;
Connect with us

Opinion

Revolutionize Handguns Through Technology

It’s not a lot to ask of gun manufacturers. And, it helps keep the Second Amendment intact.

Jeff Davidson

Published

on

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As the Smith & Wesson case vs. the State of New Jersey unfolds, it’s a good time to remember that it is the right of every U.S. citizen to be able to defend himself or herself. I believe the phrasing of the Second Amendment (above) does not require someone to be part of a militia to lawfully own and use a gun. At the same time, we are beset in the U.S., with one mass shooting after another, and one homicide after another. 

These mass shootings receive major attention if the assailant is white although, based on their percentage of the overall population, blacks commit more mass shootings and more gun-related homicides. Most shootings by black assailants receive little or no coverage, certainly nationally, because such news items do not fit the decades-long facade that the ‘mainstream’ media insists on propagating. 

Deliberately Fomenting Riots

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Police officers involved in a killing generates the most mainstream media coverage, much of it non-stop for days, especially if a black death is involved. In such cases, the mainstream media seeks to foment all types of protests, marches, and arguably, even looting and riots. That same media then downplays the looting, riots, and any associated violence, often making claims that are the direct opposite or reality.

The white victims of police gained no traction in the news. There are no marches, no looting, and no rioting. Nobody composes a slogan and posts it on a sign. No long and involved news and opinion editorials appear when a Caucasian dies at the hands of police – and in absolute numbers there are many more such victims each year than with any other race or ethnicity.

When white victims die, if any news coverage is provided, that coverage dies with them about a day later.

Incapacitate, but not Kill 

All of which brings us to the dire need to have technology revolutionize the gun industry. Why do all guns continue to be manufactured to kill or severely wound those who take a bullet? It is entirely possible with today’s technology to create guns that incapacitate and not kill. 

Police officers could be armed with such weapons and know that, if they have to fire such guns, potential assailants will adequately be incapacitated (but not killed).

Let us not second-guess for even a minute the dire role that police officers play in our country. Often, reporters as well as the general public views incidents for a few moments on a YouTube video. Or they read a highly biased account of what transpired. All the while, what’s gravely missing is context

Police officers often operate in high danger zones. At the end of their shift, they can be as shaken as soldiers at war. Post-traumatic stress disorder can affect police officers like it can affect soldiers. When you are in tense situations, perhaps day after day, sometimes you only have reflexes and adrenaline with which to operate. 

Covering Considerable Ground

An NFL pass receiver, or a track and field sprinter, can run nearly 10 yards in one second. An everyday assailant with a knife can traverse seven yards, roughly 20 feet, in a single second. If someone who is about seven paces away is charging forward and flashes a knife, a police officer has less than a single second to determine whether or not to stop that assailant. Who among us could do any better? The go-to weapon of choice is a holstered handgun. 

If today’s gun manufacturers embrace technology and produce guns for police forces that clearly incapacitate but do not kill a charging assailant, the dynamics of law enforcement on the streets would change.

Let’s call upon Colt’s Manufacturing; Smith & Wesson; Springfield Armory; Glock; Beretta; Sturm, Ruger & Company; Magnum Research; Lugar; Remington, and others to embrace today’s technology. 

Revolutionizing the Gun Industry

Going beyond mace and sprays, figure out how to safely arm police and, as a byproduct, help police to contribute to far fewer deaths of those they encounter – especially for when they suspect that their own lives might be in danger. 

It’s not a lot to ask of gun manufacturers. And, it helps keep the Second Amendment intact.

 

Opinion

Pentagon Reverses Statement on Drone Strike, Admits to Killing Civilians

Has the Biden administration done ANYTHING right in Afghanistan?!

Published

on

In the chaotic last few days of the American occupation of Afghanistan, there were a lot moving parts and quite a bit of calamity.

The Biden administration’s abrupt choice to expedite the withdrawal of US assets caused the Afghan Security Forces to essentially vaporize, and the Taliban conquered the entire country in a meager 11 days.  In the process, hundreds died, including 13 members of the US military after a series of terror attacks amid the throngs of people trying to flee via the airport in Kabul.

On top of that, the Pentagon was carrying out drone strikes meant to suppress the capabilities of new terror group ISIS-K, but, instead, killed innocent children.

Now, after initially denying that the strike was a failure, the Pentagon has decided to come clean.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Head of the United States Central Command Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced Friday that it is unlikely any ISIS-K members were killed in a Kabul drone strike on August 29, which led to multiple civilian casualties.

“We now assess that it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with ISIS-K or a direct threat to US forces,” McKenzie said of the airstrike at a briefing, following an investigation by the Military.

“This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology,” Mckenzie said, adding that he is “fully responsible for this strike and this tragic outcome.”

DOD officials also prepared a statement to the family of the deceased.

“On behalf of the men and women of the Department of Defense, I offer my deepest condolences to surviving family members of those who were killed, including Mr. Ahmadi, and to the staff of Nutrition and Education International, Mr. Ahmadi’s employer,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III said in a lengthy statement on the investigation’s findings. “We now know that there was no connection between Mr. Ahmadi and ISIS-Khorasan, that his activities on that day were completely harmless and not at all related to the imminent threat we believed we faced, and that Mr. Ahmadi was just as innocent a victim as were the others tragically killed.

“We apologize, and we will endeavor to learn from this horrible mistake,” Austin added, saying that officials “will scrutinize not only what we decided to do — and not do — on the 29th of August, but also how we investigated those outcomes.”

The incident is but one of a long list of failures by the Biden administration in recent weeks, and certainly isn’t going to throw cold water on the growing calls for impeachment.

In the chaotic last few days of the American occupation of Afghanistan, there were a lot moving parts and quite a bit of calamity. The Biden administration’s abrupt choice to expedite the withdrawal of US assets caused the Afghan Security Forces to essentially vaporize, and the Taliban conquered the entire country in a meager 11 days.  In the process, hundreds died, including 13 members of the US military after a series of terror attacks amid the throngs of people trying to flee via the airport in Kabul. On top of that, the Pentagon was carrying out drone strikes meant to suppress the capabilities of new terror group ISIS-K, but, instead, killed innocent children. Now, after initially denying that the strike was a failure, the Pentagon has decided to come clean. Head of the United States Central Command Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced Friday that it is unlikely any ISIS-K members were killed in a Kabul drone strike on August 29, which led to multiple civilian casualties. “We now assess that it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with ISIS-K or a direct threat to US forces,” McKenzie said of the airstrike at a briefing, following an investigation by the Military. “This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology,” Mckenzie said, adding that he is “fully responsible for this strike and this tragic outcome.” DOD officials also prepared a statement to the family of the deceased. “On behalf of the men and women of the Department of Defense, I offer my deepest condolences to surviving family members of those who were killed, including Mr. Ahmadi, and to the…

Continue Reading

Opinion

Even More Trouble Arrives for AOC After Met Gala Dress Stunt Flops

This one is going to sting a little.

Published

on

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is quite familiar with the way in which the media cycle works, and her place in it.  While her politics aren’t always in tune with the center of our country, her use of social media to cultivate a narrative is nigh unmatched, and it’s something that has to be taken into consideration whenever she catches a headline.

This is all a part of the show, in other words.

This week’s AOC stunt came to us from the posh, $30,000 per ticket Met Gala, at which the precocious progressive from New York was seen sporting a white dress with gaudy red writing on it.  The message?  “Tax The Rich”.

Yes, at an event that costs $30,000 to get in the door.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But AOC didn’t pay to be there.  She was a “guest of the museum”, which is a clever trick to get her around all those “impermissible gift” laws that we have in this country.

That’s why the Democrat was almost immediately slapped with an ethics complaint after the stunt.  This week, she picked up yet another.

The complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) to the Office of Congressional Ethics alleged that Ocasio-Cortez improperly accepted tickets from a table sponsor for herself and her boyfriend.

House rules allow members to take free tickets to charity events directly from event organizers, and The Post reported Tuesday that AOC and boyfriend Riley Roberts were directly invited by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

However, the NLPC argued that “it is the table sponsor who is gifting or underwriting a coveted seat to AOC at the Gala.

“And if … the table where AOC sat was one paid for by one of [the] corporations attending the event, such as Instagram or Facebook, AOC has received a prohibited gift from the corporation that also lobbies Congress.”

The dress and the scene caused a bit of an uproar when it first hit social media, as it didn’t take long for users to point out the obvious irony of it all.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is quite familiar with the way in which the media cycle works, and her place in it.  While her politics aren’t always in tune with the center of our country, her use of social media to cultivate a narrative is nigh unmatched, and it’s something that has to be taken into consideration whenever she catches a headline. This is all a part of the show, in other words. This week’s AOC stunt came to us from the posh, $30,000 per ticket Met Gala, at which the precocious progressive from New York was seen sporting a white dress with gaudy red writing on it.  The message?  “Tax The Rich”. Yes, at an event that costs $30,000 to get in the door. But AOC didn’t pay to be there.  She was a “guest of the museum”, which is a clever trick to get her around all those “impermissible gift” laws that we have in this country. That’s why the Democrat was almost immediately slapped with an ethics complaint after the stunt.  This week, she picked up yet another. The complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) to the Office of Congressional Ethics alleged that Ocasio-Cortez improperly accepted tickets from a table sponsor for herself and her boyfriend. House rules allow members to take free tickets to charity events directly from event organizers, and The Post reported Tuesday that AOC and boyfriend Riley Roberts were directly invited by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. However, the NLPC argued that “it is the table sponsor who is gifting or underwriting a coveted seat to AOC at the Gala. “And if … the table where AOC sat was one paid for by one of [the] corporations attending the event, such as Instagram or Facebook, AOC has received a prohibited gift from the…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week