tvc184

He said “you don’t need”. He has not done anything yet but if you think it he won’t take every gun that he can get his hands on through legislation, you were either not telling the truth or you have your head in the sand. Here is a what if scenario. Let’s say something miraculous happens and they find out that by next week if they hurry, they can pass a law that makes all rifles and all 9mm handguns illegal to own, even if you own it today. You don’t think that law would be passed by the Democrats and they would all get together and say, this is not right because we believe in the Second Amendment? Right….. The goal is to seize all guns available just like just like what happened in Australia.

Let’s get real here, he was not merely ousted in an election. He was the subject of a recall so the liberal citizens of San Francisco how to start a petition and get the recall on the ballot. This guy was so bad that they did not want to wait until the next election cycle. This guy was in office for two years and only got to complete half of his term. I suspect that US congressman are probably lucky that they cannot be subject to recall elections. The tide is starting to turn early. Can the Democrats conjure up enough mass shootings, gasoline shortage to blame on somebody else, and try to get back in the game for this coming November? I think there is still time for them to wag the dog. I expect another virus to appear or some kind of military action to rally around the president or some more mass shootings or something to try to get emotions back in the game. It is obvious that performance and incompetence might be about to sink the Democrats for a long time but there is still time for them to find a solution.

The claimed party of inclusion needs to take a look in the mirror. This last presidential election saw the most diverse set of people ever run on the Democratic (or any) side. We had black female, openly gay male, Asian, openly of a different religion other than Christianity or Jewish and so on. The Democrats had literally almost any demographic to choose from and who do they come up with, an elderly white guy who’s almost 4 years older than Trump. For all the talk from the people that are liberal, not the politicians, showed that their actions don’t back up their rhetoric. They had a Samoan female Hindu who was a United States military member, a homosexual male who is the mayor of a major city, black female who was a federal prosecutor and a senator and on all down the line. Who did the rank and file Democrats choose…. the old white guy. Then they will lecture you about inclusion……

Here is yet another video that list some details about the shooting in Uvalde. It is a long podcast but the first part is devoted to the shooting. You have to get past his advertisement in preparatory talk and I think you can actually drag it to the 4 minute mark to start listening. It’s an editorial piece written by some Georgia law enforcement or something similar. He basically list a media claim and then debunks it with what they know or believe they know. The part about the shooting discussed in the editorial runs 7 minutes or to about the 11 minute mark so watch 4-11 minutes. I think it is about the 7 1/2 minute mark when the narrator talks about the stupidity of the commanding officers by making comments but they have no clue as to their accuracy. After the 11 minute mark he talks for another minute or two using a bit of profanity about the media will not retract what they have done even if proven (likely) that they were completely wrong.

Well then you haven’t been paying attention. Even the president the other day said that the 9 mm round blows lungs out of the body. HUH??? Then he said there is no reason to use them for self protection or hunting and all we should have is the .22. Has he done it yet? No because it’s against the constitution. He cannot make his own laws and they have to come from Congress. If you don’t think the president wants to take self-defense handguns, much less rifles, you have not been paying attention. That is but one small example of the rhetoric coming out from the left.

Sits off a few hundred meters away and sprays a packed football stadium….. Then drives away.

Correct…. but let’s not include evil companies like Exxon Mobile that enable drunk drivers.

They wouldn’t which is what is so disgusting. The news is using video mostly of two people (mother and funeral home employee) as their experts on tactics, capabilities, gear and ability. I guess next time CNN or Fox News reports on some US military action, they can consult a random high school freshman as their experts to see if the strategy is correct.

It was self-inflicted. It’s already being said but this is been a public relations disaster with police commanders giving opposite bits of information. Call me if they should know better. They’ve been on the job for years and they’ve all been to public relations schools. I’ve been to the schools. They tell you what you should say, when you should put the information out, confirm it, etc. Once you put out false information and retract it, you’ve now giving people the reason to believe that everything that follows is a cover-up.

Reading such nonsense still being put out, I think I might have found the answer and everybody knows it or has seen it previously. I just watched some alternate news site they put out of a video from yesterday it shows the same woman in the same video and is essentially making the claim that she was able to get past the dangerous situation where the office was able to. Utter garbage and an outright lie. Then the news that has been making the rounds, apparently one of the guys that made the original 911 calls from the funeral home, after he ducked rounds from an AR15, went inside to get his gun and came back out and could have stopped it at that point but the police would not let him. I guess this guy was going to get his 9 mm pistol and killed a guy in the street in a gun fight like the opening scene from Gunsmoke. What a true stupidity. And I don’t know if the stupidity comes more from the guy or the media it now has this expert claiming that it could have been injured at that point. Disregard the fact that the guy was already in the school by that time… Back to the reasoning. Like a lot of studies, they were not looking for answers or research. They came to a conclusion ahead of time, the police made huge mistakes. Then they sent out to find evidence to back up an opinion. I’ll look here’s an expert woman that drove for 40 minutes to get to the school and she knows more in the state and federal tactical teams. Here is a funeral home director who was denied stopping the incident before 19 children were killed. And the media runs with it….

I was reading another sports forum a couple of days ago. One of the former member chairborne experts posted a video of a fire fighter going through a steel door within about five seconds. it was a demonstration on how they attack fires. I watched it and just like the police officer breacher in the video said, it takes one guy to set the Halligan tool and another guy to use a hammer to drive the wedge into the extremely narrow door gap. you simply cannot do it with your hand. As the police officer said you might have to do this several times before you could actually make entry. They’re being video that he chairborne ranger expert show, the fire fighter was able to do it in about five seconds. Why so much faster??? The simulated deadbolt that they showed was a 1/4 inch piece of wood. Yep, A firefighter broke a 1/4”x2” board and the expert said that is proof that the steel reinforced door with a 2 inch deadbolt could’ve been entered in five seconds. You can’t make this stuff up. It is amazing how far someone will come up with some completely nonsensical excuse to criticize the officers.

Yes, they should consider all possibilities. I have practiced with my team on assaulting a bus if it was stationary sneaking up in a blind spot, hitting the master kill switch in the rear engine compartment (might be tougher with EV) and having swat officers run and brace themselves against the bus while other officers use them for a ladder and fire into the bus through the windows while another team assaults from the door. We have assaulted ships and docks from ground and water and so on. Assault from the top is extremely dangerous from a suspended ceiling with no support. You can’t go in a room or two away and creep up through an attic or crawl space. It would require climbing a ladder or several and rolling into a room blind with a guy with a high power rifle waiting. You could lose four officers almost immediately and never completely make entry. But I would guess that they looked at every option including sheet rock walls. It is much easier to discuss than it is to perform. All of those take specialized equipment. We don’t know what equipment they had, if any. As the video I posted said, it was a 40 minute or more gap where there were no shots fired. At that point it is no longer an active shooter because there is no longer any active shooting, no matter what the media says or the talking head commanders and speculators.

I have said it from the beginning on various forums, it is political. When the news media started asking very pointed questions that they did not have answers to, they should have simply shut up and said we don’t have the answer. But…. they wanted to look like they were in control It was an international news story. It took a long time for the officers to get in and instead of finding out what happened, competing Talking Heads from law-enforcement and the government such as the governor, started putting out what was essentially rumors. I said it in this forum, I don’t remember a situation where so many people who are commanders were tripping over each other in order to get to the front of the line to point at the other guy. Like the video I just posted said, they still need to get the facts And the officer steel might have made a terrible mistake. From what those two officers understand and have talk to some people inside, it does not appear to be nearly the critical mistakes that were claimed. The claimed information that the door could have been easily entered or that there were 19 cowardly police officers that huddled together in the hallway not knowing what to do, appears to be complete nonsense.

Please take the time for this video. It is an hour long but take time to listen to the first 35 minutes. It is from two veteran officers from the DFW area with some on scene active shooter response including the five officers killed in Dallas. One is an expert in breaching doors. For those who take time, let me know your thoughts after hearing it. [Hidden Content]

That is exactly what I meant but in a much shorter format. Yes the officer was heroic but he made matters worse. Like always, we will have a police heroes funeral with a 21 gun salute and Taps. Officers will come from different states to pay their respects. I have been to probably more than 50 police funerals and fired or commanded the team that fired the 21 gun (technically called 3 volley) salute. I have actually set up about 5-6 police and firefighter funerals. It is a risk that we accept. Suicide that only adds to the problem should not be part of that equation.

Utter nonsense. Accepting serious risks in the job is true. Committing suicide is not. I can play out a scenario in my mind where we could easily get through the door, several officers are going to rush in like we have been taught, (which is extremely dangerous but hey, it’s what we signed up for) and we take out the bad with a known risk of injury or death. Since I get to pick my thoughts, it is easy to assault the room. I have practiced it hundred of times and spending 10 years old swat, have actually done it few times in real life. That’s easy since I get to pick my own fantasy. What happened in this case is the big question. I have repeated this probably more than a dozen times in different forums but….. it was a steel door in a steel frame which was deadbolted. I also have read but not confirmed that the door opened outward. It would be extremely difficult to break the door in if the door opened inward and almost impossible if the door opened out right. So for any officer who makes the claim that he would simply go in, OK, how will you get in? This wasn’t a guy behind a wooden bedroom door. It was a steel reinforced door with a guy on the other side with a high power rifle with rounds that would likely go through the door and kill someone on the other side. How many minutes and how many officers are going to die by trying to get into this nearly impossible task? One officer pries on the door and a shot killed. To office re rush up to pull him away and two more move up to try to pry open the door. They are shot and go down. So now we have three officers down and two want to try to get into the room. How long does this continue and how many officers are not breaching the room, will continue to die for the sake of claiming to have tried to do something? BUT……. maybe they had the means to get in within a few seconds. Maybe the Border Patrol had explosive charges to make an explosive entry. Maybe they had some hydraulic door breaching tools so they could potentially get in quick enough. There might be a very good reason for waiting for the key to get in because that might have been the only practical means of entry. Then the question becomes, when did the key arrive? That is a lot of maybes and what ifs. Any officer that claims he would’ve gone in is doing so in the fantasy played out in his mind where he gets to set the scenario. MAYBE that was actually possible but do we know? Has anybody seen any evidence that state how the officers could have gotten in earlier? I mean you don’t have to prove it to me in a court of law, simply come out and make the claim. Let the DPS commander say we now know that the key was on scene within three minutes and the BP had the ability to make explosive entry eventually within about 10 minutes of the incident starting but we held back. Okay, now we are getting somewhere. Monday morning quarterbacks and Chairborne Rangers all know the answers, I just wish they would share them with the rest of us.

Correct. I still have not seen any credible information the officers made huge mistakes. I have seen comments by other police officers in various forums that said, these officers messed up big time yet they can point to nothing that backs up those claims. While it is true that they might have made terrible decisions, what is that based on? I have yet to hear a politician or police commander to explain what the officers were facing and what capabilities they had and equipment was available. All I have heard is that the other guy made the decision and he is wrong. Okay, wrong because……. and we are still waiting.

AND… that if the same video I posted on this page above but with the entire interview but with Brandon Tatum analyzing it to show what she is actually saying.

The person that posted it said that woman saved her kids. No, she didn’t. The police got her son out and she said so. People sometimes tend to ignore the obvious when dealing with emotions. At one point in the video )about the one minute mark) the woman said that the second teacher would not open the door which I am sure is protocol. Then, “they” started to lead me out. “They” has to be the police. Who else escorted her out of the building when she was trying to get her son? Then “they” opened the door (again likely protocol to wait for the police) which again has to be the police. Next the reporter asked, did you ever see any police in the building…. “No”. Well then who was they that started to escort you out and they that opened the door to get the kids out? 1. The woman was understandably emotional. Who wouldn’t be? 2. She went into a building where the shooter was not likely located. That school has about 7 buildings and the shooter was isolated in one. 3. She was not allowed into the classroom which makes sense. The teacher probably doesn’t know her. The woman could be part of the active shooters. 4. The police (I can’t think of who else) started to escort her out and almost simultaneously opened the door to get the kids out.… the denies any police were on scene. 5. The reporter (oddly in my opinion) then says the woman was not in the same building. The reporter the adds (which is the entire point) that the woman’s energy and frustration is what “is reverberating”. Point 5 sums it up, emotions play, not necessarily the facts.

Yes, another media hustle. Emotion is more important than facts. You have to feel sorry for the woman but she is telling her understandable feelings and the media spins it for views.

I saw Top Gun Maverick tonight. It was certainly entertaining, especially if you saw the first and realize the number of references to Top Gun. I mean from the opening scene until the closing credits,…. It even opened to the same music and the same words on the screen or it explains….. in 1969 but Navy established a school for there top 1% of its pilots…. “Today, the Navy calls it Fighter Weapons School. The flyers call it……… (Next slide/page) TOP GUN” Then it breaks into Danger Zone by Kenny Loggins with a virtual remake of the opening scenes on the carrier deck but launching F 18s instead of F 14s. I mean the same angle on the cameras, steam coming out of the catapult and blowing across the deck, the bar/sled being hooked up to the nose wheel, the salute from the pilot, the takeoff, etc. I mean if you did not know where you were at and saw the opening couple of minutes, you might think you were seeing the original Top Gun. I thought that touch was outstanding. Instead of beach volleyball its beach football. Instead of Iceman being the over the top “I’m better than the rest of you”white guy, it’s Hangman. But no spoiler alerts from me. I will say that if you’re watching the last 10 minutes or so of the movie and you can’t figure out what is going to happen, you haven’t been paying attention much…. Overall it was a very solid and entertaining movie. It was not in my top 10 or 20 greatest all time movies or anything approaching that but it is worth seeing at the theater.

The ACA was passed with a large Democrat majority. The Republicans didn’t have the votes to stop it. It was not a compromise. Much like the assault weapon ban under Clinton ended the Democrats majority in a landslide victory. The ACA ended Democrat control but the rest of Obama’s 6 years.

That is nonsense. They were not in control with an unbeatable majority in both houses. The Senate takes 60 votes to break cloture and bring it to a vote. While 51 votes can pass a law, it takes those 60 to break the filibuster to get to the final vote. If that was not true, why are we debating gun control? Why don’t the Democrats with control of both houses and the presidency simply pass a law? A simple answer is easy, they can’t.

Yes, that is why I specifically stick with murders. Gun control arguments always talk about suicides but usually forget to mention it. ABOUT 25,000 PEOPLE A YEAR ARE KILLED BY GUNS!!!!! … and 9,000 of them are murders. And I am not negating the tragic nature of the 9000 or all of the suicides but with the gun control argument from the anti-gun people, it’s almost certainly disingenuous.

That was the cost of Obamacare. My city insurance deductible went from $1500 to $5000. My wife’s monthly premium on my employee account went from $230 A month to almost $500. The “Affordable” Care Act is affordable for those not paying. Sure, all of a sudden people have insurance… by me (as an example) more than $6,000 a year increase every year since enacted. I probably paid an additional $60,000+ since it went into effect. Affordable? Sure, for the votes it was intended pay for.