Dems’ New ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Is About as Gun-Illiterate as You’d Expect

Not to be outdone by gun control promoters in the House, a group of anti-gun senators released a new “assault weapons” ban earlier this week.

“Americans across the nation are asking Congress to reinstate the federal ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” reads a press release from sponsor Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. “If we’re going to put a stop to mass shootings and protect our children, we need to get these weapons of war off our streets.”

Legislative text still wasn’t available at the time of this writing, but a first look at some of the outlined portions of it shows that it would be about as effective at curbing gun violence as Feinstein’s 1994 weapons ban (which wasn’t).

Since the term “assault weapon” has no intrinsic meaning either in the gun world or the legal world, the definition means whatever the anti-gun politician using it wants it to mean. So what makes something an “assault weapon” in this case?

The bill “bans any assault weapon that accepts a detachable magazine and has one or more military characteristics including a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock.”

So the bill wouldn’t outright ban all semi-automatic weapons (as some have already suggested); rather, it would just affect semi-automatics that have certain features, most of which are aesthetic or ergonomic in nature and none of which affect how the gun itself fires. They’re all also features typically found on a modern sporting rifle (known as an AR-15), which has been the anti-gun crowd’s big boogeyman for the last few years.

But those features can look pretty scary if you don’t know what you’re looking at. That’s why we put together the Firepower 101 series last spring.

According to the press release, the legislation would also ban so-called “assault pistols,” which are defined as handguns that weigh over 50 ounces unloaded. If that sounds obtuse and silly, it’s because it is. Weight itself doesn’t necessarily make a gun more dangerous. A violent gangbanger or armed robber can do a lot more damage with a light, compact semi-automatic handgun than an antique flintlock pistol.

It also would ban pistol stabilizing braces that magically “transform assault pistols into assault rifles” because they allow shooters to “fire more accurately.” Of course, if accuracy was what made something an “assault weapon,” stabilized pistols aren’t really where someone would want to start banning. Hunting and competition rifles are designed to be far more accurate.

It also bans magazines and other “ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds,” but current owners would be able to keep their existing magazines. This, of course, would do little more than put law-abiding gun owners at a disadvantage against non-compliant criminals who still won’t have to reload as often when committing violent crimes.

However, to give credit where credit is due, the bill would exempt all guns and magazines affected by the legislation that are lawfully owned at the time of passage. That would seem like a fairly obvious exception to include, but the Trump administration’s recent bump stock ban didn’t even allow that.

Feinstein has introduced this bill into a Senate with a 53-47 Republican majority, so it’s pretty much just for show until either that math changes or something motivates 13 Republicans to go along with it. (For more from the author of “Dems’ New ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Is About as Gun-Illiterate as You’d Expect” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Church Draws Backlash for Sign: ‘Bruce Jenner Is Still a Man’

A Northern California church sparked outrage over a sign that read: “Bruce Jenner is still a man. Homosexuality is still sin. The culture may change. The Bible does not.”

. . .

The church, Trinity Bible Presbyterian Church, is located in Lake Shastina, Calif., which is about an hours’ drive from the Oregon border.

Protesters gathered in front of the church on Sunday to denounce what they called “hate and slander” and to “show our love and support for the LGBT community,” according to a Facebook page that organized the event.

Justin Hoke, the church’s pastor, wrote on Facebook Wednesday that the sign’s Plexiglass had been destroyed and the letters had been stolen.

The protesters denied having destroyed the sign, The Sacramento Bee reported. Hoke posted a picture on his Facebook Thursday of the sign back up with plaster covering the letters, writing: “It’s not pretty, but it’s back up.” (Read more from “Church Draws Backlash for Sign: ‘Bruce Jenner Is Still a Man’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Pack of MS-13 Illegal Aliens Released by Judge Stab 16-Year-Old

When you bring in hundreds of thousands of young males from the most violent countries through a lawless border, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the results. It’s called the Long Island effect. The latest victim of our “unaccompanied alien child” policy and judicial amnesty is a 16-year-old boy who was stabbed almost to death by three “Dreamers” who were members of MS-13, according to local police. They were all released by a federal judge.

WABC in New York reported yesterday that on Wednesday, a group of illegal aliens believed to be tied to MS-13 attacked a 16-year-old boy and stabbed him in the back outside a Burger King.

According to police, three suspects were arrested and charged with assault. Here are their profiles:

Ramon Arevalo Lopez, 19, entered illegally in December 8, 2016, and was apprehended by DHS in October 2017. He should have been thrown out of the country, but he was released by a federal judge.

Nobeli Montes Zuniga, 20, and Oscar Canales Molina, 17, “entered the country illegally as unaccompanied minors.” Molina was apprehended by the feds in July 2017 but was also released by a federal district judge in November 2017.

We have a lot of our own inherent violence in this country, but now we have “animals,” as Trump rightfully calls them, being released into our country and committing completely avoidable violence.

This is the big lie the media is not telling you about the border flow. When you see pictures of 16- and 17-year-old “children” coming here and wrongly being treated as refugees, being released by judges, and placed in our communities, many of them are your 19- to 20-year-old MS-13 members committing the most gruesome crimes just a year or two later. Not all of them, but way too many.

Geraldine Hart, police commissioner of Suffolk County, New York, indicated last May at the president’s roundtable on MS-13 violence in Long Island that the entirety of the MS-13 crisis over the past few years is because of the UACs and that Long Island has it bad because it was the largest recipient of UACs in the nation. “MS-13 sustains itself by constantly recruiting new members, and particularly minors,” said Hart last May 23 with Trump in attendance. “MS-13 members recruit children placed in communities in Suffolk County through the UAC program.” She noted that since 2014, “4,965 UACs have been placed in Suffolk County, making it the largest recipient of UACs in the nation. While the vast majority of these children live law-abiding lives, many of them are susceptible to gang recruitment.”

This reflects the deep problem of criminal aliens coming across our border. It is true that there are a lot of known bad people who come through, but there are also a lot of troubled youth who might not have a paper trail flagged in our international databases, but are very much at risk, particularly when they come in such large numbers and settle in gang-saturated areas. Of all people, Rod Rosenstein explained this dynamic well at that same Long Island roundtable:

“We’re letting people in who are gang members. We’re also letting people in who are vulnerable. Many of these alien children, who have no parents, no family structure — we’re releasing them into communities where they’re vulnerable to recruitment by MS-13. And so some of these kids who come in without any gang ties develop gang ties as a result of the pressure that they face from people that they confront in the communities.”

None of these people are victims of a “severe form of trafficking,” and almost none of them are in the country without any adult relative, the two conditions for eligibility to be treated as a UAC. They are, in fact, self-trafficking themselves in order to reunite with other illegal aliens in this country! They are taking advantage of us, empowering the drug cartels, and serving as the fresh blood of the transnational gangs working for the cartels. They should be repatriated back to their home countries, but instead, we now have judges implementing a greater degree of amnesty than all of the legislative amnesties we’ve successfully defeated.

Thanks to the courts rewriting statutes to include the very evil the UAC statute was designed to combat, 98.2 percent of all Central American teens who came in fiscal year 2017 still remain in our communities.

Think about all of the avoidable crimes that are committed because we refuse to deny entry to or to deport these people. Now the legal system is illegally treating these people like American citizens in all aspects of criminal law. Many of them are released if local judges and sanctuary jurisdiction law enforcement believe the crime wasn’t severe enough. Newsday is reporting that the three stabbers already have swanky lawyers representing them who are claiming their clients are not MS-13 members and are peaceful and innocent.

While everyone is certainly entitled to due process for criminal convictions, there is a broader question to be answered here. We won’t know all the facts about this attack until there is a trial, but we do know they are here illegally. Why then were they not deported when the Suffolk County database had them flagged for being MS-13? Look at how clogged our criminal justice system gets because we refuse to deport the people we can before they commit crimes.

This is a growing trend. A month ago, six MS-13 members were indicted in Lynn, Massachusetts, for killing a boy they suspected was cooperating with law enforcement. They used such force, like “chopping wood,” that the knife was bent, according to prosecutors. According to prosecutors, “At least two of the six defendants have felony records. At least two of the six defendants were previously in immigration custody but were released and went on to commit … murder.” Why weren’t they deported, and why would a judge let them go? The Boston Herald reports that, in the case of at least one, according to the feds, the lawyer “succeeded in convincing an immigration court that he was not in a gang, was not violent, did not pose a threat to the public.”

Sound familiar?

Every illegal alien crime, by definition, is avoidable because we should be enforcing our laws and getting rid of the immigration magnets. But we now have a ubiquitous crisis of known criminal aliens who are let go and are allowed to continue ratcheting up the severity of their crimes. It’s bad enough that we are too weak on sentencing for Americans and so many bad people are on the streets. But when it comes to illegal alien crime, shouldn’t we all agree they should be immediately deported after committing their first crime?

This is why the border issue is not really about the border. It’s about all our communities. Most of the recent invaders are not staying near the border; they are passing through to other states, particularly in the East Coast. At this point, perhaps the only thing that will stop this travesty is when it arrives next door to where the political elites live. (For more from the author of “Pack of Ms-13 Illegal Aliens Released by Judge Stab 16-Year-Old” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

After 18 Employees Skip Work to Attend Immigration Rally, They Receive Brutal Lesson From Their Boss

By The Blaze. After 18 employees at a Tennessee-based painting company skipped work this week to attend a pro-immigration rally, they received a brutal lesson about right-to-work laws they won’t soon forget.

According to KTNV-TV, 18 employees at Nashville’s Bradley Coatings were fired after they informed their supervisors on Wednesday they were missing work the next day to attend the nationwide protest, “A Day Without Immigrants.”

The protest sought to show the significance that immigrants play in the U.S. workforce while protesting President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

However, on Thursday when the employees didn’t show up to work, they learned that they had been terminated. . .

He added, “I would tell [my boss] he was unfair, after working for them for so many years, giving him our best. They could not understand that it was just one day. We were going to make up that day on a Sunday, but they didn’t understand that, and it was not the best way. They didn’t give us an opportunity and just told us we were fired.” (Read more from “After 18 Employees Skip Work to Attend Immigration Rally, They Receive Brutal Lesson From Their Boss” HERE)

_________________________________________

Company Fires 18 Employees After They Participated in ‘a Day Without Immigrants’

By KTNV. A total of 18 people were fired from a Tennessee business after joining the nation-wide protest “A Day Without Immigrants.”

The 18 employees at Bradley Coatings, Incorporated in Nolensville, Tennessee told their supervisors on Wednesday they’d be taking part in the nationwide movement. Then, on Thursday, they were told they no longer had jobs.

“We are the team leaders directly under the supervisors and they informed us last night that we could not go back to work and the boss said we were fired,” one employee said. . .

“Tennessee is an employment-at-will state which basically means an employer can end your employment at any time without reason or cause. Of course there are a lot of different stipulations, civil rights issues that could stop them from doing that,” Department of Labor and Workforce Development spokesman, Chris Cannon said. (Read more from “Company Fires 18 Employees After They Participated in ‘a Day Without Immigrants'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Links Emerge Between Fusion GPS-Tied Group Connected to False Flag Operation

A nonprofit group linked to Fusion GPS and partially funded by George Soros worked in recent months with a technology company implicated in a scheme to use fake Russian bots during Alabama’s special Senate election.

The groups, the Democracy Integrity Project (TDIP) and New Knowledge, partnered before the 2018 midterms to track alleged Russian disinformation networks, a website the organizations collaboratively run shows.

Both organizations have links to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), which is investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election, as well as possible Trump campaign collusion.

SSCI provided New Knowledge with data from various social media companies as part of an investigation into Russian disinformation networks, according to a report New Knowledge released Dec. 17. Two days later, news broke that New Knowledge’s chief executive was involved in a self-described “false flag” operation in the special election for a Senate seat in Alabama, as was another staffer who was the lead author on the Senate report.

TDIP is also linked to the Senate Intelligence panel. Its founder, Daniel J. Jones, was previously a staffer for Democrats on SSCI. He was also in contact in early 2017 with Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the Democratic vice chairman of SSCI. As part of TDIP’s own Trump-Russia investigation, the group hired Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, the author of the anti-Trump dossier. (Read more from “Links Emerge Between Fusion GPS-Tied Group Connected to False Flag Operation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democratic Rep. Says She Knows the Real Secret Goal That Trump Wants, and It’s Not a Border Wall

Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes that a deal could not be made with President Donald Trump to reopen the government because his real secret goal was to clear the U.S. of all immigrants and people of color.

Jayapal enthusiastically agreed to Hayes’ claims about Trump’s true goal for the border wall while referring to a statement made about “white supremacy” by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

“Donald Trump is at the border,” said Hayes, “and shutting down the government over this entirely ridiculous enterprise because he almost certainly correctly thinks his political fortunes are dependent on the Steve Kings of the world and the people who love him.”

“People animated by bigotry and fear,” Hayes continued, “people who have come to view their identity as existentially under threat from desperate Honduran moms in flip flops. Those people cannot be appeased, because what they want is not policy, what they want is an ethnically pure America, and thats why this impasse can’t be solved in any normal deal-making terms.” . . .

“He actually could have gotten funding a couple of years ago,” she explained, “or a year ago, for a wall, it was part of a deal that was proposed, not all of us agreed with that deal, but it was proposed to him and he turned it down because his ultimate goal, as you said, to make America pure in the sense of not having immigrants, not having folks of color here, and shutting down every form of legal immigration.”

(Read more from “Democratic Rep. Says She Knows the Real Secret Goal That Trump Wants, and It’s Not a Border Wall” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ocasio-Cortez Campaign Just Slammed With a Fine

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 congressional campaign was fined by the state of New York for failing to provide the proper workers’ compensation coverage to campaign staffers.

“The employer did not have the required workers’ compensation coverage from March 31, 2018 to April 30, 2018,” Melissa Stewart, the spokeswoman for New York’s Workers Compensation Board, told The New York Daily News. “[It] was issued a final penalty of $1,500, which was paid.” . . .

The self-proclaimed Democratic socialist has been portraying herself as a champion for workers’ rights. During her campaign, she advocated for a $15-an-hour minimum wage and a Federal Jobs Guarantee because according to her website, “anyone who is willing and able to work shouldn’t struggle to find employment.” . . .

“Ocasio-Cortez’s desired ‘living wage’ of $15 an hour has been a living hell for many small business owners in New York, who’ve been unable to offset the cost through higher prices,” Employment Policies Institute Managing Director Michael Saltsman said in response to the closure. “It’s fine to mourn the impending closure of your former employer — it’s better to understand the misguided minimum-wage mandates that contributed to that closure.” (Read more from “Ocasio-Cortez Campaign Just Slammed With a Fine” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Worst Racism My Children Have Experienced Came From Black Peers

In December, McKenzie Adams, a fourth grader from U.S. Jones Elementary School in Demopolis, Alabama, despondent after relentless taunting by other black children for her relationship with a white child, hanged herself in her family’s home. Although suicides resulting from school bullying have sadly risen steadily over the years, McKenzie’s death spoke to me on a very personal level. . .

We knew that adopting two little girls (4 and 9) from the other side of the world into a family of two boys (4 and 2) wouldn’t be easy in terms of bonding and re-assimilating the family birth order structure, but it was the stuff like what little McKenzie Adams experienced that we didn’t see coming, and it quickly blindsided me. . .

As we chatted before we left the store, the pastor, a black woman, suddenly lowered her voice, became somber, and inquired as to how I was “immersing the girls in their culture.” I truly wasn’t sure what she meant, so I asked. . .

She then began to sermonize about how important it was for me to get the girls subscriptions to “black” magazines and to make sure and watch “black” movies and TV shows so they could see and relate to people of their color. She veritably assured me that, as a white woman, I couldn’t be expected to understand the “black experience” in America. I needed to be sure and make appropriate and relevant material accessible so they could better assimilate with black culture. . .

Discontent with my answer and intent upon pressing her point, she continued. She believed my thought process unfortunate because my “whiteness” couldn’t process the fact that the girls’ fate would always balance at the pinnacle of someone else’s prejudicial small-mindedness. It was up to me to make them vigilant of the discrimination that would surely come their way. (Read more from “The Worst Racism My Children Have Experienced Came From Black Peers” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Here’s the Altered Video of Trump That Got a News Staffer Fired

Post a doctored video of Trump on Twitter and you’ll probably end up getting more (left-wing) followers, but air one on live television and you’ll get fired.

That’s what appears to have happened to a staffer at Fox News affiliate Q13 in Seattle after the now-former employee aired what was clearly an altered video of President Trump giving his first ever address to the nation from the Oval Office on the issue of border security.

The video the staffer aired was altered to give Trump an overly-large mouth and to make him at one point push his tongue out in bizarre fashion. The colors of the video were also adjusted to make him look more orange. . .

A local radio station was tipped off about the altered video and produced a side-by-side comparison (see below).

“A listener to my program sent me a video that appears to show a deceptively edited video of President Trump’s speech from the Oval Office,” KTTH’s Todd Herman reported Thursday. “We performed a side-by-side comparison of the video from our listener, apparently taken by a smart phone recording of Q13, to the raw video of Trump’s speech from CNN. That comparison revealed the Q13 video creating a loop of the President licking his lips — making it seem bizarre and unbalanced — it also seems that someone distorted the President’s face and may have added an orange tone to his skin.”

(Read more from “WATCH: Here’s the Altered Video of Trump That Got a News Staffer Fired” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Republicans Join Dems to Push for New Gun Control Law

We’re just days into the 116th Congress, and congressional Democrats have already gotten the ball rolling on gun control with H.R. 8, also known as the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019,” which mandates so-called “universal” background checks for gun purchases.

Who made it “bipartisan”? A handful of Republicans: Reps. Brian Mast, Fla., Chris Smith, N.J., Peter King, N.Y., Fred Upton, Mich., and Brian Fitzpatrick, Penn.

In short, the legislation would require background checks to be performed for almost all firearms transactions with narrow exceptions for things like sales or transfers to family members. Proponents of the legislation claim that expanding the kinds of purchases that require a background check would keep guns from falling into the wrong hands, but the facts don’t really back that up in any meaningful way.

The first problem with that assumption is that the law is only going to affect the law-abiding to begin with. Around 80 percent of gun-related crimes are committed with illegally obtained hardware. Criminals with black-market or stolen guns already operate outside the constraints of the existing system and would continue to do so.

When at least 80 percent of the problem that you’re trying to solve wouldn’t be touched by the law you’re pushing as a solution, it isn’t really a workable solution to the problem; it’s legislative window dressing.

In addition, federal law already requires that background checks be conducted whenever a licensed dealer transfers a gun to someone who isn’t. Federal law also prohibits private sales across state lines unless they go through a federal licensee. This, too, will come with a background check.

(And before anyone brings up that oft-discussed “gun show loophole,” that’s a misnomer and a myth that only serves to show how little the gun control crowd understands gun laws and gun shows.)

Indeed, the only lawful gun sales where background checks do not occur are between private citizens of the same state in states that do not already require background checks for private sales. And these would be the only new territory to be targeted by making background checks “universal,” as the proposed legislation makes exceptions for intra-family transfers.

States have also been historically lax when it comes to reporting information to be added to the NICS database.

Last November, the National Rifle Association estimated that some seven million records were missing from the national database, based on past studies. A number that big probably includes records of felony convictions, illegal aliens, and diagnoses of severe mental illnesses and other such disqualifications.

Furthermore, no government action can predict future behavior. Background checks cannot catch someone who has never done anything to end up in the database, even if previous disqualifying events are properly reported, since they have no disqualifying events.

Instead, all it would do is create an added barrier for law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights by selling or purchasing firearms to other law-abiding citizens.

But why not try it anyway? After all, if the law isn’t inherently unconstitutional and might possibly stop just one person from getting a gun that they shouldn’t, then what harm would it do, aside from making private sales extremely difficult if not impossible?

This is where we have to address the cultural animus behind the proposed legislation. There’s always a push to “do something” about guns. That demand is always (or at least usually) followed the assurance that that “something” isn’t outright gun confiscation, though some lawmakers have become bold enough to suggest even that in recent years.

But what happens when the next version of “commonsense gun safety” fails to stop another bloody murder in Chicago or another mass shooting? Well, then we’ll just have to use the next atrocity to push for the next law, and so on and so forth until we’ve reached the actual endgame of the anti-gun activist cadre, which is a society in which private firearm ownership goes the way of the flintlock pistol.

Background check legislation would be incredibly ineffective at countering gun crime in the United States, but it would be very effective at making things more difficult for law-abiding gun owners. (For more from the author of “Republicans Join Dems to Push for New Gun Control Law” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE