What if they want your life? (*Video*)

I don’t even know what to say about this.

A woman who was shot in the face during an ATM robbery is relived the accused shooter was arrested and in jail but is still in fear as the police search for another suspect.

Police said (Suspect) put a gun to her temple and pulled the trigger three-and-a-half weeks ago.

She lived, but is in constant pain.

Go watch the video at the link above.

And what sort of person would do this?


Perhaps we should show him what getting shot in the face is like.

When does a simple Larceny of a Vehicle charge warrant $500K bail?

So dude gets arrested for stealing a motorcycle and gets hit with a MASSIVE bail amount.

A man arrested Sunday by Wake County sheriff’s deputies who said he had a stolen motorcycle was being held on unusually high bail of $500,000 because he has felony charges pending in at least three other counties.

And he’s not just waiting on charges, he’s been convicted of some (read: “a lot”) too.


He doesn’t sound like he is planning on reforming himself.

Ask me some questions

I had fun doing my audio blog post a few days ago. (Check it out if you’ve not listened) I’d like to do some more audio blogging. I’m not yet ready to try a full on podcast, but maybe. I’d need a co-host to do that.

So to get me started, ask me some questions. If you’re hard core, you could use Audacity (or any other MP3 recording device) to record your question, comment, rant, whatever, send it to me, and I’ll respond.

Even you gun haters out there. Go ahead, ask away. Email your questions, or recordings, to [email protected]

How to cause anarchy by telling people what the law actually says

Since the story came up on Facebook, I thought I’d fire up the microphone and tell you all about the time I told all my high school peers how to beat a traffic ticket in California.

It’s not like they get better

Prison is a punishment. It really isn’t something that cures people of their urges.

Police on Friday accused a Raleigh man of an attempted sex offense with a seven year-old child.

He’s been to prison for this before

Suspect (Bonus: his sex offender profile)

And for a bunch of other things.

#NRA’s Billy Johnson imagines a world where guns were treated like other rights Gun control fanatics freak out

I’ve long thought that the bulk of anti-gun activists are emotionally challenged individuals. It appears that they are mentally challenged as well. How else do you explain the virulent reaction to what is really an innocuous video?





Oh dear! What did the NRA say now? Are children going to be forced to carry AR-15s in class? Are we finally becoming Margaret Atwood’s totalitarian Christianist theocracy, with children being forced to be the revolutionary vanguard?

Well, not exactly. It seems that Billy Johnson, of NRA News and Amidst The Noise has asked us a simple question. Why does US “gun policy” start from the  strange position of assuming that it is a good government position to limit access to a fundamental Constitutional right? Billy asks why guns aren’t treated like every other thing our government calls a right.

Watch the video and see for yourself.

You see the part where he says we should force all children to carry guns at school? Me neither.

Billy asks some good questions. Whenever something is considered a “Right” by our government, the Left goes out of their way to insist that the government not only allow people that right, but pay for it. Or force others to pay for it. Education? It’s a “Right” and so schools are free. We’ll leave aside for now the discussion of what is and is not a right. Go talk with Kevin Baker if you want to know the difference between a “Right” and “something that people have decided is important and so try to call a ‘Right’ but actually isn’t.”

Billy is correct. Since gun ownership is a fundamental Constitutional right, why is the government going out of its way to make it as difficult as possible to exercise that right? Why does the Federal government tolerate some states in their attempt to make it extremely difficult to “keep” arms and almost impossible to “bear” them? Would they tolerate a state which treated your right to free speech the same way?

If the Left was consistent, they would insist that the Second Amendment be treated just like the First. But no one actually expects the Left to be consistent. So instead of acknowledging the arguments made by Billy, they misrepresent his statements, freak out publicly, and insist that he is some sort of crazy lunatic for even opening his mouth. You can always tell who the Left thinks is a danger. The ones they attack the loudest are the ones they know are hurting them.

Well, Billy, you’re taking flak. That means you’re over the target.

There’s nothing they won’t try to ban

If you’ve ever wondered what it was like to deal with Carrie Nation and her band of obnoxious anti-alcohol crusaders, try to have a conversation with the gun ban crowd. There is nothing they won’t try to ban. For the Children™

Via email:

On Tuesday, June 17, we alerted you that the North Carolina House will consider bill HB1250 called “AMEND DEFINITION OF DANGEROUS FIREARM.”

That bill was dropped into the Senate Rules and Operations of the Senate Committee. It has now been revised and added to another bill HB 369, Criminal Law Changes and will be discussed in that committee tomorrow, July 23.

The new wording of the referenced portion of the bill reads:


SECTION 10.(a) G.S.14-316 reads as rewritten:

Ҥ 14-316. Permitting young children to use dangerous firearms.

(a)It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly permit a child under the age of 12 years to have access to, or possession, custody or use in any manner whatever, of any gun, pistol or other dangerous firearm, whether such weapon be loaded or unloaded, unless the person has the permission of the child’s parent or guardian, and the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

(b)Air rifles, air pistols, and BB guns shall not be deemed “dangerous firearms” within the meaning of subsection (a) of this section except in the following counties: Anson, Caldwell, Caswell, Chowan, Cleveland, Cumberland, Durham, Forsyth, Gaston, Harnett, Haywood, Mecklenburg, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Union, Vance.”

This section becomes effective December 1, 2014, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.’

The “certain purposes” are not spelled out but, most other countries, including the Czech Republic, Croatia and Kuwait, define these guns as “dangerous firearms” and restrict their use to children 18 and older. Most restrict velocity and some restrict pellet size as well. New Jersey and Rhode Island define all non powder guns as firearms, which generally ensures that all non-powder guns are kept out of the hands of children (absent direct adult supervision), and that felons and other individuals prohibited from possessing firearms are similarly barred from possessing non-powder guns

The current NC law,
G.S.14-316 reads as rewritten:
7″§ 14-316. Permitting young children to use dangerous firearms.
(a)It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly permit a child under the age of 12 years to have access to, or possession, custody or use in any manner whatever, of any gun, pistol or other dangerous firearm, whether such weapon be loaded or unloaded, unless the person has the permission of the child’s parent or guardian, and the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have compiled national data on non-powder gun injuries which illustrate the inherent danger of these weapons. Between 2001 and 2011, non-powder guns injured 209,981 people nationwide, including 145,423 children age 19 or younger. In 2011 alone, 16,451 injuries – including 10,288 injuries to children age 19 and younger – resulted from the use of non-powder guns. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, BB guns and pellet rifles cause an average of four deaths per year.

In 2011 two North Carolina children were killed within a week of each other from injuries sustained from pellet guns. And a 7 year-old was charged with two felonies for shooting at passing cars with a BB gun in 2013.

Because non-powder guns are designed to discharge projectiles, often at high speeds and with significant force, they should not be confused with toy guns. Both non-powder and toy guns, however, are often designed to appear almost indistinguishable from actual firearms, and may be mistaken for firearms by law enforcement or others. According to a New York Times investigation, “In recent years, dozens of police officers in Texas, California, Maryland, Florida and elsewhere have shot children and adults armed with what they believed were handguns but that were determined later to be BB guns or other types of air pistols.”

Kids injured and killed with Airsoft pellet guns-

1-year-old Georgia toddler
15 year-old Pennsylvania boy
5 year-old Kansas boy
10 year-old California boy
9 year-old Alaska boy
10 year-old Michigan girl
12 year-old New York boy
7 year-old West Virginia boy

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics -
The range of muzzle velocities for non powder guns overlaps velocities reached by traditional firearms.
Non powder guns pose a serious risk of injury, permanent disability, and even death.
Non powder guns (BB guns, pellet guns, air rifles, paintball guns) are weapons and should never be characterized as toys.

Stop this dangerous portion of the bill!!
Please contact as many members of the Senate committee as you can tonight or before 9am tomorrow and urge them to keep these non powder guns designated as dangerous weapons!



A little background. There are currently 17 counties (out of 100) in North Carolina which deem air rifles, air pistols, and BB guns to be “Dangerous Weapons” for the purpose of allowing children to use them unaccompanied.

  • Anson
  • Caldwell
  • Caswell
  • Chowan
  • Cleveland
  • Cumberland
  • Durham
  • Forsyth
  • Gaston
  • Harnett
  • Haywood
  • Mecklenburg
  • Stanly
  • Stokes
  • Surry
  • Union
  • Vance

In these counties, and not in the other 83, it’s a Class 2 misdemeanor to allow your child to shoot a BB gun in the back yard unless you’re standing right there. We can debate whether or not this is a good idea, but it’s not exactly a crime worthy of 3 months in prison and a $500 fine. It’s not the same thing as Assault, which is also a Class 2 misdemeanor.

The reason that they are only removing 5 from the list of 17 is that in North Carolina there have something called a “local bill.” That is a state law that will only apply in certain counties. The most recent example of that was the Durham firearm registration that got overturned. It was a local bill that only applied in Durham. The limit on any given local bill is 5 counties. So the sponsors of this bill had to stop adding counties at 5. There is some talk that some legislators are miffed that they didn’t run a general bill and eliminate all 17.

So this is the hill that the new NCGV leader (and Bloomberg puppet) has chosen to die on. She wants to keep it a crime equivalent to assault for you to let your child shoot a BB gun without direct supervision. If you check out their webpage, they want to see the law changed to make it a crime to allow anyone under 18 to use BB guns unsupervised.

NCGV’s Position- NCGV opposes unsupervised use of these devices by children. We would rather see this law strengthened as it is in most countries to prohibit unsupervised use until 18 years of age.

I think it’s because they know that children raised around firearms won’t grow up to be irrationally afraid of guns when they grow up. They know that they have to make children fear and hate guns so that they will have some members when the current crop of old white gun haters die.

How long until we see these strange women attacking gun stores and Walmart BB gun displays with hatchets?

Japete lying more than usual

I’m not going to link to Brady Campaign board member and all around lunatic Joan Peterson’s blog. I had to stop reading her blithering maunderings a long time ago. There’s only so much crazy I can deal with, and she’s over the line. But Weer’d Beard reads her so I don’t have to.

I have been writing about things that can go wrong when the wrong people are able to get their hands on loaded guns. But it’s not just the wrong ( prohibited buyers) who do bad things with guns and bullets. It’s sometimes those who can legally buy guns who have no intent to kill anyone but do anyway in a moment of anger, depression, jealousy, during a relationship separation, after too much alcohol, or while believing, sometimes falsely, that another is out to harm them. Occasionally a shooting is justified to save one’s life. But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other( pg. 10)

Link is safe, it goes to Weer’d.

Let’s discuss the last statement, and the unwarranted inferences she draws.

The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other (pg.10)

She links to this Bureau of Justice Statistics PDF. In addition to mischaracterizing it as a chart on “Gun Deaths™,” she fails to take into account is this statement at the bottom of the BJS chart.

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. The percentages of victim/offender
relationships are based on the 63.1% of homicides from 1980 through 2008 for which the victim/
offender relationships were known. The percentages of homicides involving multiple victims or
offenders were known for 69.1% of incidents.

That’s quite an omission, isn’t it? They’re leaving out the more than one third of single victim/single offender relationship data.

Let’s go to the source. The FBI’s Crime in the United States 2012. I took the top line data and made a pie chart to show the victims in each category of relationship,


Look at the first three largest categories of relationships. “Unknown,” “Acquaintance,” and “Stranger.” We can even see, by process of elimination, what the FBI considers an “Acquaintance.” The FBI defines “Acquaintance” as a person who is not a “Stranger,” but is also not a

  • Husband
  • Wife
  • Mother
  • Father
  • Son
  • Daughter
  • Brother
  • Sister
  • “Other Family”
  • Friend
  • Boyfriend
  • Girlfriend
  • Neighbor
  • Employee
  • Employer

So it’s basically someone who you’re not related to, not friends with, don’t live near nor have some employment relationship with, but you still know. Somehow.

You know who comes to mind when I try to come up with a person who is none of the things above? Drug dealers. Rival gang members. Criminal associates. Not related, not friends, not neighbors, and not in some sort of employer/employee relationship.

Clearly, “Acquaintance” is a very broad category of people you don’t really know all that well, but just don’t happen to be perfect strangers. And when you add up all the “Unknown,” “Stranger,” and “Acquaintance” murders, they represent 79.65% of all murders in the US during 2012. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the myth that it’s just family members murdering each other in a fit of pique.

Moving on, let’s look at the unwarranted inference Joan Peterson draws from this data.

Occasionally a shooting is justified to save one’s life. But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other.

So in Joan Peterson’s tiny little mind, the fact that people involved in homicides (sort of) know each other means that using a gun to defend your own life against a person you (sort of) know is wrong.

Does that even make sense? Is that even rational? This is what I call the “Reverse Rumplestiltskin Defense.” In Rumplestiltskin, the woman gets hauled off to a dungeon and forced to spin straw into gold, which, of course, she cannot do. Rumplestiltskin offers to do the spinning for her in exchange for her first born child. Later, after marriage and now that she’s pregnant, she resists. Rumplestiltskin, for some reason, offers her a deal. Figure out my name and I’ll give up my claim to your child. On her third guess, she gets the name and Rumplestiltskin vanishes, without taking the child. Joan’s view is the exact inverse of the story.

In Joan Peterson’s view, it might be OK for me to shoot a perfect stranger in self defense. But as soon as I know the guy’s name (or, as is probably the case in most of the murders, his “street” name) I’m not allowed to shoot him? Is that even sane?

What we’re dealing with here is the same thing that causes the gun haters to come out of the woodwork to decry guns after school shootings but to refuse to acknowledge the common everyday killings. They know that if they went on TV and talked about Ice Dog shooting Ray-Ray, no one would ever call them back. The reality is that most murders are among and between criminals or are criminals killing family members. It’s rare that those murders leap out into what we might call “polite society.” We tend not to care if criminals kill each other. As long as they are killing each other, they’re not bothering us. It’s cold, but true.

Joan misuses incomplete statistics to draw an unwarranted inference. And that, plus her enormous lack of sense, is why I stopped reading her.

Drunken getaway driver

Some people can’t help themselves. They just seem to attract trouble.

An officer responding to reports of a disturbance early Sunday morning ended up filing multiple charges against a 45-year-old woman, including being the getaway driver in an armed robbery.

When you’re breaking the law, try not to cause enough of a disturbance that someone calls the cops on you.


She’s got a track record of causing problems.

Stealing dresses

Not all crime is violent, but it takes a certain kind of person to be a criminal.

Police took a Knightdale woman into custody over the weekend after she was accused of conspiring with someone to steal 25 women’s dresses from a Belk’s store at The Streets at Southpoint shopping mall in Durham.

Most people don’t like to take what isn’t theirs.


Others, however, will rob you blind and probably won’t even feel bad about it.