Fast & Furious' Eric Holder: ‘I take personally as a failure’ the inability to pass gun control
In late October outgoing Attorney General lamented that his greatest personal failure as Attorney General was not getting more stringent gun control laws passed. As I shall show, it certainly was not for his lack of trying.
This is a very significant story but its not getting much attention, perhaps its because the media does not want us thinking about it too deeply. As Attorney General, Eric Holder could not pass laws - that is the job of Congress. So how would Eric Holder have gotten them to pass more gun control laws? Operation Fast and Furious is the answer, friends.
If you are not familiar with "Fast and Furious," it was a Justice Department operation that started early in 2009 where guns were permitted to be sold to known gun traffickers, with BATFE telling gun dealers to sell those guns to these miscreants, who then were permitted to “walk” those guns into the hands of criminals willing to pull the triggers and create mayhem. They literally armed criminals on purpose. They have given no coherent explanation or any reasonable logic for this other than they wanted to see where they would go. Well, we certainly learned the hard way. Hundreds are dead on both sides of the border as a result of arming those thugs, including US Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. A documented “Fast and Furious” gun sold to the cartels was left at the scene of his murder.
Gun ban extremists and their media sycophants will suggest what I am saying is crazy conspiracy theory talk, but frankly they don’t want to look at this and have done everything they can to mock those looking into it and block access to records of what happened. In reality, anyone wishing to ignore this and blow it off should be ashamed of themselves. Hundreds of dead cry for justice, and sadly our Justice Department was run by the man responsible for their deaths.
As I and many others have maintained for years, the point of "Fast and Furious" was to create carnage with firearms. Why else would the U.S. Government traffic firearms to known killers? Eric Holder and his boss President 0bama launched this cruel operation in the opening months of 0bama administration in hopes of creating death and mayhem so the media would drum up emotional hysteria for more anti-gun legislation. It was working too. I well remember all of the higher ups in the administration, including Hillary Clinton, as well as Democrats in Congress, passing on the lie that 90% of crime guns in Mexico came from the U.S., and that we had to ban semiautomatic firearms to stop it. Thank God for what happened next. Fox News and a reporter named William La Jeunesse, who went to Mexico, investigated and then exposed what was really going on. Fox News often gets grief from those who oppose freedom and this is why: they expose the truth and undermine the hideous things leftists will do to attack our Constitutional rights, including committing murder by arming people they knew would slaughter others without restraint. Credit must also be given to BATFE employees who were disgusted by what was going on and who blew the whistle. Sadly, they have paid a heavy penalty for exposing this insidious Obama-Holder operation.
Eric Holder and his boss should be prosecuted for the hundreds of deaths that resulted from their sending guns to drug cartels and murderous thugs. That, my friends, is what this story about Eric Holder’s lament is really about. This is a great stain on our Republic, a huge, still spreading blood stain. If this crime goes unpunished it will have been the greatest modern era conspiracy to commit mass murder in the Americas by the U.S. Government. Hopefully a future administration will fully investigate this and bring the guilty to justice for this hideous crime.
Tim Inwood is the current Legislative Liaison and Past President of the Clinton County Farmers and Sportsmen Association, an Endowment Member of the NRA and Life Member of the OGCA, A member of the Board of Directors of the OGCA, Executive Chairman of the Clinton County Republican Central Committee, and a volunteer for Buckeye Firearms Association.
Book Review: Negroes and the Gun - The Black Tradition of Arms
Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms. Nicholas Johnson, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 379 pages, 2014.
In response to a nonviolent civil rights worker who was surprised to see a firearm in the house of a well known black southern civil rights activist, the activist explained, “That’s a non-violent gun.”
This is one of scores of telling incidents and historical events documented by Professor Nicholas Johnson as he traces the American black tradition of gun ownership from its painful beginnings in slave days, through the Reconstruction and Jim Crow eras, the black diaspora to the industrial north, to the Civil Rights movement and on into the present.
The black tradition of arms is a neglected and, to some, perhaps, an inconvenient history. Although many will find it inspiring, modern progressives will probably wish to swish it away because it doesn’t align with their characteristic approach to social regulation, i.e., “We the government/elite will save you.” The progressive social cartoon poises black people as victims of the gun rather than proponents of the gun for personal defense and freedom. But history as revealed by Johnson says otherwise. American Blacks by necessity took up arms. They used them often and responsibly, and the presence of guns in black hands averted more violence than it caused, although as always the gun is a tool as well as a symbol, and taking up a gun can cause unforeseen (but not unforeseeable) problems.
Frederick Douglass counseled, “A good revolver, a steady hand and a determination to shoot,” as a way for former slaves to counter the man-hunters who attempted to seize blacks who had escaped to the North. Free state blacks often resisted and repelled incursions of slavers who came to reclaim what was then legally viewed as lost property. Armed groups of black men assembled at times to interdict slavers. Harriet Tubman of Underground Railroad fame was well known for carrying firearms and is often depicted rifle in hand. Many white southerners could not abide the idea of armed, independent black voters. This too much resembled true citizenship. After the Civil War when southern militias and nightriders attempted to disarm blacks, many of whom had been federal soldiers, there was often armed resistance. The subsequently adopted 14th Amendment attempted to assure that the rights, immunities and privileges of citizenship as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution also applied to the residents of the various American states, especially the new black citizens. Amazingly, in recent times in Chicago, the 14th Amendment had to be invoked once again in defense of the 2nd Amendment, a battle refought in a manner of speaking, in McDonald v Chicago, where a black man, the late Otis McDonald, had to go to all the way to the Supreme court to plead his right to own a gun in the city of Chicago. McDonald won. But Chicago, much like the southern Democrats of the Reconstruction Era, is still spending taxpayer money to impede the 2nd Amendment rights of good citizens. And as Johnson makes clear, there is also no doubt that many gun control laws of the last century-and-a-half were largely aimed at blacks.
And back in the Reconstruction Era South, the 14th Amendment, lawful authorities and the federal system were often a long way away, especially at night in the countryside. And as some of the accounts documented by Johnson reveal, when blacks resisted armed terrorists, it sometimes turned out after the sun rose that the bloodied attackers left behind were in fact the local authorities—sheriffs and deputies.
Violence was often lopsided. Early on in the days of the Underground Railroad blacks generally had only single shot weapons while the slavers tended to have the more modern repeating weapons. After the Emancipation and the War, blacks sometimes won, sometimes lost and often hung on, maintaining a sort of stasis made possible by the potential for defensive gun use. Armed blacks could not be attacked with impunity.
The storied NAACP enters the picture as a major player in legal cases involving armed self-defense by blacks, defending (unsuccessfully) WWI veteran Sgt. Edgar Caldwell for using his service revolver to kill a train conductor and wound a motorman who had been trying to stomp him to death after he resisted being thrown out of the white passenger section. Johnson presents more cases than can be recounted here, some virtually municipal in scale. In Elaine, Arkansas a white deputy was shot dead after he fired into a group of Negro farmers, veterans, who had formed a farmers union. In the ensuing violence, the governor mobilized troops, deputies roamed the countryside, resulting in 5 white and 25 black casualties. Murder indictments in the “scores” for the blacks were followed by kangaroo trials, some only an hour long. Eventually, with NAACP help, at the SCOTUS level of appeal the convictions were reversed. Justice Holmes justified the reversal on the grounds that the trials were merely an extension of mob violence. In Detroit, NAACP brought famous litigator Clarence Darrow into the Ossian Sweet case. Sweet, a dentist, along with friends and relatives, had been indicted for murder after a white mob attacked the house that he had purchased in an all white neighborhood on Detroit’s east side. Threats had been made and Sweet and friends armed themselves. Shots were fired and afterward a white man lay dead. The prosecutor’s office tried to present the case as incidence of armed Negroes firing on a peaceful community. In court, Darrow pointed out that prosecutors had called up a mob of eyewitnesses to testify there was no mob outside the house. After an initial mistrial Sweet was eventually acquitted. A compliment to Johnson as a scholar, being myself very interested in 2nd Amendment issues and having published extensively in this field, I had thought myself quite well acquainted with the Sweet case, but in this book I learned much more.
Of course the big problem to NAACP and black community leaders was balancing a non-violent political movement with the needs of personal home and self-defense. Non-violence wasn’t an effective political tactic for the dead. But neither was retaliatory violence good for the movement. The notion of armed aggressive black freedom fighters was more than enough to incite an unwinnable race war, and at the least could reverse progress and good will hard earned over the years. Hence the public commitment of Civil Rights Movement leadership to non-violence while privately their homes and sometimes their persons bristled with guns. It was a balancing act between political symbolism and survival. A movement of armed black men known as the Deacons protected non-violent marchers and the homes of community and movement leaders, all as unobtrusively as possible. When during the era of the Black Panthers, the Deacons and other organizational sympathizers morphed into a more militant movement, the checkbooks of northern white liberals closed to them, and support went to more moderate non-violent leaders.
In a time of threats, church bombings and burnings, Martin Luther King applied for a concealed carry permit and was turned down on the grounds that he had not demonstrated need. This is how the old unreformed “may issue” concealed carry licensing boards worked—back when boards had total discretionary power, the concealed carry permit became a boon granted to friends, cronies and brothers-in- law. Still, King was uneasy about the political ramifications of guns, so he stressed a low profile for his armed protectors. Another civil rights activist packed her gun in a paper bag everywhere she went, people thought it contained her lunch. Activists are quoted as stating that non violent or not, there were guns everywhere in the homes of movement leaders and members.
Back in the 19th Century, journalist/social commentator and provocative black essayist Ida B. Wells wrote: “The Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home. The more the Afro-American yields and cringes and begs, the more he is insulted, outraged and lynched.”
Unlike most professors Johnson knows whereof he writes when it comes to firearms. In an apt analogy he shows that the Winchester repeating level action rifle was the “assault weapon” of its time, being capable of a high rate of fire and easily reloadable. I know from personal conversations with Professor Johnson in the context of academic conferences (e.g., last year’s Second Amendment Symposium at Fordham Law School on that island of antigun sentiment known as Manhattan) that he owns and delights in an old Winchester .351 caliber rifle from 1907 or so. He enjoys showing antigun academic acquaintances that the idea of a semiautomatic so-called assault rifle has been around for a long time, and is not some new satanic invention causing havoc on society, but has long been part of the healthy social order. In the same way the Winchester rifle became a useful, freedom-preserving part of the emergent social order of the South, the Black tradition of arms. I may be attributing my own construal of meaning to Professor Johnson’s work here, if so I apologize, but you, dear reader, will get the idea. My point is that Johnson is not one of the hoplophobic hysterics that one encounters so frequently in academia. He is knowledgeable; his language is restrained, objective; his interpretations buoyed by an abundance of facts, documentation and experience.
Johnson’s book is extremely well researched. A Professor at Fordham Law School, Johnson’s scholarship is carefully anchored in citations. The depth of the research is impressive. This is not the sort of book that one takes in at a sitting. Its chapters and organization lend themselves well to episodic reading, however. Overall, though, one thing becomes certain: a commitment to non-violent political means and peace does not equate with lying down and dying when it comes to matters of self, life, home and family. Defense of home, hearth and family is the opposite of violence.
Johnson’s last chapter is especially impressive. He faces down many of the current progressive objections and myths concerning guns in private hands, even looking at the troubling differences between black and white homicide/victimizations. Recent and early 20th century victimization and crime studies show rates of blacks as victims and perpetrators at 10 times (or more) higher than the white population. Modern academics and journalists tend to blame this on the NRA and evil gun manufacturers. Johnson more rationally attributes the disproportion to a criminal “microculture,” even quoting W.E.B. Dubois on the subject. One of the big negative effects of unjust, broadly sweeping gun legislation is that it makes it difficult or impossible for blacks to defend themselves against this criminal microculture, the promise of imminence/omnipotence of the progressive state, being so much nonsense. The police or the state cannot defend: they can only appear after the fact. We should recall the reason that Otis McDonald was forced to litigate so that he could effectively defend self and family against Chicago gangs in his own home and city.
Also dealt with and dismissed is the myth that guns in the home are more of a risk to the home owner than to invaders, a much cited myth based on a lopsided study based on bad sampling and comparisons published in the consistently hoplophobic New England Journal of Medicine. Johnson also dispels the common myth that high numbers of guns are correlated with high levels of gun violence, showing that the amazing increases in gun ownership and owners in recent years have not correlated with increases in crime, quite the reverse. He sheds light on DGUs (Defensive Gun Uses), using a variety of survey sources that show most gun uses are non-violent, good citizens use guns to deter but not necessarily shoot social predators. Johnson attributes current antigun policies of black urban leaders to political alliances with progressives, who provide a great many incentives and blandishments to black communities in exchange for what are regarded as reliable voting blocks for progressive causes. He cites survey information that suggests current blacks are not as antigun as some imagine, providing guns go to good people.
A final anecdote, not from Johnson’s book, but which suggests some reasons for the disappearance of the black tradition of arms under an educational and informational system dominated by modern so-called progressive values. A professor and lawyer of my acquaintance, a black man, well educated and urbane, fairly affluent, returned recently with his family to Atlanta to set in order the effects and property of his recently deceased grandfather. In the home in a drawer by the old man’s bed they discovered a revolver in a box along with ammunition. It should be mentioned Atlanta had been, long ago, the scene of one of the race riots discussed in Johnson’s book, wherein many blacks armed themselves to resist attackers. My acquaintance and his family were terrified and alarmed by the gun and worried that it would go off or harm them in some way. They placed the box with the gun in a plastic garbage bag and put it in the trashcan behind the house, and called police. The police removed the gun. A few hours later, it must have been a nice revolver with an unsullied history, a police officer came back with a waiver the professor could sign transferring the gun to the officer personally. The professor did. So the revolver wasn’t wastefully destroyed. The moral? You see here what progressive propaganda can achieve in a generation or so. An item of utility, a means of freedom from terror and coercion, an heirloom, was transformed into a symbol of death and evil. As you can imagine, Dear Reader, Johnson’s account will not be well received in some circles because it says things that for some are unthinkable.
Johnson’s book is a blow against Orwellian history. A fine and illuminating book it is!
Dr. Brian Anse Patrick is a Professor of Communication at the University of Toledo and author of Rise of the Anti-Media: In-Forming the American Concealed Weapon Carry Movement and The Ten Commandments of Propaganda.
Antlerless Muzzleloader Season Harvest Increases Sharply in 2014
COLUMBUS, OH – Ohio’s muzzleloader hunters checked 6,613 antlerless white-tailed deer during a two-day season, Oct. 11-12, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). That is an 18 percent increase from 2013, when hunters checked 5,608 deer, the first year for the antlerless muzzleloader season.
The Ohio counties that reported the most checked deer during the 2014 antlerless-only muzzleloader season: Ashtabula (228), Columbiana (180), Coshocton (177), Licking (164), Tuscarawas (151), Guernsey (150), Trumbull (147), Stark (145), Knox (143) and Adams (142).
An additional 1,313 deer were harvested by archery hunters on Oct. 11-12. The total number of antlerless deer checked by hunters during the two days was 7,926, a 21 percent increase from 2013 (6,553).
Ohio hunters have many more opportunities to pursue deer throughout the fall and winter. The youth gun season is Nov. 22-23, gun season is Dec. 1-7, muzzleloader season is Jan. 2-5, 2015, and archery season is open through Feb. 1, 2015.
Hunting is the best and most effective management tool for maintaining Ohio’s healthy deer population. During the 2013-2014 season, Ohio hunters checked 191,459 deer. Ohio ranks fifth nationally in resident hunters and 11th in the number of jobs associated with hunting-related industries. Hunting has a more than $853 million economic impact in Ohio through the sale of equipment, fuel, food, lodging and more, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation’sHunting in America: An Economic Force for Conservation publication.
The ODNR Division of Wildlife remains committed to properly managing Ohio’s deer populations through a combination of regulatory and programmatic changes. The goal of Ohio’s Deer Management Program is to provide a deer population that maximizes recreational opportunities, while minimizing conflicts with landowners and motorists. This ensures that Ohio’s deer herd is maintained at a level that is both acceptable to most, and biologically sound.
Until recently, the populations in nearly all of Ohio’s counties were well above their target numbers. In the last few years, through increased harvests, dramatic strides have been made in many counties to bring those populations closer toward their goal. Once a county’s deer population is near goal, harvest regulations are adjusted to maintain the population.
ODNR ensures a balance between wise use and protection of our natural resources for the benefit of all. Visit the ODNR website at www.ohiodnr.gov.
Attack on PA state legislators exposes flaws in Ohio's concealed carry law - YOUR CALLS NEEDED
by Jim Irvine and Chad D. Baus
Last week, two Democrat lawmakers in Pennsylvania were attacked near their statehouse by a group of youths armed with a gun. The teens were in violation of laws prohibiting possession of the gun, and intended to break more laws by robbing the legislators. Shots were fired, so they were also comfortable violating laws prohibiting murder.
State Representative Marty Flynn (D) returned fire with his gun. He has a Pennsylvania carry license and was armed. He was able to defend his life from deadly attack because in Pennsylvania, it's legal to do that, even in government buildings, including the state Capitol building. In Ohio it's still a felony to possess guns for self defense in almost all government buildings.
HB 231, sponsored by Ron Maag, would fix this defect in Ohio law. It's time to eliminate victim zones in Ohio. Your legislators need to hear from you now and this issue needs to be addressed when the legislature reconvenes.
In Guns & Ammo's ranking of "Best States for Concealed Carry," Ohio ranks 41st, and falls far behind all of its border states. Michigan, which passed concealed carry one year before Ohio, ranks 31st. West Virgina ranks 32nd, Pennsylvania is 15th, Indiana comes in 14th and Kentucky is ranked 11th.
While working on campaigns in the coming weeks, please ask every candidate if they believe that Ohioans are more dangerous and less trustworthy than Pennsylvanians. Such thinking is the only way to justify current state law. Ask state legislative candidates what they are doing to fix Ohio law.
If you are unable to work on state legislative campaigns, call your state senator, state representative and Governor Kasich.
If they are an anti-self-defense Democrat, ask them why Democrats in Pennsylvania carry guns to protect their own, but in Ohio they rally against your right to do the same thing.
If they are a Republican, ask them why Pennsylvania’s Democrats are better on the issue than the Ohio Republicans. With Republicans holding both strong majorities in the Statehouse and the Governor's office, they could fix our law if they wanted to.
If they have any hope of bringing the Buckeye State into the 21st century when it comes to gun rights, Ohio's pro-gun rights legislators have their work cut out for them. No pro-gun legislation has been sent to the governor's desk since June 2011. While the Ohio House passed House Bill 203, an important concealed carry reform bill last year, the Ohio Senate has failed to act.
If legislators do not act, HB 203, HB 231 and many other pro-gun bills that are pending will die at the end of December.
If you want to see the General Assembly act to improve gun rights in ways that are already enjoyed by the majority of other states, call your Representative and Senator NOW and ask them when pro-gun legislation is going to move in Ohio. They want your vote in November. Tell them we want their votes too.
Jim Irvine is the Buckeye Firearms Foundation President, BFA PAC Chairman and recipient of the NRA-ILA's 2011 "Jay M. Littlefield Volunteer of the Year Award" and the CCRKBA's 2012 "Gun Rights Defender of the Year Award." Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, BFA PAC Vice Chairman, and an NRA-certified firearms instructor. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website.
BFA PAC endorsee's 'Machine Gun Social' has gun ban extremists in a tizzy
"A+" rated 2014 Buckeye Firearms Association PAC endorsee Ron Maag's recent announcement that he would be holding a 'Machine Gun Social' - a fundraiser involving the opportunity to fire fully-automatic firearms - has gun ban extremists, including his political opponent, in a tizzy.
On October 12, the Cincinnati Enquirer published an op-ed by Democrat Charlene Schneider, a psychologist who says she is running against Maag specifically because of his stance on Ohioans gun rights. From the op-ed, entited "Nothing ‘social’ about machine guns:"
Maag and I are on the opposite ends of the spectrum on most issues, but it was his position and attitude on guns that helped me make the final decision to challenge him in this election. At the end of 2013 he sent out a letter to his constituents bragging that he had been responsible for legislation that now allows conceal/carry license holders to take their concealed weapons into day care centers. Day care centers? That’s the place Ron Maag is most proud to let Ohioans take their guns? Does he seriously not have the precious, innocent faces of the children who lost their lives in the Sandy Hook massacre cemented in his brain to haunt him like most of us do? If the shooter had not had an automatic weapon, if he had to reload, fewer lives would have been lost.
No, in case you have forgotten, the Sandy Hook murderer did not have an automatic weapon, and yes, he had to reload. But Democrat Charlene Schneider claims otherwise.
There are three options here:
A) When the truth doesn't benefit Charlene Schneider, she makes up her own.
B) Charlene Schneider's entire campaign is based on something about which she knows nothing.
C) All of the above.
Fundraisers involving fully-automatic weapons are not new to Ohio. This isn't even Maags's first 'Machine Gun Social.' But Charlene Schneider clearly hasn't been paying attention.
In 2012, Representative Margaret Conditt announced a similar event, and the resulting tirade from gun ban extremists helped the event become a huge success - something we later discovered through a public records request was anticipated by a Michael Bloomberg crony who, at the time, was working in Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman's office.
The Bloomberg crony, Lee Roberts, actually tried to kill a press conference staged by Democrat legislators and the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence to criticize the Conditt fundraiser.
From the Roberts emails:
April 25, 2012:
"It really should be something Progress Ohio does a snarky email about and maybe some liberal group uses to raise money, not something we should be a part of. I'm going to try to kill it or at the least keep us out of it."
May 1, 2012, under the subject line "Remember that press conference I was trying to kill."
"This has been the biggest cluster ever."
May 4, 2012, Roberts forward a link to a Buckeye Firearms Association report about the fundraiser, telling his New York bosses:
"...that press conference OCAGV was having was a bad idea. They are going to raise a ton of cash off this now and have their own event talking about how it shows people support their agenda."
And, of course, that is just what happened. Later that summer, Maag hosted his first 'Machine Gun Social,' which drew the attention of ABC News. In coverage at the time, I wrote:
The results are clear. If you want to have a successful fundraiser, earn some free media coverage for your campaign and cause infighting among the gun ban crowd as a bonus, sponsor a machine gun shoot!
I don't know if there has been any infighting this go 'round, but Charlene Schneider is doing a wonderful job at helping her opponent publicize his fundraiser! Her op-ed has resulted, once again, in national promotion for Maag's event, details for which follow:
Saturday, October 25th
11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Hob Camp Nature Reserve 1815 S. State Route 123
Lebanon, Ohio 45036
Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, BFA PAC Vice Chairman, and an NRA-certified firearms instructor. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website.
Buckeye Firearms Association Announces Membership Program
Become a Charter Member of BFA Today
The threats we face to our Second Amendment rights are growing every day.
In response, Buckeye Firearms Association is growing to mount a stronger defense than ever before.
We're proud to announce that we are now offering annual memberships for just $35 a year.
Here's what you get ...
- 24/7 defense of your Second Amendment rights
- Official BFA membership card and decal
- Discounts on select training and events
- Invitations to gun raffles and fundraisers
- and more
Stand with us. Become a member of Buckeye Firearms Association today.
NRA-PVF Candidate Ratings and Endorsements are Now Posted for the 2014 General Election
Tuesday, November 4 is Election Day! Your NRA Political Victory Fund has rated and made endorsements of pro-gun/pro-hunting candidates in the upcoming federal and state elections. These candidate ratings can now be found at the NRA-PVF website. Before casting your vote in the general election on or before November 4 depending upon early voting in your state, please visit this site to learn who will best protect your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage.
Be sure to encourage your family, friends, fellow gun owners and sportsmen in your state to support and vote for pro-gun/pro-hunting candidates on or before Tuesday, November 4.
Click here to access the NRA-PVF candidate ratings and endorsements.