Pediatrician Group Urges Florida Doctors to Break “Docs vs. Glocks” Law.

In the meantime, the APP is urging members to keep asking parents if they keep guns in the home.

“Because of the proven value of physician counseling in preventing injury and death, the AAP is advising its members in Florida and throughout the United States to continue to uphold the standard of medical practice and ask about the presence of guns in the environments of children, and to counsel their patients and patients’ parents about the importance of storing guns safely,” reads a statement from the group.

via Pediatrician Group Urges Florida Doctors to Break “Docs vs. Glocks” Law | Miami New Times.

I imagine that the doctors will have a wee bit more sense than breaking the law even if they think it is wrong.  But do not buy for one second that AAP is purely doing for the goodness of their hearts and a 100% free from politics interest. I found a little document in their website railing against “Assault Weapons” in a language that is very familiar to us and does not sound quite medical. The reason can be seen at the end of the document:

AAP Brady Moms

I guess this is what passes for medical research on guns for the American Academy of Pediatrics: Talking points from well-known Gun Control groups. And the hits do not stop there but also on another AAP-related website with more language and proven false stats: HealthyChildren.org.

And just for kicks, I bring back an old favorite:

To engage in Home Safety Counseling without certification, license or formal training in home safety and Risk Management and to concentrate on one small politically correct area, i.e., firearms to the neglect of ALL of the other safety issues in the modern home, is to invite a lawsuit because the safety counselor, (Physician) Knew, Could have known or Should have known that there were other dangers to the occupants of that house more immediate than firearms. 
Physicians, Don’t borrow trouble.


Everytown Domestic Abuse ad bombs with The View: Moms Demand horrified.

The View is a show that cannot be called Conservative by any stretch if the imagination. On Tuesday, the ladies played the Everytown latest video showing a domestic incident where the woman gets killed by the ex-boyfriend and to most people’s surprise, three out of the four panelist were for having a gun to defend themselves:

Well, Moms Demand is having fits over the show’s direction:

Moms Demand The View Domestic

Michael Bloomberg has The Raben Group, one of the top PR firm in NYC pretty much on call to do the work for Moms and Everytown. This is not a fly-by operation but a serious company with clients including Mastercard, Time Warner and Walmart. Yet nobody saw that the ad would not only backfire but that it would do so in a well-viewed show by a majority of the hostesses.

Then again, you can escape logic only so far.

Swiss Guard Glock

Glock Swiss Guard Vatican


And that would be the seal of the Vatican.

People see the Swiss Guard at the Vatican dressed Old School and tend to dismiss them as decorative. That would be a mistake. They have been protecting the Vatican for over 500 years and carry with them the tradition of being the nastiest fighters that ever came out of Europe. So much so that not even the Nazis messed with the Vatican or Switzerland for that matter. And in case you are wondering, yes they have been tested and they have done their duty.

You may wanna see and read more at this Guns.com article.

And for those in the non-firearm section:

vatican club battleaxes

Everytown Video Fail: Which one you rather be?

This is the latest indoctrination video courtesy of the marketing geniuses paid by Michael Bloomberg:

I think the part that pissed me off the most is the 911 caller “Do you have a restraining order?” Paper does not beat abusive ex-boyfriend, OK?

Unfortunately for Everytown/Moms Demand, we had a counter-video long before they came up with this Lifetime Original piece of crap:

Refuse to be a victim..shoot the bastard.

Hat tip to Bob Owens


The good intentions of a criminal or a liberal fallacy that won’t die.

We heard & read this kind of rant before.

Did Martin deserve to die for the crime of residential burglary?
No, she did not.
Under the California penal code, the penalty for that crime is up to six years in prison. It does not call for the death sentence.
Miller and her accomplice allegedly jumped on the homeowner, so the pair was also guilty of simple assault, a misdemeanor in California punishable by a fine up to $2,000 and/or up to six months in jail. Greer never mentioned that either assailant had a weapon and since neither used one, it is unlikely.
Again, there’s no mention of the death penalty for a simple assault.
But this is where it gets complicated.
While the penalty for burglarizing a home could be six months to six years depending on the judge’s ruling, the “castle doctrine” is in effect in California.
Under the state penal code, if someone forcefully or unlawfully enters your residence, it is presumed they are there to do physical harm, KSBY6, an NBC affiliate, reported, adding that it is also presumed the resident has the right to use deadly force against an intruder.
In other words, it’s “stand your ground,” California style.

via California case more reason to outlaw ‘stand your ground’-type defenses.

I will always presume that whomever sides with this asinine argument has never been the victim of a home invasion or any time of violent crime.  I figure that they would rather see a family leave the house or be passive or even better: poll the criminals as to what their intentions are before committing to a course of action.  But the stupidest of all is to put the burden of responsibility on the victim as if it is his fault that some jackass decided to break into his house and steal their things. Pretty much like blaming rape victims for the actions of the rapist…if she had not worn that dress or even had a vagina…

And maybe the jackass breaking into a home is really not a bad guy but somebody in a bad moment who made a bad decision. But unfortunately we have no way of knowing this and we have way too many of the following to be giving free passes:

They tied the 33-year-old dialysis patient to a chair with cables and extension cords and hog-tied his 27-year-old roommate and threw him naked into the bathtub.

The victims say the men wanted money and kept repeating: “You’re gonna die tonight. You’re gonna meet your maker!”

The two roommates begged for their lives as the robbers ransacked their home looking for money and valuables.

“I really thought that they were gonna kills us,” one said.

via In KCK, robbers force gun into victims’ mouths, point them at their heads to steal electronics, money | fox4kc.com.

I am not willing to gamble my life or the life of my loved ones betting on that I will get the “nice” kind of Home Invaders. That is why the law gives people such a latitude when it comes to defending a home. That is why we have a Castle Doctrine in this country.

So when somebody asks you if you are willing to kill somebody because they want to steal your TV, you can ask in return “Why would anybody risk their lives in order to steal a TV”?

One victim, Two kidnappings.

In a rare legal move, county detectives sent a victim to jail Thursday to ensure she will participate in a trial for a man accused of kidnapping and beating her.

Faith Bronson isn’t under arrest. But she will remain in Lackawanna County Prison until she can post $25,000 bail set by Judge Michael Barrasse or until Ross Bonaddio’s trial, scheduled to begin Sept. 7.

Ms. Bronson, 34, told police in January that Mr. Bonaddio, her boyfriend, held her captive and beat her to remove the aliens he believed were inside of her. Scranton police said he screwed the doors of his home shut, so she could not leave. After three days, she escaped and a neighbor called police.

When officers arrived, Ms. Bronson was back inside the home with Mr. Bonaddio, 45, 1210 Swetland St. After breaking down the door, officers found her covered in bruises.

via County detectives take witness into custody so she shows at trial – News – The Times-Tribune.

Can anybody tell me how in the hell anybody could think this was a good idea? Is there a difference (other than “color of law”) between what her boyfriend made her go through and what the Justice System is doing to her now?

Is getting a conviction so important that there is a need to re-victimize the victim?

Hat Tip Barron B.