1. 1

    According to Nathan Abrams, a Jewish professor at the University of Aberdeen, many Jewish pornographers identified as sexual revolutionary activists and were inspired by the antifascist praxis of Reich and Marcuse. And while students and Jewish anarchists were throwing Molotov cocktails at the police “to resist the fascism of whiteness” in the 1960s, Jewish activists also sought to liberate women from what Betty Friedan called the “‘comfortable concentration camp’ of the household” by enlisting them as actresses in hardcore porn films.[37] To Abrams, the overwhelming overrepresentation of Jews in the porn industry is clearly “a case of the traditional revolutionary/radical drive of immigrant Jews in America being channeled into sexual rather than Leftist politics.”[38] To drive this point home, the Jewish porn actress Nina Hartley described “herself as ‘the blonde Jew’ porn star from ‘a long line of radical Jews,’ who ‘wants everyone to have a piece — a piece of sex, a piece of the means of production, a piece of a warm communist community’ and ‘a piece of the promised Messianic Age.’”[39]

    1. 1

      Jewish pornographer Al Goldstein stated in an interview with Luke Ford: “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.”[41] “Even when Jews live in a society that welcomes them instead of harassing them, many Jews hate the majority culture.”[42]

    1. 1

      The Senate vote was 92 - 6.

      Only 6 - six - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 - Only 6 Republican senators voted against the ‘stimulus’ – Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee ; Rand Paul of Kentucky ; Rick Scott of Florida ; Ron Johnson of Wisconsin ; Mike Lee of Utah ; Ted Cruz of Texas.

      $33 million. To Venezuela (a.k.a. directly in the pocket of Señor Maduro).

      $15 billion. To the airlines. Why ? Because labor unions own most politicians.

      $453 million. To The Ukraine…. and undoubtedly some of it will come back to the Uncle Kid Sniffer crime syndicate.

      $700 million. To The Sudan…. because being oh-so peace-loving has it’s perks.

      $1.4 billion. To “The Asia Reassurance Initiative Act”…. a.k.a., another attempt at appeasing China.

      $40 million. To The Kennedy Center For The Performing Arts

      $193 million. To Federal HIV/AIDS workers stationed abroad to buy new cars.

      That’s just some of the abject boole sheet within the over 5,600 pages in the legislation.

      There’s one more item though.

      Better grab on to something.

      Up to $1,800 each. Recipients: Illegal aliens.

      Yes, you read that correctly.

      Up to $1,800 each. Recipients: Illegal aliens.

      YOU get $600.

      1. 2

        It gets worse.

        https://twitter.com/RepRalphNorman/status/1341103031153254400 Folks, we just received a 5,600 page PDF that represents one of the largest spending bills in our history, and NOT ONE Member of Congress will have had time to read through it before voting later today. This is awful governance, and a disservice to the American people.

        https://normalamerican.com/posts/2020/5593-pages/ A growing number of Americans are out of work or unable to work because of lockdowns, but Congress has decided to divert billions of dollars to Afghanistan’s “infrastructure repair,” Cameroon’s “maritime security programs,” and for Sri Lanka’s “refurbishing of a high endurance cutter.” Perhaps the Cameroonians can stop killing English speakers long enough to say thanks.

        What will make it get better?

      1. 1

        There are “Black Lives Matter” protests that devolve into (some might say provide cover for) rioting and looting and mayhem.

        In Kalispell, Montana, the BLM affair was closer to a neighborhood bake sale. The BLM organizers started off by singing the national anthem. Some of the pro-2A men in the Flathead Patriot Guard crowd said their daughters were involved in the protest. Both the BLM organizers and the Flathead Patriot Guard said they wanted to “come together and unify” and wished each other a happy afternoon. The Flathead Patriot Guard’s mission seemed to be to protect local statues and deter rioting and looting and mayhem. And it worked.

        Wonder what was different here?

        1. 1

          How many black young men from inner cities attended the Montana event, exactly?

        1. 1

          Some guy whose name has not been released by police shot up an Airbnb house party in the San Francisco bay area last week. This attack took place around 11pm.

          California arguably has the most restrictive gun laws in these United States. But the anti-constitutionalists who represent the Democrat Party are calling for still more laws to disarm law-abiding California residents. One anti-constitutionalist politician calling himself Gavin Newsom wrote on Twitter that there must be more “commonsense gun reforms.”

          The legal system lacks precognition. What “commonsense gun reform” would have prevented the Orinda shooting while simultaneously preserving the rights of law-abiding California residents to defend themselves from one? There is no answer. It is impossible.

          Either the anti-constitutionalists are posturing or they want to ban the private ownership of all firearms (followed by a ban on pointy knives, then big sticks, then dangerous rocks). It’s unclear which it is. Though given the politics of the left, I’m betting they want forcible disarmament by SWAT teams willing to shoot first and ask questions later.

          1. 1

            As we all know gun owners, especially white men and women, are deplorable racist bitter clingers who don’t deserve due process… When some of them get executed (legally) by trigger-happy SWATing for AR-15 confiscation, this will not be an accident… At least not for the left.

          1. 2

            Oregon state law says you can’t ride your bike on the wrong side of the road. This college student did. The state trooper said repeatedly, for something like 25 minutes, that the student could leave with a warning if she showed ID. She refused. She got arrested.

            Seems to me that we should ask Oregon state politicians to defend their decision to outlaw riding a bike on the wrong side of the street in the first place. Should there really be a law saying that errant bike riders need to be arrested if they don’t show ID?

            Yale lawprof Stephen Carter is right: “Every new law requires enforcement; every act of enforcement includes the possibility of violence.”

            1. 1

              Plus the student’s an SJW transphilic lefty snowflake who tweets anti-white screeds… anti-hunting tweets… anti-religious tweets… anti-America tweets… how white police officers are racist…



              museums are the pedestals of colonialism (rape genocide and systematic erasure).

              Stealing brown kids and selling them to white parents is as American as it gets. 😒

              White people really hate being called white people.

              Trans rights mean INDIGENOUS trans rights

              Hunters are insane.

              ya astrology’s not backed by science but neither is religion and at least the stars don’t oppress women & the gays

              america is the world’s longest con, founded on a hoax

              can white girls please stop trying to wear black styles

              Without white people, not only would there still be technological advances, but it would have been sustainable as well.


            1. 1

              The Berggruen Institute is named by Nicolas Berggruen, a Paris-born businessman who is reportedly a U.S.-German dual citizen. He moved to the U.S. after university. He is a successful real estate developer and investor who took his million-dollar trust fund (in today’s dollars) and turned it into a billion dollars.

              For questions about regulations relating to real estate development, Mr. Berggruen would undoubtably have useful knowledge. But that is not his goal.

              His goal is to influence U.S. and European law more broadly. That is why he is funding his Berggruen Institute. News articles have said one of his goals is to “fight climate change.” Another initiative, a collaboration with the Huffington Post and the Washington Post, which should tell you quite a bit, is called The WorldPost. It is predictably left. It publishes articles saying the President Trump “denigrates democratic allies,” that he is “robbing America of what makes it great,” and that another politician is “a relentless advocate of gun ownership.” The horror! Of course the Washington Post reprints them as news.

              So why would Mr. Berggruen give Justice Ginsburg a $1M gift? He surely knows that Supreme Court rules prohibit the justice from accepting any cash gift, even $50.

              The answer is twofold. First, he wants to be noticed. #MediaJackals will write gleefully about this gift. People who never heard of Nicolas Berggruen now know who he is. Second, it signals that if you are a prominent lefty jurist, you might get a $1M handout after you leave the bench. Supreme Court justices get a salary of about $250,000 a year. That’s not bad, but it doesn’t pay for your vacation home in Aspen. Retirement now looks more desirable.

              As long as you continue to vote the way Nicolas Berggruen wants.

              1. 1

                If RBG wanted to tell other left donors not to give SCOTUS justices $1M checks, she could donate this $1M to the NRA… That would stop it real quick…

              1. 2

                So it seems that two white guys (apparently UConn students) shouted what has come to be called the “N-word” while walking through a deserted off-campus parking lot. There was no violence, no confrontation, and nobody else involved, and without a video that someone took through a window overlooking the parking lot, that would have been the end of it.

                There is no law against “hate speech” in this context. Under current First Amendment jurisprudence, the state law criminalizing “hate speech” would be unconstitutional.

                But the left’s goal is to overturn Supreme Court precedents and get the courts to discover a new previously unsuspected constitutional right not to be offended, which would allow “hate speech” laws to be upheld as a-OK. (If it worked for abortion…)

                Once this principle is established, “hate speech” laws will be invoked against white Christian deplorable gun-owning bitter clingers, mostly men.

                They will not be invoked against the left’s political allies. NYT #MediaJackal Sarah Jeong’s anti-white tweets clearly violated this state “hate speech” law. Was Sarah Jeong arrested and prosecuted when she visited Connecticut this year? Of course not.

                “Hate speech” laws are the First Amendment equivalent of “red flag” laws when it comes to the the Second Amendment. Both will be used against people the left hates.

                1. 2

                  The left’s demand for Nazis (for The Two Minutes Hate) outstrips the supply… so some must be invented…

                1. 2


                  What really matters is the next game, the next movie, the next phone and the next crackdown. What matters is that you can buy governments, shut down protests and suppress the truth. What matters is that more people, in China and America, are realizing that what they want isn’t a sale: it’s freedom.

                  The linked article is a bit long and a bit rambling but I can’t disagree with it.

                  I would make a simpler point. The elites who are culturally dominant in these United States (and yearn to be politically dominant) want to repress BadThink, including support for traditional Christian values or gun rights or President Trump or even a view of human sexuality that was embraced by approximately 100% of the population at the time the previous president was elected.

                  An uncensored Internet and social media and movie/TV studios allows opponents of these leftist elites to communicate and exchange ideas and even (quelle horreur!) to organize to oppose the left. Therefore uncensored Internet and social media and movie/TV studios in these United States must not be permitted.

                  Similarly, the elites who are culturally and politically dominant in China want to repress their own version of BadThink. Therefore an uncensored Internet and social media and movie/TV studios in China must not be permitted.

                  These elites have a lot in common. The demands they make on lily-livered CEOs are not that different.

                  1. 1

                    What the Z Man had to say yesterday:


                    The NBA will tell Donald Trump to take a hike, but they won’t dare get on the wrong side of the communists. The ChiComs have no fear of the human flea circus. They know who holds the power.

                  1. 1

                    There are three approaches:

                    1. Anyone who was born male competes in male-only sports, and the same with girls and women. This is fair to women. “Trans” activists will claim it’s unfair to men who want to be women.

                    2. Anyone who identifies as any gender can play in any sport. This is obviously unfair to women. “Trans” activists will claim it’s fair to men who want to be women.

                    3. Anyone who identifies as any gender can play in any sport based on blood serum testosterone levels. This is not as obviously unfair to women. It is not obviously unfair to men who want to be women.

                    For all of human history, we took approach #1. Now we’re trying #3 in adult sports, with the linked article noting that dozens of states allow #2 for teen sports.

                    The question of whether #3 is fair is an empirical one. If blood serum testosterone levels by themselves create a level playing field, then the argument for #3 can be fairly strong (putting aside cultural issues and locker room issues).

                    But the evidence is coming in that a man can have low blood serum testosterone levels but still have an unfair advantage over women. Those include, per the linked article, bone size, bone density, an increase in muscle size and strength, an increase in the tensile strength of ligaments and connective tissue; an increase in red blood cells; lung capacity, and heart size.

                    So #3 seems like an unfair approach. Looks like USA Powerlifting got it right. How long will it take for other sports to follow?

                    1. 2

                      Moms are waking up: https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/

                      My daughter, Alanna, now a sophomore, is a rising star in our home state of Connecticut. As a freshman, she led her high-school team to its third straight team championship in the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference by winning the 100-meter, 200-meter and 400-meter in one of the most dominant individual performances in meet history. She was an integral component in the team’s first-place finish in the State Open and in smashing a pair of records at the New England championships in Maine.

                      Alanna has devoted countless days, nights and weekends to training. She pushes herself to shave mere fractions of a second from her race times, yet she positions herself at the starting line knowing that, even with all that training and with her best effort, the odds are against her, the numbers are against her and that fairness doesn’t really exist.

                      Since 2017, our state’s high-school athletic conference has allowed biological boys to compete against girls. It’s enough that they subjectively identify as female. Since then, two biological boys have won 15 women’s track championships, titles held by nine different girls in 2016.

                      Watch out when Moms get woke!

                    1. 1

                      Over 3 years old but still good:


                      Faceberg, of course, is run by howling lunatics, who ban people for any deviation from the orthodoxy. The media is slowly shutting down public comment in a rather deliberate effort to shut down dissent.

                      We are social animals that look to one another for guidance and acceptance. Unleashing click farms to promote the Cloud People narrative, while demoting the critics, gets the herd moving in the right direction. It also keeps the people holding the megaphones in high spirits. By having only cheering crowds in their line of sight, they truly feel they are making a difference and therefore redouble their efforts for the cause. That’s the weird thing about propaganda. It’s often more effective on the sender than the receiver.

                      All of this is fine if your ideal society is one where the bulk of the people are treated like cattle.

                      For Facebook and it seems a lot of Silicon Valley, we are the cattle.

                      1. 1

                        When you’ve lost the ACLU…


                        The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) opposed the bill, saying it “poses a significant threat to civil liberties” because a restraining order can be sought before a gun owner has an opportunity to dispute the request.

                        Additionally, those making a request under the new law may “lack the relationship or skills required to make an appropriate assessment,” the ACLU said.

                        1. 1

                          Also: “We are speeding toward a situation when someone in one of these camps refuses to obey a major decree, arrest order, or court decision, at which point Americans will get to experience the joys of their political futures being decided by phone calls to generals and police chiefs.”

                          There are lots of ways this can accelerate. #1, an order is not obeyed (does anyone think the Deep State actually listens to the President?). #2, the president resists an unconstitutional court order that most Americans think is unconstitutional, maybe with backing from the military. #3 the president lawfully directs the military to stop an insurrection like Antifa in Portland, but meets resistance from local or state governments.

                          Under a Democrat president there’s: #4 a Democrat president orders AR-15 confiscation. Sanctuary counties resist. So eventually do sanctuary states.

                          1. 2


                            Over at our forum (TASG), I offered the following about the article:

                            Betcha heard about it when it happened.

                            Two ‘gunmen’ went into a Kansas City (Kansas) bar and opened fire, murdering 4, wounding 5.

                            Some of the typical Democrat presidential candidates were instantly all over it, demanding 2A be immediately revoked, full-by-force confiscation, etc.

                            Then, word started getting out on whoo dun ded eet, maing and guess what happened next…… Until the AP punched out this semi-buried article literally 15 minutes before my posting this [Ed. Note: Approx. 0920 Hours Eastern 7 October 2019), the latest mass-shooting to end all mass shootings simply disappeared from all but the local-to-it media.

                            —article text quoted here—

                            ‘For some reason’, these kind of facts - prohibited persons with evil scary-looking toys that go bang - isn’t even remotely newsworthy to the typical Democrat agenda-pushers.


                            1. 1

                              I’m reminded of this article from a few weeks ago:

                              Seven times this year, a gunman has opened fire in a U.S. public place, killing at least three people. One shooter is suspected of being a white supremacist. One was an Elizabeth Warren supporter. And two were black… A May 2018 policy brief by the Rockefeller Institute of Government at the State University of New York, which looked at any incident that resulted in deaths or injuries and excluded gang violence or terrorist activity, found that the perception that whites are responsible for nearly all mass shootings is a myth.

                              It sure seems like the #MediaJackals have collectively decided which shootings deserve full round-the-clock coverage. And which, when the whoo dun ded eet facts conflict with The Prevailing Narrative, quickly get disappeared.

                              I wonder if the #MediaJackals might have an agenda of their own that they’re trying to shove down our throats or something?

                              1. 1

                                Big media has been playing games with race and crime (hiding or exaggerating) for a while. Another example is serial killers.

                                Since 1990, the majority of serial killers have been black according to Radford University’s Serial Killer Database: http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Serial%20Killer%20Information%20Center/Serial%20Killer%20Statistics.pdf

                                Scroll to page six, “U.S. Serial Killers Percentage by Race and Decade.”

                                But you won’t see this reflected in media coverage.

                              1. 1

                                It’s been 10 years since the Court voted to hear a fundamental Second Amendment gun rights case. See Justice Thomas’ dissent from the denial of certiorari last year in Silvester v. Becerra:

                                If a lower court treated another right so cavalierly, I have little doubt that this Court would intervene. But as evidenced by our continued inaction in this area, the Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this Court…

                                Nearly eight years ago, this Court declared that the Second Amendment is not a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). By refusing to review decisions like the one below, we undermine that declaration. Because I still believe that the Second Amendment cannot be “singled out for special—and specially unfavorable—treatment,” id., at 778–779 (majority opinion), I respectfully dissent from the denial of certiorari.

                                One interpretation of the Court’s unwillingness during that nearly 10-year stretch is that Justice Kennedy believed that it would be politically unpopular among the howling classes of the #mediajackals and their lawprof allies to say “yes, the Second Amendment is a fundamental constitutional right, and we mean it.” So he voted against granting cert petitions. It takes 4 justices to vote to grant a cert petition.

                                Then Justice Kennedy stepped down. Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed in October 2018. Three months later the Court finally granted cert in this case. Better yet, the constitutionalist justices had enough votes to prevail against the anti-constitutionalists in the mootness skirmish last week; oral arguments remain set for December 2.

                                Thank you, President Trump.

                                1. 1

                                  Thank you, President Trump.

                                  Imagine the justices we’d have if Hillary Clinton were president today. -shudder-

                                  Also it’s a little worrisome that Justice Thomas is out sick right now.


                                1. 2

                                  Unfortunately the neocon must-have-endless-war brigade is out in full force, with the #MediaJackals gleefully baying that “conservatives are attacking the president” or some such nonsense. The obvious rejoinder is that these are warmongers, but not conservatives. And some of us expected better from Nikki Haley:

                                  Neocon Bill Kristol: “With the betrayal of the Kurds and Trump’s full-on America First tweet storm this morning, is there a single principled internationalist, a single believer in American global leadership somewhere in the Trump Administration who will resign in protest?”

                                  Nikki Haley: “We must always have the backs of our allies, if we expect them to have our back. The Kurds were instrumental in our successful fight against ISIS in Syria. Leaving them to die is a big mistake.”

                                  Mitt Romney: “The President’s decision to abandon our Kurdish allies in Northern Syria in the face of an assault by Turkey is a betrayal that will have grave humanitarian and national security consequences.”

                                  It is possible to think the Kurds are in the right and the Turks are in the wrong, yet oppose military intervention in the form of armed combat against Turkey. (There are probably a dozen current or recent military conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa where this principle equally applies.)

                                  How many dead American soldiers is this fight worth? How about: “None!”

                                  1. 1

                                    Be glad that Hillary Clinton is not president today.

                                    1. 1

                                      If she were, we’d be at war:


                                      The president has sided with authoritarian leaders of Turkey… over our loyal allies and America’s own interests. His decision is a sickening betrayal both of the Kurds and his oath of office.

                                    1. 2

                                      Interesting. The study says the authors obtained personally identifiable information on 79,678 California residents including names, date of birth, driver’s license number, sex, city, and zip code (and possibly more information as well–the description is not exhaustive):

                                      79 678 individuals were followed up from their first handgun purchase in 2001 through 2013 … The study cohort was identified using the California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) database, which retains information on all legal handgun transfers in the state.

                                      The study participants were followed up from their 10th postpurchase day in 2001 until December 31, 2013, or a prior date when they could no longer be affirmatively identified as living California residents using public records. These records initially included the California Death Statistical Master File, California voter registration records, and DROS records. If a period of 3 years or more for an individual remained unaccounted for (53.0% of the study sample), we queried LexisNexis Public Records (see eAppendix 1 in the Supplement).

                                      From the supplement:

                                      Linking variables for the cohort of firearm purchasers were obtained from the Dealers Record of Sale (DROS) database. These included first name, middle name, last name, date of birth, California driver’s license number, sex, city, and zip code. RAP sheets were linked to cohort members using first name, middle name, last name, date of birth, and California driver’s license number. Sex, city, zip code, and county were used to verify matches.

                                      To link to California voter registration data in 2002 and 2014, we used first name, middle name, last name, date of birth, city, zip code, and sex. Voter ID numbers were then used to follow people forward from 2002 and backward from 2014 to identify purchaser locations during interim time point

                                      Who gave researcher Rose M. C. Kagawa–who works at the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis–access to this vast array of personally identifiable information? Can I go to the CA DOJ site and download all that information from Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) database myself?

                                      1. 2

                                        Just for fun let’s look at California’s Information Practices Act of 1977 (aka California Civil Code §§ 1798-1798.78). We’ll start at 1798.24: “An agency shall not disclose any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains.”

                                        California being California, there are exceptions to the rule. Most do not apply. One might. It says that an agency (such as CA DOJ) may disclose personally identifiable information to researchers if a few dozen painstaking steps have been followed including detailed safekeeping and deletion requirements.

                                        Of course California state agencies are free to enact stricter rules. California DOJ has a privacy policy that says: “We only use or disclose personal information for the specified purposes, or purposes consistent with those purposes, unless we get the consent of the subject of the information, or unless required by law or regulation.” This privacy policy is referenced in DROS forms.

                                        That sure sounds like a promise, enforceable at law, not to hand out personally identifiable information to random researchers. What’s going on here?

                                        1. 2

                                          Is it too cynical to say that we live in a post-constitutional post-privacy world, where state and federal bureaucrats can do what they want… as long as they don’t get caught? And even in the unlikely event that they do get caught, they can still retire on their full pensions.

                                        2. 0

                                          Section 1798.45 allows an individual to bring a civil action against a California state agency. Injunctive relief is available. So are attorney’s fees (1798.48). “The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed.”

                                          There’s interesting wording in 1798.53 suggesting that UC Davis researchers who disclose “information, not otherwise public, which they know or should reasonably know was obtained from personal information maintained by a state agency… shall be subject to a civil action, for invasion of privacy, by the individual to whom the information pertains.”

                                          One more, in Section 1798.55: “The intentional violation of any provision of this chapter or of any rules or regulations adopted thereunder, by an officer or employee of any agency shall constitute a cause for discipline, including termination of employment.”

                                        1. 3

                                          Thanks for writing this. I’m amused by the gun-banning, magazine-banning, ammo-banning types who claim that All The Bad Guys will instantly bow to the new law and immediately dump all their standard/full capacity magazines on the front desk of the nearest police station.

                                          There are probably over 50 million standard/full capacity AR-15 compatible magazines in private hands in the U.S. today. If the full power of the federal government hasn’t been able to get rid of illegal drugs–note the Feds have effectively given up on marijuana prohibition–what makes anyone think bent pieces of metal can be outlawed?

                                          It was 6 years ago that Forbes was reporting: “Defense Distributed successfully 3D-printed and tested an ammunition magazine for an AR semi-automatic rifle, loading and firing 86 rounds from the 30-round clip.”

                                          I am reliably informed that technology has advanced since then.

                                          1. 3

                                            Well, then O’Rourke and his buddies in DC will then outlaw 3D printing plans posted to the Internet, the First Amendment be damned. Defense Distributed was forced to take their files offline and check out the mirror site: “File access is currently restricted due to a threat of prosecution.”

                                            And then because some Deplorables(TM) might link to offshore sites with the plans, those links have to be outlawed. And then because some Deplorables(TM) might post hints about where to find them in discussions, those discussions have to be outlawed.

                                            This has gone beyond a slippery slope. It’s a greased-up, slicked-down chute heading to a scary place.

                                            1. 2

                                              “ firing 86 rounds from the 30-round clip.” how does that work?

                                              AR-15’s don’t accept “clips” to my knowledge either. I believe the term is “magazines.”

                                              “Clips” are what an M1 Garand and some other rifles use.

                                              1. 2

                                                I can’t believe someone is accusing a #mediajackal of not knowing what he’s talking about when writing about firearms! :)

                                                As for the 86 rounds from a 30-round magazine, I’ll be charitable and assume that the reporter is trying, poorly, to write that the 3D printed magazine was sturdy enough that it could be reloaded. It wasn’t just a one-time use thing.

                                            1. 1

                                              I’m reminded of this from L. Neil Smith, titled “AMERICANS HAVE OBEYED THEIR LAST GUN LAW”:


                                              To the deep, almost physically painful chagrin of the people of her ilk, even if victim disarmament “worked”, and even after decades of anti-self-defense propaganda, the Productive Class doesn’t want it and doesn’t need it. Except for those those areas controlled by “progressives”, the inner city cores, this is the most peaceful, prosperous and, yes, truly progressive society in the history of the world.

                                              It’s also heavily armed—750 million firearms, according to the industry, “of modern design, in good working order”—it’s pissed off about a number of issues, and better than ever before, it knows its rights. It knows that, even if the Second Amendment were repealed, the basic right to own and carry weapons doesn’t come from the Bill of Rights, The Second Amendment was written to protect a pre-existing organic right to own and carry weapons. In short, the tax-slaves are getting uppity, and that terrifies plantation staffers like this law professor.

                                              1. 1

                                                You can read the text of the NFA here: https://www.atf.gov/file/58141/download

                                                It includes:

                                                The Secretary shall maintain a central registry of all firearms in the United States… A person possessing a firearm registered as required by this section shall retain proof of registration which shall be made available to the Secretary upon request.

                                                Firearms without serial number. Any person who possesses a firearm… which does not bear the serial number… shall identify the firearm with a serial number assigned by the Secretary…

                                                It shall be unlawful for any person… to receive or possess a firearm which is not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record; or to transfer a firearm in violation of the provisions of this chapter; or to make a firearm in violation of the provisions of this chapter… to receive or possess a firearm which is not identified by a serial number as required…

                                                And the penalties:

                                                Any person who violates or fails to comply with any provision of this chapter shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000, or be imprisoned not more than ten years, or both… Any firearm involved in any violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture…

                                                Biden wants to aim this law at owners of AR-15s. If you merely “possess” an unregistered AR-15 or similar rifle under President Joe, you’ll be “imprisoned not more than ten years.”

                                                This plan will surely reduce political tensions. Right?

                                                1. 1

                                                  I think you’re joking but this is one way that the transition from a cold civil war to a hot one happens.

                                                  From the introduction to Mike V’s novel that I posted about in another discussion:

                                                  Once again we hear demands for bans on semi-automatic rifles and for federal control of all private transfers of all firearms (the so-called “gun show loophole”). This time, it is said, there will be no “grandfather clause” of existing weapons and that confiscation of all military-pattern semi-auto rifles is intended.

                                                  Yet the Three Percent will not obey such laws and they will defy the federal government to do anything about it.

                                                  I was once told by a “gun safety” advocate back in the Nineties that he favored total civilian firearms confiscation. Only the military and police should have weapons he averred and what did I think about that? I began to give him a reasoned answer and he cut me off with an abrupt, “Give me the short answer.”

                                                  I thought for a moment and said, “If you try to take our firearms we will kill you.”

                                                  It was true then, it is true now.

                                                  And that was written maybe 10-12 years ago.

                                                1. 4

                                                  The late Mike Vanderboegh had a lot to say about this. A deep stroll through the archives of http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/?m=1 is wise reading for anyone.

                                                  1. 3

                                                    Thanks… I just took a look. I hadn’t read it before.

                                                    Here’s one post based on email that Mike Vanderboegh wrote to a lefty writer in summer 2009, over a decade ago:

                                                    We are, we must admit, two peoples sharing a common language, the same national border and not much else. You are seeing through a glass darkly when you perceive looming civil war. This much I will credit you. But you are foolish to demand that we put up or shut up, for I assure you, we WILL put up if forced to it. And, thus for the sake of preventing the civil war whose prospect you so irresponsibly invoke, it is THIS critical topic which must still be discussed.

                                                    We are done being shoved back from the free exercise of our God-given, inalienable rights. It is you, not us, who are pushing, shoving, tempting, even demanding that this country descend into its third civil war. But it is we who are more ready to prosecute that war than you.

                                                    And another, from 2015:

                                                    So advocates of further citizen disarmament must ask themselves, how many of us – along with our families and other innocents – are they willing to see dead in the civil war that they start in order to accomplish their “benevolent” goal? And how many of their side are they willing to sacrifice in order to win the civil war they start?

                                                    Mike seems to have been warning of this possibility for at least 10 years. How many people on the other side were paying attention? Any?

                                                    1. 2

                                                      Mike V. wrote a novel about the switch from a cold civil war to a hot one. Not much is free in today’s world but Mike V.’s novel, called “Absolved,” is: https://billstclair.com/absolved/absolved.html

                                                      Only problem is that it ends a little abruptly. Maybe he never quite finished it?

                                                      Here’s the Author’s Note:

                                                      “that makes Wolverines, and the entirety of my novel Absolved, a cautionary tale for those who aspire to be agents of an American Stazi. Put another way, if you ain’t one of those, Mr. LEO, you have nothing to worry about. But if those who are think that one of their own would not offer them up to an assassin’s bullet out of deeper held principle because he is a fellow LEO and thus wouldn’t “turn traitor,” I would suggest they read the real history of one Eamon “Ned” Broy.

                                                      In the movie Michael Collins, Ned Broy is portrayed as having been killed by the Brits. He wasn’t. He survived the War for Irish Independence and the Irish Civil War that followed. In fact, although captured and threatened with execution, he outlived for a considerable number of years dozens of his fellow Royal Irish Constabulary G-men and British secret service agents whose names he gave to Michael Collins for disposal by the “Twelve Apostles” of “The Squad.”

                                                      By all accounts, Broy even slept well at night, knowing it had all been done in the cause of Irish freedom. A cautionary tale indeed for any would-be American secret political policemen.– Mike Vanderboegh.”