I'm making a rather easy prediction; the recent violence on the Las Vegas Strip (the shootings) will be used to push gun restrictions on lawful gun owners. Whether it is an outright restriction, giving signs the force of law, or repealing preemption so Clark County can make local ordinances.
The recent violence on the Strip is all because of the devastating effect of Gov. Sisolak's COVID-19 policies. The shutdown of casinos resulted in a huge loss of income for the businesses that compounds what the loss in travelers has done. As a result, they lowered room rates to get people in to lose their money—I mean gamble. This attracted low-class tourists who normally are staying "uptown" if they can afford Circus Circus.
You know if you have to visit Las Vegas and stay in a motel that you really can't afford to gamble, but this town wasn't built on intelligent vacationers. What no one will mention is the class of people who have been attracted here are trash. That's why room rates are going up; to price out the trash.
So this mess is in Sisolak's hands. He helped crush the casinos and forced them to take desperate measures to attract business. The violence will soon be blamed on "guns" and a magic law will be the answer. Oh how I would love to hear the conversations with the Bloomberg lobbyists over this stuff.
Any legislation will have about as much effect at stopping criminals and guns on the Strip as much as the mask mandate, temperature checks, and contact tracing has on COVID-19. That's right; despite all that, the casinos are the superspreaders of Nevada.
Criminals will still carry guns and will still shoot people. Crime will probably increase on the Strip precisely because people are disarmed.
There is good news; with a fifth conservative going to the Supreme Court, gun control is on borrowed time. We'll win in court and there's its decisive.
Just when you thought that 2020 couldn't get any more interesting, the Notorious RBG had died. As for someone who supported a lot of evil policies, I say good riddance. There are now 8 seats on the Supreme Court, leaving President Trump to nominate her replacement, which likely won't happen until after the election at the earliest.
Now we may have a chance at getting another solid conservative on the court to counteract the feckless now-liberal Chief Justice Roberts.
But Trump has to get re-elected first. Because of the importance of the Supreme Court, the Left will go absolutely batshit over this. Brace for impact.
The UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program is a publicly funded research program that takes credit for developing "the public health approach to firearm violence." These are the people that get doctors and the CDC in investigating gun control. The program, run by Dr. Garen Wintemute, an ER doctor, is heavily biased in favor of gun control. That's not just my opinion, either.
The results of his research is used to bolster demands for further gun control. Don't believe me? Even Wikipedia has this:
His research on Saturday night special handguns, especially a 1994 study he published entitled "Ring of Fire", has been credited as the main reason for the California government's efforts to impose strict regulations on them. In 2017 he has published a study showing that gun owners with an alcohol-related criminal conviction are more likely than gun owners without such a conviction to be arrested for a subsequent gun-related crime.
Of course, their investigations turn up information that we already know, like background checks don't impact murders by gun.
These are the people that are setting the stage to deprive past DUI offenders of their gun rights and why some doctors are asking about your guns. To this audience, I really don't need to argue why this group is not our friend.
They also blame California gun violence spikes on Nevada gun shows, which is a preposterous error of correlation and causation. We discussed that on the old blog a while back. That research ignores the obvious problem that California's people who are committing the crime are rotten and only getting their tools (maybe) here. Fun fact: California imports the largest amount of crime guns into Nevada. Ha!
If you want to know what causes violence, it's evil in the hearts of men. Importing the third world and implementing socialism doesn't help. Destroying black families, robbing young men of jobs, letting criminals out of jail/prison, failing to properly punish criminals, and denying citizens the ability to protect themselves all encourages and grows crime. Leftism is why violence went out of control in the 60s-80s, why the bluest cities are crime ridden hellholes, and why it's growing out of hand today. Quantify that, UC Davis.
Going back to the email, the phrase that gives me pause is: "how individual firearm buyers and sellers learn about background check requirements and the ways in which organizations help them with these firearm sales regulations in different states [emphasis added]." This leads me to think they are trying to find evidence against states that don't ban private sales (like Nevada did, before 2020) to show that guns make it into California from Montana or whatever.
After the Gilroy Garlic Festival shooing, where the killer LEGALLY purchased his weapon as a Nevada resident here, politicians started jumping up and down about what was legal in Nevada and not in California. They also bitched about private sales in Nevada and the people who took guns home to California (no longer a problem, thanks to Michael Bloomberg buying the Nevada Legislature).
Obviously, I declined to be interviewed. Seriously, do these people think we're stupid or something, like we haven't heard of them before? Or are naive enough to think they are unbiased? Hard pass.
It should be every gun owner's worst fear: you do everything right and protect your life or that of your family and yet you are charged with a crime for self-defense. We are seeing lawful uses of self-defense charged criminally now purely for political reasons. That should terrify anyone who intends to protect their family.
Over the years, we've chronicled bad shoots, mainly where someone looses their temper and uses a gun in a situation that didn't warrant it. In many of these cases, the situation could have been mitigated if the shooter shut their mouth and didn't talk to police. Our society today doesn't tolerate the same use of a gun in situations where generations ago we may have considered it appropriate. While these's guys actions may have been wrong, under the totality of the circumstances a good lawyer and defense might have mitigated the outcome.
But today we're facing a whole new reality. Leftist mobs target people specifically to provoke a reaction out of them and when things get violent and deadly, self-defense is charged as murder. From Kyle Rittenhouse to the McCloskeys in Missouri, being within the law to protect yourself often isn't enough. Leftists can call and demand prosecutions from weak-willed prosecutors.
Each one of us in a blue-leaning area is one shooting away from being on trial for their life, even if we did everything by the book. The right to self-defense is being taken away from us under the threat of prosecution. Justifiable homicide laws exist partly to ensure that if someone uses force legally that they won't face prosecution over it. Yet today prosecutors are showing that they are willing to roll the dice at trial. This is specifically done to produce a chilling effect on the Second Amendment.
In Portland, Mike Strickland, a journalist, was harassed by leftist mobs and forced to draw gun to defend himself. In a totally corrupt trial, he was convicted of a felony. The state appeals court blew off what is an obvious case of prosecutorial and judicial abuse. Now his fate is in the hands of the US Supreme Court where he will likely have his certorari petition denied.
Nevada's legislature has already tried to repeal protections against self-defense and it is only a matter of time before the Bloomberg bought and paid for Democrats succeed in such an attempt. Do you want to be in their crosshairs?
The only solution to this is by throwing out these prosecutors, which isn't possible in every area. There is also another solution, but that one is far uglier and our cold civil war hasn't reach that point yet. I don't think any of us seriously want that.
Once again, I would highly suggest that if you own a gun for self-defense that you purchase CCW insurance. Can you afford an attorney to defend you? Join USCCA and get an on-call legal team, 24/7, with coverage that provides for your defense up front. They also provide for a civil suit defense and liability coverage. Don't rely on a public defender or hope you can talk your way out of trouble with the police. The detectives may be on your side, but will the ambitious deputy district attorney vying for a Democratic legislative seat? Joining USCCA through the below link also helps the blog.
This occurred at the Rainbow Library, the center of the lawsuit against the Las Vegas Clark County Library District for illegally banning open carry.
The robber attacked a man in broad daylight outside the library. The suspect grabbed the victim's arm and tried to pull the victim from the vehicle. The victim then deployed pepper spray and the suspect ran away with the victim's keys. The suspect then, 20 minutes later, attacked a woman before he was apprehended by police.
Under the legislation proposed by a library trustee and assemblywoman, if the library got its way, it would be illegal to even have a gun in the parking lot.
There are no "gun free" zones, just places where law abiding citizens looking out for their own self-defense can be arrested by police for exercising their Second Amendment rights.
If you had to shoot someone in a situation like this, would you have legal protection, or would you be paying for a lawyer out of pocket? Do you have the kind of cash to hire legal representation or someone to defend you? The USCCA provides protection for self-defense with any weapon, including pepper spray. Join the USCCA today.
Yes, you can carry a gun at a polling place in Nevada. There is no law in the Silver State prohibiting carrying while voting. This does not change existing laws that apply at schools and the prohibition on concealed carry at posted public buildings.
All firearms are prohibited in the following places:
NRS 202.3673 (concealed carry only) prohibited areas:
Due to potential violence and fraud, it is highly recommended you vote in person during early voting and protect yourself while doing so.
John MacArthur is the pastor of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California—a district of Los Angeles. On Sept. 10th, a judge granted the county an injunction against the church because MacArthur has dared to hold indoor services, which are against California’s coronavirus edicts. MacArthur cited many reasons, from weather considerations (the inland valleys of Los Angeles get desert hot) to biblical ones, for disobeying the edicts.
The simplest one is the freedom of religion. To this audience, I don’t need to make the arguments of why MacArthur and all churches should be allowed to meet indoors. We’re here to talk about guns and rights.
California has prohibited open carry and practically any other form of unlicensed carry. Licensed carry is darn near impossible in Los Angeles County and many other counties as well. Presuming that the church elders and pastors prayed about it and were on board with it, it is impossible for patriots to legally defend the church with openly carried rifles.
Now standing around a church or business with openly carried rifles is a threat. “If you try to close down this place, we will prevent you from doing that, possibly with deadly force.” Of course, at this hour many patriots are unwilling to go that far and arguably it might not be wise to dial things up to 11…yet. But it is nonetheless a powerful statement to have men with guns facedown police or worse, some flunky from the health/business licensing department.
The whole idea of standing around with guns is that someone in the sheriff’s department will have the sense to avoid the PR disaster. One (fat) sheriff in Ector County, Texas, didn’t have the sense to do that when he sent Donut Team Six to raid a bar with open carriers protesting in the back. On the far end of the dial, the patriot security team stops the bureaucrat from entering (physically), probably beats them to get the point across, and uses their firearms to deter/stop the predictable police response. It kinda gets ugly from there, so we don’t need to go further, but again we’re looking at the extreme.
You see, in California, citizens don’t even get the opportunity to make the PR point by blocking the entrance of the bureaucrat until they give up and just mail the citation. Open carry is a powerful political tool of protest. Lots of peaceful people with guns makes a point that politicians can’t ignore. That’s why they banned it in California, starting in 1967, and other states are looking to do the same thing.
12,000 armed Americans in Richmond, Virginia, scares Democrats. Nevada’s own Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui slandered open carry protesters as domestic terrorists through crafty wordplay. Ideally, the hoplopaths would love to make it illegal for you to take your gun outside your home. This way, you are forced to disobey the law to exercise your First and Second Amendment rights.
If it is illegal to protest, even peacefully, with your rifle openly carried, that means if you choose to do it (or protect a business or church from tyranny) you will have to decide if you are willing to be arrested or fight the cops. Even if you don’t fight the cops, detectives can simply identify you later and the DA can charge you after the fact. Then you’re playing roulette with a state judicial system that is not in your favor. Unless you want to kill cops, that is, and going that route is something very few of us on the right want to do.
Banning open carry is nothing more than a blatant suppression of free speech and the castration of the Second Amendment.
I follow a lot of people who hold strong and unusual opinions online; the type of people that predicted the social unrest we've seen this year a long way out. People who are realistic about cultural and racial differences. Yet some of these voices have gone beyond empirically based opinions, such as a given race scores lower on IQs than the other and tends to have worse life outcomes than the other, to frankly idiotic viewpoints.
I'm talking about Antisemitism. A few people who I respected have gone too far into Jew-hating. Why? I don't know, but Antisemitism has never been logical. It seems that once again Antisemitism is in vogue in society. Personally, from a Christian viewpoint that doesn't surprise me at all. Antisemitism is one of the oldest satanic plots in the book.
A lot of these Antisemitic posts or whatever are basically just the equivalent of pointing the finger and yelling something insulting. There is no argument, just "blame the Jews." It's naked hatred and no different than seeing someone post "Fuck Trump" or the mindless Leftist garbage that they spew.
Demolishing Antisemitism is not for me; others have written about how stupid and ignorant it is and I'm not going to re-hash their work. I just want to say publicly that I do not approve of Antisemitism and I'm tuning out anyone who promotes in in their feed, page, blog, or whatever. I'm sure I'm a Zionist shill or something, but I'm tired of seeing it and am not going to patronize your crap anymore.
Some random and unorganized thoughts I noticed on talking a walk around my suburban neighborhood that are applicable to warfare in suburban areas.
Avenues of retreat/escape from homes will be limited. Escape from homes in most suburbs will be through adjacent yards, over fences and walls, or through alleys.
Going yard-to-yard may not be viable, even if one is physically fit, for several reasons. First, going over walls and fences is dangerous due to objects, thorny shrubbery, or animals. Many cops and suspects have been hurt jumping over walls without looking and landing on stuff, dropping into cactus, or being eaten by dogs.
Neighbors may attack you, not knowing who you are. You may be a total stranger to someone several houses away or even your next-door neighbor may overreact. Enemies could easily see you jumping the fences or walls or running through unfenced yards.
Since most cities are in some sort of a grid fashion or relatively organized into blocks, alleys can easily be bottled up on either side. Alleys are also avenues of attack to flank your house or defensive position. Even without alleys, all an enemy has to do to prevent you from “fleeing out the back” from the neighbor’s house is walk around the block.
If you are very lucky, there is a storm drain, creek, or other natural feature that the enemy hasn’t placed security in.
Shooting will occur at distances below 300 yards and often well under 100 yards. Studies of infantry engagements show that the vast majority of them happen under 300 yards (90%) with 80% being under 200 yards. On an average suburban street, block length is typically not more than 200 yards (your neighborhood may vary). A simple red dot scope without magnification is probably going to be sufficient.
Remember, there is a decent likelihood you will be shooting a very short ranges; perhaps 100 feet or so (2-3 houses away). Your enemies will probably be closing the distance to attack your home or will be such inept shots that they have to be closer to make hits.
There will be a lot of concealment in your neighborhood. Concealment is what can hide you, but can’t stop bullets (shrubbery and cars). Cover is going to be more sparse, but depending on how your neighborhood was built, you may have things like retaining walls and terrain features to hide behind. However, one should take caution because many residential outdoor walls are often built of hollow blocks that are not very bullet-resistant.
Take into consideration the nature of vegetation where you live. Newer neighborhoods in Las Vegas aren’t going to have a lot of trees or bushes, but 30+ year old neighborhoods in Reno and Carson are veritable forests.
Homes are not bulletproof. The overwhelming majority of American homes are made of wood. Rifle bullets with sufficient energy can, under the right circumstances, penetrate right through a poorly constructed home. At the very least, both handgun and rifle bullets can penetrate the front doors and walls of a home, never mind the windows. Using a home for cover or expecting that bullets will be stopped by a layer of stucco, plywood, and drywall is foolish.
You are vulnerable to snipers or even being casually picked off, especially if there are a lot of places for an enemy to hide. Take for instance a mob. The mob tosses a Molotov cocktail on your roof. You run out to grab the garden hose and suppress the fire. They shoot and kill you as soon as you expose yourself outside. You are also vulnerable to being shot through a window if you are silhouetted by a light or behind a shade/curtain.
In a gunfight in urban areas, gunshots will echo making locating a shooter by sound very difficult and may create the illusion of multiple shooters.
Consider the geography and buildings in your area. Are their high-rises or hills/bluffs where someone can shoot at you from? Construction sites where people can hide? Open lots, fields, and natural areas are perfect lanes of assault for antagonists. Is your complex/neighborhood close to a freeway where people can easily jump on and off after committing an attack? Also, be prepared for the possibility of a brush fire being deliberately set.
Clayton E. Cramer
Gun Free Zone
The War on Guns
The View From Out West