https://twitter.com/SelwynDuke" follow him on Twitter or log on to  HYPERLINK "http://www.selwynduke.com/" SelwynDuke.com

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 936 words, total size 7 kb.

dana Mathewson

Something to get your thoughts off the Vegas shootings. This would have happened when Kelly was still at DHS.

Trump's Chief os Staff has phone hacked

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:01 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Funny; leftists are saying the Vegas shooting is evidence of white male rage and that the country would be enrages if this shooting were by a minority.

Naaz Modan, editor of CNN's Muslim Girl magazine, makes the following accusation:

"Mass shootings are a violent epidemic that have been met with fatal passivity for far too long. If mass shootings were perpetrated mostly by brown bodies, this would quickly be reframed and reformed as an immigration issue. If thousands died at the hands of black men, it would be used to excuse police brutality, minimize the Black Lives Matter movement and exacerbate the "raging black man” stereotype. If mass shooters identified as Muslim, it would quickly become terrorism and catalyze defense and security expenditures."

End excerpt.

Interesting. Wasn't tehe whole point of Black Lives Matter predicated on the view that blacks are being murdered and nobody cares? Now this Vegas shooting was predominantly whites and this woman is offended that they are being treated exactly the same way as blacks who have died. I thought we weren't supposed to say "all lives matter".

And we aren't suposed to point out that Chicago is strewn with black bodies. Or St. Louis. Or Detroit, or Baltimore, or any other city where black crime is out of control. Nope. We have absolutely no right to mention that; it is pure racism. We are supposed to pretend that the majority of violent crime in Ameerica is perpetrated by black people. When a mass shooting occurs and it is a white person suddenly WE are the hypocrites. And to claim that we would have a different view if an immigrant did this is ludicrous; were that immigrant a Scotsman or Australian we would have exactly the same approach as we would if it were a Honduran or a Somali; an immigrant not here cannot committ mass murder, no matter where they hail from.

And she is clearly jumping the gun in exhonorating Islam in this; ISIS still claims credit for it. And terrorism from teh Islamic world dwarfs any from anywhere else.

A final point; the majority of mass shootings are indeed white people, but as a percentage of the population they are not that high.And these stats divide crime from mass shootings. Ignore that and the amount of killing by minorities rises sharply.

She goes on to attack the Second Amendment, as we knew she would. Funny; the guns used were illegal anyway as many in this case were full automatic - a Federal crime. And she apparently doesn't know that Brazil, which has strict gun control, is awash in gun violence. We've seen rises in gun violence in Australia too after imposing gun control.
The fact is, Asians are more likely as a percentage of the population than are white people. Liberals need to do their homework. But then, that would prove their views utterly wrong.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 491 words, total size 4 kb.