House and Senate Democrats Are Coming After Your Ammunition Now

Matt Funicello reporting for RedState 

On Thursday, November 2nd, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Congressman Robert Garcia (D-CA) introduced their newest gun control measure in Congress to further restrict your rights, but this time it is the ammunition they are after. The bill dubbed the AMMO Act, will federalize a version of existing state law here in California that restricts ammunition sales by requiring a criminal background check, banning out-of-state ammunition orders, requiring vendors to obtain a separate license to sell ammunition, and more. If passed, the AMMO Act will prohibit purchases of more than 1,000 rounds of any caliber within a five-day period, as well as require all vendors to obtain a federal license to sell ammunition, and it will require all vendors to report ammunition sales to the ATF. 

In a joint statement on X, Warren and Garcia give their reasonings for their legislation, which parrots the same old lies and fear-mongering the left uses when it talks about guns and gun control. 

With their latest move for the gun control agenda, this legislation makes no sense. Besides being another attack on the Second Amendment, this is really just another power and money grab by the federal government. On the surface, it doesn't seem to be that bad to some people — technically, you can still buy over 1,000 rounds; you just have to wait a week between purchases. But now you have to pay a background check fee, of which they do not specify what amount that fee will be, and now the government gets to keep track of how many times you buy ammunition and what kind of ammunition you are buying. Oh, and they are asking for an additional $150 million to upgrade the NICS, which is the National Instant Check System that is used for gun purchases. 

Call this whatever you want to, but this is just another pathetic attempt at infringing on your basic human right to self-defense. In Garcia's press release, the laughable attempt to justify this dumpster fire of legislation is on full display, and we will break that down for you here. 

The bottom line is no individual should be buying bulk amounts of ammunition without a federal background check from places like gas stations, pharmacies, and convenience stores...

I hate to break it to the Congressman — ok, maybe I don't — gas stations or pharmacies aren't offloading tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition from their stores. In fact, I can guarantee you that no pharmacy whatsoever is selling ammunition at all. Maybe, and I mean maybe, a gas station here or there might be selling some ammo, but they're not moving pallets or barrels of ammunition every day or year. Furthermore, why should I, or anyone else for that matter, be prevented from purchasing bulk amounts of ammunition without a background check? I personally go through several thousand rounds of ammunition every year. There were times when I bought three to four thousand rounds of ammunition in a month because I was training so much. 

Millions of Americans are buying thousands of rounds of ammunition at a time, every single day in this country. They are buying it because they want to train or take multi-day classes that require at least 1,000 rounds per gun that you take and use. Others are professional shooters who participate in competitions all over the country and the world. Some of these men and women buy 10,000 rounds of ammunition at once, and that will last them maybe a few months. And some people, like myself, want to maintain a stockpile of ammunition to have just in case. 

It defies common sense that individuals can amass a huge amount of munitions with more ease than they can stock up on medication for cold and flu season.

Then you got this gem, where he laughably tries to compare bulk ammunition sales to buying cold meds in bulk for the cold and flu season. Nobody is buying thousands of cold and flu meds for a season. The only people that are doing that are the people that are making meth, not somebody who is trying to stock up on a case of Tylenol for Cold and Flu because they are getting ready for the next five years of cold and flu season. Cold and flu medications aren't the crux of an argument regarding constitutional rights either. They are mentioning it as a dog whistle for an apples-to-concrete comparison; they just don't add up. 

The press release wraps up with a brief summary of what the bill does, and they use the ever-famous evil .50 caliber ammunition that can be used as an anti-aircraft gun. For all you beginners out there, the .50 caliber round costs between $4 and $9 PER ROUND. If you were using a .50-caliber rifle for competition, you could be looking at spending over $1,000 for just 100 rounds. Furthermore, a .50 caliber rifle has been used in the commission of a crime less than 10 times in the past 40 years. Yet, the hoplophobic politicians have an insatiable appetite for banning or restricting them. 

As I, along with my RedState colleagues, have written about Second Amendment issues at length. There is no limit to the length that the left will go to in order to strip away our rights. You can find some of them here:

Weapons of War: What They Are and Why We Need Them

Gun Control: Who Gets the Blame for Taking Away Your Rights? 

Here's Why You Should Never Trust Anti-Gunners

Study Reveals FBI's Massive Under-Reporting of Defensive Gun Use by Legal Gun Owners

This latest attempt by the left to go after ammunition now is a clear signal that they will never stop going after the Second Amendment until it is gone. The only way to prevent them is to actively support the groups that are taking the fight to local, state, and federal governments with lawsuits. Peaceful noncompliance is also a strategy that is growing in popularity, as well. At the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, fight, we must, lest we lose everything. 

And we Know, Red Pill News, and more- Nov 4

 

U.S. and EU Officials Gently Discussing Need for Ukraine to Enter Peace Negotiations with Russia

 

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

All things considered, this is a positive first step and the first significant indication that Western propaganda around World War Reddit is failing.

According to sources who are speaking to NBC News, U.S. and EU officials are gently beginning to talk to Ukraine government officials about what steps might need to be taken to bring an end to the Ukraine-Russia war. Obviously, for those who do not pretend, we all know the decision to end this conflict comes down to the USA telling Ukraine President Zelenskyy to open peace talks with Russia.

The EU NATO alliance has recently started to show less interest in the maintenance of a U.S. proxy war against Russia, and more open public statements that the current status of a stalemate is unsustainable given the amount of money, hardware and political energy required to maintain it.

Additionally, Zelenskyy is running out of men to throw into the meat grinder; the troops and military leaders are actually defying his orders now.

Therefore, if the Biden administration (State Dept and CIA) concede to the reality, Zelenskyy will have no alternative except to talk to Russia about ending the conflict.

This is the baseline of non-pretending honesty that President Trump has been saying in his remarks about his ability to end the “killing and death” within 24 hours. The reality of the situation is not complex.

Ukraine pledges not to join NATO, the USA pledges not to use Ukraine as a proxy nation to conflict with Russia, the untrusting Russian government keeps part of Eastern Ukraine as a safety mechanism, and the war/bloodshed ends.

However, given the use of Ukraine as a financial mechanism for U.S. politicians to get rich, and given the financial stakes for multinationals like Blackrock, there are other financial considerations which will play out in the background of any potential peace talks. In the end, just like in the beginning, it’s all going to come down to money.

(Via NBC) – WASHINGTON — U.S. and European officials have begun quietly talking to the Ukrainian government about what possible peace negotiations with Russia might entail to end the war, according to one current senior U.S. official and one former senior U.S. official familiar with the discussions.

The conversations have included very broad outlines of what Ukraine might need to give up to reach a deal, the officials said. Some of the talks, which officials described as delicate, took place last month during a meeting of representatives from more than 50 nations supporting Ukraine, including NATO members, known as the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the officials said.

The discussions are an acknowledgment of the dynamics militarily on the ground in Ukraine and politically in the U.S. and Europe, officials said.

They began amid concerns among U.S. and European officials that the war has reached a stalemate and about the ability to continue providing aid to Ukraine, officials said. Biden administration officials also are worried that Ukraine is running out of forces, while Russia has a seemingly endless supply, officials said. Ukraine is also struggling with recruiting and has recently seen public protests about some of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s open-ended conscription requirements.

And there is unease in the U.S. government with how much less public attention the war in Ukraine has garnered since the Israel-Hamas war began nearly a month ago, the officials said. Officials fear that shift could make securing additional aid for Kyiv more difficult.

Some U.S. military officials have privately begun using the term “stalemate” to describe the current battle in Ukraine, with some saying it may come down to which side can maintain a military force the longest. Neither side is making large strides on the battlefield, which some U.S. officials now describe as a war of inches. Officials also have privately said Ukraine likely only has until the end of the year or shortly thereafter before more urgent discussions about peace negotiations should begin. U.S. officials have shared their views on such a timeline with European allies, officials said.

“Any decisions about negotiations are up to Ukraine,” Adrienne Watson, spokesperson for the National Security Council, said in a statement. “We are focused on continuing to stand strongly in support of Ukraine as they defend their freedom and independence against Russian aggression.”

An administration official also noted that the U.S. has participated with Ukraine in discussions of its peace summit framework but said the White House “is not aware of any other conversations with Ukraine about negotiations at the moment.”  (read more)

Ultimately the decision to end the Ukraine-Russia war is not up to Joe Biden.  At a certain point the CIA and State Dept will tell him the cost -v- benefit analysis is no longer worth it, politicians are getting too many angry calls from Americans, and it’s time to end the conflict.

Biden will do what he’s told and read what is prepared for him, while the people around him try to position the end of the Ukraine conflict to gain Joe Biden the Nobel Prize for peace.

The political propaganda at the conclusion of a proxy war that NATO and Biden started is very clear to see. 

Our October 7: The terror attacks coming to the US

posted by D. Parker at American Thinker 

Officials from the Biden regime are issuing heightened warnings after years of lying that the border was closed and after they admitted that millions have illegally invaded the country.

Amid an unprecedented surge in illegal entries into the United States and mounting calls for a global jihad as the Israel-Hamas conflict escalates, U.S. officials are vocalizing increasingly urgent warnings that the U.S. is vulnerable to a terrorist attack.

FBI director Christopher Wray took a break from investigating President Trump and his supporters, parents attending school board meetings, and Catholics to warn the Senate Homeland Security Committee of the increasing likelihood of an attack from real terrorists:

“This is not a time for panic, but it is a time for vigilance,” Wray declared in response to questioning from Florida GOP Sen. Rick Scott. “What has now increased is the greater possibility of one of these foreign terrorist organizations directing an attack in the United States.” 

While he did assert that the bureau had not yet seen any evidence of a group directing an attack, Wray noted that the FBI had seen “one terrorist organization after another calling for attacks.”

“It is a time to be concerned. We are in a dangerous period,” Wray told Scott, who then asked whether the FBI was able to track all threats and prevent attacks on the U.S.

For some reason, Alejandro “The Border Is Closed” Mayorkas was trying to imply that the threat is from radicalized “lone actors,” when there are millions of men of military age who have invaded the country.  Why wouldn’t the terrorists take advantage of this vast resource provided by President Obama-Biden and, by extension, supporters of the Democrat party?  This points to a surprise October 7 terror attack.  

Antisemitism on the rise as the US grapples with threats from radicalized “lone actors,” officials say

“Hamas terrorists horrifically attacked thousands of innocent men, women and children in Israel on Oct. 7, brutally murdering, wounding and taking hostages of all ages,” Mayorkas said. “In the days and weeks since, we have responded to an increase in threats against Jewish, Muslim and Arab-American communities and institutions across our country.”

Then there is the massive illegal invader caravan that is heading our way.  Why are they taking this provocative action at this point?

The invaders are getting in, so why raise awareness with a massive invasion movement?  What do they know that we don’t know?

The odds are that Obama’s hand puppet is going to have to get serious about closing the border after a terrorist attack facilitated by the Biden regime’s working for our enemies. 

Thus, the illegal invaders could see this as their last chance to exploit the situation.

We certainly have been under this threat since the horrific events of October 7.  It should also be obvious why we will be next.  No matter its horrid history, antisemitism these days is simply a toxic mixture of leftist class warfare and anti-religious zealotry. 

There is a video from a few weeks ago from Thomas Sowell on the rise in antisemitism around the world.  He explained the issue by referring to a conversation he had years ago with an official of one of the Jewish organizations in New York, asking how they could minimize the hostility they face.  He gave a one-word answer: fail.  Like others who succeed, they are hated because they are successful.  

That means that if you’re hardworking and believe in something besides the ideas that Karl Marx perverted from Plato and Sir Thomas More, you’re also going to be a target.

First, they came for the Israelis, And I did not speak out, Because I was not an Israeli...

The point of the Martin Niemöller poem is that evil will always try to divide and conquer people, making those who aren’t the current target feel safe from the mob.

It helps the collective take out its targets in turn because those who aren’t currently in the crosshairs keep their head down and uninvolved.  It’s the evil of Saul Alinsky’s Rule 13, and that alone should tell you which side they are on.

So what should we expect when Nazi/Hamas decides to strike?

No one knows.  We can only speculate based on recent and past terrorist behavior.

During the murderous acts of violence of October 7, the terrorists had to do some work to get through the border barrier around the Gaza Strip and then move to attack and brutally massacre innocent Israelis. 

But thanks to the disaster that is Obama’s sock puppet, if not a player for the other side, our potential attackers can just move over the border and through the wire conveniently cut for them by our government.  Even better for them and worse for us, the same feral government is also conveniently transporting them around the country to a target area of their choice — all paid for with your tax dollars.

We also know from recent experience that terrorists prefer to mount large-scale attacks with innovative techniques that catch everyone off guard, as was the case on October 7.  We don’t know how many hundreds or thousands of terrorists have invaded the country through our open border, but it would seem logical that they would take advantage of these circumstances.

We don’t know what the attacks are going to look like because they have so many options.  Remember: the terrorists have the added advantage of an open border to bring in whatever weapons or equipment they want.  So again, thanks to the disaster that is President Obama-Biden, he can break a few records in not only being the worst in history, but spawning new and innovative terrorist attacks.

So now is the time to consider this taking place and plan for this potential emergency.  It is also the time to start asking questions of what Biden will do with this “opportunity” when these take place.

How will Obama’s sock puppet and the rest of the far left try to use this “serious crisis”?

Will they endanger people by taking away their guns, absurdly labeled as safety legislation?

Will they foist other freedom restrictions on the innocent instead of the guilty?    

Are they going to use this as an excuse to push us further into police state status?

Will they take this as a hint to finally secure the border or will they use it for another pet policy agenda?

Will they in effect cheer on such an attack by exploiting it as a “serious crisis,” or will they finally take this as a sign to stop trying to destroy the country?

Jobs, Wages and Official Labor Reports Continue Showing Major Disconnects from Reality on Main Street

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

I have not written as much about the economic analysis coming from the official institutions of government because, well, quite frankly, none of it has made sense for several months.  In this era of great pretending, I am reminded of the official catchphrase which began in 2021, “managing the transition.”

When you contemplate that “managing the transition” can also equate to controlling public opinion, and when you overlap the dynamic of large U.S. institutions manipulating information in order to control that opinion, then suddenly the trust in the data evaporates.   When the reality of the economic situation you can measure, gauge, and sense on Main Street is increasingly detached from the government data about what’s happening on Main Street, things get weird.

EXAMPLE TODAY – Bureau of Labor and Statistics: “Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 150,000 in October, and the unemployment rate changed little at 3.9 percent.” That’s the topline as announced.

Then you drop to the adjustments on the same report: “The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised down by 62,000, from +227,000 to +165,000, and the change for September was revised down by 39,000, from +336,000 to +297,000. With these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 101,000 lower than previously reported.”

September and October are generally significant upticks in labor, as the process for holiday preparation (shipping, transport, etc.) are underway.  However, that historic pattern is no longer applicable.  We see consumer trends in a downward direction, general uneasiness of the economic situation is relayed by businesses and consumers who are the key to reality, and yet the official reporting reflects something entirely different.  Thus, you must ask yourself if this is part of the aforementioned “managing the transition.”

Additionally, staying with the bigger (non-pretending) picture, the U.S. government intentionally imports 7.5 million illegal aliens.  Where are they in the data of employment conditions?   Is there a metric that can evaluate the impact of a non-skilled labor influx that takes place simultaneous to a negative economic reality of inflation and diminished wages felt by those traditionally measured.

When you look carefully at the data provided by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the Dept of Labor (DoL) and the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS), what you come away with is the data-driven impression of something that you cannot actually see in the reality of the economic world around you.  Quite simply, none of it makes sense.

If you begin talking about the disconnect, you enter a sphere of sounding like a conspiracy theorist.   Would the official institutions of economic analysis actually manipulate data as an outcome of the larger goal to “manage the transition”?  For me the answer is an emphatic, yes.   However, how do you quantify that disconnect when the people with a vested interest in hiding any conflict are the same people who control the release of the data?

It is a reality that 75% of the American people feel their economic situation has worsened and continues to be worse.  Many people are increasingly incapable of staying ahead of increases in cost of living.  Govt institutions say inflation has come under control, yet the prices continue skyrocketing and everyone can feel it.  Financial insecurity is the new normal amid a growing population, while the managers of the transition say, ‘all is well.’

The only thing that brings a person back from the world of crazy speak, is a review of actual ground reports on Main Street from people who are living their daily lives and trying to cope with the costs of maintaining that standard.  Almost everyone expresses having more difficulty keeping their financial head above water.  Yet the data released by government paints a different picture.   The distance between reality and ‘official data’ has never been wider than it is today.

Fewer goods are being manufactured.  Fewer goods are being shipped.  Fewer sales are taking place.   In a naturally contracting cycle this would mean less jobs.  However, the data shows job growth.

♦Health care added 58,000 jobs in October, in line with the average monthly gain of 53,000 over the prior 12 months. Over the month, employment continued to trend up in ambulatory health care services (+32,000), hospitals (+18,000), and nursing and residential care facilities (+8,000).
♦Employment in government increased by 51,000 in October and has returned to its pre-pandemic February 2020 level. Monthly job growth in government had averaged 50,000 in the prior 12 months. In October, employment continued to trend up in local government (+38,000).
♦Social assistance added 19,000 jobs in October, compared with the average monthly gain of 23,000 over the prior 12 months.
♦In October, construction employment continued to trend up (+23,000), about in line with the average monthly gain of 18,000 over the prior 12 months. Employment continued to trend up over the month in specialty trade contractors (+14,000) and construction of buildings (+6,000).
♦Employment in manufacturing decreased by 35,000 in October, reflecting a decline of 33,000 in motor vehicles and parts that was largely due to strike activity.
♦In October, employment in leisure and hospitality changed little (+19,000). The industry had added an average of 52,000 jobs per month over the prior 12 months.
♦Employment in professional and business services was little changed in October (+15,000) and has shown little net change since May. Employment in temporary help services changed little over the month (+7,000) but is 229,000 below its peak in March 2022.
♦In October, employment in transportation and warehousing was little changed (-12,000) and has shown little net change over the year. Over the month, warehousing and storage lost 11,000 jobs, while air transportation added 4,000 jobs.
♦Information employment changed little in October (-9,000). Employment in motion picture and sound recording continued to trend down (-5,000); the industry has lost 44,000 jobs since May, at least partially reflecting the impact of an ongoing labor dispute.

DATA

What do you see happening in/around your area?   How are the employment conditions nearest you?

No, Bidenomics Won’t End In A ‘Soft Landing’

Millions of families have been getting kicked in the teeth for years — and will keep getting kicked, whether a recession arrives or not.

posted by Christopher Jacobs at The Federalist

In the contrast between elites — in Washington and on Wall Street — and the working-class Americans across our country, two words banded about in recent months stand out: “soft landing.”

In economic parlance, the term refers to whether a combination of monetary policy decisions by the Federal Reserve, macroeconomic forces, and sheer good luck can manage to lower inflation levels without crushing economic activity to the point that it causes a recession and/or massive job losses.

But to people in the nation’s heartland, the words “soft landing,” as they relate to our economy, represent something between a misnomer and an insult. On multiple levels, millions of families have been getting kicked in the teeth for years — and will keep getting kicked, whether a recession arrives or not. To suggest that there’s anything “soft” about it just shows the people who run our economy are out of touch.

Inflation Baked into Prices

A few weeks ago, the latest inflation report showed that the consumer price index rose by “only” 3.7 percent in September. That’s down by more than half from the 40-year high of 9.1 percent in June 2022. But lower levels of inflation haven’t begun to solve the problems created by “Bidenomics.”

While inflation may have abated somewhat — that is, prices are rising more slowly — the American economy hasn’t experienced deflation, with prices actually falling. Even if the price of a hypothetical sofa may remain at $1,200 for a while, it has very little chance of dropping back to the $1,000 level where it stood before inflation took off during the pandemic.

But people who walk into that furniture store — or the grocery store, or stop by their gas station — still have sticker shock every time they go to buy items. Their incomes haven’t kept up with the spike in prices over the past few years, so they feel poorer — because they are poorer. 

The recent Census Bureau release of income data for last year shows how Americans have become poorer due to the recent bout of inflation. In 2022, the median (i.e., 50th percentile) household earned $3,670 less than they did in 2019, after taking the effects of inflation into account. Separate reports have concluded that real wages stagnated for the first half of this year, as well.

Even if real wages rebound slightly in the second half of 2023, families will still feel poorer than they did before the pandemic — because after taking the effects of inflation into account, they are poorer. It will take several more years of real wage gains for that dynamic to remedy itself, meaning that families struggling with their monthly budgets won’t get a “soft landing” any time soon.

Home Ownership: Haves and Have-Nots

Over and above the question of family budgets, families face tough decisions about where to live. A decade-plus of questionable monetary policy has created a two-tiered housing system since the pandemic that will take years, if not longer, to unwind.

A friend of mine faces the dilemma that many young families are contemplating: He and his wife can’t afford to buy a home. They make good money and don’t live in an area (like Washington or San Francisco) with very high home prices. But the yo-yo-ing of monetary policy has effectively put homeownership out of reach for them.

Consider what it now takes to buy a home costing $500,000. Assuming a 10 percent down payment and an interest rate of 8 percent — mortgage rates have approached this level in recent weeks — the estimated monthly payment comes to $3,489. That monthly amount doesn’t include taxes or insurance — and it assumes that a family has more than $50,000 up front to fund a 10 percent down payment and closing costs.

But if mortgage rates were still at the 3 percent level, their monthly payment would come to only $2,085. The difference amounts to over $1,400 per month in interest costs alone. And for many families, that sum is the difference between having an affordable home within reach and having to put the “American Dream” on hold.

Undoing the Fed’s Damage

Seeing these numbers, many people would point the finger at the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policies for causing this mess. The Fed is one major cause of the problem — but not for the reason one might think.

Prior to the early 2000s, mortgage rates of 6 percent, 7 percent, 8 percent, or even higher were the norm, not the exception. But over the past two decades, financial markets — both the stock market and the housing market — have become addicted to cheap cash at ultra-low interest rates. Over that time, the Fed has largely obliged, printing money on numerous occasions since the financial crisis to keep interest rates arbitrarily low.

That money-printing helped stoke inflation since the pandemic, which the Fed is now trying to resolve by raising interest rates back to more historically appropriate levels. But it has also exacerbated inequality by creating asset bubbles and setting up classes of “haves” and “have-nots.”

Over time, the dynamic outlined above will have an effect on housing prices. Even if the housing market doesn’t crash, prices will either stay flat or soften for several years, because a house that’s affordable with a 3 percent mortgage can easily become unaffordable when mortgage rates hit 8 percent.

But the “haves” — those families lucky enough to have locked into low-rate mortgages over the past few years — won’t want to sell if doing so means they need to take out a new mortgage at a much higher rate. As a result, it may take years for the housing market to become “un-stuck,” as no one will want to move. This dynamic will also likely affect the job market because relocating to take a new position now imposes a huge financial penalty given the change in mortgage rates.

Long Return to Normalcy

The bottom line: Undoing all the damage of this ill-advised monetary policy — beating back inflation, and moving to a stable housing market not pumped up by cheap Fed money — will take time and impose sizable economic costs on families across the country. And that’s assuming that all this credit tightening doesn’t spark a major recession, another financial crash, or both.

Given the level of pain involved in this adjustment — both that already inflicted and that yet to come — no one should give the Fed credit for “engineering a ‘soft landing’” even if the economy doesn’t crash. Just as an arsonist should win no points for putting out his own fire, no one should lionize the Federal Reserve if it manages to resolve economic problems largely of its own making.