Categories
Born again Cynic!

A great question

IAMPLUMP on Twitter: "Knowledge is power #COVID #safe https://t.co/C1tec0gR7W" / Twitter

Categories
Born again Cynic!

Yep!

May be an image of 1 person, beard and text that says 'lifemello LIFE'S TRAGEDY IS THAT WE GET OLD TOO SOON AND WISETO ETOO LATE.'

Categories
Born again Cynic!

The Kyle Rittenhouse Shooting

Categories
Ammo Born again Cynic! California

Should California ban live ammunition on movie sets after ‘Rust’ tragedy? Democrats are divided BY HANNAH WILEY

Alec Baldwin calls for police officers to be on movie and TV sets with guns  after "Rust" shooting - CBS News

BY RACHEL MASON VIA STORYFUL A California Democrat is calling for a ban on live ammunition on movie sets in response to the deadly “Rust” film accident last week that left the cinematographer dead after actor Alec Baldwin unknowingly fired a gun containing a lead bullet while filming in Santa Fe. State Sen. Dave Cortese of San Jose announced this week that he will soon unveil legislation for the 2022 session that would prohibit the use of live ammunition and guns that can fire live rounds in theatrical productions. Cortese said that language is already being drafted. Cortese, who chairs the Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment and Retirement, said the proposal wouldn’t ban guns in motion pictures. Rather, it would set up safety requirements for their use on set.

“There’s a whole heck of a lot of better ways to get imagery of a firearm into film or video than to actually be rehearsing with or brandishing that kind of live weapon on a live set, a crowded set,” he said. The “Rust” accident devastated the entertainment industry after news broke that Baldwin, who was both the lead actor and a producer of the western film, fired a live round during a scene rehearsal that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

The bullet also injured the film’s director, Joel Souza, who was hospitalized and then released after treatment. Capitol Alert newsletter Get political and Capitol news in your inbox every weekday, plus breaking alerts. SIGN UP This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. An investigation is still underway, but New Mexico officials confirmed Wednesday that the gun was loaded with a lead projectile. Authorities also discovered 500 rounds of ammunition on the set of “Rust,” which they believed to be a combination of live and dummy rounds. Not all productions use real firearms as props, and the industry already has strict rules against using live ammunition.

When real guns are used, often for authenticity purposes, they’re usually filled with blanks to mimic a real discharge. Sometimes special effects are used in place of a blank. Specialized crew members, called “armorers,” handle firearm safety on set. Those in charge of the weapons on the “Rust” set have said they did not know the gun was loaded with a live projectile. One armorer said she did not know how live ammunition showed up on set, and claimed that the production lacked safety training. The incident prompted some within the industry to calling for a ban on using real guns on set.

Despite the tragedy, another California Democrat who oversees entertainment industry regulations said she isn’t sure a ban on live ammunition should be up to the Legislature. $2 for 2 months

Fullerton Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva, chair of the Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media Committee, said she’s open to considering Cortese’s legislation that tightens existing rules.

But ultimately, Quirk-Silva said, the unions that have historically negotiated workplace safety regulations should determine what needs strengthening. “As far as saying no live ammunition, I would want to hear from both sides,” Quirk-Silva said. “The motion picture industry and workers. I like to see them negotiate this among themselves rather than the state get involved when we don’t need to.” Quirk-Silva also said California is home to some of the toughest gun laws in the country and that an on-set accident like this hasn’t happened in decades. “We want movie sets to be as safe as can be,” Quirk-Silva added. “We know California has the highest standards and will continue to work toward improving those standards if there’s a need.” CalOSHA spokesperson Luke Brown said that there “no workplace safety regulations specifically related to the handling of firearms on film and TV sets.” “TV and Film production sets in California for the most part just fall under general industry safety orders,” Brown said, adding that CalOSHA and the Department of Department of Industrial Relations do not get involved in labor contract negotiations.

The International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees did not respond to The Sacramento Bee’s email request about what rules exist for using live ammunition in performances. Cortese acknowledged that labor groups might already have standing agreements that ban live ammunition on sets in California. Still, Cortese said there should be similar requirements for non-union sets and for California-based companies to adhere to when they’re working outside of the state. “There’s room for additional safety,” he said. This story was originally published November 2, 2021 5:00 AM. RELATED STORIES FROM SACRAMENTO BEE

Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article255387991.html#storylink=cpy

———————————————————————————

Never waste an Crisis! Grumpy

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic!

Our “Friends” of the other side of the Spectrum

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic!

MEDIA SHAKES MSR MYTHS IN RARE REPORTS By Larry Keane

The media is learning, perhaps by pure accident, that the AR-15 isn’t the monster they’ve portrayed it to be. That’s a lesson that the rest of America learned long ago.

ABC News has been running a series of reports focused on firearms and criminal violence. Two of those reports tell the truth of the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSRs), or AR-15 style rifle and the real culprit. ABC News reported it was criminally-obtained handguns that are used in most murders.

“The 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates said that 90% of the prisoners who had a gun during their crime didn’t get it from a retail source,” ABC News reported.

That shatters several myths. First, it proves that criminals obtain their firearms illegally. Second, it shows that the MSR isn’t the fabled monster as the media portrays.

It’s a rifle that’s often maligned, mostly because of a moniker of “assault weapon” that was tagged to the rifle. Josh Sugarmann, who works for the Violence Policy Center gun control group, seized upon the public’s misunderstanding of the semiautomatic black rifle and the automatic firearm used by the military, according to The Washington Post in 2013.

“The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons,” Sugarmann wrote in 1988.

Things have changed in more than three decades. The ABC News report described the fact that while MSR ownership is more common than that of Ford F-150s, they are still rarely used in crime. There are more than 20 million MSRs in circulation, and they are the most popular selling centerfire rifles in America today. The fact is most crimes are committed by criminals that illegally obtain handguns.

Media Misinformation

AR-15-style rifles, the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR), or “assault weapons” as they’re erroneously called in gun control circles and allied media, are not that. They are semiautomatic rifles that use the same one-trigger-pull, one-fire technology used by handguns and shotguns that was invented in the late-nineteenth century.

That doesn’t stop media from portraying MSRs as difficult to handle and aim, as CNN did, and dangerous machines capable of breaking a grown man’s arm. Political journalist Kevin McCallum described his first time handling an AR-15 as life altering.

“It is difficult to describe the impact — physical and personal — of that first shot,” McCallum wrote. “A deep shock wave coursed through my body, the recoil rippling through my arms and right shoulder with astounding power.”

That description went viral and drew rebuke from MSR owners across the country. In one response parents of a 7-year old girl posted a video of her firing several rounds from an MSR, demonstrating the rifle’s limited recoil. It’s one of the characteristics that make MSRs popular.

Modular Self-Defense

The vast majority of criminal firearm violence is committed by criminals who by a 90-percent margin have stolen their firearm and most often use a handgun, according to FBI data. That doesn’t stop gun control advocates from boogey-manning the MSR and seeking to ban them, as President Joe Biden has asserted he wants to do again.

The MSR’s modular design that’s easily fitted with accessories make the firearm ideal for users of all sizes and shapes, is just one reason it is so popular. That’s critical when used for home and self-defense. NSSF’s Mark Oliva told ABC in their report, “The way it’s designed, it is easily adaptable. It can fit my frame. It can also fit my wife, and she can shoot that rifle just as easily.”

Twenty-six year old Megan Hill told NBC News she purchased an AR-15 in 2017. “We looked at the AR-15, and it was all in one package,” Hill said. “Luckily we haven’t had to use it in self-defense, but it’s a comfort knowing that it’s there to protect my children and my family.”

In one of the more high-profile instances of law-abiding citizens using AR-15-style firearms for protection, Steven Williford used an MSR to stop the murderer from inflicting more carnage in the Sutherland Springs, Texas tragedy four years ago. There are numerous other examples media ignore.

For Hunting

Beyond self-defense, MSRs are increasingly popular for their adaptability and effectiveness while used in hunting. The MSR is popular among big game hunters searching for deer, elk and bear, but also as a favored firearm to take out predator species like coyotes and hogs that inflict damage on crops and livestock. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, feral hogs are responsible for $1.5 billion worth of crop damage annually by devastating farmers’ fields by trampling or eating crops and rooting and eating seeds before they sprout.

As a result, Alabama opened up night hunting for hogs and coyotes this year and sold over 500 licenses. 20 states allow hog hunting and the MSR is the overwhelming choice of firearm among hunters to hunt these predators.

Despite what most major media outlets continue to falsely claim, the MSR is a versatile firearm that is able to meet the unique needs of a diverse population that recognizes its functionality and effectiveness, including millions of women.

Whether for self and home defense purposes, or to take out to the woods and fields for a hunt, MSRs are safe and get the job done. It’s why there are more than 20 million MSRs in private circulation today.

Categories
Born again Cynic!

Just Remember to Vote Folks!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! California

Anti-Gun Researchers Want More Money For California Red Flag Law By Cam Edwards (& I am supposed to be surprised by this call for more $$$!?!)

AP Photo/Julio Cortez
California’s had a “red flag” gun seizure law on the books since 2016, but apparently it’s not being used often enough for gun control activists. The UC-Davis Violence Prevention Research Program, a state-funded anti-gun “research” center headed up by longtime gun control activist Dr. Garen Wintemute, is out with a new report calling on the state to increase funding for the implementation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders that allow the state to confiscate the firearms of anyone a judge deems to be a danger to themselves or others.

I wrote about the due process dangers and the lack of a mental health focus inherent in these red flag laws yesterday, so I won’t re-litigate those arguments here. I do find it interesting, however, that even in California these laws apparently aren’t that popular, and haven’t even been used in many counties. Wintemute and his colleagues chalk that up to a lack of information about red flag laws among law enforcement agencies and the general public, but I think they’re unfairly discounting the idea that in many counties, there’s not a lot of support for red flag gun confiscations.

In order to conduct their “research,” Wintemute and his colleagues conducted “semi-structured interviews” with ” 27 key informants, including judges, law enforcement officers, city and district attorneys, policy experts, and firearm violence researchers” to talk about how well (or not) red flag petitions are being implemented. No number crunching involved here, just subjective interviews with folks, the vast majority of whom have undoubtably already come to the conclusion that red flag laws are valuable and needed “gun safety” tools. In fact, the study authors admit as much:

Potential key informants were selected due to their experience with or demonstrated knowledge of GVROs (e.g., through published reports). They were identified through professional relationships with the authors, activity in the gun violence prevention community, public records indicating involvement in the service or disposition of GVROs, and by recommendation from other informants.

Was there a single stakeholder interviewed who has a knowledge of “Gun Violence Restraining Orders” but who thinks they’re a bad idea? Given the fact that (according to Wintemute) only 14 of California’s 58 counties had enforced a red flag gun seizure order between 2016 and 2020, it shouldn’t have been difficult to find a sheriff or D.A. with an opinion contrary to those writing the report. It sounds to me like these “researchers” simply weren’t interested in hearing another point of view. And why would they, if they already knew that the gist of the report was going to be “red flag laws are good, but here’s how they could be better”?

So the state-funded “research” center came to the completely unsurprising conclusion that more state funds are needed to improve how Gun Violence Restraining Orders are implemented. Any problems with the law (including the fact that in 50% of cases handled by one police officer, individuals refused to give up their guns) can be addressed by throwing money at it. Or rather, any problems that the gun control lobby and their political allies are willing to acknowledge can have more tax dollars thrown at it. Inherent defects like a lack of counsel for those who can’t afford to hire an attorney or a low legal standard for a finding of dangerousness, on the other hand, can be brushed aside and ignored completely.

If this sounds more like propaganda than research, I’m with you. Unfortunately, we can expect this same gun control advocacy disguised as objective science to soon be coming from our federal government, not just anti-gun academics in California, thanks to the CDC’s newfound interest in researching “gun violence.” Millions of dollars have already been appropriated to various academics around the country who’ll soon be issuing reports of their own that either lavish praise on gun control laws already in place in some states or warn of the dire consequences of not imposing those restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. It’s far more junk than science, and unfortunately its our tax dollars (well, more like our grandchildren’s tax dollars at this point, given how much we’re borrowing) that’s paying for it.

Categories
Born again Cynic! California

Long Beach, California in 1912 (In some ways we sure have gone downhill from then!)

r/LosAngeles - Long Beach, Los Angeles in the year 1910 (colorized)

Categories
Born again Cynic!

What about your Flamethrower?