Tuesday, December 31, 2024

As 'Gun Violence' Reportedly Declined, Vox Completely Misses the Plot

As 'Gun Violence' Reportedly Declined, Vox Completely Misses the Plot

AP Photo/Michael Conroy, File

As 2024 comes to a close, a lot of people are going to look back on the year. This is common and I can't say that we won't do it, either. I guess it's some aspect of human nature that drives us to do this and I'm not remotely critical of it. After all, I'm a history buff, so I do it on slightly broader time periods.

But far too many people will look back without any real context or any desire to look beyond their preconceived notions.

I'm talking about Vox, where it seems someone decided to look back at the year with regard to so-called gun violence. It's just too bad they glossed over just about everything.

If you follow the news about gun violence in America, you know that there’s a lot to be pessimistic about.

Guns were already a major public health concern when the pandemic hit and the murder rate skyrocketed. The surge in homicide in 2020 and 2021, research has shown, was best understood as a surge in gun violence, with firearms-related deaths counting for the majority of the increase. Not all communities suffered equally: In 2020, 61 percent of victims of gun homicide were Black, with the largest increases among boys and men ages 10–44. The following year, according to the Gun Violence Archive, the number of mass shootings — shootings in which four or more people, not including the shooter, are shot and injured or killed — reached 689, up more than 50 percent from the number of mass shootings in 2018.

And then the Supreme Court issued a ruling that functionally allowed all Americans to carry weapons in public. Coming on the heels of an awful rise in gun violence, experts warned that it would almost certainly get worse.

But that hasn’t really happened. Some of the worst-case scenarios, based on the recent trends around gun violence, haven’t yet come to pass. To be clear, the United States still has exceptionally high levels of gun violence. The country has more guns per capita than any other nation on Earth, and a messy patchwork of laws that make regulation extremely difficult. For those reasons, the country is still incredibly vulnerable to seeing more gun-related deaths in the future.

This is, to me, the big story. Vox was right to put this near the beginning because Bruen was touted as the end of the republic by some, all because no suddenly we'd be the Wild West with gunfights happening daily, with people gunning down others over perceived slights, and even Vox has to acknowledge that none of that happened.

Of course, they still have to make it about guns--they ignore, for example, that we also have higher levels of non-gun homicides than most other developed nations have of homicides in total--but the violence that was supposed to occur didn't.

If it ended there, this would be fine. I'd applaud them for admitting to something that we all know they'd rather not.

But they don't stop there. They don't expound on this point alone, either.

It would have been fine if they also kept it to acknowledging that it looked like we were going to see an outbreak of political violence that simply didn't happen. Two assassination attempts on Trump--one thwarted without the bad guy ever getting a shot at the now president-elect--signalled that things could be getting sporty, but things have largely died down now. I think they're downplaying what happened since assassination attempts against presidential candidates aren't exactly common, much less two of them, but fine. We can disagree about the overall framing.

But then we get to this bit:

Ghost guns don’t have serial numbers, which make them difficult for law enforcement to track where they came from. For that reason, they’re especially appealing for people looking to commit crimes and not get caught.

They’ve become a huge problem in recent years, with the number of such weapons being recovered from crime scenes increasing a staggering 1,083 percent between 2017 and 2021. Many of these guns were not printed at home, like Mangione’s apparently was, but instead were sold as easy-to-assemble kits online. Just one ghost gun manufacturer was responsible for 88 percent of the guns recovered during that time.

The government moved quickly to address the problem. In 2022, the Biden administration said that the ghost gun kits and their receivers (or frames) were subject to the same federal regulations as regular guns — meaning, they needed a serial number. The rule was challenged in the courts, but it appears that the Supreme Court is likely to uphold the law, which the government says is necessary for cracking down on the untraceable guns. Meanwhile, the gunmaker responsible for most of the guns showing up at crime scenes was hit with lawsuits. It appears they have since shut down. According to an analysis by The Trace, the numbers of ghost guns being recovered from crime scenes are now falling in several cities.

This is interesting because the Biden administration really didn't do what this piece claims.

Not really, anyway.

See, the federal rules as they currently stand only apply to incomplete receivers manufactured by third parties. 3D printers can still make them without a serial number, and if you're looking to get into the business of making "ghost guns" for illegal sale, those make a whole lot more financial sense in the first place.

So why has the number of "ghost guns" been dropping? Maybe it's because crime itself is dropping? You can't recover things at crime scenes if there are no crime scenes in the first place.

Besides which, despite the hysteria, unserialized firearms might be common enough in criminal circles, but only if you include guns with serial numbers removed but that were manufactured by a traditional manufacturer. The claims of "growing numbers" and such might not have been false, exactly, but they always neglected to mention that it was still just a small percentage of the total number of firearms. 

Sure, Polymer80 shut down, but again, this is a case of assuming correlation automatically translates to causation. You can't do that.

Especially as all the other hysteria noted didn't come to pass. That should be a clue that maybe things are a bit more nuanced than the author would like to believe.

https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2024/12/26/as-gun-violence-reportedly-declined-vox-completely-misses-the-plot-n1227233

Don's Tuesday Column

THE WAY I SEE IT by Don Polson       Red Bluff Daily News 12/31/2024

    The more things change, they say...

It’s an old saying: The more things change, the more they stay the same. The rock group, The Who (dating myself but younger readers should look up the lyrics), had a pithy line: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” (from “Won’t get fooled again”).

Are you hoping that anything will really change for the better here in California? Our state’s political and economic elites think they have valuable guidance for the rest of America. Hint to elites: You are right, but not the way you mean; our state’s experiment in self-rule is mostly an aberration, a warning to, and an example for, the rest of America—of what not to do.

***

More on that after noting an inspiring (for some, a “concerning”) event at what we consider our “local” California ski area: Mt. Shasta Ski Park. Throughout the 90s and later, we had many cherished trips to Alpine (downhill) and Nordic (cross country) sections of the ski park.

Work and budgets hindered venturing beyond Mt. Shasta. It was a rewarding recreational learning experience (which involved both upright technique and the occasional “yard sale” of scattered equipment after a fall) in the shadow of that magnificent mountain.

Every mountain can have a “vibe” that envelopes visitors who hike, camp, or otherwise recreate thereupon. For those that ski, board, slide on tubes, and then relax on patios and in parking lots amidst the unparalleled beauty of mountain vistas, it’s a special atmosphere. Some would say it’s a religious, or at least a near-religious, “vibe.”

News of a 20-foot tall statue of Mother Mary, holding her baby Jesus, on the top of Douglas Butte at Mt. Shasta Ski Park, may have come your way. The Daily News doesn’t cover Shasta County, and we only returned here about 10 days ago.

I was searching for ski park elevations and saw some headlines: “Mt. Shasta Ski Park Unveils Controversial Virgin Mary Statue at the Top of Douglas Butte” (Activenorcal.com, 12/09); and “Statue honoring Mount Shasta's ‘beauty and spiritual power’ completed after controversy” (Redding.com, 12/17).

The “controversy”? While secular, some would say pagan, religions proliferate, the placement of a statue of a religious figure, devoutly revered by Catholics worldwide, prominently placed by a devout Catholic family on land that they own—rubs some the wrong way.

“Our Lady of Mt. Shasta...symbolizes a deep connection to the area’s beauty and tranquility, encouraging all to embrace faith, kindness, love, and peace on earth” (https://www.skipark.com/our-lady-of-mt-shasta). I find it comforting, even inspiring, to know that the next time we venture to Mt. Shasta, we can spend a few minutes in reflection, whether during the Christmas season or not, on the single greatest event for the good of humanity in history.

1) No one is forcing anyone to use the ski area, and 2) you’d have to strain your neck and risk a collision to try to see the statue from I-5 (Douglas Butte is a fleeting image only if you know just where and when to look), and 3) it’s not visible from either Mount Shasta city or McCloud.

So, who is really offended? I think we already know: The same political and cultural crowd that whines and complains over devout, patriotic tributes to the founding and advancing of America, and this nation’s ideals of constitutional, representative self-rule.

They’re for “democracy,” (three wolves and two sheep voting on the dinner menu); they vehemently, even violently oppose anything that doesn’t fit their notion of progressive, “woke” ideology. Even when majorities support things they oppose, or disapprove of things they support, the majority must be “misinformed,” and condemned for not realizing that they think “wrongly.”

These leftists don’t object to 1) the worship of nature in the Gaia “religion,” or 2) a Satanic display on public property (in Minnesota a while back), or 3) revering the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the European Union and its International Criminal Court, or 4) demanding respect for symbols of the quasi-religious Black Lives Matter movement.

***

More stuff not likely to change: 1) “PG&E electricity bills rising far faster than other utility titans,” faster than inflation—blame expensive “renewables,” not fossil fuels. 2) “Gender-identity law elicits praise from [sex change] advocates.” To these fanatics, children belong to the state, not the parents. 3) “Biden signs defense bill despite objections to ban health care for children.” Drugs and procedures trying to change the sex of children on military bases is not—not—health care; it’s irreversibly harmful.

4) “Lawmakers begin special session to protect state laws from second Trump presidency.” Apparently, Californians need protection from: a) higher gas prices (“Another refinery shuts down. What happens to gas prices?”);

b) Cheaper houses (“As affordable housing disappears, state scrambles to shore up losses”);

c) Water for homes and farms (“Water flow cuts fuel the debate over imperiled smelt”);

d) Better educated kids (“State test scores inch up, but still lag pre-Covid numbers”).

Dems Are in Disarray — Here's Hoping They Stay That Way

Dems Are in Disarray — Here's Hoping They Stay That Way

AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar

Top O' the Briefing

Happy Friday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Kerzenwuud had a habit of belting out an a cappella rendition of "Livin' la Vida Loca" at what the local authorities considered inappropriate times. 

I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas and Feast of St. Stephen. I think I will be full until Groundhog Day. 

Because the party that holds the White House historically doesn't do well in midterm elections, conventional wisdom dictates that the Republicans only have until 2026 to be ambitious with their agenda. Conventional wisdom isn't what it used to be, however, and historical political trends have been a bit wobbly for the last several years. For example, the Republicans weren't exactly world-beaters in the 2022 midterms.

President-elect Donald Trump is the wild card who has upended the regular order of the political universe, which means that the Democrats probably shouldn't pencil in recapturing the House in a couple of years. There's also the fact that the party has lost its way so badly that it may need more than just two years to become functional again.

There have been a few people on the Left who have been honestly assessing some of it went so horribly wrong for them this year and they aren't painting pretty pictures. This is from something that Matt wrote yesterday:

Doug Schoen, a former advisor to President Bill Clinton, is sounding the alarm over the current direction of the Democratic Party, warning that the party is facing a “systemic problem” that goes far beyond the issues of “woke” culture and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Appearing on Fox News Wednesday, Schoen laid out his concerns, urging the party to return to fiscal responsibility and focus on issues that matter most to everyday Americans.

Schoen highlighted the dramatic shift in the Democratic Party’s economic approach, contrasting it with the policies that defined the Clinton administration. “When Bill Clinton was president, we cut spending, we balanced the budget, we ran a surplus,” he said. “Now the Democrats have created the greatest deficit in history. And it’s ultimately what cost Kamala Harris and the Democrats control of the White House and the Congress.”

Many reliable Democratic voters have admitted that the pitiful state of the Biden-Harris economy drove them to vote for Trump. Not only did the Dems wreck the economy, they were in full-throated denial about having done so. Their flying monkeys in the mainstream media ran interference for them, essentially telling voters who expressed concerns about the economy that they were idiots. 

The party also revels in its fiscal irresponsibility. Lacking any real message or viable candidates, they have been trying to buy votes. As we've seen with the recent spending fight, none of the elected Democratic officials are interested in changing their profligate spending ways. 

Rick wrote about Democratic mega-fundraiser Lindy Li, who hasn't been pulling any punches since the election:

Li, a frequent critic of top Democrats like Bernie Sanders and a former rising star in the party, called the Democratic Party "a cult" after coming out in support of Trump defense secretary nominee Pete Hesgeth and getting hammered for it. The reaction was so toxic that she announced she was quitting the Democratic Party.

"This past week has been harrowing for me," Li told Piers Morgan in Wednesday's "Uncensored" episode. "This Saturday, I went on ‘Fox & Friends,’ and I said, ‘Democrats have a stench of loser hanging over them.’ As soon as I said that, there were boycott campaigns against me. Unblock, unfollow campaigns."

The Dems are in need of more than just a quick rebranding and slick sales job from their friends in the media. They need a complete overhaul. The good news for the Republicans is that the Democratic elites are just as dishonest with themselves as they are with the voters. It's unlikely that they'll be able to admit what's truly wrong with the party for a while.

Trump and the GOP still need to be full-throttle next year. They can accomplish a lot while the Democrats are wandering around so lost. 

An aggressive agenda might just help them buck historical trends in 2026, too.

https://pjmedia.com/stephen-kruiser/2024/12/27/the-morning-briefing-dems-are-in-disarray-heres-hoping-they-stay-that-way-n4935444

Let's See If These Cable Nets Doubling Down on TDS Boosted Post-Election Ratings (Spoiler: NOPE!)

Let's See If These Cable Nets Doubling Down on TDS Boosted Post-Election Ratings (Spoiler: NOPE!)

Twitchy

Plummeting ratings have resulted in pay cuts at MSNBC, and that cable net along with speculation that CNN could be sold off this year is really hurting, and it's all self-inflicted.

On Election Day voters showed what they thought about all of the lefty media's daily TDS meltdowns based on total BS, and viewers have grown weary of the insanity on MSNBC and CNN: 

Ouch! And it couldn't be more deserved:

The differences are far starker for the TV networks that have been consumed by political news.

After election night through Dec. 13, the prime-time viewership of MSNBC was an average of 620,000, down 54% from the pre-election audience this year, the Nielsen company said. For the same time comparison, CNN’s average of 405,000 viewers was down 45%.

At Fox News Channel, a favorite news network for Trump fans, the post-election average of 2.68 million viewers is up 13%, Nielsen said. Since the election, 72% of the people watching one of those three cable networks in the evening were watching Fox News, compared to 53% prior to election day.

Maybe CNN should give Scott Jennings his own show and that might help turn their numbers slightly in the other direction. MSNBC is especially beyond saving. 

Yep, insanity is exactly what caused that kind of a ratings drop. Also maybe a lot of their previous viewers realize they were lied to repeatedly and won't go back for more.

Monday, December 30, 2024

Why These Liberal Lawyers Think the Gov't Should Use 'Nuclear Option' to Prevent Trump from Taking Office

Why These Liberal Lawyers Think the Gov't Should Use 'Nuclear Option' to Prevent Trump from Taking Office

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Liberals are never going just to accept the fact that President-elect Donald Trump blew the election out of the water and defeated outgoing Vice President Kamala Harris, amping efforts to prevent Trump from assuming office. Many are attempting to invoke constitutional provisions or unprecedented legal maneuvers and undermine democratic principles by allowing government institutions to circumvent the will of the voters, even if that means using nuclear powers to keep him out of the Oval Office. 

In an op-ed by The Hill, two left-leaning lawyers, Evan Davis and David Schulte, are urging the federal government to invoke the rarely used Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to keep Trump taking office. They argued that the incoming president’s involvement in the January 6, 2021, Capitol protests and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election results acts as an “insurrection” against the Constitution. 

The unlikelihood of congressional Republicans doing anything that might elect Harris as president is obvious. But Democrats need to take a stand against Electoral College votes for a person disqualified by the Constitution from holding office unless and until this disability is removed. No less is required by their oath to support and defend the Constitution. A vote for a candidate disqualified by the Constitution is plainly in accordance with the normal use of words ‘not regularly given… no different from disqualification based on other constitutional requirements such as age, citizenship from birth, and 14 years’ residency in the United States. 

To make an objection under the Count Act requires a petition signed by 20 percent of the members of each House. If the objection is sustained by a majority vote in each house, the vote is not counted, and the number of votes required to be elected is reduced by the number of disqualified votes. If all votes for Trump were not counted, Kamala Harris would be elected president.”

The attorneys wrote that to object to the Count Act, it requires a petition signed by 20 percent of the members of each House, which, if sustained by the majority vote, the vote is not counted, and the number of disqualified votes reduces the number of votes required to be elected. Therefore, they claim that Harris would become president if all the votes for Trump were not counted. 

Despite the lawyer's argument, several Democrats said they would not object to Trump’s win— even those who opposed his presidency after the 2016 election.  

Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) said he would “respect the wishes of the American people” and that there would be a “pretty sort of normal transfer” of powers. 

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), one of the many Democrats who refused to accept Trump’s win in 2016, said she is not “intending to do that again because I think that people don’t differentiate.” 

In addition, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said he has not spoken to a single Democrat who plans to try to prevent Trump from being inaugurated. He said if he had, he would “certainly discourage it.” 

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2024/12/26/liberal-lawyers-suggest-gov-should-use-nuclear-option-to-prevent-trump-from-taking-office-n2649606?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl