J. Kb

Dick’s Sporting Goods is f*cking evil

After the Parkland shooting, Dick’s Sporting Goods made a big deal about a corporate decision to stop selling AR pattern rifles and destroying $5 million guns they had in inventory.

They were doing it for the children.

Well, after Dobbs, Dick’s Sporting Goods made another announcement.  They would give every employee up to $4,000 to have an abortion.

If they destroyed guns “for the children,” then what are they destroying children for?

Evil.

Progressive values.

Evil.

How many more children will be murdered, subsidized by Dick’s than would have ever been killed by an AR they sold to a law abiding citizen?

These moralizing companies are not good.  They are evil.

Any company that pays you to murder your own child in the womb is not your friend.  They are your enemy, destroying the root of love and fulfillment, having a family, to keep you as a low cost employee.

They are paying employees to murder their children for Progressive social credit and to reduce their employee costs.

Evil.

 

 

California doxxes law abiding gun owners

Massive Trove of Gun Owners’ Private Information Leaked by California Attorney General

The California Department of Justice’s 2022 Firearms Dashboard Portal went live on Monday with publicly-accessible files that include identifying information for those who have concealed carry permits. The leaked information includes the person’s full name, race, home address, date of birth, and date their permit was issued. The data also shows the type of permit issued, indicating if the permit holder is a member of law enforcement or a judge.

The Reload reviewed a copy of the Lost Angeles County database and found 244 judge permits listed in the database. The files included the home addresses, full names, and dates of birth for all of them. The same was true for seven custodial officers, 63 people with a place of employment permit, and 420 reserve officers.

2,891 people in Los Angeles County with standard licenses also had their information compromised by the leak, though the database appears to include some duplicate entries as well.

A video reviewed by The Reload shows the databases with detailed information were initially available for download via a button on the website’s mapping feature. They appeared to have been removed from public access by Tuesday afternoon and replaced with spreadsheets without the individualized identifying information.

Liberal California bureaucrats and politicians are pissed over the SCOTUS NY Rifle & Pistol decision.

Their precious system of corruption and influence peddling will come crashing down if California, along with other may issue states, becomes shall issue.

It seems that someone within the CA DOJ decided to vent their frustration by doxxing current permit holders.

The Reload is not publishing the leaked data in order to protect the privacy of those affected by the leaks. However, posts across social media indicate many others were able to obtain the documents during the time they were live on the state’s website. There are also several social media posts that indicate similar identifying information from the state’s dealer record of sales database and its “assault weapons” registry were part of the leak, though The Reload was unable to review copies of those databases.

Not just does this make these individuals a target of theft, as The Reload notes.  It makes these people a target for vindictive Liberal punishment.

We’ve seen the extent to which Leftists will go to destroy people online.

I suspect that these people should fear Leftists contacting their employers, children’s schools, etc. with this information.  E.g. “Dear [company], are you aware your employee [name] owns several assault rifles?  This makes him a danger, you need to fire him.”

Then there is the fear of Red Flag Law abuse.

Knowing who has guns and what types will allow these people to be targeted.

There is a myriad of ways this data could be used to harm law abiding citizens.

The leak comes just over a year after California moved to provide detailed personal information of all gun owners in the state to educational institutions across the country despite objections over concerns about data security and individual privacy. It also comes as a similar policy to California’s restrictive gun carry law was invalidated by the Supreme Court, which will likely result in many more Californians being added to the same database the state just leaked.

So the insecurity of the system is a feature not a bug.

This is absolutely intended to intimate and harass law abiding California gun owners.

I suspect that our two tier justice system will make sure the leaker is not found or punished because the assumption will be all the doxxed parties are Right-Wingers and they deserved it.

Sometimes its the little stories that really piss me off

Miguel touched on this but it threw me into a tizzy.

https://twitter.com/mtwrighter/status/1541561048398024704?s=20&t=96k3ltVutrOdvnKvT_lu7g

https://twitter.com/mtwrighter/status/1541562540773326850?t=WQS0j8HryI7s070eXncEEQ&s=19

https://twitter.com/mtwrighter/status/1541564140392677384?t=dt8YN6KgNQx3ID2dyhfNjA&s=19

 

She stole a full automatic weapons from the Texas National Guard.

She smuggly bragged about it on Twitter thinking she’s a good person.

She chastised and insulted the Guardsmen who are patrolling our borders and goes so far as to nit pick them for not wearing seat belts.

She’s a Leftist so she’s smug and secure in her knowledge that she won’t get in an ounce of trouble for this.

Had anyone else stolen an M4 from the Guard out of a Guard vehicle, they would be the recipient of their own one man Waco re-enactment.

But she’s safe to act like a stern kindergarten teacher taking away a naughty child’s toy.

God damn our system is broken.

Hollywood celebrity wants a second Civil War

 

Yup.

The United States of New York and California with everyone else being told to shut up and obey.

Really embracing the idea of a Constitutional Republic with that one.

This is how civil wars and balkanization happens.

Clarence Thomas want to bring the media to heel

Having secured gun laws for the people and overturned the judicial activism of Roe, Justice Thomas seems to be aiming his mighty Gavel of Justice at the fake news industry.

Clarence Thomas signals interest in making it easier to sue media

It’s about God damn time.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday expressed a desire to revisit a landmark 1964 ruling that makes it relatively difficult to bring successful lawsuits against media outlets for defamation.

Thomas’s statement came in response to the court’s decision to turn away an appeal from a Christian nonprofit group who disputed their characterization by the civil rights watchdog group Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Coral Ridge Ministries Media sued the SPLC for defamation for listing them as a hate group on their public database, which led to Amazon excluding Coral Ridge as a recipient of charitable contributions from online shoppers.

Thomas dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the lawsuit, which had been dismissed by lower courts for failing to overcome the decades-old legal standard, established in the landmark 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision, that public figures who sue for defamation must not only prove defendants made defamatory statements, but that those statements were made with “actual malice.”

“This case is one of many showing how New York Times and its progeny have allowed media organizations and interest groups ‘to cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity,’” Thomas wrote.

Trump really showed how dishonest the media is and how they get away with it.

The media has been taking liberties with Sullivan to overtly slander the Right then say “oopsie” and get away with it because there is insufficient evidence of malice.

Four years of “Russian collusion” and “pee-pee tapes” but no malice.

Bullshit!

It’s not the first time Thomas has called for revisiting the actual malice standard, which many journalists and free speech advocates see as a fundamental protection for reporting on public figures.

Last year, he dissented in another instance where the Supreme Court declined to take up a defamation case that had been stymied by the 1964 precedent.

“The lack of historical support for this Court’s actual-malice requirement is reason enough to take a second look at the Court’s doctrine,” Thomas wrote in his 2021 opinion. “Our reconsideration is all the more needed because of the doctrine’s real-world effects. Public figure or private, lies impose real harm.”

It’s unclear how much traction his argument is getting among the other five conservative justices. While none of his colleagues joined Thomas in dissenting on Monday, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote an opinion last year concurring with his call to revisit the New York Times v. Sullivan decision.

Good.  This needs to be revisited.

The media has too long, since Watergate at least, seen it’s job to be the assassination of Republican careers by any means necessary.

A free press can’t be an unaccountable super PAC.

I hope Thomas succeeds at this.

The racism and bigotry of the LA Times and its readers

Miguel posted a screen shot but I wanted to dig into the article.

Column: Is California ready for more Black people to legally carry guns in public?

Nathan W. Jones leads the Bay Area chapter of the Black Gun Owners Assn. But until a few years ago, he wasn’t even into guns.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit. And George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police, sending racial justice protesters into the streets. And white supremacists trashed the U.S. Capitol in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

“I had visions of mobs dragging people through the streets, and something just kind of switched,” Jones told me. “We can’t rely on anybody else to come and save us. It has to be us.”

On the one hand, he wants it to be easy for law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves “if and when the time arises.” But on the other hand, he’s a 50-year-old realist who knows that fear and hatred of Black people run deep in the United States, especially when we’re armed.

“There’s no overt racism when we go to the gun range, but we know how people are looking at us,” Jones said of the dozens of Black members who meet up to go shooting. “We know the things that people think.”

This is interesting.  They interviewed a black gun owners in California who assumes everyone around him watching him shoot is a racist.  Being from California, most of the people he is surrounded by are Liberals.  Given how the LA Times introduced him, it’s highly likely that he is on the political Left himself, and therefore sees race and racism in everything.

Whatever bigotry at the range he’s experienced, I haven’t seen in Alabama.  Nor have I seen it in the gun community that subscribes to high profile gun rights advocate Colion Noir and cheers on the increase in minority gun ownership.

California Democrats are scrambling to craft and enact new legislation this week that would somehow salvage the requirement — assuming local law enforcement continues to enforce it — that residents get a permit before carrying a concealed weapon.

But the governor and lawmakers could fail, and the Supreme Court’s ruling could stand. And then, California could be forced to confront a reality that has long made many self-proclaimed liberals uncomfortable: Black people — potentially a lot of us — legally carrying guns in public.

This is an amazing admission.  That tolerant Liberals/Progressives are uncomfortable with black people owning guns.  They are the bigots they call everyone else.

Lest you think I’m being facetious, recall how California got started on its journey to having the toughest gun control laws in the country.

It was in 1967 that members of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense staged a protest at the California Capitol. Armed with the handguns and shotguns they normally used to protect Black neighborhoods in Oakland by “policing the police,” they announced that the time had come for “Black people to arm themselves against this terror before it is too late.” And then they went inside.

Lawmakers were so freaked out that they quickly passed the very bill the Black Panthers had been protesting — the Mulford Act, which banned the open carry of loaded weapons without a permit. Gov. Ronald Reagan signed it posthaste.

Over the next few years, the Mulford Act, which the National Rifle Assn. supported, inspired a slew of gun control laws in other states and Congress.

Of course, these days, the NRA is very much against gun control, although its stance on Black people doesn’t seem to have changed very much.

Yes, we know about the Mulford Act.  We know how the NRA has shifted over time.  It it, however, a slander without evidence to say that the NRA was and is bigoted against black people.

Considering their aforementioned admission of Liberal bigotry, this is just projection.

Still, over the last few years as Americans have stocked up on guns at record rates, it is Black people — especially women — who have been buying them the most. Between 2019 and 2020 alone, there was a 58% spike, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

The defund the police movement and soft on crime policies of the Left have caused massive crime spikes in black communities.  They want to protect themselves.

That meme that has been floating around social media for a few weeks — the one that half-jokingly suggests that Republican politicians could be prompted to support gun control if more Black people were to start packing heat?

The Left can’t meme.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in his opinion for the Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen case, waxed philosophical about how the right to bear arms was crucial for the self-protection of Black people in the South during Reconstruction.

And how in 1868, Congress “reaffirmed that freedmen were entitled to the ‘full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings concerning personal liberty [and] personal security … including the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.’”

Meanwhile, a coalition of progressive organizations, including the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, the Bronx Defenders and Brooklyn Defender Services, filed an amicus brief in the case, urging the court to rule exactly as it did.

Ummm…. yes.  Much of the history of gun control was “how do we keep those undesirables from being armed.”

In the South, that was mostly freed blacks.

In New York, it was blacks and immigrants.  Rich people could always afford the licenses.

A business owner in Oakland, his gun club — like Choice’s club — is full of Black professionals. Doctors, even cops. Law-abiding citizens with wives and husbands and children, and deep ties to their communities.

“Still, we know that all eyes are on us,” Jones said. “And so we also know that we cannot be the group that has an accidental discharge. We cannot be the group that is handling our firearms in an unsafe manner. We have to be more in control and knowing what we’re doing more than anybody else, because all eyes are on us waiting for us to make a mistake.”

Welcome to the world of legal concealed carry.  Every responsible CCW owner feels this way regardless of race because if we screw up we will be the case study the Left uses to take down concealed carry.

Talk to white guys with permits.  You’ll be surprised just how common our footing is on this.

Jones sees it as part of the mission of the Black Gun Owners Assn. to challenge preconceived notions many Americans have about who should and should not be able to carry a gun. But he laments that this is the reality, even in liberal California.

Liberal Californians are a bunch of bigots.  Take a CCW class in Miami.

If the Supreme Court’s ruling sticks, Jones believes, more Black people could start carrying their weapons in public — particularly if the white supremacists and Christian nationalists in our midst start doing the same.

Good to know the LA Times assumes the millions of us CCW holders are Christian nationalist white supremacists.

Jones feels he has little choice but to be a gun owner, though.

“What we need to do,” he said, “is redefine the notion of Black people with guns and what that means.”

Again, this is the perspective of someone from California.

I think the perspective of a black or other minority gun owner from Florida or Texas would be different.

The takeaway here is the California Liberals are horrendous bigots.  For all they preach about tolerance, in the end they are no different that Southern Democrats from the 1860s.  They cannot stand the idea of black people having guns.

They deal with this cognitive dissonance by projecting their bigotry onto the Right.

 

I’m not shocked, I’m raging like hell

Miguel said he won’t be shocked at the antics of the Pride activists in Seattle.

He shared a video of naked cyclists.

 

They were doing that in front of children.

You can, and I do, blame parents who took their children to that, but that does not absolve the cyclists themselves.  They did this in public to be seen.  If they had shame, when they saw children watching they would have covered up.  They wanted to be seen by children or they would not have done this.

Then there is this:

 

I was a Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Eagle Scout, and Venture Scout.

The only thing ever discussed with Scouts of a sexual nature was our annual training on what do to if an adult tries to molest you.

Now there are Scouts marching with Pride flags.

Marching with Pride flags held higher and more numerous than the American flag.

When I got into politics in college as a College Republican, I honestly believed in gay rights.

My older cousin was gay.  I lived on Miami Beach for a while.

I sincerely believed that the 14th Ammendment granted gays equality under the law, that they should be able to marry and get jobs and housing without being discriminated against.

I signed up for equal rights, not government sanctioned and supported public displays of sexual degeneracy directed at children.

We live in a Banana Republic where there are two sets of laws and clearly the LGBT community can engage in any and all sexual depravity in public around children and get away with it.

If you had a bunch of straight men waggling their penises at children they would be violently arrested and sent to prison.

Gay men in bandage gear doing the same while carrying a Pride flag?  The media will tell you that it’s a good things for children to see it.

The Dobbs decision stated that the Court wasn’t going to revisit gay marriage.

On Friday I thought that was right.

This morning I want them to overturn Obergefell.

I want them to reverse anti-discrimination laws on the basis of sexual orientation.

I look at this and I  want the LGBT community waffle stomped back into the closet.

I want to go back to the bad old days when you couldn’t be out in public.

Then, after sufficient residence time, we can let them back out of the closet on a short leash.

Go ahead and get married.

Go ahead and live normal, middle-class lives, and at night go home to a same-sex spouse and do whatever it is that you do behind closed doors.

Bare your dick to a child in public a have Boy Scouts carry a flag of sexual degeneracy and we will yank your leash so hard so fast it will make your head spin.

Do I sound extreme?

You are damn right I sound extreme.

I didn’t start out this way.  They did this to me.

When I was a Scout, if an adult exposed himself sexually to a Scout, the police got involved.

Now I have to worry that my son in Scouts might be exposed to a cock in public while carrying a Pride flag at a sanctioned event.

Shit like that is what turns me into what I am today.