Racism And Guns: Why The Left Keeps Painting Gun Owners As Racist

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

The media know their lies will be believed because people are too lazy to investigate and find out the truth about gun owners.

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

― Mark Twain

Gun owners get an awful rap in the modern media. While it’s fine for a Hollywood action hero to be loaded down with guns, the average citizen who does so is a ticking time bomb in their world. It’s worse with the news media, which routinely paints gun owners as being every kind of bigot imaginable. Recently, Bearing Arms has run two stories where this has come up. The first one, anti-gunners were trying to paint pro-gun folks as racists. The second, run just this weekend, liberal gun folks talked about the NRA’s supposedly “racist” policies.

Now, we all know this isn’t true. Gun owners are incredibly open to new folks, regardless of ethnicity. We love seeing new people shoot. Race is irrelevant for the vast majority of us.

I’m not saying there are no racist gun owners because we’re not some monolithic group, but you’ll have a far easier time finding racists at the Democratic National Convention than at the NRA’s annual meeting.

And that, my friends, is why the left tries to paint gun owners as the racists.

By now, many pro-Second Amendment advocates and activists understand the racist roots of gun control in this country. Even the more mainstream political site, The Hill, understands it.

One month after the Confederate surrender in 1865, Frederick Douglass urged federal action to stop state and local infringement of the right to arms. Until this was accomplished, Douglass argued, “the work of the abolitionists is not finished.”

Indeed, it was not. As the Special Report of the Paris Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867 found, freedmen in some southern states “were forbidden to own or bear firearms, and thus were rendered defenseless against assault.” Thus, white supremacists could continue to control freedmen through threat of violence.

Congress demolished these racist laws. The Freedmen’s Bureau Bill of 1865Civil Rights Act of 1866, and Civil Rights Act of 1870 each guaranteed all persons equal rights of self-defense. Most importantly, the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, made the Second Amendment applicable to the states.

Because of the 14th Amendment, gun control laws now had to be racially neutral. But states quickly learned to draft neutrally-worded laws for discriminatory application. Tennessee and Arkansas prohibited handguns that freedmen could afford, while allowing expensive “Army & Navy” handguns, which ex-Confederate officers already owned.

The South Carolina law against concealed carry put blacks in chain gangs, but whites only paid a small fine, if anything. In the early 20th century, such laws began to spread beyond the ex-Confederacy. An Ohio Supreme Court Justice acknowledged that such statutes reflected “a decisive purpose to entirely disarm the Negro.”


The anti-gun left paints gun owners in general, and the NRA in particular, as racist because they don’t want anyone to see their own racist past. They’re the mean kid in school who picks on everyone so nobody will look too closely at their own flaws.

Unfortunately, most folks who don’t know the gun culture don’t realize that no, we’re not a bunch of racist rednecks. They don’t understand that we’re just good folks who want to protect ourselves and our families.

They might know an individual gun owner or two who they don’t think of a racist, but the media paints a picture that makes it easy for the average American to believe those are the exception, not the rule. The anti-gun left likes it that way because it makes it easier to disarm law-abiding gun owners if the rank and file voter thinks we’re all hood-wearing Klansmen.

Meanwhile, they hide the racism in their past all while still trying to keep inner city blacks from obtaining weapons to protect themselves.

They’ll paint us a racist because


Sheriff Has Strong Message for Gun Grabbers After School Shooting


H/T Conservative Tribune.

How long before Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich comes under fire from the left for his insightful comments?


Guns cause violence and don’t belong in the hands of Americans. At least, that’s the message spread by liberals and the media, but one sheriff in Washington state just pushed back against the anti-gun narrative with a strong message of his own.

Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich gave a detailed news conference on Thursday, and made it clear that going after gun ownership wouldn’t stop violence.

The sheriff’s politically incorrect, pro-gun speech came shortly after a 15-year-old student carried out a school shooting in Spokane. One student was shot dead, while three others were wounded but are expected to recover.

I can tell you, folks, I carried a gun all my life. I hunted, I shot. My friends and I…It’s huntin’ season back home. When I was in high school, every one of those rigs in the high school parking lot had a gun in the gun rack,” Knezovich explained, according to KREM News.

“Why? We went huntin’ on the way home. None of those guns ever walked into a school. None of those guns ever shot anybody,” he continued.

“What’s the difference? Did the gun change? Or did you, as a society, change?

“I’ll give ya odds that it was you, as a society, because you started glorifying cultures of violence. You glorified the gang culture, you glorified games that actually give you points for raping and killing people. The gun didn’t change, we changed.”

In addition to calling out the modern shifts in society that romanticize violence, Knezovich also pointed a finger squarely at out-of-touch politicians.

Lawmakers on “both the right and the left, you’re both enamored by radicalized hate,” he stated, echoing similar statements that President Donald Trump made after the violence last month in Charlottesville, Virginia. “You seem to hate everybody and everything. It’s time for you to end that too.”

At the end of the day, the ultimate responsibility for violence lies with the person pulling the trigger. With that said, the sheriff is right on target about the overall problem: There’s a cultural reason that school shooters decide to harm others, and it has very little to do with the actual gun.

H/T Gateway Pundit

NJ Candidates Use Scare Tactics Over Gun Range Opening

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

One more reason not to go to the communist state of New Jersey.

One of the challenges many shooters throughout this country face isn’t buying a gun. With the exception of a handful of states, a purchase is relatively straightforward. A bit of a pain in the rear, but straightforward.

No, the issue many face is finding a convenient place to shoot.

In Wayne, NJ, capitalism looks to take care of that thanks to the opening of an indoor gun range.

Unfortunately, despite local leaders signing off on the plan to open the range, Democrats running for state office are latching onto this as an issue and are wanting to block the opening of the range.

Three Democratic state legislative candidates have denounced a gun range that will be built on Route 23 South, saying a loophole in state law gives people easy access to firearms.

The Planning Board Aug. 28 approved a state-of-the-art gun range with 15 shooting stalls on the former Fuddruckers property. No variance was required so residents within 200 yards of the facility did not have to be notified of the application.

State Legislative District 40 candidates Paul Vagianos, Christine Ordway and Thomas Duch have come out against the shooting range.

At issue are what these candidates claim is a lack of safety precautions that will protect residents in the range’s area.

You see, anyone with a valid license will be able to rent a firearm for use at the range after watching a gun safety video. To these candidates, that’s insufficient because…well, because.

“Municipalities should not approve any gun ranges until Trenton closes this loophole,” Ordway said in a statement. “We must take steps to protect our residents with more than a short safety video.”

Bear in mind that these rentals won’t be taken from the range. They’ll be under the supervision of trained safety personnel at all times in addition to the video. They’ll be indoors, thus making it far less likely for a stray round to actually do anything with the neighborhood around the range.

In short, there’s no loophole. Ordway and her fellow candidates are simply grasping at straws because they’re part of the crowd that thinks guns are bad.

The problem is, these candidates are getting in the way of gun education. People learn how to safely handle firearms at gun ranges. The four rules of firearm safety aren’t complicated. They don’t require an all day class in order for reasonable people to understand them. But there’s more to handling a firearm than learning to keep the booger hook off the bang switch and not to flash folks with your muzzle. Those are the things learned on a range.

The fact is that these three candidates haven’t presented any real evidence that anyone is in danger. While the article notes that a couple of people committed suicide at a range last year and that six people have been hurt on New Jersey gun ranges between September 2014 and July 2016–which seems like an awfully arbitrary date range to me–it misses a couple of points.

Primarily, six accidental injuries in two years are easily six too many, but it lacks any scale. How many people were using New Jersey gun ranges during that period? While it’s difficult to tell, it’s not hard to estimate that out of tens of thousands of shooters who used gun ranges in New Jersey, the idea of six injuries is still a fairly low rate.

Further, there’s no information indicating that any of these injuries took place outside of the range, which is what these candidates are kvetching about.

While shooting has some inherent dangers, so does everything else in life. The Wayne, NJ range is doing what it can to mitigate those dangers. Too bad politicians looking to score points with a firearm-ignorant electorate can’t see the reality of what they’re doing.

Or do they see it and just simply not care?

Hat tip: Cam & Company.

Little-Known Group Aims to End Private Gun Sales (and More) in Ohio (and Beyond)


H/T Oath Keepers.

This sounds like a case of wolves in sheep’s clothing so to speak.

Who are these guys? And how serious of a threat do they represent?

Proposed Ohio ballot initiative would require background checks for all gun sales,” NBC4i Columbus reported Thursday. “The newly formed group calling itself ‘Ohioans for Gun Safety’ says they want ‘common sense’ background checks to stem the number of gun deaths.” They’re looking at how they can make that happen politically through a ballot intiative.

“Newly formed”?  Who are these guys?

It’s essential to know who you’re up against.

Do they have big backers? Do they have the resources to run a professional PR campaign, buy TV time and become a credible threat?  Can we follow the money, assuming there is any?

Ohioans for Gun Safety is still pretty obscure, so we need to work a bit to find out who’s behind them. I’m going to go through the steps I took in the hope that it may turn some reading this on to things you can do to check out hostiles making noises about going after our rights.

The first thread I pull is to try to see who is behind their website. In this case it’s registered by proxy, so that doesn’t help. And as a new group, they don’t yet appear on the Guidestar nonprofit information resource, so I don’t see anything about officers, revenues, tax filings/financials and the like.

Dead ends are a routine part of the process.

Next, because they are an Ohio group, I go to the Secretary of State’s corporate listing – that’s how Bloomberg’s infiltration of the states was first discovered and reported. Doing that let me find the Articles of Incorporation. They in turn listed an agent and an address, both of which pointed to a Columbus law firm.

So we know they’re setting up professionally, and in earnest.

And the organization’s “Groundbreaker” list provided plenty of names of members who have left internet trails to follow, many of them leading, along with an acknowledgment to the Cleveland chapter of the National Council of Jewish Women. They’re into all things “social justice” with a special place in their hearts for citizen disarmament – what my friend and founder of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, the late Aaron Zelman, deemed “bagel brained.”

The group’s IRS filing says “NJW is a grassroots org of volunteers and advocates who turn progressive ideas into action,”  and its 2016 “end of year” assets is just short of $16M.

They can do some damage with that, above and beyond the $31K the NBC4i report says they’ve collected to date via “house parties.” Meaning gun owners had best be aware of their presence and intentions, and prepared to counter the anticipated disinformation campaign that will surely accompany their ballot initiative effort.

Nothing this group does will prevent future victims like this man’s son.

In this case, going back to the NBC4i report, they offer nothing new and plenty that can be disputed, starting with the chosen face of their effort, a man whose son was murdered, and wants to do something to keep anyone else from suffering as he has.

That’s a noble desire. Every decent person can agree with that goal and sympathize with his loss. That said, the group he’s being exploited by doesn’t stand a chance of achieving that goal with their co-called “background check” bill.

His son’s murderer, with “prior drug convictions,” did not obey existing “gun control” laws ostensibly put in place to prevent people like him from even possessing a gun, let alone carrying one — and let alone then using it to hunt down another human being and execute him. What “law” could possibly compel compliant behavior on the part of monsters?

Besides, no less an authority than the National Institute of Justice concluded:

“Universal background checks … Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring registration…”

So it’s not just “background checks” they want? But they’ll take that beachhead if they can and then use it as the launch point for their next incursion?

Lather, rinse, repeat, and with each gain decry the lack of “common sense gun laws” and accuse “the gun lobby” of refusing to “compromise.” And assure everybody that no one is talking about taking their guns.

Watch this group.  Chances are nothing may come of it, at least in Ohio as things are at the present (and with only a handful of Facebook and Twitter followers). But you never know, and you never know how quickly things can change, especially now that the media has noticed and is helping them appear to be more than they are.

And watch for similar efforts emerging where you live. When they do, start pulling threads to gather intel on who they are, and on their alliances, capabilities and strength.


H&K Announce It Will No Longer Sell Weapons To This Country Among ,Others


H/T Bearing Arms.

H&K better realize they are alienating may American gun owners as we proudly stand with Israel.

Heckler & Koch make some fine quality firearms. Few people disagree with that statement. However, many of us in the gun community have wondered if they actually give a flying flip about civilian gun owners. A buddy of mine once referred to them as the most anti-gun owner gun company in the world.

I don’t know that I’d go that far, but I will say that for a company that’s wanting a bigger chunk of U.S. market share, the latest move by the company might not be the way to go.

Heckler & Koch, the German weapons manufacturer whose guns are estimated to have killed more than 2 million people since the company was founded in 1949, has quietly adopted the most ethical sales policy of any gunmaker in the world.

The company has pledged no longer to sell arms into warzones or to countries that violate corruption and democracy standards, including Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, or any African countries.

Though never officially announced, the new strategy was included in Heckler & Koch’s latest yearly financial report, and confirmed at an annual general meeting in August. A spokesman said that the firm had “withdrawn from the crisis regions of this world”.

Heckler & Koch – sometimes called Germany’s deadliest company by activists – said it would now sell only to “green countries,” which it defined according to three criteria: membership of Nato or “Nato-equivalent” (Japan, Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand); Transparency International’s corruption perceptions index; and the Economist Intelligence Unit’s democracy index.

Look, almost no one gives a damn if H&K refuses to sell to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia. No one really cares if they refuse to sell to any nation in Africa.

Yet American gun owners, the very people who create the U.S. civilian market that H&K supposed wants deeper penetration into, are typically conservative politically and tend to stand behind Israel. The idea of cutting off the West’s one faithful ally in a deeply troubled region won’t sit well with many in the firearms community.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the Israelis are losing sleep over this announcement. They have local companies that make pretty good weapons as it is. (Disclosure: I lust for a Tavor.) The lack of H&K firearms is probably not going to have much of an impact on Israel as a nation.

That’s not the point for many, however. Instead, they see it as a tacit endorsement of the left’s anti-Israeli rhetoric which presents the state as a rogue actor and oppressor of innocent Palestinians who do nothing wrong. Those rockets that fly out of Palestine are irrelevant, as are the countless terrorist attacks Israel has endured through the years.

The reality that H&K would do well to accept is that American gun owners, as a general rule, stand with Israel. If they want to eat deeper into a market dominated by companies like Smith & Wesson and Glock, it’s probably not a good idea to alienate that market by refusing to sell guns to a country that has that market’s support.

National Reciprocity Bill Nears Goal Line in the House but Needs Your Support to Reach the End Zone

1 Comment


We need to put pressure on our Congress Critters to get this bill passed and sent to President Trump to sign into law.

Gun owners received good news this week with the passage of the SHARE Act by the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources (see related story). Meanwhile, progress continued to be made on another NRA legislative priority, as Congressman Rob Goodlatte (R-VA) – chairman of the House Judiciary Committee – signed on to co-sponsor H.R. 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017. The latter bill now has 212 co-sponsors, and its prospects in the House are looking better with each passing week. 

That hasn’t stopped Michael Bloomberg’s gun control cabal, however, from crowing about their supposed “grassroots” effort to defeat the bill. Referencing the practically limitless war chest of their gun-hating patron, the group’s president sneered in an editorial that “Everytown and Moms Demand Action will do, and spend, whatever it takes, including leveraging the full weight of our grassroots network, to defeat the gun lobby.”

While Everytown claims to have a grassroots army, it’s really a vanity project for billionaire and ex-New York City mayor Bloomberg, who funds and inspires the group’s activities virtually single-handedly.  

Urge Your Representative and Senators to Support Concealed Carry Reciprocity

Please contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative and urge them to cosponsor and support passage of S.446 — the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017– in the Senate, and H.R.38 — the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017– in the House. You can contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative by phone at (202) 224-3121


We recently highlighted how a disaffected gun control activist challenged the group’s supposed “grassroots” character in a scathing essay in the Huffington Post. “For too long,” she wrote, “gun control groups like Everytown have implemented top-down organizational models that treat gun violence prevention advocates like servants and gun violence survivors like fundraising fodder, giving us little or no say in our own advocacy.” That author ultimately resigned her position as an Everytown Survivor Fellow after being blocked from the group’s Survivor Network Facebook page for posting comments critical of management decisions. “I was not as empowered as I thought,” she fumed.

Another article from May notes how Shannon Watts, the principal behind Everytown franchise Moms Demand Action, has been described by sources close to the group as a “nightmare” and a “self-promoting tyrant.” That article detailed a number of high-level staff departures attributed to the difficulties of working for Watts.

Nevertheless, another article reported that Everytown has pledged over $25 million specifically to defeat the NRA’s national reciprocity effort. 

That’s certainly no stretch for egomaniac Bloomberg, whose nearly $45 billion net worth and seemingly inexhaustible zeal to control those he considers his inferiors make him a formidable foe.  

In fact, the only hope of defeating Bloomberg’s anti-gun aspirations is to show him what real grassroots activism looks like by keeping up steady pressure on Congress to send a national reciprocity bill to President Trump’s desk.  

Please contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative and urge them to cosponsor and support passage of S.446– the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017– in the Senate, and H.R.38 — the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017– in the House. You can contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative by phone at (202) 224-3121, or click here to Take Action.

Man Gets 8.5 Years For Killing With Stray Round

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

This reckless asshole gives responsible gun owners a bad name.

His sentence of 8.5 years should be a Hell of a lot longer.

A Washington state man was sentenced to 8 and a half years in prison for manslaughter after he killed a neighbor while shooting at a car thief.  Tobin Panton, age 40, accidentally shot and killed 61-year-old Linda Green when he exited his home after noticing his Jeep leaving his driveway.

Tobin Panton, 40, of Bonney Lake in the Tacoma area, was sentenced last week in Pierce County Superior Court on one count of manslaughter in the first degree for the death of 61-year-old Linda Green.

“Instead of calling 911 he took matters into his own hands,” said Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Erika Nohavec. “He didn’t think of any of his neighbors and Linda Green lost her life that day.”

The incident, which occurred last November, happened just after Tobin was getting out of the shower and saw his Jeep leaving his driveway. Retrieving his .40-caliber Glock, Tobin fired at the departing vehicle from his porch until he ran out of ammunition. Pierce County deputies were called a brief time later to a home two blocks away from the man’s residence, where Green was found shot in the head in her sleep.

Detectives discovered a bullet hole in the window of Green’s home that faced Tobin’s porch and numerous “strike marks” on the front of her residence as well as her next-door neighbor’s home.

Undoubtedly, comments will be made regarding Panton’s accuracy, but I also think that’s the wrong lesson to take away here.

First, he used force in a situation that didn’t necessarily warrant the use of force. While I believe anyone who has been the victim of a theft understands the sentiment, firing in a situation where you did not have a legitimate fear of physical harm is a bad idea. It would have been different if Panton was being car jacked, but that’s not what happened. He was safe and sound inside his home when the car was being stolen, so he went outside to shoot at the thief, thus creating a potential for harm where little to none existed.

Second, he failed to account for his surroundings. Panton failed to consider where else his rounds would go. Remember that Rule Four says to know your target and what’s beyond your target. There’s a reason for that. Rounds go through things, after all, and in this case, it resulted in an unfortunate death.

Panton expressed his remorse during his trial, and I have every reason to believe it’s genuine. It’s a shame, but for better or worse, Panton isresponsible for where his rounds end up, not just where he meant for them to go. The prosecutor pointed out that Washington doesn’t have a law that permits one to use lethal force to defend their property–which means that even if Panton had hit the thief, he likely would still have ended up in hot water–and the judge noted that he intended to pull the trigger. That intent meant that he was responsible for what happened afterward.

Folks, we all know gun owners who don’t read up on things like use of force laws. While I’m not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, I know enough to know you don’t shoot in a situation like this. Do yourself and your friends a favor. Talk to them about stuff like this, so that we can spread the word that no, this is not how you deal with a fleeing thief. I think it’s the least we can do for Linda Green.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: