Comprehensive Law Enforcement Survey Shows Overwhelming Opposition to Proposed Gun Control Legislation

95.7% oppose limiting magazine sizes. 91.5% oppose “assault weapon” bans. 80% say more armed citizens needed to stop mass shootings.

Police One:

In March, PoliceOne conducted the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation’s attention in recent weeks: gun control.

More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals took part in the survey, which aimed to bring together the thoughts and opinions of the only professional group devoted to limiting and defeating gun violence as part of their sworn responsibility.

Totaling just shy of 30 questions, the survey allowed officers across the United States to share their perspectives on issues spanning from gun control and gun violence to gun rights.

Breaking down the results, it’s important to note that 70 percent of respondents are field-level law enforcers — those who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis — not office-bound, non-sworn administrators or perpetually-campaigning elected officials.

1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.

3.) About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.

4.) Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions. Similarly, more than 61 percent said they would refuse to enforce such laws if they themselves were Chief or Sheriff.

5.) More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent). See enlarged image

6.) The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.

7.) More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.

8.) More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.

9.) More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.

10.) When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required. About 42 percent say it should be required for all weapons, with the remainder favoring training classes for certain weapons.

11.) While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.

Bottom Line Conclusions
Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.

In fact, many officers responding to this survey seem to feel that those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent criminals.

Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.

The officers patrolling America’s streets have a deeply-vested interest — and perhaps the most relevant interest — in making sure that decisions related to controlling, monitoring, restricting, as well as supporting and/or prohibiting an armed populace are wise and effective. With this survey, their voice has been heard.

 

 

 

Texas Public University Professor Forced Students to Create Anti-Second Amendment Propaganda

Not a few days go buy when we don’t see a story like this coming from our public schools.

Via Campus Reform:

Midwestern State University Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Betty Stewart confirmed to Campus Reform Friday the school has launched an investigation into professor Jennifer Yucus’ conduct after a student filed an official complaint on Thursday.

According to the complaint, obtained by Campus Reform, the professor compelled students in her graphic design class to create artwork opposing firearms on campus and opposing pro-gun legislation currently pending before the Texas state legislature.

The professor then used the artwork students created online to publicize an anti-gun petition entitled “MSU is anti-Concealed Carry on Campus” and on a now deleted Facebook page opposing firearms, says the complaint.

“On Monday, April 1, around 7 PM (class was 5:30 – 8:20), Jennifer Yucus, Assistant Professor of Graphic Art/Design, compelled students from her Computers For Artists class to advocate in favor of a political petition opposing firearms on campus, in opposition to a pair of bills currently before the Texas legislature, using personal art materials and MSU resources,” reads the complaint.

“Several of my classmates were uncomfortable with the assignment and either quietly or openly expressed this,” it continues. “Professor Yucus asked students to rationalize objections by thinking of it as a job from an employer (or words to that effect).”

The complaint adds that Yucus “did require all works to include the URL to the petition” she had created and adds that students were photographed while crafting the posters to give the illusion of youth support.

“Professor Yucus took photos of her students in the process of drafting and creating the posters, but did not say how these would be used,” says the complaint. “The posters were then hung in the hallways of the Fain Arts building, giving the impression of student support.”

Some of the photos later appeared on an anti-gun Facebook page that appeared to have been created by Yucus. The page appeared to have been deleted after the complaint was filed, but Campus Reform was able to capture the posted images before they were removed.

According to the complaint, Yucus used her official university-issued e-mail address to later forward a URL to her petition to the entire class.

State law in Texas appears to forbid professors at public universities from using their authority to compel others to advocate for political causes.

“A state officer or employee may not use official authority… to interfere with or affect the result of an election or nomination of a candidate or to achieve any other political purpose,” reads subsection C of 556.004 of Government Code, Title 5, entitled “Open Government, Ethics.”

 

IRS: We can read your emails without a warrant

This is a direct violation of the 4th Amendment.

The Hill:

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has claimed that agents do not need warrants to read people’s emails, text messages and other private electronic communications, according to internal agency documents.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request, released the information on Wednesday.

In a 2009 handbook, the IRS said the Fourth Amendment does not protect emails because Internet users “do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications.” A 2010 presentation by the IRS Office of General Counsel reiterated the policy.

Under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986, government officials only need a subpoena, issued without a judge’s approval, to read emails that have been opened or that are more than 180 days old.

Privacy groups such as the ACLU argue that the Fourth Amendment provides greater privacy protections than the ECPA, and that officials should need a warrant to access all emails and other private messages.

Traditionally, the courts have ruled that people have limited privacy rights over information they share with third parties. Some law enforcement groups have argued that this means they only need a subpoena to compel email providers, Internet service companies and others to turn over their customers’ sensitive content.

But in 2010, a federal appeals court ruled that police violated a man’s constitutional rights when they read his emails without a warrant.

Despite the court decision, U.S. v. Warshak, the IRS kept its email search policy unchanged in a March 2011 update to its employee manual, according to the ACLU.

Hidden Camera: Teacher Tells Students Republicans Are Racist Losers (video)

In watching this video you see almost every long debunked far left Democrat fallacy in the book, which he presents to students as fact.

Spreading his kind of racial animus is a tactic right out of the Frankfurt School of Marxism (communism). The goal, according to Frankfurt School teachings, is to spread cultural marxism via conflict theory. Pit people against each other via any difference that can be exploited; white vs black, rich vs poor, management vs labor, men vs women, urban vs suburban etc – in order to keep them fighting while the Marxists build an all powerful  leviathan state in the name of “bringing people together”.

A wise man once said, “Only a fool fights in a burning house”. The left keeps people fighting while they loot the burning house.

What is seen in this video is not as unusual to see in class as one might think. When I sat in class I didn’t let teachers get away with it. I helped publish a student newspaper and made it very clear that what is said in class is game for publication. That helped professors to behave themselves, at least while I was watching.

Campus Reform:

A professor at the University of Southern California (USC) appears to have used a fall semester 2012 political science class to deliver sustained and angered attacks on Republicans, who he characterized as old, white, racist, and “losers.”

In a 15 min. video secretly captured by USC student Tyler Talgo, political science Professor Darry Sragow also appears to endorse the illegal suppression of Republican votes.

“You lose their information on the election in the mail,” he suggested when a student asked him how to keep Republicans from voting. “I mean there is lots of ways to do it [SIC].”

A teaching assistant (TA), who also appeared to work for the university, then seemed to suggest Black Panthers could be placed at polling stations to intimidate Republican voters.

Rather than rebuking the TA, Sragow appeared to confirm the suggestion.

“Yeah, yeah,” he said. “You can do that.”

Neither a spokesperson for USC, or professor Sragow, responded to multiple requests from Campus Reform seeking comment.

While endorsing illegal techniques Sragow also accused the GOP of suppressing Democratic votes by supporting laws requiring voter I.D.

“Republicans are trying to prevent people of color and people of lower income from voting by requiring voter I.D.” he said.

Judicial Watch Sues State Department Over Benghazi Cover-up

Good.

Judicial Watch:

Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State seeking access to “all videos and photographs” depicting the Benghazi, Libya, Consulate between September 10 and September 13, 2012, the period leading up to, during, and immediately following the deadly attack that took the life of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Judicial Watch filed its lawsuit on February 25, 2013 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-00242)).  This is one of three Benghazi FOIA lawsuits being pursued by Judicial Watch.

Specifically, Judicial Watch seeks the following records pursuant to its December 19, 2012, FOIA request: “Any and all videos and photographs depicting U.S. Consulate facilities in Benghazi, Libya (including the Special Mission Compound and the Annex) between September 10, 2012, and September 13, 2012 that were provided to the Accountability Review Board (ARB) for Benghazi and/or to any individual member of the ARB.”

The State Department acknowledged receiving the Judicial Watch FOIA request on January 4, 2013, and was required by law to respond by February 4, 2013. As of the date of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the department had failed to produce any records responsive to the request, indicate when any responsive records will be produced, or demonstrated that responsive records are exempt from production.

On December 19, 2012, the Accountability Review Board (ARB) for Benghazi, convened by then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, released its report on the attack on the U.S. Consulate. According to ARB Chairman Ambassador Tom Pickering, the Board “reviewed thousands of documents and watched hours of video” during the course of its investigation.  The Obama administration also reportedly shared Benghazi video with certain members of Congress. The State Department, however, has refused to comply with the Judicial Watch FOIA request seeking access to these materials on behalf of the American people.

“It has now been more than five months since the attack on America’s Benghazi consulate, and the American people still don’t know basic facts about what actually occurred,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Any video or photos will tell us more about Benghazi than Obama administration lies and spin.  This latest stonewall shows that President Obama’s line, that his administration is the most transparent in history, is laughably false.”

Judicial Watch has a separate FOIA lawsuit seeking access to the controversial internal “speaking points” used by the Obama administration in the days following the attacks when administration officials advanced the false narrative that the attacks were inspired by a rudimentary Internet video perceived as anti-Muslim. Judicial Watch also sued the State Department for records detailing a nearly $400,000 contract awarded to a foreign firm for “Security Guards and Patrol Services” at the Benghazi Consulate prior to the deadly attack of September 11, 2012.

Editor to Giffords: A terrible injury is not a license to lie

The left has a long history of trotting out victims; those who will gladly use the victim card as a device to put politics over morality and truth in order to push an agenda most good people would otherwise never accept.

After observing how the far left politicized 9/11 this writer decided that he would never be intimidated into silence again by such underhanded tactics.

What politicization you ask? There are many examples, but the one that stands above the rest are the “four 9/11 widows” who claimed to speak for all 9/11 victims. These political operatives, often called the Jersey Girls, behaved as celebrities while engaging in the most histrionic demagoguery against President Bush. I remember one of them saying (paraphrasing):

It was President Bush’s fault that so many died on 9/11 because when we were under attack he was reading to school children. That’s where he was on the morning of 9/11.

These four women, opposed very vocally and often ridiculously, every action President Bush took to protect the nation and when called to back up their statements they would attack you for daring to be so insensitive to their victim-hood, as if these four political hacks were infallible.

The whole point of “the victim card” is to use the grief to make a political point while preventing anyone from responding. After the Jersey Girls wore out “their 15 minutes” with their antics Pulizer Prize winning journalist Dorothy Rabinowitz undressed the Jersey Girls in her famous piece in the Wall Street Journal.

A prominent Marxist once made the point clearly:

Freedom is a bourgeois prejudice. We repudiate all morality which proceeds from supernatural ideas or ideas which are outside the class conception. In our opinion, morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of the class war.

And this brings us to former Member of Congress Gabby Giffords who had this to say in a recent op-ed piece she wrote:

What they will do is create one fair system for all gun buyers, instead of the giant loophole we have now. Right now, we have one system where responsible gun owners take a background check — my husband, Mark, took one just last month, and it took 5 minutes and 36 seconds. I remember waiting a lot longer than that for the subway to take me to my office when I lived in New York City! And then we have a second system for those who don’t want to take a background check. Those people — criminals, or people suffering from mental illness, like the young man who shot me — can buy as many guns as they want on the Internet or at a gun show, no questions asked.

That doesn’t make sense. We know how to fix it — by establishing a universal background check system. And yet some of our elected officials are not listening. Some even say this legislation shouldn’t get a vote in the United States Congress.

Giffords clearly states that the young man who shot her, Jarrod Loughner, did not go through a back ground check. That is not true. Loughner most certainly did pass a back ground check and she well knows it, as it has been widely reported.

Giffords is lying and pointing this out is critically important for several reasons. Everyone who buys firearm from an exhibitor at a gun show goes through a back ground check. Private sales between collectors at gun shows who are not licensed dealers are rare. Instances of private collectors selling guns to genuine criminals are so rare that it is not able to be statistically measured reliably.

The first elephant in the room that Giffords is lying about and helping to paint a false picture of to help conceal is this – what she is calling a “universal back-ground check” is in reality a civilian gun registration scheme.  A way to know what honest civilians has what guns, so that the database can be used to data-mine those people for political purposes, up to and including eventual confiscation. Such people tend to be the political enemies of far left Democrats. See ATF Seeks ‘Massive’ Database of Gun Owner’s Personal Info: ‘Assets, Relatives, Associates and More’.

One newspaper printed such a list in New York solely for the purpose of smearing gun owners, violating their privacy and endangering them. Quite simply, there is no reason to believe that such data will not be abused. The Patriot Act has strong provisions against the abuse of the tools it granted government, but we have all seen what has happened in its application.

The second elephant in the room that Giffords is concealing is just why Jarrod Loughner was able to pass the back ground check and buy the handgun that he used.

The case of Jarrod Loughner is especially egregious as he had multiple contacts with university police and the sheriff’s department. The police reports show that they knew Loughner was dangerously mentally ill. Arizona has the law in place to have people forcibly evaluated and all police and/or the sheriff had to do was dial a 1-800 number to get it done. The sheriff’s department did not do so because Loughner’s mother is a supervisor in the county parks department. That same sheriff, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, fellow Democrat and friend of Gabby Giffords, publicly blamed Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin for the shooting.

If Sheriff Dupnik had simply done his job and used the tools the law gave him, Loughner would have been entered in to the national instant check system and would have failed his back ground check. He would also have had a real chance to get treatment for his severe mental incapacity.

If Giffords is genuinely concerned about the quality of back ground checks, where is her critique of Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who is as responsible for her terrible injuries as anyone? Where is her critique of the Obama Administration who is failing to enforce the back ground check system we have now? It stopped 70,000 ineligible people from getting guns, over 15,000 of which were felons trying to trick the system, and guess how many the Obama Administration prosecuted for trying to get a gun  – 44.

If Giffords is genuine in her concern for guns on the street, where is her critique of the Obama Administration who sent thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels in an effort to blame the following bloodshed to “make the case for more gun regulations“? The administration was outed by their own ATF agents.

Maria Gamez fast n furiousInstead, Giffords is a willing participant in what is nothing more than a political attack on 80 million innocent gun owners, most of whom oppose what President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership is doing. Giffords can be sure that the vast majority of those 80 million gun owners, Americans, including this very writer, prayed for her speedy recovery again and again.

Today some of the parents of the Sandy Hook shooting victims were taken to Capital Hill on the taxpayers dollar to lobby members of Congress to pass this registration scheme. Parents of victims who were not fooled and do not support the gun registration scheme were not invited to speak. Are their dead children somehow less precious? Why are they denied the same opportunity to speak to Congress?

Editor: To know Lady Thatcher was to love her…..

by Political Arena Editor Chuck Norton

margaret-thatcher

My hands tremble as I type this short memoriam to one of the greatest political heroes the world has ever known. Lady Thatcher was such a fine example. I was so fortunate to grow up in a world with Ronald Reagan, Lady Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, and Lech Walesa, the four great leaders who put an end to militant communism.

The moniker of “The Iron Lady” was given to her by the communists and was not meant to be complimentary, but she wore it as a shield. To know lady Thatcher was to love her. Those who are younger than Generation X have no idea what they have missed.

Lady Thatcher:

Last week, at Blackpool, the Labour Party made the bogus claim that it was “putting people first”. Putting people first?

Last week, Labour:

— voted to remove the right to a secret ballot before a strike

— voted to remove the precious right we gave to trade union members to take their union to a Court of Law.

Putting people first?

Last week Labour voted for the State to renationalise British Telecom and British Gas, regardless of the millions of people who have been able to own shares for the first time in their lives.

Putting people first?

They voted to stop the existing right to buy council houses, a policy which would kill the hopes and dreams of so many families.

Labour may say they put people first; but their Conference voted to put Government first and that means putting people last.

What the Labour Party of today wants is:

— housing—municipalised

— industry—nationalised

— the police service—politicised

— the judiciary—radicalised

— union membership—tyrannised

— and above all—and most serious of all—our defenses neutralized.

Never!

Lech Walesa comments via AFP:

Staunchly anti-communist Margaret Thatcher was key in hastening the fall of the Iron Curtain, Poland’s former president and anti-communist freedom icon Lech Walesa said Monday, hailing the late former British leader, AFP reported.

“She was a great person. She did a great deal for the world, along with (late US president) Ronald Reagan, pope John Paul II and Solidarity, she contributed to the demise of communism in Poland and Central Europe,” an emotional Walesa told AFP.

“I’m praying for her,” the founder of the anti-communist Solidarity trade union said.

Lady Thatcher’s legacy:

Lady Thatcher’s stand against socialism from her final appearance before Parliament as Prime Minister:

Lady Thatcher in battle against Socialists:

Thatcher makes a brilliant point on Keynesian economic theory which has proven so destructive time and time again (1:35), “…what he was saying was If we all spend more than we’ve got we shall all be very rich. It was always a very stupid sentiment.”

Lady Thatcher’s eulogy at Ronald Reagan’s national funeral service:

ATF Seeks ‘Massive’ Database of Personal Info: ‘Assets, Relatives, Associates and More’

In light of the fact that the Obama Administration is pushing for civilian gun registration, this news becomes even more disturbing. So much for the “right to privacy”.

CNS News:

A recent solicitation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) reveals that the agency is seeking a “massive” online database capable of pulling up individuals’ personal information, connections and associates.

On March 28, ATF posted the notice on FedBizOpps.gov, entitled “Investigative System.”  The solicitation was updated on April 5 with a few minor changes.

The document says that the system will be utilized by staff “to provide rapid searches on various entities for example; names, telephone numbers, utility data and reverse phone look-ups, as a means to assist with investigations, and background research on people, assets and businesses.”

The system is described as a “massive online data repository system that contains a wide variety of data sources both historically and current that can be utilized in support of investigations and backgrounds.”

The overview of the solicitation states:

Staff will utilize “a number of internal databases as well as external sources to provide timely and relevant information and intelligence products to law enforcement agencies at the federal, state and local levels.”

The system “provides a means to rapidly check records across the country” and is “necessary in assisting investigators, agents and analyst to find people, their assets, relatives, associates and more.”

The ATF says they will use this system to provide information to Intelligence Analysts, Special Agents, Inspectors, Financial Investigators and Law Enforcement.

The investigative system will allow ATF to “obtain exact matches from partial source data searches such as, incomplete social security numbers, address, VIN numbers, etc.”

The system will also have the ability to “link structured and unstructured data to find connection points between two or more individuals.”

Number of TSA Agents fired for theft…

Via Greg Davis:

If you travel by commercial air, you might be interested in these stats.

Nothing quite compares to government employees with badges and guns who rip you off while you are your most vulnerable.

Top airports across USA for TSA employees fired for theft:

1. Miami International Airport (29)

2. JFK International Airport (27)

3. Los Angeles International Airport (24)

4. Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (17)

5. Las Vegas-McCarren International Airport (15)

6+7. Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and New York-Laguardia Airport (14 each)

8,9+10. Newark Liberty, Philadelphia International, and Seattle-Tacoma International airports (12 each)

11. Orlando International Airport (11)

12+13. Houston-George Bush Intercontinental Airport and Salt Lake City International Airport (10 each)

14. Washington Dulles International Airport (9)

15+16. Detroit Metro Airport and Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport (7)

17+18+19. Boston-Logan International, Denver International and San Diego International airports (6)

20. Chicago O’Hare International Airport (5)

90 million drop out of labor force, lowest since 1979

So what does this make the real unemployment rate, our guess is at least 19%. Yet the elite media keeps saying that the economy is improving as is the job market, none of which is true.

Zerohedge:

Things just keep getting worse for the American worker, and by implication US economy, where as we have shown many times before, it pays just as well to sit back and collect disability and various welfare and entitlement checks, than to work .The best manifestation of this: the number of people not in the labor force which in March soared by a massive 663,000 to a record 90 million Americans who are no longer even looking for work. This was the biggest monthly increase in people dropping out of the labor force since January 2012, when the BLS did its census recast of the labor numbers. And even worse, the labor force participation rate plunged from an already abysmal 63.5% to 63.3% – the lowest since 1979! But at least it helped with the now painfully grotesque propaganda that the US unemployment rate is “improving.”

People not in labor force:

Labor participation rate:

John McCain: I Don’t Understand Why GOP Would Filibuster Senate Gun Control Bill (video)

Oh really Senator? Let me explain it to you…

Well for starters it sets up civilian gun registration, which history shows not only is useless at crime fighting, but is used to disarm the citizens before a disaster. It bans certain guns, in such a way that goes directly against the Supreme Court rulings in Heller and Miller.

Combine such a list with current data mining in the government and you have a new 4th Amendment problem as well. What ever happened to the right to privacy?

Senator McCain asks “why can’t we have an open debate (and simple majority vote implied) about this?” The answer is obvious even to him:

1 – Human rights are not subject to majority vote. It says “shall not be infringed” for a reason.

2 – Politicians are not honest brokers when debating most any issue. What they are calling “universal back ground checks” is really civilian gun registration. All while they try to sell to the masses that most people go to a gun show to buy guns without a back ground check, when that simply is not the case.

While talking about “back ground checks” for mental health, the left has and continues to oppose inserting more of these records into the current national instant check system. The left also opposes mandatory evaluations for those who are dangerously mentally ill; actually arguing that people “have a right to be mentally ill”.

The left refuses to enforce the gun laws we have now against genuine criminals. Chicago has the lowest gun crime enforcement rate and the highest gun crime. That is not an accident. However, when the left has a chance to go after an honest citizen who makes a technical violation of a gun law without criminal intent he is prosecuted with zeal, unless of course he is politically well connected.

Speaking of not debating as an honest broker, in the budget battle the Democrats have redefined the term “balanced” in the budget to mean “more tax increases fewer spending cuts and more spending elsewhere” rather than a budget that does not spend more than it takes in. When politicians stoop to this level of dishonesty any debate becomes a platform and tool for the lying politician.

And to think somehow John McCain was able to become the Republican Presidential Nominee.

Erin Morgart’s Washington Examiner Interview

This writer s very fortunate to be friends with three of the most successful and beautiful  fitness trainers in the world, Lori Hendry (pic), Christine Lakatos (pic), and Erin Morgart (pic). They are all brilliant, traditional in their point of view and influential in political circles.

Erin Morgart

Our pal Erin Morgart was interviewed at The Washington Examiner by Steve Contorno and we are happy to bring that to you:

Morgart is a model and the reigning Ms. United Nations USA, as well as Mrs. Galaxy Virginia International 2012. She is also a certified trainer who was voted one of the top 10 fitness trainers by FitTV.

It’s the time of the year when people have made New Year’s resolutions to get in shape. What can people do to stick to their goals?

For people not to get discouraged, having an accountability workout partner is key. That way you can stay on track and keep each other in check. I have several clients who meet with me once a week, and that’s just to do vitals, blood pressure, weight and body fat. You have to look at it as a lifestyle change. It’s not the next four months or six months, but a new way of living. It’s eating to live and not living to eat. Find a group and find that support system that will help them in check.

Is there a trick for people who want to know what kind of workout can help them achieve their goals?

It helps to find someone that you want to look like, you ask them what they’re doing and where they’re doing it. … You find that out and you emulate what they do.

How important is it for people to have a healthy lifestyle from a young age?

When I was in Hawaii, I also worked with a lot of young people and pediatricians. They had kids that had been prescreneed for diabetes, and the biggest thing I heard from parents was “I don’t have time for this.” It starts with the parents and the families. They need to break bad behaviors and join the YMCA, and then it becomes a family thing.

 

The Truth About “Universal Background Checks” On Gun Sales

By Political Arena Editor Chuck Norton

UPDATEATF Seeks ‘Massive’ Database of Personal Info: ‘Assets, Relatives, Associates and More’

UPDATEComprehensive Law Enforcement Survey Shows Overwhelming Opposition to Proposed Gun Control Legislation

UPDATESenate Universal Background Check Bill Designed To Land You In Prison

UPDATEComprehensive Law Enforcement Survey Shows Overwhelming Opposition to Proposed Gun Control Legislation

UPDATE – Missouri Democrat political appointees illegally hand over all CCW information of citizens in the state to the Social Security Administration and the ATF and lied about it until caught – LINK.

The Obama Administration has admitted that the only way to have what they are erroneously calling a “universal background check” is to have total gun registration. The eventual purpose for such registration schemes is confiscation.

The left says that they do not want to take away guns from citizens. Fine, if you don’t want to take them than you don’t need to know what I have.

The left has always opposed putting mental health records in the current instant background check system called NICS (a system that the NRA pioneered and the left opposed).

Just a few months before the shooting there was a bill in Connecticut that would have allowed family and police to have someone forcibly evaluated for 48 hours – the left was able to defeat the bill. The ACLU said that people have a right to be mentally ill (no kidding).

The shooters mother was trying to get her son committed against his will and the political left stopped it from happening.

In the case of James Holmes and Jarrod Loughner, they had contacts with police and the police knew they were dangerously mentally ill and they refused to call it in. All of the laws in the world are useless when the police  fail to utilize them.

[Editor’s Note: In the case of Jarrod Loughner who committed the Gabby Giffords shooting, Loughner had multiple contacts with university police and the sheriff’s department. The police reports show that they knew Loughner was dangerously mentally ill. Arizona has the law in place to have people forcibly evaluated. All they had to do was dial a 1-800 number to get it done. The sheriff’s department did not do so because Loughner’s mother is a supervisor in the county parks department. That same sheriff is the one who came out to blame Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin for the shooting.]

Speaking of background checks, How about the Obama Administration enforce the back ground check system we have now.  It stopped 70,000 ineligible people from getting guns, over 15,000 of which were felons trying to trick the system, and guess how many the Obama Administration prosecuted for trying to get a gun  – 44.

Obama lets 15,000 felons WALK and then says he needs to restrict you and me? Give me a break.

Why is it that Chicago has the worst gun crime and the lowest enforcement of gun laws against criminals? It is no accident.

The simple truth is this, Joe crack head with a .25 or an untreated paranoid schizophrenic with a stolen gun is not a threat to a leviathan state, good people with the ability to defend their freedom with effective means are.

Idiot Of The Year: Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) (VIDEO)

ep. Diana DeGette (D-CO)
Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO)

Anti-self defense zealot Congressman Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) tells a senior citizen who is concerned about self defense that he is probably going to die anyways. But the stupidity doesn’t stop there….

Congresswoman Degette has been a primary sponsor of federal gun ban legislation, legislation she quite obviously knows nothing about:

You heard that right… when asked how a ban on magazines holding more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing gun violence, DeGette said:

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

She has no idea that a magazine can be reloaded.

It gets better, when blasted by the media and blogs over her foolishness she corrects her gaffe with yet another gaffe. The Denver Post reports:

“The congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,” Johnson said.

Yes you read that right. Even after having a chance to check, she still does not understand that ammunition clips (which are different from magazines) are also re-loadable, as anyone who has ever handled a firearm knows very well. It is also apparent that no one on her staff under stands that either.

More details at TWITCHY.

UPDATE: Colion Noir responds:

Senator Ted Cruz: Obama Admin Admits “Universal Back Ground Checks” Really A Gun Registration Scheme (VIDEO)

Senator Ted Cruz: The Obama administration has admitted that whet they are calling  “Universal Back Ground Checks” is really a gun registration scheme.

Gun registration only has one purpose as history has proved that gun registries have no impact on gun crime. That purpose is confiscation from civilians.

Colion Noir responds:

Communist Terrorist Who Killed Three Police Officers Given Professorship At Columbia (video)

And just before she was given the professorship she was “honored” by New York University.

We have been reporting the repeated and unending idiocy coming from the public education sector for some time now. We have more to report when time permits.

Study: Obamacare To Increase Claims Costs 32 Percent. White House Response Misleading…

By Chuck Norton

This is what happens when you add 21 new taxes to healthcare and insurance, 20,000 pages of new regulations (so far) and hundreds of new mandates on insurance, many of which make no sense.

The IRS estimates that the cheapest Obamacare approved health plan available in 2016 (to avoid the penalty) will cost $20,000.

In bold face below is the administration’s response to this study and what they say is just plain dishonest. Why?

The Obama Administration is trying to confuse people on cost vs price. A small percentage of Americans will have their skyrocketing health insurance premiums partially subsidized by the government, but while that may bring down the price of the premium, the actual cost of the premiums and the rising cost of the claims due to the taxes and regulations still skyrockets.

In this case price does not equal cost. For example: If your son goes to the store to buy a Hot Wheels car that costs $3.00 and your son only has $2.00, if you give him the extra dollar to pay for it, the cost of the toy car is still $3.00.

The idea of the subsidy making insurance affordable is also misleading because those who will be able to qualify to get help paying their premiums, will still not be able to afford their portion of the insurance premium because the cost of the insurance will be so high – subsidized or not.

This very writer’s employer subsidized health insurance premium went from about $30.00 a month to $267.00 and I make too much money to qualify for a subsidy. The poor simply cannot afford to pay it.

The other misleading statement from the Obama Administration is that some people can go on the state insurance exchange and get the state exchange to pay for part of their insurance premium. Setting aside the cost does not equal price fact we explained above, many states are not participating in the exchange. Why? Because after the first three years of Obamacare the states have to pay the subsidized portion of the rising premiums themselves which state after state has made very clear will bankrupt them (assuming that the poor would have the money to sign up and pay for their part of the estimated $20,000 per year premium).

AP/Fox News:

Medical claims costs — the biggest driver of health insurance premiums — will jump an average 32 percent for Americans’ individual policies under President Obama’s overhaul, according to a study by the nation’s leading group of financial risk analysts.

The report could turn into a big headache for the Obama administration at a time when many parts of the country remain skeptical about the Affordable Care Act. The estimates were recently released by the Society of Actuaries to its members.

While some states will see medical claims costs per person decline, the report concluded the overwhelming majority will see double-digit increases in their individual health insurance markets, where people purchase coverage directly from insurers.

The disparities are striking. By 2017, the estimated increase would be 62 percent for California, about 80 percent for Ohio, more than 20 percent for Florida and 67 percent for Maryland. Much of the reason for the higher claims costs is that sicker people are expected to join the pool, the report said.

The report did not make similar estimates for employer plans, the mainstay for workers and their families. That’s because the primary impact of Obama’s law is on people who don’t have coverage through their jobs.

The administration questions the design of the study, saying it focused only on one piece of the puzzle and ignored cost relief strategies in the law such as tax credits to help people afford premiums and special payments to insurers who attract an outsize share of the sick. The study also doesn’t take into account the potential price-cutting effect of competition in new state insurance markets that will go live on Oct. 1, administration officials said.

“It’s misleading to look at only some of the provisions of the law because, taken together, the law will reduce costs,” said Health and Human Services spokeswoman Erin Shields Britt.

But a prominent national expert, recently retired Medicare chief actuary Rick Foster, said the report does “a credible job” of estimating potential enrollment and costs under the law, “without trying to tilt the answers in any particular direction.”

NBER: CRA and other leftist policies lead to mortgage collapse

Those who are regular readers of Political Arena are not surprised by this as this writer has penned over a dozen articles on this very subject.

The piece below is certainly written with a partisan attitude, but in this case the facts justify the arguments within the article. Multiple analysis from the New York Times, Dr. Thomas Sowell, The Wall Street Journal, Investors Business Daily and many others have come to this same conclusion as the evidence is simply overwhelming.

UPDATE – More from IBD:
A1BigCRA_121221.png.cms

Robert Moon:

A new study from the widely respected National Bureau of Economic Research released this week has confirmed beyond question that the left’s race-baiting attacks on the housing market (the Community Reinvestment Act–enacted under Carter, made shockingly more aggressive under Clinton) is directly responsible for imploding the housing market and destroying the economy.

The study painstakingly sorted through failed home loans that caused the housing market collapse and identified an overwhelming connection between them and CRA mortgages.

Again, let’s review:

-President Bush went to Congress repeatedly for years warning them that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were going to destroy the economy (17 times in 2008 alone). Democrats continuously ignored him, shut down his proposals along party lines and continued raiding the institutions for campaign contributions on their way down.

-John McCain also co-sponsored urgently critical reforms that would have prevented the housing market collapse, but Democrats shut that down as well, along party lines, and even openly ridiculed anyone who suggested reforms were necessary…to protect their taxpayer-funded campaign contributions as the economy raced uncontrollably toward the cliff.

-No one was making bad loans to unqualified people until Democrats came along and threatened to drag banks into court and have them fined and branded as racists if they didn’t go along with the left’s Affirmative Action lending policies…all while federally insuring their losses. Even the New York Times warned in the late 1990s that Democrats continuing to force banks into lowering their standards would lead to this exact catastrophe.

-Obama himself is even on the record personally helping sue one lender (Citibank) into lowering its lending standards to include people from extremely poor and unstable areas, which even one of the left’s favorite blatantly partisan “fact-checkers,” Snopes, admits (while pretending to ‘set the record straight’).

-Even The New York Times admitted that there is “little evidence” of any connection between the “Republican” deregulation measures Obama blames, like the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (signed into law by a Democrat), and the collapse of the housing market.

[Political Arena Editor’s Note: The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed almost unanimously]