A wise and good sheriff is lectured by fools

The Associated Press is reporting that Douglas County (Oregon) Sheriff John Hanlin told CNN on Friday that his position on gun control [this wise sheriff supports gun rights] had not shifted following Thursday’s shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, which is in a politically conservative region west of the Cascade Range.

He spoke out against state and federal gun control legislation last year, telling a legislative committee that mandating background checks for private, person-to-person gun sales would not prevent criminals from getting firearms.

Hanlin also sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden in 2013, after a shooter killed 20 children and six adults at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school. Hanlin said he and his deputies would refuse to enforce new gun-control restrictions “offending the constitutional rights of my citizens.”

The community, where people like to hunt deer, elk and bear, echoes his push to protect gun rights.

“I carry to protect myself — the exact same reason this happened,” said Casey Runyan, referring to the Thursday’s shooting. Runyan carries a Glock 29 automatic pistol everywhere he goes.

Retired U.S. Army nurse Donice “Maggie Rose” Smith, who also hosts a talk show on Internet radio, said she and her husband, a retired Army captain, chose Douglas County for their retirement because of a low crime rate and strong local support for First and Second Amendment rights.

J.C. Smith said barring people from carrying guns on campus made it particularly vulnerable to a “lone wolf” attack.

“With current world events, (armed people) would keep the ground safer,” he said.

The gun control mafia is out to get Sheriff Hanlin for his comments in support of gun rights.  If you put “Sheriff John Hanlin” into a Google search the first two pages of hits, approximately 20 news stories, all castigate Sheriff Hanlin for his stance on gun rights. The Brady Campaign to prevent enable and facilitate gun violence has called for Sheriif Hanlin’s ouster . Salon.com says, “This is why the gun nuts win: An Oregon sheriff’s nutty conspiracy theories explains the GOP’s impotence. The fantasy lives of gun lovers, such as Oregon sheriff John Hanlin, are why we can’t address gun violence.”

Google’s algorithms are designed to make it appear as though no right-minded person supports gun rights. Maybe it’s just that supporters of gun rights don’t whine as much as gun control fanatics.

Logic has to be abandoned, and all attempts at reason fail. The fact that the active shooter is only stopped by someone else with a gun does not seem to them to be worthy of consideration.

If a good guy with a gun had been on the campus of Umpqua Community College lives could have been saved. The real “nuts,” the real antisocial psychopaths, are the gun control zealots who seem to relish every opportunity to dance in the blood of victims.

Oregon law does not prohibit guns on college campuses. It was the Umpqua Community College’s own policy rule that prevented even their security personnel from being armed.  I’m waiting for the day when those who turn their premises into free fire kill zones for freaks to roam to be sued for the terrible damages they enable.

The final toll this time is 9 dead, 7 injured.

The Parallels between Obama and Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan

AN ARMY OF MCCLELLANS The Syria Mess and the Pentagon’s Serial Failures

The pathetic failure of the Pentagon’s efforts in Syria indicate that if anything, this culture of self-congratulation and failure is getting more entrenched. An extensive autopsy of the now-infamous Syria training program in the Wall Street Journal today has plenty of damning details about the White House’s lack of decisiveness and micromanagement.

The U.S. is running a vast, multi-country war effort that has become unhinged from any serious strategic vision, and we have a military system in which the commanders who see the futility and try to do something about it (and there are plenty) are sidelined. Go along to get along is the way things work in Obama’s Pentagon, and both the White House and the Congress are more interested in making the military look pretty on the parade ground than making it perform effectively in the combat zone.

The President and the political overseers in Congress have made their priorities clear: You can persist with strategies that don’t work for years and still get steadily promoted up the ladder as long as you jump through hoops about integrating women and gays into more military roles. There’s nothing wrong with those goals. Integrating the armed services racially was once attacked by traditionalists as a step that would destroy military cohesion, but it’s made both the U.S. and our armed services much stronger over time. But the essence of military leadership (and effective civilian oversight) is to get the combat missions done with the lowest possible cost and loss of life.

The above is all good commentary except the attempt to equate the ending of racial segregation in the military with how the military deals with women and gays, which is ridiculous. They are not analogous in any way.

Turkey Is in Serious Trouble — The country has seen periods of turmoil before. But this time may be different.

The source of Turkey’s dangerous polarization is [Turkey’s former Prime Minister and now de facto “President,” Recep Tayyip] Erdogan himself. Erdogan has won successive elections since 2002, and built a cult of personality, as a kind of authoritarian underdog, portraying himself as a victim who is forced to crack down harshly on those whose “conspiracies” undermine his authority. On this basis, he has successfully targeted and politically brutalized the secular Turkish military, businesses, liberals, the media, Jews, left-wing voters, Alevis, and now the Kurds.

Combined with the story of Turkey’s economic success, this narrative has contributed to Erdogan’s enduring, if shrinking, popularity. And though he stepped down as prime minister and AKP leader in August 2014 due to his party’s term limits, he has continued to run Turkey as president from behind the scenes. As a result, the country is on the verge of a constitutional crisis: It is a parliamentary democracy per its charter, with the prime minister as head of government responsible for running the country, but it looks more and more like a de facto presidential system, with Erdogan at the helm. The AKP won about 40 percent of the vote in the last election, and Erdogan himself retains significant support from Turks who identify with his humble roots and social conservatism. Conversely, the nearly 60 percent of the electorate that voted for anti-AKP parties in the June 7 elections, including a demonized and alienated opposition, will not support his efforts to change the constitution and give himself more power.

And violence is increasingly part of this hazardous split. The Erdoganist camp is turning to vigilantism to “defend Erdogan.” On September 7, for example, a pro-AKP mob raided the offices of Hurriyet, Turkey’s most popular and influential daily, setting it on fire in retaliation for Hurriyet’s supposedly unsympathetic coverage of the president. Though Erdogan’s opponents are divided politically among different parties, any of them could strike back in this climate—witness the worrisome rise of formerly dormant far-left militant groups and attacks by the PKK.

There is a strong analogy between what Obama has done to America and what Erdogan has done to Turkey. I guess this explains why Obama considers Erdogan his best buddy.

Anti-gunners hoisted with own petard

Glenn Reynolds:

In 2012, Room for Debate asked ”Is the Gun Lobby Invincible?” Since then, the answer has turned out to be “yeah, pretty much.” And the reason is trust.

Is the gun lobby still invincible? Yeah, pretty much. The reason is trust. And if you want more trust, police and politicians must be more trustworthy.

According to a recent Pew poll, more Americans support gun rights than gun control. That represents a significant shift over the situation a few decades ago. And I believe the reason is that people don’t trust the government to protect them anymore, and, in fact, that they don’t trust the government in general.

To feel safe in a society where only the police have guns, you have to trust the police. But in post-Ferguson America, trust in police is at a 22-year low. (Paradoxically, many of those criticizing police for brutality and abuse also support gun control, and appear oblivious to the inherent contradictions.) [emphasis added]

And, if you’re at all a gun rights supporter, to support “reasonable” gun control measures you have to trust politicians who say they only want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies, not confiscate guns from everyone. That’s hard to do when President Obama — who said in 2008 “I won’t take your gun away” — now says that Australia, with its draconian program of gun confiscation, is a good model.

So if you want more gun control, you need more trust. And if you want more trust, police and politicians must be more trustworthy. Good luck with that!

If you want a society where only criminals have guns and you don’t trust the police, and this is what you want, you’re nuts. I’ve always found that I’m better off relying on myself to get what I need and to stay safe instead of waiting for others to act. Funny how that works.

Illustrating Chicago Values

Screen Shot 2015-10-03 at 8.02.47 AMIllustrating the values held by the politicos in Obama’s hometown.

Why isn’t Obama talking about all the black homicide victims in Chicago? Why isn’t he talking about all the draconian gun laws in Chicago that don’t seem to make any difference to the mass carnage on the streets of Chicago?  Why isn’t he talking about the unholy alliance of Chicago politicians and Chicago street gangs? Why isn’t he talking about the Sinaloa Cartel that uses Chicago as its main drug distribution hub? Why does he incessantly use mass shootings as a a political foil, almost giddily it seems?

These questions all answer themselves.

Note that the table at left only accounts for homicide victims and the race of assailant only accounts for those incidents where an arrest has been made.

The murder clearance rate in Chicago is less than 24%.

See more illustrations of Obama values at heyjackass.com.

Go-to-meeting Sunday not what it used to be

The assimilation of mainline Protestant denominations has been unquestionably disastrous. It has all but extinguished their witness of the gospel while gutting their congregations. They are, by and large, no longer anything more than spiritually themed social clubs and lecture series that apply a patina of the eternal to otherwise worldly communities. Their reason for existing—salvation!—now abandoned, these churches will survive only as long as identifying as a Christian has social cachet.

Secularism only subjugates. By definition it permits nothing superior to or on par with itself in a culture or community. This is, in part, why secularism and liberalism, classically understood, make such a dysfunctional couple: In the Trojan Horse of “neutrality,” secularism is welcomed into liberalism, then while we’re asleep they ransack the churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples. The result is a desiccated, uniform, and illiberal public square. —- Brandon McGinley at the Federalist

Secular liberalism long ago invaded and conquered the mainstream protestant churches. Our grandparents would not recognize anything that exists there today and certainly would not approve. For them going to church on Sunday was meant to keep oneself on the straight path of a good life, not simply a meeting of misfits bent on destruction of all traditional social mores and restraints.

Matthew 7:1-3 counsels to “Judge not lest ye be judged,” but liberals have always considered the Christian church to be too “judgmental.” When someone named Ed Stetzer tried to examine the reasons for flagging church attendance (probably no more than 20% of Americans attend church these days) the Huffington Post angrily responded this way: “I’ve got news for you, Mr. Stetzer, there are scores of people who have left the church, not because they possess some phony or inferior faith, as you would like to believe, but precisely because they do not want to be around judgmental people like you.”

Matthew 7:1-3 does not, at least in my way of seeing these things, mean that you can never judge the actions of other people, only that you must do so with mercy, restraint and wisdom. Above all it seems to say that if you endeavor to conform your conduct to the same standards to which you know you will be judged, you will be living life according to Micah 6:8 which counsels us to “love mercy, do justice and go humbly with God.”

You can judge for yourself on that. Here is the rest of Matthew 7:1-3, from the King James text:

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

I’m in the 80% that doesn’t attend church anymore. The reason is pretty simple. I looked for my church one day, and it was gone.

The racist roots of American gun control laws

The Oregon shooting today makes this video more relevant. It exposes the racist history of American gun control laws

All you need to know about the Oregon mass shooting

Up to 15 dead, many more injured. From the LA Times:

Joe Olson, the former president of the school, told the Associated Press that the school has only one security officer on duty at a time, and that person isn’t armed.

It’s a gun-free zone.

If there had been 20 such “security officers” that were unarmed they probably couldn’t have stopped this shooting. But just one good person with a gun could have.

This won’t stop until this country stops denying others the natural right of self defense. It’s still true that only one mass shooting [Gabby Giffords, Tucson] has ever occurred in a place that was not a gun-free zone. That one was stopped by a lawfully armed citizen, although he never drew his gun. He tackled the shooter and that ended it. There should be no such thing as a gun free zone for anyone who has passed a background check, got training, has knowledge of the laws that apply, knows how to properly conduct themselves, and been certified to carry a concealed firearm. The only exception should be where even cops don’t carry, such as in jails.

I think Louisiana has two levels of CCW permits, the higher one involving more training and allowing carry in more places. I like that idea.

Chicago sees deadliest September in 13 years

14 shot in 15 hours, 5 of them fatally.  Chicago Tribune on Monday:

In all, 14 people had been shot, six fatally, over a 15-hour period. In the waning days of the month, Chicago had already recorded 60 homicides, the city’s deadliest September since 2002, according to a Tribune analysis. In fact, September has had more homicides than any other month this year, even more than the traditionally violent summer months. Perhaps not coincidentally, the month has been one of the warmest Septembers in years.

The burst of violence came after two consecutive weekends in which more than 50 people were shot for the first time in the four years that the Tribune has been tracking shootings. And in August, more than 40 were shot on four consecutive weekends.

In separate remarks, a clearly frustrated Mayor Rahm Emanuel and police Superintendent Garry McCarthy both emphasized their long-held beliefs that the proliferation of guns and lax gun laws are to blame for much of the violence.

At an unrelated press conference, the mayor lamented how “gangbangers can get access to guns at will” and that violence “happens with a frequency that is unacceptable.”

“I will probably regret what I say because I am angry at what happened here,” Emanuel said. “And I think I speak for everybody who believes that enough is enough.”

In the two mass shootings alone Monday night and early Tuesday, a total of 10 people were shot, five fatally. Those took place in adjacent neighborhoods in the city’s Deering police district, which has seen a sharp increase in shooting incidents so far this year. Through Sunday, there had been 129 shooting incidents, up nearly 75 percent from 74 in the year-earlier period.

Maybe it’s time to end the unholy alliance between the gangs and Chicago politicians. And this isn’t helping: Chicago is a major drug distribution route for the Sinaloa cartel.

Obama mourning the loss of his patsy in the House

Obama loses a patsy

Obama loses a patsy

Thomas Sowell says Good Riddance!:

Speaker Boehner had a tough hand to play, given the internal splits among House Republicans. But Boehner’s biggest problem was Boehner. And it is a recurring Republican problem.

Nothing epitomized Boehner’s wrong-headedness like an occasion when he emerged from the White House, after a conference with President Obama and others, to face a vast battery of microphones and television cameras.

Here was a golden opportunity for Speaker Boehner to make his case directly to the American people, unfiltered by the media. Instead, he just walked over to the microphones and cameras, briefly expressed his disgust with the conference he had just come from, and then walked on away.

Surely Boehner knew, going into this White House conference, that it could fail. And, surely, he knew that there would be an opportunity immediately afterwards to present his case to the public. But, like so many Republican leaders over the years, he seemed to have no sense of the importance of doing so — or for the time and efforts needed to prepare for such an opportunity beforehand.

Whoever the next Speaker of the House is, someone should have a plaque made up to put on his desk — a plaque reading: TALK, DAMMIT!

If the political situation in Washington is such that many of the expectations of Republican voters cannot be met, then at least take the time and trouble to spell that out in plain language to the public.

Maybe the smug consultants in Washington don’t think the public can understand. But Ronald Reagan won two landslide elections by doing what subsequent Republican leaders disdained to do.

In between, he accomplished what was called “the Reagan revolution” without ever having a majority in both Houses of Congress. He could go over the heads of Congressional Democrats and explain to the public why certain legislation was needed — and once he won over the voters, Democrats in Congress were not about to jeopardize their reelection chances by going against them.

One of the secrets of Reagan’s political success was a segment of the population that was called “Reagan Democrats.” These were voters who traditionally voted for Democrats but who had been won over to Reagan’s agenda.

Contrary to the thinking — or lack of thinking — among today’s Republican leaders, Reagan did not go to these Democratic voters and pander to them by offering them a watered-down version of what the Democrats were offering. He took his case to them and talked — yes, TALKED — to let them know what his own agenda offered to them and to the country.

Today’s Republicans who proclaim a need to “reach out” to a wider constituency almost invariably mean pandering to those groups’ current beliefs, not showing them how your agenda and your principles — if you have any — apply to their situation and to the good of the country.

You won’t swing a whole constituency of Democrats your way, and neither did Ronald Reagan. But he swung enough of them to win elections and to force Congressional Democrats to respect the “Reagan Democrats” he had won over.

There are issues on which Republicans can appeal to blacks — school choice being just one obvious and important issue. And it is unlikely that all Hispanic voters want open borders, through which criminals can come in and settle in their communities.

But unspoken words will never tap these sources of votes, nor perhaps even convince Congressional Republicans.

Boehner gone may not change anything it the Republican eunuch caucus simply elects a new speaker with the same stripes.

Thomas Sowell is a national treasure. He was 85 on June 30th last. Long may he live!

UPDATE: Democrats’ Sudden Embrace of John Boehner is Infuriating.