From the Huffington Post, published the day after Christmas.

Why Black People Own Guns.

That’s the headline.  Here is the subheadline.

HuffPost spoke with 11 black gun owners to figure out what gun ownership means in a country determined to keep its black populace unarmed.

Um, what?

But it gets better.

As much as America loves her guns, she has never liked the idea of seeing them in black hands.

Before the Revolutionary War, colonial Virginia passed a law barring black people from owning firearms — an exercise in gun control as racial control. In 1857, in his notorious Dred Scott decision, Chief Justice Roger Taney summoned the specter of black people freely enjoying the right to “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Surely, he argued, the founders were not “so forgetful or regardless of their own safety” to permit such a thing. When black people armed themselves against white supremacist attacks following the Civil War, Southern state governments passed “black codes” barring them from owning guns. 

Democrats banned black people from owning guns.  Racist, pro-segregationist, Jim Crow supporting Democrats, did that.

Funny how HuffPo never mentions that.

In 2016, legal gun owner Philando Castile was shot after informing a Minnesota police officer that he was armed. Two years prior, Tamir Rice was killed by Cleveland police while holding a toy gun. John Crawford suffered the same fate in a Beavercreek, Ohio, Walmart.

The Castile shoot was a bad shoot, at least I think so.  The Tamir Rice situatio is a little more complicated.  The John Crawford shoot was horrible, and the result of a civilian who lied to 911.

None of these, however, is part of a wider conspiracy to deny blacks the right to keep and bear arms.

So what does black gun ownership mean in a country so determined to keep its black populace unarmed? 

This shit again?  Where is it that blacks are being kept unarmed?  In the same states were all law abiding citizens are being kept unarmed.  New York City, California, Chicago, Maryland, Washington DC, all Democrat strongholds.  The black codes no longer exist.  It’s large, urban, deep blue states or cities that have the strictest guns laws, and also happen to have higher percentages of black people.

So what was the common answer by all 11 black people asked?

They want to protect themselves.

Shocking!!!

They own guns for mostly the same reason that white people own guns.

Here is what I did notice that was interesting.  This is the list of cities that the 11 people were from: Tulsa, Detroit, Topeka, Minneapolis, Houston, Winter Garden (FL), Philadelphia, Atlanta, Tampa, Plano (TX), and “Western Pennsylvania.”

Hmmmm…. notice anything?  Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, and Florida are extremely gun friendly states.  Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are moderately gun friendly, having a balance of urban and rural populations that keeps the gun laws from being too restrictive (coincidentally at least two are swing states for the same reason).

Detroit is deep blue, but a couple of years ago the Detroit police chief told the law abiding people of the city to arm themselves because there were not enough police to protect them.

There wasn’t a New York City, or Los Angeles on the list.

It seems like black people are white people in gun friendly states are really similar their approach to guns.

My favorite interview was with the guy from Philly.

Maj Toure, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 
Toure, who declined to give his age, is an activist and entrepreneur who founded Black Guns Matter. 

America would not have even been created without firearms. Some people say it’s a contradiction for me as an African-American man to have a position: “When they wrote the Second Amendment, they didn’t mean it for you.” I don’t give a fuck who they meant it for. It’s mine now.

It is a lie that the Second Amendment wasn’t meant for him.  Free blacks had the right to keep and bear arms since the founding of America, and even fought in the Revolutionary War.

It was the Democrats who told him that he didn’t have gun rights.  They told it to his ancestors as slaves, and later under segregation.  Now is is Democrats who say that he, along with everybody else, doesn’t have the right to keep and bear arms because the 2A is not an individual right.

The Democrats have gone from trying to disarm black to trying to disarm everybody.  This is the only policy they have that has gotten less racist over the years, only because it’s become more tyrannical.

HuffPo went searching for something.  I’m not sure what.  Racism probably, because that is what HuffPo does.  Of course they’d never admit that the side that has the hardest time with black gun owners is the same side that has a problem with gun owners in general: their side.

The accusation of Russian Collusion (whatever the fuck that means) with the Trump campaign to elect Donald Trump is falling apart.

More than a year into the hysterics they still have no hard evidence to back the idea that Russia helped Trump win in any way.  What little they scream about turns out to be wrong.  The Fusion GPS dossier, which was they they wanted to hang their hat on, has backfired on them.

What are Democrats to do now that they can’t make an effective case that the election of Donald Trump was an illegitimate act of cheating.

Go full Leonid Brezhnev, that’s what.

The Soviet abuse of psychiatry and medicine was well understood.  The Soviet Union and Communist China both used accusations of insanity and mental illness for political reasons.  Speaking out against Soviet or Maoist policy was evidence of mental illness.  The once great New York Times covered this back in 1987, that the Soviet Union would confine protesters and political dissidents in mental hospitals as political punishment.

Hence, Congressional Democrats met with a Yale psychiatrist, who having never met or talked with President Trump even once, said that Trump’s mental state was an emergency.

Leading this call is Bandy Lee, an assistant professor in forensic psychiatry (the interface of law and mental health) at the Yale School of Medicine who has devoted her 20-year career to studying, predicting, and preventing violence.

She recently briefed a dozen members of Congress — Democrats and one Republican — on the president’s mental state. And this week, she, along with Judith Herman at Harvard and Robert Jay Lifton at Columbia, released a statement arguing that Trump is “further unraveling.” The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, a collection of essays from 27 mental health professionals that Lee edited, was published in October.

The purpose of all of this is to remove Trump from office.

We, the undersigned mental health professionals, believe in our professional judgment that Donald Trump manifests a serious mental illness that renders him psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of President of the United States. And we respectfully request he be removed from office, according to article 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution, which states that the president will be replaced if he is ‘unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.’  

This psychiatrist said that Trump must be dealt with because he will wipe out humanity.  Seriously.

If it were possible, Dr. Bandy Lee said, “we would be declaring a public health emergency that needs to be responded to as quickly as possible.”

“As more time passes, we come closer to the greatest risk of danger, one that could even mean the extinction of the human species,” she said. “This is not hyperbole. This is the reality.”

Neither the Toba supervolcao or asteroid collisions managed to wipe out the human race.  I somehow doubt that Trump and North Korea is more dangerous than that.

I know that Democrats will say “but Dr. Lee is a respected psychiatrist from Yale.”

Well, to them I say. “Fuck you.”

Josef Mengele was a respected doctor in Germany, who attended the best German medical schools, before he began torturing people in concentrations camps.  Japanese Unit 731 was staffed by top Japanese surgeons, who performed horrible experiments and vivisection on prisoners.  Even American doctors with the Public Health Service performed horrible experiments on Blacks in Tuskegee, in the name of medicine.  Not to mention the countless Soviet and Maoist psychologists who were used to declare political dissents insane.

Medical professionals are not some superior class of people who are above doing terrible things political motivation.  In fact, history shows the opposite to be true.

This is an attempt the Democrats to abuse psychiatry to force Trump to step down using the 25th Amendment.

The one positive is that at least Dr. Lee recognizes that there might be a tiny problem with this.

We encounter this often in mental health. Those who most require an evaluation are the least likely to submit to one. That is the reason why in all 50 states we have not only the legal authority, but often the legal obligation, to contain someone even against their will when it’s an emergency.

So in an emergency, neither consent nor confidentiality requirements hold. Safety comes first. What we do in the case of danger is we contain the person, we remove them from access to weapons, and we do an urgent evaluation.

This is what we have been calling for with the president based on basic medical standards of care.

Surprisingly, many lawyer groups have actually volunteered, on their own, to file for a court paper to ensure that the security staff will cooperate with us. But we have declined, since this will really look like a coup, and while we are trying to prevent violence, we don’t wish to incite it through, say, an insurrection.

I doubt the Democrats will worry about that little detail too much.  There were always more psychologists who would be happy to use their credentials to add credibility to a bloodless coup.

I’m sure, this plan will fail to unseat the president too.

But that’s not the point.  A failed plan is still a plan.  It just shows how much of the Soviet playbook that the Democrats have embraced.

The only question left is once this plan implodes the way the Trump dossier did, what is the next Soviet move they are going to try?

Yesterday, ABC news sent out a Tweet containing a video of Secretary of Defense James Mattis doing an interview.

Asked his biggest military concern of 2018, Defense Sec. Mattis responds, "I don't have concerns, I create them." https://t.co/WQiRtVjKK5 pic.twitter.com/A1OuhqJc0i

— ABC News (@ABC) January 5, 2018

His answer to ABC is reminiscent of what he told CBS Face the Nation last year:

And CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.

Watching Sec Def Mattis give interviews is enough to give any red blooded American a patriotism boner.

If your find yourself inspired by these videos to read listicle after listicle of “best Mattis quotes” and your patriotism boner last for more than four hours, stop, and watch this compilation video of Maxine Waters quotes to alleviate symptoms.

I caught this one over at The Daily Wire.

Because a two-year-old can’t speak in sentences, it is not sentient and therefore it’s morally justifiable to kill it.

What is it with these people?  If they aren’t trying to fuck your kids, they want to kill them.

As the father of a three-year-old and a one-month-old, I can tell you, a two year old can communicate his/her needs.  I know when my baby is hungry.  I know when she needs to be burped, I know when she is unhappy about being wet, and I know that she really enjoys a warm bath.  She, like my son before her didn’t need sentences to communicate all that.

That’s part of being a parent.

The reality is that people like these will use any perversion of logic to justify killing whoever they want.

Once upon a time progressives thought is was reasonable to forcibly sterilize the infirm and disabled.

Aktion T4 was the Nazi justification for the extermination of those who were detrimental to German “racial hygiene.”

Either you believe life has intrinsic value or you don’t.  If you don’t, it doesn’t take much to rationalize ending it.

I don’t know why this piece of shit doesn’t like children, but since he looks like an unfuckable mound of old gum, I doubt he will have to make the choice of whether or not to murder his own offspring any time soon.

The one thing about him that I do know is that I have never wanted to stab a college kid in the throat so badly.

I’m going to double down on Miguel’s post Show me in the dolly where being a responsible Gun Owner hurt you.

I am an ardent advocate of concealed carry.  I have made the same argument that many other concealed carry advocates make regarding things like CCW for women.  It goes something like this:

Women should carry because rapists are predators and even though they shouldn’t be attacked, some men will and women should take precautions.  

The feminists say “we should just teach men not to rape.”  Yeah.  I’m pretty sure we do.  Guess what?  It still happens.  Why?  Evil exists in this world.

That’s not victim blaming.  That is a realistic assessment of how the world works.  You have no control over what other people do.  There are bad people out there and they do bad things.

The Chief of Police of Atlanta tells people not to leave their guns in their cars.

OK, gotcha.  Makes sense.  If I have to leave my gun in my car I’m going to lock it in the Job Box bolted into the bed of my truck.

I figure the same principle from above applies.

Gun owners should secure their guns when they are not using them because thieves are predators and even though they shouldn’t be have their stuff stolen, some men will and gun owners should take precautions.

Then I see some people shrieking about that like they are a bunch of social justice feminists yelling about short skirts not being an excuse.

Every gun I have, when it is out of my immediate possession is behind steel.  I have a safe in my house, a handgun vault in my bedroom, and a lock box in my truck.  I paid good money for that gun, I don’t want it to disappear on me.  I also have a very smart three year old and I don’t want him to have an accident.

There is an Arabic proverb, trust in Allah but tie up your camel.  

If you carry because you know evil exists and bad people will do what they shouldn’t, you should lock up your guns when you are not using them for the very same reason.

I finally watched Kong: Skull Island.

I lost the movie at 30 min in.  I get that they have to establish Kong as a beast but taking out an entire Air Cav unit like that was stupid.

Kong is 100 feet tall.  The UH-1 Iroquois has a service ceiling of 12,000 feet with a 1,200 foot/min climb rate.

Why the hell did the Air Cav unit feel the need to fight Kong at eye level?  

Also, military data puts M80 7.62×51 penetration at 60cm or 24 inches of tissue.   In a 100 foot ape, that would barely go through his skin.  It’s obvious that all the M60 fire was jut pissing Kong off. 

Was is anti military sentiment that made that scene so bad?  Couldn’t they strand the Air Cav unit some other way?  I just couldn’t get past how bad that part was. 

Iceland made it illegal to pay men more than women for the same work.

Forgetting that the Equal Pay Act was passed in 1963, Bernie Sanders Tweeted this.

Iceland just became the first country in the world to make it illegal to pay men more than women. In the United States in 2016, black women made 62.5 cents on the dollar compared to white men and hispanic women made 54.4 cents. That is a disgrace. pic.twitter.com/y2sxSWYVrm

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) January 3, 2018

To be fair, Bernie was only 22 at the time, so he might have missed that bit of news.

What he doesn’t say is the Icelandic law requires companies prove that their pay is equal or they are fined.

That’s just what we need in America Federal bureaucrats to audit business of more than 25 people and make them justify the salary or wages of all their employees and account quantitatively for any discrepancy.

It should be easy to come up with a standard so the different levels of education, quality of schooling, skill, etc., can all be accounted for in pay in a way that passes bureaucratic scrutiny.

I can only see this encouraging businesses to hire people and reward things like effort and performance.

I can’t see how that wouldn’t backfire at all. 

We should take all of our cues from a nation with the population about the size of our 57th largest city (Santa Ana, California, pop. 334,000) and that suffered total economic collapse not 10 years ago.

Maybe Sanders could convince Vermont to try it first.