94% of Coronavirus deaths include underlying conditions.

Electron microscope image of  Coronavirus particles. NIAID. 

94% of Coronavirus deaths included an underlying condition with only 6% of deaths stemming from the disease alone. Atlanta Journal Constitution. These comorbidities include respiratory failure, vascular failure, dementia, heart failure, renal failure and injury. The CDC also says that less than 10,000 people in America had listed only Coronavirus as the cause of death. 

My Comment:

This story is causing quite a lot of political controversy, which I will cover first. President Trump retweeted a post that essentially said the same thing as the article in the AJC. That post was removed by Twitter, the user denigrated as a conspiracy theorist and the President was attacked for it. The articles attacking the post as well falsely claim that the data is wrong. 

I think this is another good example of the tech companies being out of control. This goes far beyond trying to protect people from false information, they are peddling in it now. Unless the CDC is lying about their numbers then the post was true and should not have been removed. But Twitter did it anyways because lying about the President is more important to them then actually letting correct information get out there. 

With that out of the way, I do think this information isn't that surprising. It's been clear for awhile now that the virus mostly kills only people that are either elderly or weak from some other condition. The actual numbers are slightly shocking though, with only 6% of people who died did so while otherwise healthy. And I am guessing that a decent portion of that 6% was elderly or had a condition that wasn't discovered.

Does this mean that the virus isn't dangerous? Of course not. There are a lot of people that have underlying conditions in this country and if all of them get the disease a decent number of them will die. American health isn't that great to begin with and if the virus infects everyone then there will be even more deaths then we have now. 

But I do think it shows that your average person doesn't have too much to worry about when it comes to Covid-19. If you aren't already sick or have some kind of medical issue you should be able to survive the disease if you get it. Indeed, everyone I know that has had the Coronavirus has made a full recovery and many of them only had the mildest of mild symptoms, no worse than a case of Influenza or even the common cold. 

This information could be used to change the way we are dealing with the virus. Instead of blanket lockdowns and mask mandates we could focus our efforts on protecting the most vulnerable. This is how we have treated every other outbreak in recent history and I don't know why we can't do it again for Coronavirus. 

As for the reaction to the disease, I think people are sick and tired of it. I do see people complying with the mask mandates here in Wisconsin but only when they go into stores. Other than that I rarely see people with masks on. Indeed, when I hear about the virus at all it's mostly people complaining about how things aren't back to normal yet, with very little worry about actually catching the disease. 

Indeed, the virus itself isn't anywhere near the story it was earlier this year. Current events have overtaken it completely to the point where it's basically only ever discussed when it can be framed as a political attack on Republicans. The health community blew there chance to have the disease taken seriously when they came out in support of the riots. After that, nobody cared what they had to say anymore as it's crazy to suggest that not wearing a mask while shopping will kill grandma but doing the same while rioting is perfectly safe... 

One dead in shooting in Portland after Trump rally

Emergency workers tend to the victim. Reuters/Sergio Olmos.

One person is dead after a shooting in Portland Oregon after a major Trump rally. Reuters. The incident occurred in downtown Portland where a man was shot in the chest. Police are not releasing the details of the incident or the suspect. The area was the scene of a massive convoy of pro-Trump supporters who drove through the area in their vehicles, which led to some conflict between them and groups like Black Lives Matter and Antifa. However, the shooting occurred long after the caravan had left the area. Other news outlets are reporting that the victim was wearing a "Patriot Prayer" hat, which is a right wing group that has clashed with Antifa in the past. Portland has consistently failed to act against rioters since the death of George Floyd. 

Listen closely. This was the instant of the murder in Portland.

A: "Hey! Hey, we got one right here! We got a Trumper right here!"
B: "Right here?"
<Two gunshots>pic.twitter.com/UxUGdKZ1tJ

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) August 30, 2020

Antifa can be seen celebrating the death on Twitter.

Antifa forces celebrating their cold-blooded murder of a Trump supporter in Portland

“We can take out the trash on our own!” pic.twitter.com/WXJSdhRsHs

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) August 30, 2020

My Comment:
 Yet another case of leftist violence. Add this to the murder of David Dorn, the deaths at the CHAZ/CHOP area, and the child that got killed at Wendy's in Atlanta. I've been hearing for awhile now that Antifa and Black Lives matter aren't violent, but it's pretty obvious that they have amassed quite a butcher's bill.

Given the video of the murder where you clearly hear someone say "We got a Trumper right here", I think it's pretty clear that this murder was politically motivated. And it also seems clear that the victim wasn't doing anything to provoke the attack on him other then exist while wearing right wing gear.

I think this death has to be laid on the feet of Ted Wheeler, the weak and incompetent mayor of Portland. He's resisted sending in the National Guard for months now and has also failed to allow police to arrest rioters. Indeed, he just rejected sending in the National Guard yet again. He will not act against Antifa and Black Lives Matter and people are dying because of it. President Trump says that the National Guard could have solved this problem months ago and I agree. This is happening because Ted Wheeler wants it to happen.

I do have to say that I think this death should be a wakeup call for right wing people. Though I think that rallies and other forms of protest are needed right now, desperately, there is a right way to do it and a wrong way to do it. And the wrong way to do it is by acting alone.

In this case it was clear that the victim was by himself with no one to back him up. He didn't have someone watching his back and he didn't have any help when he was shot and killed. If he had been with a group of people the attacker might have been too worried about retaliation to try anything, or could have been stopped before he carried out his attack.

Going it alone is what got Kyle Rittenhouse in trouble in Kenosha as well. Had he not been alone I doubt the men that attacked him would have done so and even with him being armed it wasn't enough to protect him. I'll say it again, unless you have a few guys with you that you trust, don't go to one of these events. And even then, make sure you stick with your guys and don't get separated.

Indeed, I followed my own advice here. They had some kind of Black Lives Matter related disturbance in my neck of the woods tonight and I wanted to check it out. In the end though I decided against it and not having anyone to back me up is the main reason I stayed home instead. It's clear that anyone that isn't Antifa is at risk from them and trying to go it alone is a very bad idea.

As for what should be done, I sincerely think that President Trump should deploy the National Guard, regardless of what Ted Wheeler wants. The media might screech against it but at this point I doubt there are many actual voters that would care. It's clear that these people are out of control and that something needs to be done.

I do have to say that it was pretty surprising to me that they managed to have such a large rally in Portland, of all placed. I know that Oregon is a red state outside of the city (which outvotes the rest of the state) but even I was shocked at how many cars were able to drop everything and drive through town.

This violence is going to change people's minds. Everyone is sick and tired of these riots and I think the polling is starting to reflect that. Even CNN was saying that Joe Biden needs to start condemning the violence and looting but I think that's too little too late. People are blaming Democrats for these riots and if it continues it's going to ensure that President Trump wins the swing states and could even nudge formerly safe blue states, like Oregon and New York, into swing state territory. Republicans are going to vote like their lives depend on it because it sure looks like it actually does.

Kanye West sues in Wisconsin and Ohio in order to get on the ballot.

Kanye West. David Shankbone. 

Kanye West has filed lawsuits in Wisconsin and Ohio in order to get on the ballot for the 2020 presidential election. WBAY. West sued in Brown County Wisconsin arguing that the state election commission exceeded its authority by rejecting his application. West filed his paperwork at 5:00 pm and 14 seconds and has already lost in court arguing that was close enough to the filing deadline. Now his campaign is alleging that the paperwork would have been filed at 4:30pm that day but the election commission would not open the doors. West did have enough signatures to get on the ballot in Wisconsin. West is also suing in Ohio arguing that his rejection there was unconstitutional. West is on the ballot in 9 states but has been rejected or failed to file in the majority of states. 

My Comment:

I actually think that West has a pretty good argument that he and his campaign got screwed over by the election commission. He had enough signatures to get on the ballot and he tried to file on time but was prevented from doing so by the election commission. If it's true that they didn't open the doors for him that just seems like bias and I think the judge should rule in West's favor. 

That being said, I think the late lawsuits in Wisconsin and Ohio are symptomatic of a larger problem for the West campaign. He waited far too long to join the race and now it's pretty much impossible for him to gain enough votes to win in 2020. Even if he wins all the states he qualfies in he wouldn't be able to get more than 77 electoral votes. If he wins the suits in Wisconsin and Ohio, that's 28 more but still well short of the 270 he needs to win. 

It makes me wonder why West is even bothering at this point. I think there is an argument to be made that the election commission in Wisconsin should be exposed for what they are accused of doing in West's lawsuit, but it's not likely that West has any hope of actually winning. His campaign is pretty useless at this point. 

I know Democrats think that West is running just to try and screw over Joe Biden. They argue that most of West's voters are going to come from Joe Biden and by having him on the ballot it could cost Democrats states. I don't know if I trust that argument as having read West's platform he doesn't seem to have much appeal to the current "woke" base of the Democratic voters. Indeed, given that West is a pro-gun, anti-abortion, pro-marijuana legalization candidate, it's hard to say who he is going to drain votes from. Indeed, I think he might end up being a bigger threat to President Trump than he is to Joe Biden. 

But I don't think that is what West is doing. I'm not hugely familiar with the man but I do think that he seems to be a genuine person and I think he does want to be President. He has strong political opinions and his friendship with Trump hasn't kept him from running against him. My guess is that his desire to win is genuine and that his run is legit. 

Will Kanye West's run effect the election? I don't think so. As of this writing the only swing state he has qualified for the ballot in is Minnesota. He may yet qualify in Iowa and Virginia, but I think those states are safe red and safe blue respectively, regardless of West being on the ballot. If he wins in Ohio and Wisconsin that might have an effect but honestly, Ohio is pretty solidly red and, if the dozens of Trump signs I see every time I go for a drive are any indication, so is Wisconsin. 

Still, both the Green Party and Libertarian Party had a pretty big effect in 2016. Neither of those parties have gained any kind of buzz, so if there is going to be a third party candidate that has any effect at all it's going to be Kanye West. Nobody has ever heard of Jo Jorgensen or Howie Hawks but everyone knows who West is and I think he could be where the votes of people who don't like either party will go. Even if it's a write in campaign, West could get a few votes. 

Editor's Note: Vacation!

I'm on vacation starting today so expect posting to be at odd times or infrequent, just like usual. I don't have any big plans so I will probably still be posting. If nothing else, at least I won't be at work!

Shooter in Kenosha gathers defense team after being charged with two counts of 1st degree homicide.

A screencap from one of the videos showing that someone else was shooting before Rittenhouse opened fire. New York Times/Drew Hernandez. 

Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17 year old that shot and killed two people during the Kenosha riots, has been charged with multiple crimes and is assembling a defense team. Reuters. The lawfirm Pierce Bainbridge has agreed to represent Rittenhouse. Pierce Bainbridge had represented notable clients including Rudy Giuliani and Tusli Gabbard. The firm is working with lawyer L. Lin Wood, who is notable for winning defamation lawsuits against CNN and The Washington Post, forcing them to settle for his client Nick Sandmann, who was harassed at the Washington DC March for Life. Rittenhouse was charged with one count of 1st degree homicide, one count of 1st degree reckless homicide, one count of attempted homicide and two counts of reckless endangerment, along with a misdemeanor charge for carrying a weapon under the age of 18. 

The New York Times has a good round up of the Kenosha shooting, along with most of the video collected on the scene. 

EDIT: I have been able to locate the criminal filing for the arrest of Kyle Rittenhouse. I find it very strange that the 1st degree homicide charge was for Anthony Huber, the guy that hit him with the skateboard and the 1st degree reckless homicide charge was for Joseph Rosenbaum. You would think the charges would be the other way?

My Comment:

It is a good thing that Rittenhouse is getting help. Unlike other high profile cases of this nature it looks like the conservative base is willing to fight for this young man. It's already quite clear that the media narrative has very little to do with what actually happened. 

Given the round up by the New York Times (which actually shocked me with how unbiased it appeared to be) I don't think there is a real chance of him being convicted on most of the charges. I do have to say that he has zero defense for the misdemeanor charge of carrying a weapon under the age of 18. It's very clear he broke that law and I don't see how he gets out of it. 

But the rest of it? There is pretty much no way that the 1st degree murder charge sticks. At the very worst, he might be convicted of 2nd degree homicide. In Wisconsin 2nd degree homicide is a homicide that has one of four mitigating factors that reduces the charges. Two of those appear to be relevant here. 

The first is 940.01 (2) (C) which is prevention of a felony. It was clear that the men shot were committing felonies. They were destroying a car lot and generally being terrible people. Though lethal force isn't allowed in Wisconsin for preventing a felony it is considered a mitigating factor 

The second is 940.01 (2)(B) which is imperfect self defense. In that case the shooter believes that he is in danger of death or great bodily harm and the jury finds that belief unreasonable. I don't think there is any argument at all that Rittenhouse was acting in self defense but a jury will have to decide the reasonability of that argument.  

But I think that the jury will find this to be self defense. The accounts that I have seen, both on video and in print, builds a strong case for self defense for all of the charges except the misdemeanor charge. As the New York Times article shows there was someone else shooting during that event and that alone probably makes it justified to shoot and kill an unarmed attacker. 

Wisconsin doesn't have a stand your ground law but it's pretty clear that Rittenhouse did do his duty to retreat. He was running from the first attacker and didn't shoot him until there wasn't anywhere to run. He turned when he heard the shots, fired a warning shot (or negligently discharged) and then killed the 1st man after he tried to disarm him. After that he fled again, trying to reach the safety of police lines. He was attacked, fell down and then could not retreat anymore. 

I don't think it matters that the first attacker was unarmed. It sounds as though he was trying to steal Rittenhouse's firearm and as far as I am concerned that justifies shooting him, even ignoring the fact that he was charging Rittenhouse, had thrown something at him and someone else was shooting in the area. Trying to steal someone's weapon is always a threat of death or great bodily harm as far as I am concerned. 

In the 2nd encounter Anthony Huber, who was shot and killed by Rittenhouse, is seen hitting him with a skateboard and then trying to take the rifle. Again, stealing the weapon seems like a threat of death or great bodily harm to me. Hitting with just a skateboard might not justify a shooting, but again, he tried to steal his gun.

Finally, the shooting of Gaige Grosskreutz was the most justified of all. Grosskreutz was filmed backing off and raising his hands in surrender. And then when Rittenhouse was distracted he pulled his gun and likely would have shot and possibly killed Rittenhouse if he hadn't shot him first. Indeed, I wonder if Grosskerutz wasn't the one shooting in the original situation, though there is no proof of that either way at this point. 

The reckless endangerment charges are a bit more tricky. It appears that Rittenhouse shot at someone who had kicked him. That alone probably wouldn't justify shooting, but in context with the situation I think it does. He was being attacked by multiple parties and had been knocked down. My guess is that he understood that the mob would tear him apart if he didn't defend himself. That being said, I think the case here is probably strongest and if Rittenhouse gets convicted of anything other then the misdemeanor charge it will be this. 

And I do have to point out that none of the people killed or wounded in this incident were good people. All of them had criminal records and all of them were participating in an illegal riot. And the first man shot Joseph Rosenbaum, was harassing people and dropping the n-word like it wasn't a big deal. 

Now that it is confirmed Joseph Rosenbaum was one of the people shot and killed by alleged gunman Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, I filmed him earlier in the night taunting the armed civilians, saying, "Shoot me, n***a." pic.twitter.com/Nn2encm78Y

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) August 27, 2020

 I do think that we have reached a turning point in this country. The attacks against Rittenhouse are fairly baffling to those of us that still believe in law and order. That doesn't mean that he did everything right, as far as I am concerned he never should have been there. But I do think that this is a pretty obvious case of self defense unless there is some unknown evidence out there that changes the context of this case.

Three people shot, two fatally, at Kenosha riot.

The protest in Kenosha Wisconsin. The Daily Caller/AFP/Getty.

Three people have been shot, and two of those people have died, after a confrontation during the Kenosha Riots. Fox News/AP. The three men who were shot were hit in the head, chest and arm respectively. Viral video shows a man with a long gun fleeing from a mob when he stumbles and falls. Another man comes and attacks him and is shot at close range while a third person does the same thing and also gets shot. It is unclear if the shooter was the only one firing shots or if he has been taken into custody. Many people invovled in the riot were armed with weapons, with some trying to protect businesses.

The Daily Caller was one of several news organizations that had reporters on the scene. One of their reporters, Richie McGinniss, helped to retrieve one of the injured people and brought him to a hospital. 

The incident was captured on video and can be viewed below, but be aware it's graphic content. 

(Warning, Graphic/Violent)
A crowd chases a suspected shooter down in Kenosha. He trips and falls, then turns with the gun and fires several times. Shots can be heard fired elsewhere as well, corroborating reports of multiple shooters tonight #Kenosha #KenoshaRiots pic.twitter.com/qqsYWmngFW

— Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) August 26, 2020

My Comment:
A bit more information I have been able to gather from Twitter and other social media. It seems as though people already know who the shooter was and that he was with a group of Black Lives Matter affiliated libertarians.  Elijah Schaffer, a reporter with The Blaze actually spoke with the alleged suspect before the shooting.

CONTEXT: I spoke with the alleged shooter earlier in the night who stated he was there to protect property

He did not make racist comments, condemn #BLM, or mention political motivations for his actions

He said that he was there to protect property & was carrying a firearm pic.twitter.com/ViYUB65tiy

— ELIJAH RIOT (@ElijahSchaffer) August 26, 2020

Other witnesses said the first man who was shot, the one shot in the head that was rescued by the Daily Caller reporter, supposedly threw something at the man in the above video and he returned fire. Then he fled after calling the police but was chased by people and that's when the video of the shooting happened.

It's also important to note that the car dealership/garage was being attacked by the rioters. There were people smashing in car windows with baseball bats and causing major damage. Given that a car dealership was burned to the ground on the first night of riots it's fair to say that the property was under threat.

This video was take a few yards away from the shooting where you can see the rioters destroying the vehicles pic.twitter.com/LXHMQoIMh4

— ELIJAH RIOT (@ElijahSchaffer) August 26, 2020

So what's my take on this? It's a total mess and one that should have been avoided. I had thought Governor Tony Evers response was weak and it turns out I was right. Had he deployed more National Guard then I doubt this incident would have even happened. As President Trump said, when the looting starts the shooting starts and this was a predictable outcome of letting rioters run wild.

I'm also somewhat flabbergasted at the accused suspect. I can't imagine being a libertarian while also being affiliated with Black Lives Matter. I'm no libertarian myself but it makes little sense to fight for the rights of people that have zero respect for property and civil rights and, more importantly, hate you because of the color of your skin. But I also know that there are a lot of libertarians out there that hate cops even more than BLM does, which is really saying something. It's why I no longer read Reason, as the comment section disgusted me. EDIT: This appears to be false after more information on the shooter has been released. It seems as though the shooter did not have a connection to BLM. 

However, I do think it's very important to note that this wasn't a case of a white supremacist or even a Republican shooting up a protest. This was one protester shooting up a bunch of other protesters. The motive doesn't appear to be race, assuming there was a motive at all.

As for who is at fault here I am not sure. Without the video of what started this mess it's really hard to determine who is right and who is wrong. If the rumors about the shooter having objects thrown at him are true it might qualify as self defense. A brick to the head can certainly kill you, to say nothing of a Molotov cocktail. However, if he was shooting just to protect property then he is legally screwed as lethal force is not justified in defense of property in Wisconsin. The suspect would have to prove that he was in fear of his life, and that is not clear at all for the first person he shot.

But the other two people he shot? It sure looked like self defense to me. One thing you can't do is try and disarm people as any reasonable person would think that you would turn their weapon on them. The two guys that got shot, one fatally, should have kept that in mind. I would fear for my life in that situation and I think any reasonable person would.

Of course if the first shooting was not justified, which it may very well be, then that throws a huge obstacle in the claims of self defense. In that case the men who got shot could have been performing a legitimate citizens arrest. Wisconsin doesn't have a citizens arrest law per se but the right is recognized by common law. If they thought they were tackling a murder suspect that would likely legally justify their actions.

That doesn't change the fact that it was a colossally stupid thing to do. Even dumber than, say, fighting with the police and then reaching into your car. Trying to win a gunfight while unarmed is a great way to get shot. And if the rumors are true that the first person to get shot was throwing things at an armed man then, again, what did he expect to happen? Regardless of the legality of the situation it was a completely idiotic thing to do.

Not that the shooter is anywhere free of guilt here. I don't have a problem with armed people protecting property but a car dealership isn't worth going to prison for. And generally speaking if someone is throwing things at you, your best option is to retreat (and keep in mind that Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state, outside of cases covered under castle doctrine). Without knowing more about what happened I can't be sure if the shooting was legally justified or not, but either way it was an absolutely stupid and reckless move that will likely result in criminal charges of some sort, up to and including 2nd degree murder.

I do hope that this incident changes things. It should be a clear message to mayors and governors that they can't afford to screw around when people start rioting. If they don't and the cops aren't willing or able to stop arson, vandalism and looting, then people will take steps to do so on their own. And that is going to lead to more incidents like this and more deaths.

And finally, on a more personal note, I have to say that as a resident of the great state of Wisconsin, I am absolutely furious that this incident happened in the first place. I can forgive not having enough cops and National Guard to keep Kenosha safe on the first night this happened. But on day three? Absolutely no excuse. And I sincerely hope that day four ends with the riots suppressed and its leadership thrown in jail. Experience tells me that it will instead just be more of the same...

UK might scrap its aging tank force entirely.

A British Challenger 2 tank (right). BBC.

The United Kingdom could end up scraping its aging tank force entirely. BBC. The Challenger 2 tank has been in service without a major upgrade since 1998. The UK has 227 tanks but only half of them are service ready with the rest in storage. The Army is looking into options including upgrading the tank and its turret as well as possibly buying German Leopard 2 tanks. However, some are suggesting mothballing the tanks entirely to focus on other defense technology. The problem with the UK's armor force goes beyond just tanks as many of their APC's are also old and outdated, with a program to modernize 700 Warrior APC's crippled by delays and and cost overruns. The UK would not be the first force to abandon tanks as the Dutch have also given up their armor while the US Marines have announced they will abandon their armored units as well. 

My Comment:

It's amazing how little money the UK government (and Europe in general) is willing to spend on their defense. It's crazy that they are even considering getting rid of their tank forces. I know they are under a budget crunch but it seems like they should be able to find some money to modernize their tank forces. 

I do think that scrapping their tank force will be a mistake. Though tanks are not as useful as they once were they are very good at supporting infantry and are pretty good in counter insurgency. We saw this in Syria where tanks, despite being less survivable than in other conflicts, gave the government a major advantage over the rebels and terrorists. 

And the tanks are useful in conventional warfare as well. Though they won't survive as long as they did in previous conflicts, they would still play a critical war if the unthinkable happens and Russia goes to war with Europe. Without tanks the UK forces would be hamstrung. 

Of course the status quo isn't great either. The Challenger 2 tanks are very out of date. For comparison, the M1 Abrams, the US tank, has gone through two major upgrades and Russia has introduced five new tank models since the Challenger got updated. The rest of the worlds tanks are more survivable and have better armament and technology than the Challenger 2's. 

I think the major problem is that the UK still assumes that if a war were to break out that America would have their back. We are the elephant in the room and it's very clear that if we were to back the UK in any war we would bear the brunt of the cost. But what happens if we don't show up? The United Kingdom would be screwed to put it bluntly. 

I think it's very foolish for the UK to scrimp and spend on defense. They can't count on America having their back and eventually the United States is going to tire of having one of their major allies being a paper tiger. They need to spend some money to keep their fighting force relevant. 

Rioter in Kenosha pulls a gun on a reporter...

Twitter screen grab via Townhall.

One of the most shocking things I saw last night in the coverage of the Kenosha riot involved Elijha Schaffer, a reporter with The Blaze, a conservative news outlet. Schaffer was covering the riot when a rioter he was walking with threatened the police, pulled out a gun, and pointed it at the reporter. He didn't fire but it was a crazy moment.

HOLY SH*#: while interviewing this #BLM rioter in Kinosha he pulls out a real pistol and points it at my camera while explaining what we would do to cops if they rolled up on us right now

It’s been a while since I had a gun pointed at me even if it was just to make a point pic.twitter.com/hjQqO9Ccbb

— ELIJAH RIOT (@ElijahSchaffer) August 25, 2020

This is the same guy who pointed a gun at my face talking to @VenturaReport earlier about killing cops https://t.co/d7xudbTsV4

— ELIJAH RIOT (@ElijahSchaffer) August 25, 2020

Townhall, another admittedly conservative outlet has coverage of the incident here, but I just wanted to make a few comments. First of all, this was a very serious crime. I know because I served on a jury where we sent someone to jail for pointing a gun at someone. I didn't believe that that person wanted to kill the person he pointed a gun at, but regardless, it's a crime to point a gun at someone in Wisconsin, a class A misdemeanor. This guy is just as guilty and given the evidence I wouldn't have any problem throwing him in jail.

Second, this is about as reckless behavior I have seen with a gun in a long time, maybe ever. The man in this case violated just about every gun safety law in the book. He did have trigger discipline but it's still horrible to point a gun at someone given the decent chance that it could result in a death or injury.

Third, the man was threatening police with a gun for basically no reason. I guess nothing happened in response but it's crazy to me that people are so worked up over what seems to me to be a pretty bog-standard police shooting. Why would you throw your life away over a criminal that didn't even die? Because if this guy started to shoot at cops he would be dead.

I hope that the national news coverage that this incident is receiving will help identify this man. I live in Wisconsin and though I am not anywhere near Kenosha I am worried that I share a state with someone dumb enough to point a gun at someone to make a point. I hope police find and arrest this man.

National Guard called to Kenosha after riots break out in response to the shooting of Jacob Blake

Burned out cars in Kenosha. BBC/EPA.

The National Guard has been called to Kenosha after a night of riots and arson in response to the police involved shooting of Jacob Blake. BBC. Blake was shot on video as he was trying to escape and enter his car. The officer involved shot him seven times in the back, but Blake is in stable condition. The video went viral and resulted in riots which involved widespread arson and rioters confronting police with firearms. Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers said he would deploy 200 troops to help the police quell the riots. Very little information has been released about the incident or why police opened fire. 

A Wisconsin officer was caught on video shooting 29-year-old Jacob Blake in the back seven times as he was getting into a car with his 3 kids. He's miraculously survived but is in serious condition.https://t.co/pcufy4Y4Lq pic.twitter.com/RMcs82wqOL

— Aamir Ghazanfar (@AamirGhazanfarS) August 25, 2020

My Comment:
Ugh, what a mess. I hate that this incident went viral so fast before any facts were known. I'm starting to think that everyone having video cameras in their pocket is a bad thing as if this wasn't the case this incident would have been a local story at best and there would have been an actual opportunity for an investigation to happen. Instead we get to see yet another city burned for no reason. 

The BBC article left out some critical context to the case. Jacob Blake was a wanted fugitive that had been charged with 3rd degree sexual assault, trespassing and disorderly conduct, all with the domestic abuse modifier. The media is portraying him as a perfect father who never did anything wrong but he had been charged with some pretty serious crimes. The sexual assault is a felony and it's pretty important to note that the person is the media is defending here is an accused rapist.

I'm also extremely frustrated that the media is portraying this as unjustified, despite the fact that no investigation has been done. Having watched both angles captured by people on the scene it's clear that Blake was resisting arrest. It looked like he was fighting with the cops and when he ran to the car it's not unreasonable to assume that the officer involved feared for his life. That may or may not be the case but the media is acting like there isn't an argument.

The above video shows why police don't let people run back to their vehicles when they are resisting arrest. The officer involved in that video died because he didn't open fire. That video is also an extremely common training video and I wouldn't be surprised if the officer that opened fire had that video in his head when he opened fire.

So was this shooting justified? I can't say for sure. Almost no investigation has been done and the few seconds of video leave out most of the context. It's possible that Blake was armed and it's possible he wasn't. There is always a chance that more evidence will come out either way that could either vindicate the cops or condemn them. Without that information I don't want to make a judgement either way.

This is extremely important because I can think of two recent cases where both scenarios happened. The first was Ahmaud Arbury. In that case the original video made it look like Arbury was the aggressor but then more information came out and it was clear that the people that shot him went way beyond self defense in trying to stop him and appeared to actually be racist.

In the George Floyd case the original video made it seem like the officers were actively killing a man for no reason. Then, months later after riots and chaos, the bodycam footage was released which showed that Floyd was out of control and fighting with the officers for half an hour and the cops were doing all that they could to keep him under control.

Without that context it's pretty impossible to determine if the case was justified or not. I'm leaning towards justification as it sure looked to me that Blake was reaching for something in his car. But I'm not jumping towards conclusions.

However, that certainly hasn't stopped anyone else. In response to the video the city of Kenosha got burned with a church getting damaged and a car lot being destroyed. And there were a few crazies trying to intimidate the swat team with rifles. All without knowing any details about the case.

To his eternal shame that included Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers. I haven't been a fan of his since he got elected and I feel he botched his response to the Coronavirus crisis. But worst of all he immediately went on twitter and implied that the incident was racist in nature without any proof at all. I am glad that he is deploying the National Guard but he should have kept his mouth shut.

I do have to say that regardless of the outcome of the case I have to say that I am utterly shocked that Blake has survived to this point. The officer shot him at point blank range and wasn't able to kill him. He did get very good medical care but you would think the officer would have been able to hit something vital at that close of a range. On the other hand he was also fighting with the suspect at the same time and shooting one handed from the hip so perhaps it wasn't as easy as I suspect.

I live in Wisconsin and though I don't live anywhere near Kenosha I am worried that the unrest there might spread elsewhere. My area had some very minor disorder during the initial riots and I wouldn't be surprised if Antifa and Black Lives Matter cause some rioting up here as well. I'm sick and tired of having to worry about that and I sincerely hope that people will finally turn on these people. Even if the shooting does turn out to be unjustified, nothing can ever justify riots and arson.

President Trump announces FDA approval for plasma treatment for Coronavirus.

An electron microscope image of Coronavirus particles. NIAID.

President Trump announced today that the FDA has given approval for a plasma convalescent treatment for people with the Coronavirus. AP. The treatment involves taking plasma from the blood of patients who have recovered from the disease. The antibodies in the plasma may help fight the disease. The treatment has shown promise but more studies will be done to determine the best practice for using it. Currently the treatment is used for people who are in the hospital but not on a ventilator. President Trump had accused the FDA of "slow walking" the treatment for political reasons. 

My Comment:

The news articles about this treatment are atrocious. There is very little about how this treatment works and why it's so promising but so very much about bashing President Trump. Just like previous treatments, like Hydroxychloroquine and the "bleach" hoax, the media cares more about attacking and discrediting the President then giving the people some actual good news for once. The AP article was slightly better then most but it's still a shameful display. 

As for the treatment itself, I am surprised it took this long. I had heard for a long time now that blood plasma could be a decent treatment for the Coronavirus. Obviously the presence of antibodies will help destroy the virus and help the body produce it's own antibodies. It makes a lot of sense that the treatment would work. 

It's also fairly easy and cheap to make. Almost anyone who has recovered from the virus can donate plasma. It's a well understood process and one that should be easy to do. Given how many people have been sick and recovered there should be a large source of people that can donate plasma. 

Will people do it though? I'm not sure. Some people can't be bothered and others might distrust the medical community. Another problem is that a lot of people that have antibodies don't know that they have them because they either didn't know they got sick or didn't know they had the virus. 

In my case I have no idea if I have had the virus or not. I've tested negative twice but I did suffer from a brief illness last spring, and given how many people tested positive at my job I'd be shocked if I hadn't been exposed. If I knew whether or not that I had the virus antibodies I'd be all for donating plasma in order to help with this treatment. But without that knowledge there isn't much I can do. 

As for the outbreak itself I get the feeling that most people in my area or over it. I only really see masks at work and at the grocery store. People are sick and tired of the virus and want to stop thinking about it. 

I do think that if the convalescence plasma does work then I think that we can finally roll back some of the worst restrictions. If we can reduce the death rate then we don't have to worry to much about new cases. 

Indeed, I think this has largely happened at this point. The Coronavirus is not as deadly as it was before in my estimation. Not only do we now have multiple effective treatments, the virus itself has  changed. Most viruses change over time to become less deadly as the more deadly variants kill too quickly to spread widely. The weaker forms spread easily and it seems to me that the current strains are a lot less dangerous than the form that spread in Wuhan. 

Suspect in Portland BLM attack surrenders.

Police in Portland. The Hill/Getty.

Marquise Love, the suspect in a brutal attack in Portland that left a man in the hospital, has surrendered to police. The Hill. Love has been charged with assault, coercion, and rioting and is being held on a $260,000 bail. The victim in the case, Adam Haner, was attacked by a group of rioters after trying to help a transgender woman. He tried to flee but crashed his truck and was assaulted by a group of rioters. Love is accused of being the man who brutally kicked Haner in the head. 

My Comment:

This is just a quick update on a previous post, not a full post on it's own. I just wanted to show people that sometimes an arrest is made against these violent rioters. Even though Love was identified right away, with 4chan being one group that figured out who he is, it took awhile for him to surrender to the police. With Love in custody there is at least a little bit of justice in this case. 

It is good news that Adam Haner is recovering. I had heard many rumors that he had died but I guess those were false. Given how brutal the attack was I think there was a decent chance of him dying and though I know why they didn't charge Love with attempted murder (or whatever Oregon's equivalent is) it probably would have been morally justified at least. 

I am glad that they are taking this case seriously. There was some fear that the police and prosecutors in Portland would let the suspect off with a slap on the wrist. But he had been charged with felonies which means, at the very least, this guy will spend more than a year in prison if he is convicted. I'd prefer it if he never gets out but that's not in the cards. 

I'm not sure how important this case will be in the long run. I do think that it gave further proof to the lie that Black Lives Matter and Antifa are peaceful. Though I don't know if Love was a member of either group, he was using their tactics and it resulted in a man getting sent to the hospital. Hopefully it will be a wakeup call for other activists and rioters that even in super liberal Portland, if you put someone in the hospital you are going to prison... 

Massive flooding in China further threatens the Three Gorges Dam

Flooding in Chongqing City. CBS News/AFP/Getty.

China's worst flooding in recent history is causing massive amounts of damage and may threaten the Three Gorges Dam. CBS News. An additional 100,000 people have been evacuated in Sichuan province as it reached the highest level of its flood control protocol. The Three Gorges Dam, which many have feared could collapse, reached it's highest levels on record with 90,000 cubic yards of water per second for nine hours straight. Chinese officials claim to be confident that the Dam will hold. So far the flood has killed at least 219 people and has forced the evacuation of 4 million people. The flooding has been so severe that even the giant Buddha in Leshan was flooded out. 

The Giant Buddha in Leshan. CBS/Reuters.

My Comment:

This news story dropped out of the public discourse for awhile due to improving conditions. However, the conditions changed fairly rapidly after a tropical storm hit the area. This erased any progress that was made and actually made the situation considerably worse. 

It's pretty clear that China is doing whatever they can to save the Three Gorges Dam. To do so, they are allowing places both up and down stream from the dam to flood. By doing so they are trying to reduce the pressure on the dam.

Will it work? The Chinese officials want to make it sound like it is, but I have my doubts. For one thing, if the dam was about to collapse the Chinese government would never tell anyone until after it was happening. To admit there was a problem would cause them to lose face and that is something they will never allow. 

But I think it's possible that the dam will fail and if it does it would be the worst man made disaster in history. Such a collapse would cause millions of deaths and billions of dollars of damage. It would throw the world's economy for a loop as well as the world is dependent on the manufacturing downstream of the dam. 

The thing is, that even if China is able to save their dam, this is still massive disaster. There has been major damage done to dozens of cities now and much of China's food producing areas have been flooded out. Billions of dollars of damage has already been done. 

It's even worse though as the massive damage to the crops of China is complicated by two other disasters. A massive swarm of desert locusts has struck China and also decimated some of their crops. And the outbreak of African Swine Fever has forced China to cull much of their pig herds. Right now China might be dependent on imports to feed their people, assuming there is enough international food supplies to go around. 

Of course if the dam collapses food will only be one of the problems for China. They will likely have civil disorder problems as well. China has always operated on the mandate of heaven and the world's worst human caused disaster would almost certainly convince people that the Communist government of China no longer holds it. Even if China were up to the task of rebuilding after a massive collapse, I doubt the people of China wouldn't hold the government to account. After all, this was an entirely avoidable disaster. The flooding would have always happened but if they hadn't built the massive dam the threat of a breach wouldn't exist. 

President Trump is asked about QAnon conspiracy...

President Trump. White House photo.

President Trump was asked about the QAnon conspiracy theory today during a briefing. USA Today. Trump said that he didn't know much about the group but that they like him and love the country. When asked if he knew that the theory is that Trump was protecting the world from satanic pedophiles he said "Is that supposed to be a bad thing?" QAnon is a wide ranging conspiracy theory that believes that President Trump is at war with the Deep State, which is made up high ranking pedophiles, among other things. The movement is very popular and some supporters of the theory are prominent, including congressional candidates Laura Loomer and Majorie Taylor Green. Critics of the theory blasted Trump for not denouncing it. 

President Trump's comments can be seen below:

My Comment:

Though I have discussed the QAnon theory on social media before this is the first time I have done so on my blog. I understand I am taking a risk in doing so as I was shadowbanned on Twitter for awhile after denouncing the effort to censor the theory. That could happen again so if my blog disappears you know what happened. 

If it does disappear that would be fairly ironic as I am not a QAnon supporter. Indeed, I have been critical and skeptical of the movement since it began back on 4chan in the day. I don't think the theory is true and I think that the supporters are naive at best. 

I have followed the theory from the start though. I was in the original calm before the storm threads on 4chan and though I didn't post I was looking at it. At the time I was skeptical but I thought there was a chance it was true. When the movement went to 8chan I pretty much stopped caring and when Attorney General Jeff Sessions got fired I thought that should have been the end of the movement, given how critical he was to the original theory. Currently, I would be shocked if the theory is based in reality at all.Though I don't really believe in conspiracy theories, I do enjoy reading about them. QAnon is no different and I've found it fascinating, even though I don't think it's true.

Since I haven't followed the theory in a long time I am somewhat surprised that the theory has evolved so much. Back in the day it was more about the Clintons and the deep state. Now it seems to have moved on to a grab bag of right wing conspiracy theories, including elite pedophile rings, the Russia collusion hoax and general anti-Democrat theories. Indeed, it seems to have picked up where Pizzagate left off, with a large focus on celebrity and political pedophiles. 

That being said, I do think a lot of those things are probably true in some way. I do think that the political establishment is opposed to President Trump and conspired to remove him. To argue otherwise is to pretty much deny reality, as turning on CNN will show that the media is against him at the very least, and there have been several high profile government officials that have turned on him. I also think that there are probably elite pedophile rings (Epstein alone is proof of that). I just think that QAnon is wrong on all the details and is probably a conspiracy itself. 

But is QAnon dangerous? I don't think it is. The USA Today article tried to imply that QAnon supporters are violent but I haven't seen that. I do think there is some danger in people believing things that aren't true but given the events of the past years I doubt that they are any worse then the people that believe in the Russia collusion hoax or the Black Lives Matter movement. It probably is dangerous to the Democrats though...

I also think that QAnon could be a valuable asset to the Republican Party. The movement is huge and it could be used to organize people to get out and vote. Denouncing them offers little advantage and won't help with anything, but tolerating them could help win in 2020. Even though social media has been moving against them, they are still a huge group of voters and have international levels of influence.

As for President Trump, I doubt he knows much about QAnon. He has probably been briefed on him given how many Q supporters have been filmed at his events, but I doubt he knows much about them. Indeed, at the briefing he seemed surprised about he specific allegations. He's savvy enough that he didn't alienate them but I don't think he actually knows the specifics of the theory. He walked a fine line where the Q people will think he admitted it was true while everyone else will think that he didn't denounce them but didn't confirm them either. 

I do think that the censorship of QAnon is pretty despicable. I think the supporters are harmless and the censorship is more about interfering with elections then keeping people safe. And if it really is a conspiracy theory, how are people supposed to debunk it if they can't even read or write about it? And even if you are critical of it, like I have been, you can end up banned from social media. 

Of course banning QAnon is probably the worst thing you could want to do if you want to stop a movement. The Streisand Effect is real and by trying to remove Q from the internet you are just encouraging people to look into it. And given the theory has a lot to say about media, doing so also fits right into the conspiracy theory. It's idiocy. 

Finally, I have to say, why on earth did it take this long for a journalist to ask President Trump about QAnon? The theory has been around for years now and the press has had multiple opportunities to question him about it. Had they really wanted to nip the movement in the bud, asking President Trump about it long before he had any knowledge of it probably would have destroyed it. Plus, basically everyone, supporters, critics and skeptics alike probably wanted to hear what the President was going to say.

Controversial Republican Laura Loomer wins primary in Florida.

Laura Loomer during an appearance on Infowars. Alex Jones Channel. 

Controversial Republican Laura Loomer has won her primary race for the 21st Congressional District in Florida. Florida Politics. Loomer will now face Democrat incumbent Lois Frankel, who also won her primary race. Loomer beat five other candidates for the seat. Loomer gained fame as a conservative rabble rouser often appearing on far right sites like Infowars. Loomer was attacked by the left for anti-Muslim comments and was banned from most social media after criticizing Ilhan Omar for anti-semitism. Despite the controversy, Loomer had national appeal and was able to massively out-raise her primary opponents. Loomer is still considered a longshot to unseat Frankel, who won her seat in 2018 unopposed and won in 2016 by 25 points.

My Comments:

Let me say that I have never been a fan of Laura Loomer. She always struck me as more than a little crazy, plus I have always thought her antics were more damaging then helpful. Though, unlike a lot of the other right wing e-celebs, I don't doubt her sincerity. 

However, I think there is more than a little justice in her running for congress. Loomer has been banned from basically all social media. Though her comments about Ilhan Omar might have been offensive to some people, they are protected speech. Loomer did not break any laws with her words and though Omar herself might have been offended that's not a reason to ban her. 

I am guessing her bans are a major reason why Loomer both ran for congress and why she won her primary. She obviously wanted revenge and I am guessing that even people that don't like Loomer that much would vote for her if they thought her ban was unjust. If she does make it to congress I am guessing taking on the tech companies will be a major priority. 

As for the tech companies I don't think they can justify keeping Loomer banned anymore. If they don't allow her a campaign account I would consider it a campaign donation to Lois Frankel as well as election interference. They would be more than tipping the scale in the favor of her opponent and that can't stand. If they don't give her an election account then they should be punished. Severely. 

Does Loomer have a chance to win in Florida's 21st district? I'm not sure. It doesn't seem that likely given how blue of an area it is. Frankel hasn't had much competition and she won his last contested race by 25 points. That's a huge advantage to overcome and I'm not sure if she can pull it off. 

On the other hand, if anyone can do it it might be her. Loomer has national appeal and I am expecting a larger win for President Trump than he had in 2016. Loomer might be able to ride that wave and I am thinking that people are getting tired of the Democrats. Loomer would be a good protest vote, even though I don't have any idea of how good she would be if she actually got elected. 

Black Lives Matter protesters violently assault and kick a man unconscious in Portland.

The victim of the attack. Twitter screengrab. 

Black Lives Matter protesters violently assaulted a man, kicking him unconscious, in Portland. Fox News. The brutal assault has gone viral with several videos showing the incident. The man was in his truck and fled from protesters. He then crashed his truck and was surrounded and assaulted by the protesters. Another man then got a running start and kicked the man in the head, knocking him out. Witnesses and other video show the man and his wife trying to defend a transgender person who as attacked by the mob. The rioters claimed that the man has tried to run them over but the videos do not show that. Portland police, who were not present during the incident, have asked the public for help identifying the suspects. The victim of the attack was taken to the hospital and is recovering. 

The man was kicked and knocked unconscious in the street. #antifa medics arrive to help. pic.twitter.com/JuBmSShAyC

— Kalen From Scriberr (@FromKalen) August 17, 2020

My Comment:
I'm limited on what I can link to on this page. There are a lot more videos of what was posted above but even that might be too much for blogger. Needless to say that this was a senseless act of violence. More video is available online but I don't think I can link to it.

I can however summarize what I have seen. The man and his wife was trying to help a transgender person that may have been assaulted and robbed. They tried to defend this person but the mob turned on them. The mans wife was assaulted and tackled and she ran away on foot. The man's truck was attacked and he was hit. He fled, knocked a couple of people over (driving much slower than I would have) and then crashed his truck. That's when the assault happened.

It seems as though the suspect in the attack has been doxed. I won't repeat his name (or the name of the victims) as they haven't been publicly released, but the information is out there. It seems as though 4chan has tracked them down. Hopefully they will end up finding the attackers and arresting them.

That being said I have little faith in the police and the prosecutors in Portland, Oregon. The political situation there is in the tank for Black Lives Matter and Antifa and even though this assault was absolutely horrible. It seems as though the police is trying to solve this case but I doubt the prosecutor will move on them. Indeed, the new DA is already dropping charges against rioters. With such a man in power I doubt we will see any justice here.

I do think that this attack was entirely caused by the fact that the Portland police have been muzzled. Outside of Portland, Seattle and Chicago, all states ran by far left mayors, the riots have subsided. Even Minneapolis has finally calmed down. It shows that deploying the national guard and being aggressive with arrests is the way to keep the peace. But these leftist cities have no interest in that.

I do think that these kinds of attacks are going to turn people against Black Lives Matter and the Democrats in general. Indeed, some of the polling I have seen has borne that out. This attack has gone viral and shows that the idea that these were "peaceful protests" was nothing but a lie. Whatever the movement was originally about it's clear that it's not about anything but violence and destruction now.

I also have to say that the media narrative with Portland is now undeniably wrong as well. For weeks all we were hearing is that peaceful protesters were getting attacked by the Federal government. The feds have now pulled out but the violence hasn't stopped which means the feds were never the problem in the first place.

All I know is that I am tired of this. Though I agree that there would have been blowback for President Trump cracking down on these people, letting them run rampant has been a disaster. I am hoping that sooner or later that everyone else will be tired of them as well. All I know there can't be more attacks like this...

President Trump says he is considering pardoning NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden.

Edward Snowden. Reuters.

President Trumps says he is considering offering NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden. Reuters. President Trump said in an interview that many people fell he has been treated unfairly and that he would start looking at a pardon. It marks a major shift from Trump's previous position, which was that Snowden was a traitor. Pardoning Snowden has bipartisan support but also bipartisan opposition. The move would also anger the intelligence community.

My Comment:

I hope that President Trump does go through with this. Edward Snowden was a true whistle-blower and was able to expose some truly disturbing things about the NSA. Without him we would have never known that the NSA was basically monitoring all communication online. He also did it in a way that made sure that nobody would get hurt. 

Why did President Trump change his mind? I think when he made his original statements he still had trust in the intelligence community. For obvious reasons now, he no longer does. I think he realized that Snowden was right all the time and that the intelligence community is out of control. After having those same intelligence agencies weaponized against them it makes a lot of sense that President Trump would change his mind. 

It is pretty weird seeing the reactions to this idea. In most things today Democrats and Republicans disagree with each other on everything but in this case both the support and the opposition are bipartisan. There are some very pro-Trump people that hate this idea and some very anti-Trump people that hate it. It's insane to me to see people on the far left actually praising President Trump for once...

I do think it's funny though that I don't think Snowden actually likes President Trump all that much. Though he was a Republican he always struck me as a neocon with a libertarian streak. I'm not sure but I doubt Snowden would have voted for Trump in 2016 if he had the ability to do so. And if he does get a pardon and gets back in time to vote, I'm not sure he will vote for him in 2020. Still, I don't think he has weighed in either way. 

Will it happen though? I think it's possible. I think President Trump realizes that pardoning Snowden will change things at the margin for his reelection campaign. And it might actually give him some actual decent media coverage for once. Plus I do think that Trump probably realizes that it is the right thing to do.   

My thoughts on the Cannon Hinnant murder.

Cannon Hinnant (right) and his accused killer Darious Sessoms. Heavy. 

As you may be aware the death of a five year old has blown up to be one of the biggest news stories right now. Cannon Hinnant was a five year old boy riding his bike when his neighbor, Darious Sessoms allegedly shot and killed him in front of his two sisters for unknown reasons. Heavy has more background on the case and the history of both Sessoms and Hinnant.

As tragic as this story is you might be forgiven for wondering what it made national and international news. After all, most murders don't, even ones even more horrific than this one. But this case has made international news now and appears to be one of the more important ones to happen since the death of George Floyd, at least in terms of criminal justice. 

Most of the articles I have read have downplayed the racial angle but I am sure that this is why the story has gone viral. Ever since the death of George Floyd (and even before it) the media narrative is that black people are the victims of a racist system that is set up and enforced by white people. This case shows that narrative isn't the only one and indeed shows that white people can be victims of black violence as well.

And I think this case blew up because of the outrage over the outrage over George Floyd's death. I don't really think the two cases are that comparable, but I do think they have a point. After all, Floyd was a criminal and it's not really news when a criminal dies, whether at the hands of the police, the hands of a fellow criminal or by his own hand. Floyd's death sparked massive protests and riots that have killed a lot of innocent people, but it was pretty clear that Floyd was on a path that would have ended with him dead at a younger age regardless.

But Hinnant? As a five year old he was totally innocent. There is nothing that could ever be said to justify his death. In many ways, George Floyd chose to go out the way he did. He didn't have to take drugs, he didn't have to fight the cops and he didn't have to try and pass fake bills which caused the incident in the first place. Hinnant was just in the wrong place and the wrong time and he died for it.

And I think that's a big part of why there is so much outrage in this case. When you compare the life of George Floyd, a career criminal who basically caused his own death, with the life of Cannon Hinnant, an innocent child, it's clear which one is the actual outrage. But the response to the Floyd case was totally out of proportion. Even if you grant the police were out of line (and after seeing the bodycam footage I don't anymore) it's insane that the Floyd case ended with massive riots which were supported by the media while we all know that the Hinnant case will not. The message that Americans are getting is that the life of a black criminal is more important than the life of a white child, and that is a message that isn't going to resonate with anyone who isn't racist. 

Part of the outrage too is also the media's reluctance to cover the story. For the first few days after the murder of Cannon Hinnant only right wing and local news outlets were covering his death. The mass media did end up covering it in the end after a massive shaming campaign but even now they are downplaying the death, mostly focusing on who Hinnant was and not his alleged killer. Even finding a mugshot for Sessoms was difficult for me, most of the bigger outlets aren't showing it. It's very clear that the media is uncomfortable with this story as it goes against their preferred narratives.

The case is bringing out a lot of racism on both sides. Sure, there are a lot of anti-black people out there, but they don't seem to be reacting the way the media thinks. Instead of attacking Sessoms, they are almost gleefully attacking Hinnant's father, who they see as an idiot at best and a race traitor at worse for inviting Sessoms into his house, even though the attack happened later. 

But there are a lot of other racists out there that are celebrating this child's death. I've seen social media posts attacking Hinnant and saying he somehow deserved what happened to him just because he is white. They also try to downplay his murder by implying, falsely as far as I am aware, that he said the N-word to Sessoms. As if that would somehow justify the murder of a five year old...

Though tragic on it's own I think this case is going to become a rallying cry for people sick and tired of the Black Lives Matter movement, for better or worse. I doubt Hinnant's family want that to happen but it's already too late. It's an extremely strong argument as to why the reaction to George Floyd's death was not justified and it shows the media's bias a little to well to go away soon. 

Appeals court rules California's magazine ban unconstitutional.

A 30 round AR-magazine along with a 10 round clip. Own work. 

A three judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of appeals have ruled that California's ban on rifle and handgun magazines that can carry more than 10 rounds is unconstitutional. USA Today. The judges noted that the law violated the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution that protects the right to keep and bear arms. They also noted that mass shootings are not enough of a justification for a law that effectively bans half of all magazines sold in America. It is unclear if California will appeal the decision to the full 11 judge panel or even to the Supreme Court. The ruling will only be for the 9th district but could end up with a case reaching the Supreme Court. Until a decision is made on appeals, magazine sales will remain banned.  

My Comment:

This is a huge victory for gun rights. It's important to note that this ruling goes further than the original ruling from Judge Rodger Benitez, who only ruled on a new law on banning possession magazines that can hold 10 or more rounds. It ruled that California's existing law on magazines, which prevents sales and imports was also unconstitutional. It's more than we were expecting to say the least.

I think that the courts arguments are sound. The standard for a long time for gun ownership is common use. Under that standard everyone's AR is fine but something like an RPG or a sawed off shotgun might not be. Well "high capacity" magazines are so standard that I call them standard capacity magazines. 

For example, for my AR I own a total of 12 30-round magazines and that is generally considered "rookie numbers". And for my handgun I own two 16 rounders. Most people own way more magazines than I do and there really isn't a major reason to own smaller capacity magazines (though there is an argument to be made for 20 rounders in AR as that allows the gun to be fired more easily from a prone position). To argue that "high capacity" magazines aren't in common use is pretty ridiculous. Though I don't have the sales data to back it up, I am guessing that the most popular magazine by far is a 30 round AR mag. Hell, just the Magpul P-mag might be enough to outsell all other non-AR mags just by itself!

The real question is what happens now. If California decides they have wasted enough money on this and just lets the ruling stand then we are going to see a run on 30 round magazines nationwide. When the original ruling hit back in 2017 there was a huge run that ended up depleting the stocks of 30 round magazines pretty much nationwide and kept going until the judge ruled that the ban on sales could stay in place until the case worked its way through the courts. Though the 2nd round probably won't be as bad as the first it could still deplete stocks for an industry that already can't keep product on the shelves (due to the triple threat of the Coronavirus outbreak, the George Floyd riots and the fear of a possible Joe Biden/Kamala Harris presidency).

More likely though is that California will appeal this further. It could go to the full 11 judge panel in the 9th Circuit Court. In the past this would have been the death penalty for basically any conservative cause as the court was seen as incredibly liberal. But President Trump, in one of his major unsung accomplishments, has largely flipped the court so a good ruling there is not only possible it's likely. 

The other major option is to appeal it to the Supreme Court. This actually worries me a lot more than the 9th Circuit, as sad as it is to say. Though conservatives ostensibly control the court with a 5-4 majority, Chief Justice Roberts has emerged as a swing vote at best and another liberal at worst. It's because of him that the court didn't consider many new gun rights cases that could have been considered this year. With Roberts on the bench there is no guarantee that the Court would protect gun rights if the case reaches them. 

Still, it's important to note that this is a huge victory for gun rights regardless. California has been a bastion for these awful laws and it's good to see them losing in court, even if the victory isn't total. My hope is that they will realize that it's just not worth it anymore to keep pushing these insane laws and that if they do their laws will be overturned on appeal. And hopefully someday soon the people of California will get their rights fully restored.