AP: We're not saying police are giving guns to crooks...

Imagine the ridiculousness of the following rhetorical headlines:

“Ex-WSP cruiser used by drug dealer.”

“Woman raped by taxi driver in former Seattle PD car.”

“Capitol Police sell cars to convicted drunk drivers.”

“Former Police Interceptor used in highway suicide attempt.”

That’s what the Associated Press has done in its “guns sold by law enforcement” article. The article seems to imply that Washington law enforcement agencies are selling guns directly to disturbed folks. The lurid headlines like “Baby Shot in Car Seat” draw the eye away from the easy to skip over the details that these guns were sold to dealers, traded for new guns, or auctioned off. This might be news to the AP, but not to any gun enthusiast.

It’s common for law enforcement to dispose sell or trade-in their used firearms for new models; the old guns are then sold to the public through licensed dealers. When Glock was new to the American market, it made a business model out of this. Police trade-in guns provide a high-quality handgun at a lower cost than an equivalent new model and often have collector value as well. This allows departments to get new guns very cheaply; a bonus in the days of cash-strapped municipalities.

Likewise confiscated firearms are sold to the public as well. It’s a practice actually mandated in several states. These confiscated guns aren’t “crime guns” in that they are murder weapons dripping blood. Instead, they are usually taken from prohibited persons, for concealed weapon violations, or other reasons. Non-weapons are disposed of by police all the time.

I argue that the whole point of the article, as Zerohedge either missed or deliberately skewed, is to discredit these practices.

The “journalists” who prepared this article omitted one important fact: each person who bought the gun from a dealer (again, a dealer, not the police), would have to pass a background check. So either the persons involved:

1. Passed a background check, then went nuts or became criminal;
2. Passed a background check that failed to catch their prohibited status;
3. Had someone else buy the gun illegally (a straw purchase); or,
4. Stole the gun;
5. Bought the gun secondhand in an illegal private transaction.

 Such facts are inconvenient to the narrative. Imagine the figures and stories if the story was about what criminals, looneys, and bad actors did with factory-direct firearms! Read the details of the incidents carefully. They have been cherry picked to involve—key word “involve”—a gun that somehow came from local police.

“BABY SHOT IN CAR SEAT”

Found a gun, not the murder weapon.

“TEXT THREATS”

Merely owned a shotgun that happened to be a former police weapon.

“JUVENILES IN STOLEN CAR”

Stole a car, didn't threaten anybody with the gun, just had it.

“DRUNKEN FELON”

How did the felon get the gun? Did pass a flawed background check? Did some buy the gun for him in a straw purchase? Did someone else buy it, then sell it illegally in violation of the unenforceable universal background check law? Five years passed; did he buy it legally when he was not a felon?

“PROHIBITED FROM HAVING GUN”

Felon in possession of a stolen gun.

“DRUG HOUSE ASSAULT”

Domestic dispute, no weapon involved. Just happened to find a cheap .22 rifle that was disposed of by police.

“THREATS TO KILL”

Also owned 15 other guns, not sold by local police.

The hoplopathically-biased liberal media doesn’t want the public to own guns. They would love to get guns out of public hands and paint an innocent police program, one that brings money to the departments, new weapons into officer’s hands, and gives the poor a cheap way to protect themselves, as well as make the police look like monsters. Such misleading and malicious “journalism” ought to fall under libel laws. The mainstream media is dying a little more each day because of their constant penchant for lying and promoting their progressive agenda any way they can. 

High Crime Not "New Normal"; Defensive Gun Uses Up

A higher crime rate in the Las Vegas area is not a "new normal." Crime rates rise and fall. America is as peaceful as it was during the last major lull in homicide rates, the late 1930s through early 1960s. Review-Journal reporter Rachel Crosby wrote that she's glad she's leaving the crime beat. She bemoans the violence she's covered and recounts a few stories.

A man in a broken relationship snapped and killed his family before killing himself. A teenager who broke the law killed himself to avoid the consequences of his actions. Unarmed security guards were shot by a robber in a mall that bans firearms. Well, it's better than the Sun's examples callingfor gun control, at least. None of those examples are really outside the norm of the valley.

If blame is to be laid for rising crime rates, look to the failed administration of Sheriff Lombardo. Under Lombardo, homicide rates are up. Attorney General Sessions came to Las Vegas in regards to the Las Vegas sanctuary city policy. And everyone is afraid to point out the causes and solutions of crime. Crime to middle and upper class citizens of all races is not a problem. While homicides are up, defensive gun uses are also way up over the past few years. There have been 24 defensive gun uses so far in a year that's only a little more than half over, versus 18 last year.

The how, why, and who of local crime is far more important than the numbers. A man who murders his wife does not make me fear for my safety, it makes me feel sad. High violence in certain neighborhoods occurring between certain members of certain communities for particular reasons, none of which are common to me, means that I am not in danger, though violence is statistically up. Just as we cannot ignore the uncomfortable realities behind crime and violence, we can’t ignore the solutions of personal responsibility to help curtail violence and protect ourselves.

Perhaps it is the limitation of the print version of the newspaper (which shouldn't limit the online version) that the details and causes behind the crimes are left out. Many stories have no follow up and leave out many details, including race. Much of Las Vegas area homicide is among minorities who are often involved in drugs or gangs. The failure of inner city minority communities to end violence among themselves by no longer tolerating it does not exist. In the Old West, frontier violence did not decline until western communities became tough on crime and did not excuse easy killing.

My suggestion to newspaper owners: higher ex-cops to investigate and write crime stories. They can handle the heat, understand the cause, and communicate to the reader whether or not fear is merited. I do not have the resources (money and time) to go to crime scenes, talk to the PIOs, order police reports, talk to witnesses, etc. The newspaper "journalists" do, but they don't. They merely regurgitate press releases or press conferences, digging down to a Facebook account at the most. Within a few days, the story is forgotten.

Today's college kids that seem to populate newspaper offices need to read real newspapers from a hundred years ago. People who take the time to read news are on average smarter than TV news viewers and we want analysis and details.

We should never accept higher crime rates as normal. We each have the ability to safeguard ourselves from criminal attack by exercising our right to self-defense. Those in communities plagued with violence have the responsibility and the duty to reform their own communities by turning in criminals and setting the standard at home and in church that crime and violence is unacceptable. For the rest, we can start by getting handle on things by voting out Sheriff Lombardo in 2018 and by electing legislators and politicians who will be tough on crime and enforce immigration laws.

Bad Reporting of Question 1 Money Sources

Democrats, liberals, and statistics all have one thing in common: they’d rather give money and buy what they want rather than honestly try to change minds. If they can lie, bluff, and bluster, they’ll do it. NBC Ch. 4 in Reno has a segment called “Ask Joe” where reporter Joe Hart answers questions from viewers. One viewer asked where the money for Ballot Question 1 was coming from. First, he covered the supporters.

Everyone should know now that Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety is the force behind this across the country. It’s like the aliens in Independence Day: they keep moving from purple state to purple state spending money abusing the initiative process to get uninformed voters to give up their rights. In a stellar, courageous, and detailed investigation, Joe called the spokeshole for the supporters to ask them where the money came from. Conveniently, the spokeshole didn’t tell him that most of the money came from out of state and from very rich donors.

Where is the money coming from? Well, Everytown for Gun Safety has spent/given about $1.7 million so far—that’s not grassroots. Not to mention the bunches of millionaires, billionaires, and multimillion dollar corporations contributing money. My two local favorites are: 

• Gary Ackerman, owner of Ford Country in Henderson
• Adam Kutner (TV injury attorney)

 Check out the contributor reports here. See if you know any of the names or recognize any addresses. Of course, since being an actual journalist is too hard, Joe never bothered to pull the data from the Secretary of State’s website that would show his emphasis on “2,000 donors of less than $1,000 (to imply it was a grassroots funded measure). Well, maybe he did, but didn’t care. I don’t know what his political ideology or take on Ballot Question 1 is, but his “investigation” sucked. You failed to mention where most of the money came and about the bunches of prominent people who gave $1,000 or more. 

Gun owners have a huge machine, powered by mindless zombies who throw money at anything they don’t like. It’s a shame that gun owners don’t spend their money to tell other people what they should do and think that sending the NRA $35 a year for a magazine is helping out the cause. Not to mention all those wealthy gun owners and Second Amendment supporters who have been cowed into hiding their support for gun rights.

Unfortunately, that means commercials with some guy you’ve never heard of trying to imply law enforcement thinks more unenforceable laws are a good idea. Plus they have the media firmly in their pocket, but it’s nice when we catch “journalists” at their deceitful games. And Joe, it’s okay if you’re biased. Just admit it any at least think objectively, even if your segments really aren’t, but don’t pee on our legs and tell us it’s raining. Misleading and omission of critical facts is lying Joe. 

Vote No on Ballot Question 1.