The BBC on the Taylor Woolrich story

This past August the CPRC co-sponsored and organized a conference for Students for Concealed Carry.  The first speaker was Taylor Woolrich.  Her story is continuing to make a difference in explaining to people why it is important that stalking victims have the right to be able to defend themselves.  From the BBC:
A former beauty pageant contestant from California, 20-year-old Taylor Woolrich is the first to admit she's not your usual guns rights campaigner. 
She's fighting for the right to carry a weapon on campus, for a very personal reason.
For years she's been stalked by a man she first came into contact with while waitressing at a cafe.
He would turn up to see her every day and began to track her down outside work. An emergency restraining order failed to deter him.
Things became even more terrifying when she moved across the country to study at Dartmouth college in New Hampshire.
"It wasn't even on my mind, and then he contacted me via LinkedIn and used social media to continue to contact me - sent me various very frightening messages, making it very specific he knew where I was," she says.
One summer, when she went home to California, he turned up at her parents' doorstep. She says police found what they call a "rape kit" - rope tied as a slip-noose, gloves, duct-tape, flash light, and a sweatshirt - inside his car.
Taylor's stalker is currently in jail. His sentence will soon be up. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.

My newest piece in the Daily Caller: “When Security Fails, Gun Rights Are The Last Line Of Defense”

My newest piece at the Daily Caller starts this way:
These days, it isn’t even safe to get a cup of coffee. Australians just learned this the hard way. In the U.S., watching a movie can apparently be too dangerous. At least, terrorist threats by North Korea canceled the showing of “The Interview” in movie theaters. 
With very little money, ISIS has managed to instill fear in countries around the world. Simply by using Internet posts, ISIS has encouraged “lone wolf” terrorists. 
In May, four people were shot dead in an attack at the Jewish Museum in Brussels. In September, there were beheadings in Oklahoma and London. October proved even worse: a car attack in Quebec, a shooting in Ottawa, a hatchet assault in New York City, and a knife attack that left five dead at an Israeli synagogue. This is but a sample. 
The Canadian government rushed to revamp its security agencies in the wake of the recent attack on Parliament. But lone attackers are unlikely to send incriminating emails that alert law enforcement. What do you do if security fails? How do we protect what seems like an infinite number of possible targets?. 
The attacks in Brussels, Ottawa, and Sydney illustrate the limitations of preventive measures. In each case, the perpetrators had criminal histories that prevented them from legally buying a gun. 
Still, they all managed to obtain firearms. The Brussels killer, Mehdi Nemmouche, even obtained an illegal machine gun. . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.


My newest piece at Fox News: "Expert: Blacks trust police more than whites do"

My newest piece at Fox News starts this way:
Do blacks trust police more than whites do? Given the anger over events in Ferguson and New York City, the very question seems absurd. But it is not. Behind the polls and demonstrations, there is evidence that blacks trust police at least as much as whites do. 
The poll results are hardly surprising. A new Gallup poll confirms blacks place less confidence in police and the criminal justice system. Using survey data from 2006 through 2014, Gallup found: 
-- 31 percentage points more blacks than whites believe black males are more likely to go to prison than white males primarily because of discrimination (50 percent versus 19 percent). 
-- 7 percentage points more blacks believe the honesty and ethics of police are low/very low (17 percent versus 10 percent). 
Similarly, a 2013 Pew Research Centersurvey reveals that 70 percent of blacks believed police treated whites better than blacks. By contrast, only 37 percent of whites agreed. 
But what people say and what they do are often different. And there are both victims and criminals in black communities. 
Victims may trust the police for the same reasons that criminals dislike them. Blacks are not a monolithic group: blacks who who have been through the criminal justice system as criminals could answer these questions quite differently than those who have relied on police as victims. 
The polls don’t distinguish between these two groups. As Charles Barkley recently said: “[Police] are the only thing in the ghetto between this place being the wild, wild west. 
Most violent crime victims don’t report crimes to police. For example, only about half of rapes are reported to police. That has a lot to do with how victims believe they will be treated by the police. In the case of rape, victims who think that the police are unsympathetic to rape victims or are unlikely to solve the cases are even less likely to report rapes. 
If black victims really believe police are racist, why would they report the crime to the police? Blacks victims don’t want other blacks locked up simply due to their race; they want the criminals who actually committed the crime punished. . . .
The article continues here.

Labels: , ,


Why isn't Obama imposing sanctions on North Korea for its act of war? Isn't attacking Sony an attack on US territory?

While many in the media is attacking Sony for its "cowardice," can one really expect Sony to stand up to such pressure by itself.  After all, the media with its constant reporting based on this stole information has done huge damage to Sony.  Representative Ed Royce discusses one thing that the Obama administration could do here

Possibly if the Obama administration had come forward sooner, the results from this past week could have been avoided.

But NBC's Pete Williams says: "“I would say the best I can tell from that is that [the Obama administration] haven’t a clue [what to do about North Korea]."


U.S. Appeals Court says that just because you once had a mental illness problem doesn't allow government to ban you for life from owning guns

The risk of violence from people with mental illness is extremely low to begin with, but if the risk is low even when people are suffering a mental illness, why ban them for ever from owning a gun, even after they are cured?  From the Wall Street Journal:
In the first legal ruling of its type, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati on Thursday deemed unconstitutional a federal law that kept a Michigan man who was briefly committed to a mental institution decades ago from owning a gun. 
A three-judge panel of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the federal ban on gun ownership for anyone who has been “adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution” violated the Second Amendment rights of Clifford Charles Tyler, a 73-year-old Hillsdale County man. 
“The government’s interest in keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill is not sufficiently related to depriving the mentally healthy, who had a distant episode of commitment, of their constitutional rights,” wrote Judge Danny Boggs, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, for the panel. 
Lucas McCarthy, Mr. Tyler’s lawyer, called the ruling “a forceful decision to protect Second Amendment rights,” and said he hoped it that it would have “a significant impact on the jurisprudence in the area of gun rights.” . . .

Labels: ,


14-year-old shoots at two intruders who broke into home, protects ill grandmother

From WSOCTV.com in Charlotte, North Carolina:
Charlotte-Mecklenburg police said the second man involved in a home break-in that turned deadly near the Charlotte/Mint Hill border has been arrested. Another suspected intruder was killed when a 14-year-old inside the house shot and killed him Tuesday night. 
Two intruders, who police identified as 18-year-old Isai Delcid and 22-year-old Carlos Delcid, attempted to break into the home on Rolling Fields Lane just after 5 p.m., according to investigators. Isai was shot and died at the scene while police said Carlos fled. 
Officers arrested Carlos late Tuesday night and charged him with first-degree burglary.
Police said a grandmother was at the home with her grandson at the time. According to officers, the grandson shot and killed Isai. 
The grandfather, George Wyant, told Channel 9 his 14-year-old grandson shot the intruder. 
"It’s not something you can be proud of. But, I’m happy the way it turned out. Because my wife is getting over an illness," Wyant said. "What would have happened if he wasn’t there? That’s all I can tell you. What would have happened?" . . .



Dramatic story where burglary victims catch criminals two days after crime, concealed carry

Two days after their home was robbed, victims of a home break-in catch the alleged burglars and held them at gunpoint until authorities could arrive.  Both the wife and husband of the family that caught the criminals appear to be concealed carry permit holders.  From WBRC Channel 6 TV in Warrior, Alabama:
. . . A home surveillance system captured video of the suspects breaking into the Wyatt family home on Gobbler Knob Road on Friday afternoon. 
The surveillance video shows a woman knocking on the family's home. 
When no one answered, a male accomplice kicked the door open. The woman and two men helped themselves to two TVs and several of the family's Christmas presents, including gifts for their 1-year old-son. 
The three suspects then drove away in a black Ford Ranger pickup truck.Jefferson County Sheriff's deputies responded to the Wyatts' home around 9:30 p.m. Friday to investigate the burglary. 
Two days later, around 4 p.m. on Sunday, Dec. 14, deputies investigated a second burglary, this one in the 1600 block of New Bethel School Road. 
The victim said someone forced open the door to his home and stole a computer monitor, trumpet, knife collection and jewelry, according to Chief Deputy Randy Christian. 
While deputies were still on the scene investigating the second burglary, the Wyatts called the sheriff's office to say they had found the suspects who broke into their home and were holding them at gunpoint. . . . 
Fox News has a discussion here.

Labels: ,

Why are gun control advocates so excited about Vivek Murthy's confirmation when he promised that he wouldn't push gun control?

Gun control groups are excited about Vivek Murthy's confirmation's, but before his confirmation his supporters were pointing to his promise not "use the Surgeon General's office as a bully pulpit for gun control," and instead would make his top priority "obesity prevention."  So why should the gun control groups be so excited? Was it because he didn't mean his promise to the Senate?


Powerful interview of CIA interrogation "architect" where he reacts to Senate interrogation report

The interview with Psychologist James Mitchell is very powerful (it is available here).  Really brings into question the Senate Democrats' report.  Senate Democrats have publicly outed this man and have put his life in danger.  They also refused to talk to Dr. Mitchell or anyone else who was actually involved in these interrogations.  This is only two-thirds of his Mitchell's interview tonight, but it is still very worthwhile.



Homeowner shoots man who broke into home around 8:30 AM

From Jefferson County, Colorado:

. . . . Investigators told 7NEWS the intruder broke into a home on Clear View Drive, near Interstate 70 and Lookout Mountain, around 8:30 a.m. 
There was a confrontation between the man and the homeowner and the homeowner shot and killed the man. 
The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office said they don't know yet how the intruder got into the home. 
Investigators told 7NEWS they believe this shooting will fall under Colorado's Make My Day law, but they are investigating. Under the statute, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly force, against another person when that other person had made unlawful entry into the dwelling and occupant feels threatened. Homeowners are immune from criminal prosecution and civil liability for the use of force. . . .


Will Florida pass a law that would allow people with permits to carry a concealed handgun on college campuses?

After a mass public shooting at Florida State University left students defenseless last month, one area state legislator is trying to fix the problem.
. . . The proposal (SB 176), filed Thursday Sen. Greg Evers, R-Baker,  is identical to a bill (HB 4005) filed earlier this week by Rep. Greg Steube, R-Sarasota. The bill would allow people with concealed-weapons licenses to carry guns on campus. It comes after an incident last month at Florida State University in which a gunman shot three people at the campus library before he was killed by police. 
The bills will be considered during the 2015 legislative session. 
Steube said he already planned to sponsor the measure before a shooting incident last month at Florida State University —- but that the attack, which left three people injured and the gunman dead, helps to make his point. The bill would apply to people who are licensed to carry concealed weapons. 
“I think it (the attack) brings it closer to home for people who think these events don’t occur in Florida, or that law enforcement can prevent them from happening,” Steube told The News Service of Florida. . . . 

Labels: , ,

A bill in Texas to prevent students being expelled fro using a Pop Tart as a gun

From the Houston Chronicle:
. . . Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City, has filed a bill that would prohibit schools from punishing students who use their hands, playthings and, yes, even pastry items to mimic firearms. The proposed legislation also would protect students through the fifth grade who play with toy guns or draw or possess pictures of guns. 
Guillen said he filed the bill after a second- grader in suburban Maryland was suspended for two days in March 2013 for chewing his Pop- Tart into the shape of a gun. A similar situation has not arisen in Texas. 
"Texas students shouldn't lose instruction time for holding gun-shaped Pop-Tart snacks at school," said Guillen. "This bill will fix this." 
The story of Josh Welch, who finished out the year in his Anne Arundel County school, grabbed national headlines and even netted the now 9-year-old a lifetime membership to the National Rifle Association. His teacher said the suspension followed a history of problematic behavior, but Welch's case became a rallying point for gun rights advocates after his parents said the punishment represented a gross overreaction. . . .



More political correctness at universities: "UCLA law professor learns Ferguson-related exam question taboo"

My son Maxim has a new piece up at Fox News:
Professor Robert Goldstein said the exam question was designed to test students’ ability to analyze the line between free speech and inciting violence. It cited a report about how Michael Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, shouted, “Burn this bitch down!” after a grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown.
The question then asked students to imagine that they are lawyers in the St. Louis County Attorney’s office and had been asked to advise the prosecutor “whether to seek an indictment against Head” for inciting violence. The exam reads:
“[As] a recent hire in the office, you are asked to write a memo discussing the relevant First Amendment issues in such a prosecution. Write the memo.”
But students complained, and writer Elie Mystal at the popular legal blog “Above the Law” opined that the test question was “racially insensitive and divisive.” Mystal also incorrectly alleged that the question asked students to “advocate in favor of extremist racists in Ferguson.” . . .
Other law professors say there should be no need to apologize for such a straightforward exam question.
“If there are some law students who are such delicate flowers that merely being asked to assess whether certain controversial speech that's been in the news is constitutionally protected, in a class covering the First Amendment of all things, then maybe they should find another profession,” David Bernstein, a law professor at George Mason University School of Law, told FoxNews.com. . . . .
The rest of the article is available here.  There are other good quotes in the piece.

So what would have been wrong if the test had in fact asked students to make a case in favor of bringing legal action against Louis Head?  Wouldn't students know how best to argue against that position if they first had to figure out what the strongest arguments in favor of it are?

Labels: ,

Federal budget contains provision preventing attempts to ban lead ammunition

The claims about the risks from lead ammunition are very misleading (a discussion of that scientific evidence is available here).  Fortunately, the new federal budget will prevent new Obama administration rules from banning lead ammunition.  From The Hill newspaper:
"For years, radical animal rights and environmental advocates have used all the tools at their disposal, including litigation, to attempt to ban lead ammunition," the NRA writes. "A ban on traditional ammunition would affect hunters, sportsmen, law enforcement, military and target shooters — whether or not they hunt. There are currently no comparable alternatives to lead ammunition in terms of cost, ballistics and availability. This bill would prevent a traditional ammunition ban and protect not just hunters, but millions of American gun owners." . . .

Labels: ,


It probably isn't very smart to rob a gun store, woman employee with a gun stops two armed robbers

From Channel 5 TV News in Springdale, Arkansas:
Marcus Gould, 25, and Leon Roberson, 20, face charges of Attempted Capital Murder and Aggravated Robbery, according to police. Roberson was booked into the Washington County Detention Center at 1:55 a.m. and is set to appear in court for an 8.1 Hearing on Monday (Dec. 7th), according to the detention center’s website. 
Police said the incident happened around 9 a.m. Saturday at the C & S Gun and Pawn Shop at 1208 South Thompson in Springdale. 
Employees reported two men walked into the store, one wearing a gray hooded sweatshirt and the other wearing an orange hooded sweatshirt, police said. 
“They split up, they both pulled out hand guns that looked like black semi-automatic pistols and began to rob the store,” according to Lt. Derek Hudson with the Springdale Police Department. “One of the employees also pulled out a weapon and there were shots exchanged.” . . . 
Sergeant Daniel Grubbs with the Fort Smith Police Department, said Gould arrived at Sparks Hospital with a gun shot wound to the forearm. . . .
A video is also available at the link


My son's news article at Fox News: "College president sorry for saying 'All lives matter'"

From Fox News:
The president of prestigious Smith College is red-faced and apologetic Tuesday for telling students on the Northampton, Mass., campus that "all lives matter." 
Kathleen McCartney wrote the phrase in the subject line of an e-mail to students at the school, whose alumni include feminists Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan, former First Lady Nancy Reagan and celebrity chef Julia Childs. McCartney was attempting to show support for students protesting racially charged grand jury decisions in which police in Missouri and New York were not charged in the deaths of unarmed black men. 
Protesters have adopted several slogans in connection with the cases of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, including "Black Lives Matter." McCartney's more inclusive version of the refrain was seen as an affront that diminished the focus on black lives and racism, according to emails obtained by FoxNews.com. 
“We are united in our insistence that all lives matter,” read the e-mail,in which she made clear she was strongly behind the protests, writing that the grand jury decisions had “led to a shared fury… We gather in vigil, we raise our voices in protest.” 
But she soon received backlash from students for her phrasing. They were offended that she did not stick with the slogan “black lives matter.” 
The Daily Hampshire Gazette, which first covered the story, quoted one Smith sophomore, Cecelia Lim, as saying, “it felt like she was invalidating the experience of black lives.” . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.



My newest piece at Fox News: "Media Matters, the facts and me"

My newest Fox News piece starts this way:
With just one telephone call this year, Erik Wemple of the Washington Post was able to convince Media Matters to let me respond to their attacks on me in the comments section of their website — after they ignored my emails, telephone calls, numerous tweets and posts for seven years. 
Media Matters purports to correct misinformation that the “conservative” media puts out, but, ironically, they have systematically hidden comments critical of their work from their readers. They have a blog where it appears that conservatives and others can respond, but they don’t tell their readers that they have regularly removed responses that they couldn’t answer. 
I have been attacked in over 80 posts on Media Matters over the years. They have even criticized reporters from such places as the Washington Post and the New York Times just for interviewing me. They have described me as a “discredited gun researcher.” They have claimed “Gun Advocate John Lott Lashes out at Trayvon Martin’s Mother.” They say I’ve misrepresented Obama’s record on guns, what “assault weapons” are and the views of police on gun control. They have used doctored pictures of me and screen shots of posts. 
Media Matters uses a hit-and-run strategy: Attack, and move on to the next attack. They never acknowledge responses, even those published in major media like the ones I’ve written for Fox News.  
If Media Matters started engaging in debates, their readers would quickly learn that their criticisms of others involve mischaracterizations, carefully edited quotes and outright lies. Their unwillingness to post contrary comments says a lot about their inability to defend themselves. 
A typical example was their March 20 post covering a piece I wrote for FoxNews.com on Vivek Murthy, President Obama's nominee for surgeon general. Media Matters’ headline read: "On Obama's Surgeon General Nominee, It's Medical Experts Vs. Discredited Gun Zealots." With 288 mainly positive comments on their post, Media Matters apparently worried that people might find the ones I posted with a link to the discussion on my website. So Media Matters simply removed my comments. . . . .
The piece continues here.

Labels: , ,


Technology helping you recover stolen items

While this product can be used for finding many items, in watching this video I was particularly struck by how it is can enlist all sorts of other people in helping you to find a stolen item.



Very strong correlation between Right-to-work states and Republican controlled ones

Click on figures to enlarge them.

Note that there are only four states that don't fit the pattern. 

Virginia is a right-to-work state but it has a Democratic governor and a Republican legislature.
Iowa is a right-to-work state but Democrats only control one house of the state legislature.
Wisconsin isn't a right-to-work state but it has clear Republican control of the state.
Ohio isn't a right-to-work state but it has clear Republican control of the state.

Besides those four anomalies, all the other red states are right-to-work states and all the right-to-work states are red states.  Still even these anomalies aren't that far off, Ohio almost became a right-to-work state and Wisconsin has changed the rules for public employee unions so that people can't be forced to join a union.  And Virginia was close to having Republicans in control of the state.  Iowa was also more red than blue.

Thus the two right-to-work states can hardly be classified as blue states and the two red states are hardly solid anti-right-to-work states.

The question is one of causation.  Do already trending red states support workers making the their own decisions on whether they should join a union?  Or do right-to-work laws make it so that unions can't raise a lot of money from people who don't want to be union members so that the unions can support Democrats?  I don't know of anyone who has studied that question carefully.

Here is a list of states ranking them by the percent of workers in the state who are union members (Republican controlled and right-to-work states are in bold).



Two cases within a couple days where concealed handgun permit holders stopped robberies

One customer was killed here, but without the permit holder in this case, multiple customers might have been killed.  St. Louis (occurred on Tuesday night, December 2, 2014):
The ex-officer, who worked for the department for several years in the 1970s and has a concealed-carry permit, fired back, shooting Wade in the eye and Davis in the shoulder, police said. 
Another male customer, 73, was shot in the ankle and was in critical condition; a fourth male victim, 66, was released from the hospital after receiving treatment for two shots to his buttocks. 
Davis and a third gunman, whose identity was unknown, fled in a stolen Mazda, investigators said. Police found the wounded Davis at a hospital; he claimed he had been shot at a different place. A manhunt continued for the third man. . . . .
Las Vegas (occurred on Thursday, December 4, 2014):
Las Vegas police arrested a man after he allegedly tried to a rob a Red Lobster restaurant on Thursday night. 
A call was made to police around 9:45 p.m., reporting a man had entered the Red Lobster . . . near U.S. 95, with a handgun. 
The man, who has now been identified as 28-year-old Dillon Webb, allegedly threatened customers and employees and took the drawer from a cash register. 
Witnesses said the man ran out the back. A customer from the restaurant, attempting to flee the area, was confronted by the suspect in the parking lot. The customer, who was armed with a handgun fired one round. Webb reportedly dropped the drawer and ran. . . .
Thanks for Tony Troglio for the first link. 



Hilarious explanation for why so many health insurance plans were canceled by Obamacare (also why there will be more cancelations in the future)

Admittedly the law is hilarious, though the consequences of it are rather sad.