MSNBC: Voters ‘selfishly’ expect Second Amendment rights to ‘stay the same’

The hosts of “MSNBC Live” told viewers on Thursday that President Trump’s support continues to be strong due to an abundance of “selfish” Second Amendment supporters. Co-anchors Stephanie Ruhle and Ali Velshi mulled over the White House’s solid support as the midterm elections near and concluded that self-centered Americans are to blame. “While we could find or do find the president’s constant lying or lawlessness or reprehensible behavior morally unacceptable, a lot of people vote pretty selfishly, and they say, ‘What’s going to give me more money in my pockets?’ ” Ms. Ruhle told billionaire Tom Steyer. “Or what’s going to make abortion illegal, or what’s going to make sure that my Second Amendment rights stay the same, and clearly, that adds up to enough people that the president still has something akin to 40 percent of the electorate in polls,” added Mr. Velshi. Mr. Velshi added that it was “fascinating” but difficult to talk about the kind of voter who demands lawmakers follow the official amendment process when changes to constitutional rights are sought. The Washington Free Beacon noted that Mr. Steyer, who claimed that “80 percent” of Americans are not benefiting from the nation’s economic boom, gave more than $90 million to support Democratic Party causes in 2016.

And this is why MSNBC and CNN have NO clue why their ratings continue to tank.  They simply don’t get it…and by calling voters “selfish,” they’re alienating half of the electorate.  Over 62 MILLION people “selfishly” voted for Donald Trump in 2016; many of them sick and tired of self-righteous, arrogant, and out-of-touch liberal media personalities like these tools over at MSNBC.

Senate Democrats rail against reported guns-in-schools idea

Senate Democrats on Thursday railed against reported plans that the Trump administration is looking at using federal funding to let school districts buy guns for teachers, saying the news threatens to scuttle bipartisan work on a massive spending package the Senate is considering this week. Sen. Chris Murphy on Thursday introduced an amendment to the $857 billion bill, which funds the Departments of Defense, Labor, Education, and Health next year, that would block the Education Department from allowing school districts to use federal funds to buy firearms for teachers. The vehement protests from Senate Democrats came after a report in the New York Times said U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is weighing a proposal that would allow local school districts to use grant funding to buy guns for teachers. Mr. Murphy acknowledged his amendment is unlikely to get a floor vote, but said if Mrs. DeVos goes through with the plan Republicans will be forced one way or another to be put on the record on whether they support it. “There’s no way Republicans are going to avoid a vote on the floor on guns in schools, and that’s a terrible policy idea,” said Mr. Murphy, Connecticut Democrat. “It’ll get more kids killed. But it’s also terrible politics for Republicans to have to continually go on record supporting arming teachers — something that a very small slice of the electorate actually wants.” Mr. Murphy pointed out that language in the $1.3 trillion “omnibus” spending bill that funds the government through September includes some money for school safety, with language prohibiting those funds from being used to arm teachers. The report said the department is eyeing a separate program that doesn’t mention prohibiting weapons purchases. Mr. Murphy said if the Trump administration ends up following through in pursuing the idea, it could derail forthcoming negotiations on how to reconcile the House and Senate education funding bills. “It would likely be an issue for conference, especially since we came together as Republicans and Democrats to say no to guns in schools in the omnibus,” said Mr. Murphy, a member of the appropriations committee. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said news of the potential proposal threatens to put a damper on the bipartisan work that’s gone into the education spending bill. “Let’s spike this hare-brained idea before it gets off the ground,” the New York Democrat said.

Washington liquor store has private gun club in back: ‘Don’t think there’s anything like this in the country’

Two brothers in Washington state claim their liquor store has the largest selection of mini liquor bottles — but that’s not what sets this store apart from others around the country. T Brothers Liquor and Wine Lodge in Olympia is the only liquor store in the country that also has a private gun club in the back, the owners Andy and Mike Thielen claim. “We don’t think there’s anything like this in the country,” said Andy Thielen, co-owner of both the liquor store and the Glacier Gun Club, said to K5 News. The Glacier Gun Club is behind an unmarked locked door in the liquor store that members must be swiped into. The Thielens opened the liquor store in 2012 and wanted to use the space in the back that was meant for storage. “We believe every square foot is a dollar missing if you’re not utilizing it properly,” said Mike to K5. In 2015, the brothers opened up the members-only gun club. Mike said the NRA warned the brothers that a membership-only club wouldn’t work. “They said a membership program-only will not work without selling ammo and holsters and big gun retail,” Mike recalled. “But I knew if we built it right, they will come.” The Thielens built a swanky gun lodge with leather couches, a cigar lounge, six shooting range lanes and a training room where Mike says he and his brother are always available to give tips or advice to shooters as part of the membership. Currently the brothers have more than 1,000 members in the gun club. All new members have to pass a required background check, pay $100 initiation and $30 per month for unlimited use of the range. And, even though the club is behind a liquor store, members are not allowed to bring any alcohol into the venue. “Everyone’s been vetted,” said Mike to K5. “You know who’s shooting next to you.” Andy told K5 that in the three years since they have opened the gun club, they have never had a problem with alcohol. “They understand,” he said. “They remember signing the rules.” However, the brothers don’t mind if gun club members buy alcohol on their way out of the range. “It’s like the gift shop coming out of a Disneyland ride,” Mike joked to K5.

Very cool!!    🙂

French: Corporate Gun Control Might Be the Worst Threat to Gun Rights

Let’s be honest. If you own guns or you’re a gun-rights supporter, and if you’re concerned about government restrictions on your Second Amendment rights, the future looks bright. The elevation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court may well represent the death knell for draconian forms of gun control — including bans on so-called “assault weapons” and bans on standard-capacity magazines in semi-automatic pistols and rifles. Moreover, meaningful federal gun control has been blocked for a generation, and red-state legislatures are moving almost uniformly to liberalize state gun laws. Witness, for example, the steady spread of “constitutional carry” in red states across the land. But another threat looms, one that can stretch across the entire American landscape, is immune to the filibuster, and is largely sheltered from judicial review. It’s a threat that can choke off financing for the gun industry, stifle speech about guns, and lock the gun-rights community into offline (and small online) ghettos that restrict their ability to communicate. So, what’s happening? Titans of American banking and communication are taking steps to restrict the use of their funds or platforms by gun makers, gun-rights advocates, and others. The threat is just now emerging, but it may be as great a danger to gun rights as it is to the culture of free speech in this nation, and indeed the two are linked. A short, non-exclusive survey should help paint the picture. Citigroup struck one of the first blows, taking action in March: “Citigroup is setting restrictions on the sale of firearms by its business customers, making it the first Wall Street bank to take a stance in the divisive nationwide gun control debate. The new policy, announced Thursday, prohibits the sale of firearms to customers who have not passed a background check or who are younger than 21. It also bars the sale of bump stocks and high-capacity magazines. It would apply to clients who offer credit cards backed by Citigroup or borrow money, use banking services or raise capital through the company.” Not to be outdone, Bank of America has acted against assault weapons. Here’s the beginning of a New York Times story from April: “Bank of America will stop lending money to gun manufacturers that make military-inspired firearms for civilian use, such as the AR-15-style rifles that have been used in multiple mass shootings, a company executive said Tuesday.” While the banks’ actions apply to the manufacture and sale of firearms, there are considerable unfolding online threats to speech about guns. Consider the actions of these titans of tech: Facebook has recently restricted any links to a website called, which contains downloadable plans for a number of entirely legal firearms, including the 3D-printable firearms at the heart of the lingering Obama-era case against Cody Wilson. The site includes plans for weapons such as the Colt 1911, a weapon so common and so basic that its plans date back to, well, 1911 (actually before). You can even buy the plans on a t-shirt. YouTube has its own restrictions on speech about firearms and prohibits any content that “intends to sell” firearms or provides instructions on “manufacturing a firearm.” The latter prohibition is broad enough to (if YouTube wishes) include information on assembling a firearm from its component parts — a necessary part of firearm cleaning and maintenance. Reddit has banned certain gun forums and updated its policies to forbid using Reddit to “solicit or facilitate” (extremely broad terms) transactions or gifts involving firearms. Its policy applies to gun sales, drug sales, prostitution, stolen goods, personal information, and counterfeit official documents. One of those things is not like the other. The keeping and bearing of firearms is an explicit, enumerated constitutional right. The rest of the list largely deals with criminal activity. The list just keeps going. Amazon Web Services has reportedly removed from its web servers, and Shopify just updated its free-speech policies to deny space for “the kind of products intended to harm.” It also placed on its “restricted items list” all semi-automatic weapons packaged with detachable magazines “capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.” It also reportedly deleted the accounts of a number of weapons retailers, including Spike’s Tactical and Franklin Armory. Let’s keep in mind that these actions represent not the culmination of a gun-control campaign but the front edge of a wave of corporate censorship and suppression.

Exactly!! Thanks to attorney, and Army Reserve officer (Major), David French for this excellent op/ed.  For more, click on the text above.  David was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.

North Carolina kids fatally shoot man abusing their mother, police say

Two North Carolina children got ahold of a gun and fatally shot a man police said was assaulting and strangling their mother. During the attack, Steven Kelley, 46, said he was going to cut the throat of Chandra Nierman, his girlfriend, and kill everyone in the home, the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office said. Police said Nierman’s 12-year-old son obtained a gun, and her 15-year-old daughter used it to shoot Kelley in the chest twice. Nierman’s 16-year-old daughter was injured in the shooting after a bullet grazed her leg. She’s since been released from the hospital, according to police. Nierman also “suffered significant bruises and contusions from the assault,” police said. Police were called to the home just after midnight on August 8 and found Kelley already dead. Kelley was a convicted felon who had two active domestic violence protection orders against him from women in Indiana and Ohio, the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office said. He also assaulted Nierman just days before his death, police said. Then, investigators said, he fired a gun inside the house multiple times “to threaten and terrorize Nierman.” Police said they found multiple guns in the house and on Kelley’s body that belonged to him. Authorities have said that no charges will be filed against the children as the shooting is considered “justified.” The children have not been named because they are minors. Forest City is about 65 miles west of Charlotte, North Carolina.

A classic example of why it is so important to exercise your Second Amendment rights, and teach your kids in the proper use, and safety, of firearms.  Clearly this 15 year old girl knew what she was doing,  and under extreme duress saved her mother’s life, and in so doing put down this piece of garbage.  That took courage.  Outstanding!

Analysis: 3D guns and the truth — Don’t get bent out of shape by newfangled weapons

Many Americans – including law enforcement officers – were expressing fear Tuesday over the thought of guns being churned out by 3D printers on demand. That’s understandable. The thought of criminals, terrorists and mentally ill people pressing a button and getting rifles and pistols popping out of printers like candy out of a vending machine is frightening. But that idea is also fundamentally mistaken. Under a settlement reached in June between the State Department and a company called Defense Distributed, it was supposed to become legal Wednesday for the company to make blueprints for hard-plastic guns available for download on the Internet. But with only hours to go, a federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order Tuesday blocking the settlement from taking effect at least until an Aug. 10 hearing. The order came in response to a lawsuit by eight Democratic state attorneys general, who argued that 3D-printed guns posed a risk to public safety. There’s a lot of misinformation floating around about exactly what 3D printing of guns is and what it’s not, so let’s get some facts straight about a pretty new technology. For starters, it’s important to understand the Justice Department settled the lawsuit with Defense Distributed because the government was certain to lose. Prior to the settlement, the government position was that sharing printing files known as CADs violated International Traffic in Arms (ITAR) regulations and thus could be censored by the government. But Defense Distributed – which pioneered using 3D-printing technology to make guns at home and eventually at stores like Kinko’s – contended that sharing information about how to make guns on the Internet was no different that sharing it in a book or instruction manual. The information-sharing amounts to speech, and is therefore protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution, the company argued. The First Amendment protects speech that is unpopular as well as popular. So the argument that the amendment protects information about how to build a gun is valid. Next, you need to know that 3D-printing technology is years – perhaps decades – away from being cheap, efficient and ubiquitous enough that it will be a major source of guns. Currently, it takes days and a lot of money to print 3D guns – and that’s not going to change for a long time. More importantly, we know for a fact that having more guns in circulation and the legal right to carry them hasn’t led to increases in gun crime and violence, even when counting mass shootings.

For more, click on the text above.

Liberal 9th Circuit surprises with pro-2nd Amendment decision blocking California ammo ban

Second Amendment activists were given a surprise boost this week when the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals backed a lower court’s decision to suspend California’s ban on the possession of large magazines. Activists, supported by the National Rifle Association, have argued that the state’s ban on ownership of magazines holding 10 bullets or more is unconstitutional. They won a preliminary injunction by a San Diego district court last year, and a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit backed that injunction Tuesday. The court found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the injunction or by concluding that magazines fall within the scope of the Second Amendment. “The district court did not abuse its discretion by applying the incorrect level of scrutiny,” the judges also found. “The district court concluded that a ban on ammunition magazines is not a presumptively lawful regulation and that the prohibition did not have a ‘historical pedigree.'” “This is a significant win for law-abiding gun owners in California,” Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “This unconstitutional law criminalizes mere possession of many standard capacity magazines and would instantly turn many law-abiding gun owners into criminals.”

Agreed!  A small, but welcome, rare pro-gun victory for the law-abiding gun owners in California.