Categories
Category: California
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is again pointing to the “homicide rate” rather than the number of residents killed with firearms in California as he continues his attempt to prove gun control is working.
He turned to the “homicide rate” after an NBC News anchor attempted to corner Sen. James Lankford (R) by claiming the “crime rate” in Oklahoma is “higher than the rate New York and California.”
Newsom reacted by posting to X: “Oklahoma’s homicide rate is 47% higher than California’s.”
What Newsom omitted are the latest figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), showing that 3,209 people were killed with guns in California in 2023 while 814 people were killed with guns in Oklahoma in the same year.
By subscribing, you agree to our terms of use & privacy policy. You will receive email marketing messages from Breitbart News Network to the email you provide. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Newsom did a similar thing last year, when he criticized gun violence in Missouri without mentioning that California had over two times the fatalities.
California has more gun control than any other state and is ranked Number One for gun control stringency by Mike Bloomberg-affiliated Everytown for Gun Safety.
However, FBI data showed California was also Number One in the nation for “active shooter incidents” in 2021 and 2023, despite having gun control upon gun control upon gun control.
AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio, a member of Gun Owners of America, and the director of global marketing for Lone Star Hunts. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal in 2010 and has a Ph.D. in Military History. Follow him on X: @awrhawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
Hell hath no fury like a crazy cat lady.
Catalina Island sits 26 miles off the coast of Southern California. Surrounded on all sides by crystal clear Pacific ocean, it is an incredibly popular destination for tourists, fishermen, and boaters. There is a resident bison herd of about 150, left behind after a 1930’s movie shoot, five native animal species, one Zane Grey Hotel, 4000 human residents, and 1800 deer, all shoved into 76 square miles.
The Catalina Island Conservancy, which oversees 48,000 acres of land, has reported that the isolated environment is in serious trouble, as native flora and fauna are getting absolutely decimated by the pesky and overbearing deer population. The deer were originally brought over to encourage an ideal hunting opportunity for Southern Californians in the 1930’s, but with no natural predators on the island, and California hunters dwindling, things got out of hand and the population exploded well over the 500 deer carrying capacity.
The goal is to maintain native fauna, replant the flora, and further prevent erosion caused by record rains the past year. First, they will need to begin a more aggressive deer management strategy to bring the population to an appropriate number. The Conservancy is proposing using a contractor, White Buffalo Inc, to utilize helicopters and riflemen to efficiently target and remove portions of the deer population—i.e. they are going to shoot and kill the deer. Aerial operations have proven effective in combating runaway populations of species throughout the world, including California’s Channel Islands, resulting in faster, ethical solutions.
Seems reasonable right?
Not to the local cat ladies. The Catalina Island Humane Society is the island’s only animal rescue shelter, and as of right now, only advertises cat adoption (no cats listed as of this writing), but they are raising hell. As soon as the Conservancy posted their plans to restore the island, the cat ladies declared war. A petition started making the rounds that told readers that the Conservancy planned to slaughter deer that belong to residents, whatever the hell that means. As of Monday morning there are 3500 signers of the petition and are pleading with State Fish and Wildlife (who helped plan this) to step in and “save” the deer. Irony so thick you could cut it with a knife.
Up until now, the island has had a set management plan in place in the form of 200 deer tags issued a year to members, but with the island’s capacity of 500 deer, there are about 1300 too many. With the record rains that hit the island this past year, the population is expected to boom, and planning ahead for massive drought, this won’t go well for the large population.
The Conservancy is faced with a very steep uphill battle. Not only will a group with “humane” and “society” in its title dredge up the usual army of online keyboard conservationists, but this being California, they will most likely gain the attention of every desperate politician wanting to virtue signal their way into reelection. Don’t be shocked to see an ensemble cast of Hollywood actors supporting non-science based conservation when they begin defending deer they will never see. The idea of AR-15 wielding hunters flying in on helicopters like Apocalypse Now (with or without “The Ride of the Valkyries” blaring) slaying Bambi’s mom will attract every group from PETA to Moms Against Braincells, or whatever they’re called.
The fact of the matter is, the Conservancy and Cal Fish and Wildlife have agreed on a solid plan to restore equilibrium. They understand that as stewards of the island, the habitat must be properly managed—not just for the wildlife, but for the inhabitants too. What the cat ladies are proposing is a plan made of make believe, where the deer will magically leave the island and everything will go back to normal. Culling, while not necessarily PR friendly, is a proven method of containment and control whether in South Africa, Texas, or California. In order to save the island and its native populations, the plan needs to be enacted fast, as winter storms will only prove more devastating, and next year’s drought will certainly make it worse.
Usually, we can assume that scientific-based conservation will win, but with this being California, don’t be shocked when cat ladies and public opinion dominate. This will be an interesting story to follow.
If there’s a big loser in Second Amendment-related court proceedings over the past few months, it has to be California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
In fact, after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on July 24 that the state’s ammunition background check law violated the Second Amendment and affirmed a district court’s order granting a permanent injunction against enforcement of the law, Newsom shared some harsh words with the media.
“Strong gun laws save lives—and today’s decision is a slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence,” Newsom said in a released statement. “Californians voted to require background checks on ammunition, and their voices should matter.”
Newsom’s frustration isn’t just with the decision on ammo background checks, however. To be sure, Newsom’s and California’s anti-gun regime have seen plenty of court losses as of late, and they have been dealt with especially harshly by the 9th Circuit Court—historically a bastion of anti-gun advocacy—in recent weeks.
For one, on June 20, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court struck down the California law limiting firearm purchases to just one every 30 days. This gun-rationing scheme, the court said, not only violated the Second Amendment but had no historic precedent as required by the Bruen doctrine.
“The district court held that this law violates the Second Amendment. We affirm,” the 9th Circuit ruling stated. “California’s law is facially unconstitutional because possession of multiple firearms and the ability to acquire firearms through purchase without meaningful constraints are protected by the Second Amendment, and California’s law is not supported by our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation.”
Less than a month later, the 9th Circuit reversed a district court decision and upheld an earlier ruling that the Golden State’s law prohibiting advertising of any “firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors” is also unconstitutional.
“California has many tools to address unlawful firearm use and violence among the state’s youth,” the ruling stated. “But it cannot ban truthful ads about lawful firearm use among adults and minors unless it can show that such an intrusion into the First Amendment will significantly further the state’s interest in curtailing unlawful and violent use of firearms by minors.”
Note that the big losses haven’t just been in the 9th Circuit Court, but also at the district court level. On July 1, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California ruled that the state’s law banning nonresident carry permits is unconstitutional.
“Although California identifies a regulatory burden from potentially tens of thousands of new applications, the constitutional infringement pushes the balance of equities in Plaintiffs’ favor,” the ruling stated.
Ultimately, his recent court losses might have something to do with Newsom’s recent lie proclaiming he’s now a Second Amendment advocate.
“I’m not anti-gun at all,” Newsom said at the time. “I’m for just some gun safety common sense. I’m challenged by large-capacity magazine clips in urban centers, weapons of war sometimes outgunning the police. But otherwise, man, people have the right to bear arms, and I’ve got no ideological opposition to that at all.”
Hopefully, pretending not to be anti-gun made him feel a little better about all the bad beatings he’s been taking in court recently. He’s going to need it, as more lawsuits in the pipeline will continue to dismantle the state’s tangle of anti-gun laws.
This guy sure has a hard on for the LAPD! Grumpy