UCLA Protesters Convert to Islam, Say Muslim Prayers

 Sarah Arnold, yesterday at Townhall.com reported that Hundreds of UCLA Students Converted to Islam and reported prayed Islamic prayers shouting "Allahu Akbar". the saying Allahu Akbar means Allah is the Greatest God. I am sure that these ignorant students do not realize this, but they are playing with fire.

I have said before that whoever Muhammad was speaking to in that cave, it wasn't an angel of God. Let me be more explicit; Allah is the Snake in the Garden of Eden. He is the very devil, and these students have just pledged themselves to him. Unlike Christianity which requires a catechism (course of instruction) it is easy to convert to Islam. But I will leave gentle readers to find out for themselves.

Hundreds of University of California of Los Angeles (UCLA) students converted to Islam and participated in a massive group prayer to Allah on Wednesday night.

Just before police officers moved in and dismantled defiant pro-terrorism protest encampments at UCLA, students said Muslim prayers as the sun set over the campus.

The pro-terrorism students chanted "Allahu akbar" during the prayer and chanted "Allah is the greatest" of all gods.

Fortunately, the True God of creation, who can not lie, is merciful, even if Allah is not. One can repent of such foolishness. But one has to repent and ask for forgivenness. I doubt these students will do so though.

Man Adapts to Climate Change

 Ted Noel at the American Thinker today has an interesting twist on the so-called climate change hysteria. Mr. Noel uses his vacation to Scotland to point out that not everywhere has the same climate as where we live. He lives in sunny Florida, where it gets so hot that he is driven from the golf course. Having lived in Panama for several years, I can tell him that it is no hotter in Florida than in Panama. And in the Summer, it is no hotter here in North Carolina than in Florida.

These observations point to the fact that if we did in fact have man-made global climate change as the "Karens of Klimate Katastrophe" claim, the areas that are hot today wouldn't get uniformly hotter. Instead, the extra warmth would be in the Artic and Antarctic regions. This is where Noel's story gets interesting. You can find Noel's article at Living With Climate Change.

It’s really easy to think that the whole world is like home. I live in Central Florida, so warming seems like a threat. In the summer, it’s hot enough to threaten my ability to play golf, and it’s “hydrate or die.” Any warmer and I won’t be able to swear and beat the ground with sticks. Then this week I visited New Lanark, Scotland.

...snip...

Most of the Karens of Klimate Katastrophe completely neglect the northern (or far southern) climes in their nattering. While various tropical and subtropical areas might have concerns with warmer temperatures, much of the civilized world is actually located in areas where an increase in average temperature might not have such awful effects as are routinely advertised. Florida’s upper crust, who can afford coastal vacation homes made possible by federal flood insurance, might find their property falling into the sea. Ditto for the California coastal elites. The rest of us won’t see much more than dramatic pictures at 6:30 and 11:00.

People in the upper Midwest will be thrilled as winter blizzards diminish. They may have a shorter ice fishing season, but will exchange that for longer growing seasons with fewer parka days. For those who don’t wish to board a giant aluminum cloud for the trip across the pond to experience this, an alternative is readily available. Just get on a floating hotel and cruise the Inside Passage to Alaska. It’s a beautiful trip, and Juneau is the same degree of northern latitude as the Isle of Mull, where I am currently writing. Yesterday the snow level on Ben More was below three thousand feet.

Noel is philosophical about the fact that climate change happens, and always has happened. Man has nothing to do with it, and it is the ultimate hubris to believe we do. I personally attribute this fact to the Creator's plan. After all, would a merciful God give flawed mankind the power to ruin His climate? I don't think so. Indeed, the very idea that meteorologists can't predict the weather with any accuracy a week in advance tells you they have no ability to predict it 100 years from now.

Climate is always changing. Man has nothing to do with this simple fact. Our paltry contribution of carbon dioxide will raise the temperature of the earth by about the same amount that the period at the end of this sentence will block the light from your computer screen. It didn’t begin to rise much until long after warming began at the end of the Little Ice Age about two hundred years ago. If we achieve “net zero,” we may actually see a large part of the green on the earth disappear, since carbon dioxide is essential to all plant life. If, on the other hand, we encourage its rise, then plants will grow more readily in arid climates, allowing deserts to bloom like roses.

...snip...

The very idea that mankind can predict or control the climate is an ultimate act of hubris. The pursuit of climate modification is, rather, a religion, whose sole value inures to the person who declares what penance the rest of us must pay in order to pacify the demigods of green “virtue.” It is a fool’s errand, far more expensive to us in taxes and loss of freedom than any imagined benefit. We can and will adapt, regardless. My proper response to those who choose to be my “better” and command my behavior is not printable in this location. It is time for us to demand that they go away and leave us alone.

I urge you to read all of Noel's article. It is not the usual facts and figures, but just common sense.

J. B. Shurk Asks the Question: Who Are You?

 J. B. Shurk at the American Thinker today has a compelling "must read" article for those suffering in today's turbulent times, entitled And Who Are You?. It is a question both to ponder for ourselves, and also to ask of those who might try to influence us. Shurk gives us a program to help us find the true ground upon which to stand:

It is no longer sufficient simply to turn off the television, avoid the Internet, and head out to the closest wilderness trail in search of momentary respite, if not tactical escape. Because Western Marxism seeks to politicize everything, it is increasingly difficult to find suitable refuge from the abhorrent hordes of “climate change” cultists, pronoun-obsessed wackadoodles, virtue-signaling simps, racial grievance monsters, Hamas enthusiasts, and other angry, “woke” trolls. While we endure the peak surges of Marxist globalism — a totalitarian system destined to crash from the weight of its own contradictions — it can feel as if we are drowning in unrelenting waves.

Please allow me to offer a lifeline. I know of no better daily exercise than to spend time (1) repairing and maintaining your relationship with God, (2) helping and protecting the members of your family, (3) testing and strengthening your own character, (4) improving your mind, and (5) healing your physical body. I have found that if a person works on these goals each day, it is much easier to silence outside noise and find peace.

I can attest to at least some of Shurk's prescription. I have kept a daily lectionary provided by our church. With it, one reads a selection from the Bible each day, which in a year covers the entire Bible and the Psalms twice. Psalms are the prayers of the ancient Israelites. In addition, I have long practiced daily prayer. Of course I read eclectically, indeed always have. But recently I have taken up strength training to stave off sarcopenia. It is already showing results. But I do need to work on character building more.

There are two chief reasons why this is so. First, these five exercises are not easy, and they are not meant to be. You could spend every second of every day dedicated to any one and never accomplish the task. Maintaining a good relationship with God? Priests and pastors struggle to do so all their lives. Helping your family? That responsibility never ends. Improving your character? Even honorable people sometimes fail to do what is right. Becoming a better thinker? Learning new things requires patience and diligence. Remaining healthy? The older a body gets, the more committed a person must become to engage in regular physical activity. No matter how simple they might seem when reading these words, every one of these five activities requires tremendous energy and time.

The second reason this daily routine will reward you with a sense of peace is that none of these extraordinarily difficult tasks requires you to submit to the madness of the outside world. Think about the personal responsibilities I have listed: God, family, character, mind, and body. No matter what level of external chaos afflicts us, we are always in complete control over how we choose to interact with God, how we aid our families, how we weigh what is right and wrong, how we use our brains, and how we direct our bodies to persevere. No Marxist subversive or government agency can dictate to us how we perform these duties. They will certainly tell us that they have authority over how we pray, how we live, what we teach, what we know, and how we choose to protect our families. But what they tell us and what they can make us do are entirely different things. I would suggest that when untrustworthy people insist on interfering in the way you perform these daily resolutions, you consider their intrusion a test and an opportunity to strengthen your own self-purpose, commitment, and character. Outside forces cannot diminish us when we use adversity to grow. After all, as iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.

It does not matter how late in life a person learns to take these five daily exercises seriously. Once they become a part of your routine, you will see the world with more clarity. What is more, you will soon realize that almost everything you do in life gives you a chance to improve one or more of these personal responsibilities. When you are confronted with something uncomfortable or demanding, you will begin to ask yourself how the challenge before you might provide the perfect opportunity to enhance your relationship with God, reinforce the foundations of your family, test your character, help you learn, or make you stronger. Eventually, more and more of the craziness in our world will disappear as the goals you set for yourself lead you down a richer path.

I urge gentle readers to read the entire article by J.B.Shurk, and to ponder the answer to his question "Who are you?" Personally, I am God's servant and soldier in a fallen and pagan world. Who are you?"

There Is Every Reason to Prevent the Government from Assuming Powers the Constitution Does Not Grant

 Mike McDaniel at the American Thinker once again brings gun issues into clear light through his experience as a law enforcement officer. The issue is so-called "ghost guns." McDaniel is reporting in The Supreme Court and Ghost Guns that the Supreme Court should rule that the government has no right to extend the serial number requirement to firearm components, thus making home made firearms at the very least more expensive, if not illegal.

The Biden’s Handler’s DOJ has done it again. Actually, they did it in 2022, but the Supreme Court has granted cert. The issue is so-called “ghost guns,” guns without a unique serial number.

This stems from the Gun Control Act of 1968, which required a serial number for every firearm manufactured in America. Not every manufacturer before then used serial numbers. The system established by the GCA works like this: serial numbers are recorded on each ATF Form 4473, which must be filled out at the retail point of sale for each gun. Those forms are kept by every Federal Firearm Licensee (FFL).

...snip...

That provision of GCA has always been interpreted as referring to finished firearms. However, in 2022 Garland promulgated a rule extending that requirement to firearm components. This would significantly increase the regulatory reach of the Biden administration over the firearms industry and increase the cost of making and selling firearms, rendering them less affordable and accessible to American citizens, and forcing many firearm makers and sellers out of business.

McDaniel points out that in his experience as a law enforcement officer, he never solved a crime using the serial number of a gun, and he didn't know anyone who did. Even if you can find the first buyer of the gun, you still must do the investigation to put the person at the scene with the weapon in question.  But let McDaniel tell it:

In recent years, many Americans have enjoyed building their own rifles and handguns from parts kits, which is entirely legal. Many of those kits do not have serial numbers, and a gun made from raw materials by someone with the necessary skills and machinery likewise has no serial number. These are the “ghost guns” so commonly demonized by contemporary D/s/cs.

Serial numbers are of little use. Criminals, by nature lazy sorts, rarely if ever obtain guns by building their own. Their guns come largely from thefts and the black market. “Ghost guns” are made and possessed almost exclusively by Americans who will never commit a crime, and certainly not with the guns they make.

During my police career, I never solved a crime by tracing a serial number, nor am I aware of anyone who did. Anti-gun/liberty cracktivists, and Hollywood would have us believe serial numbers are an essential crime fighting tool. Reality, as usual, is otherwise.

The police find a handgun left at a robbery scene and enter the serial number into their computer. The all-knowing government database tells them it was bought by Joe Normal of 1234 Average Street, Placid, Nebraska, at Placid Guns, on 11-02-2010. Ah-hah! They have their man, and the case is solved in less than an hour, minus commercials.

Not quite. There is no such government database, and even if there were, all it would tell the police is the identity of the original buyer 14 years earlier. They would still have to prove Joe Normal was present at the time and place of the crime, and used that handgun in violation of the law. What’s most likely is Joe traded that gun in for another one in another state sometime in the past, and the ownership trail moves on, indecipherably, from there.

If the robbery happened in Placid, NB, and if the police went to every FFL licensee in the area and checked their records, they might be able to find Joe’s 4473. If Placid Guns computerized all their 4473s before 2010, that is. If not, they’d have to go through every paper copy on file at Placid Guns to try to find that serial number. Imagine if the robbery happened in another town or state.

Now, having serial numbers on guns can be very useful to the manufacturer, when it comes to which weapon was sold to who and when if warranty work is needed. Beyond the manufacturer, old guns of historical nature such as the 1911 are of interest because of where they served and who might have carried or owned them. A gun worn by a well-known General at a certain battle for instance is more valuable that a nondescript 1911. But I see little reason why the government needs to get involved, unless it is to track who owns what guns in the event of a mass disarmament. But that goes against the Second Amendment.

A serial number, if the victim of a burglary kept a record of it, might help if the burglary was reported and the local police agency entered that serial number into the federal NCIC database. If the burglar was caught with the gun and an officer ran an NCIC check, the gun might show as stolen. That’s less common than one might imagine. But other than that, there is little reason to require serial numbers.

There is, however, every reason to prevent government from assuming powers the Constitution does not grant. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will agree.

Constitutional Carry in NC?

 I missed this Cam and Company episode when it came out on the 25th, but I am catching up.  Here is Cam Edwards at Bearing Arms reporting that NC Gun Owners Demand Constitutional Carry. Will Republicans Listen. One thing that has always bothered me is that criminals wander around every day carrying firearms in public without a permit. So, what is so difficult about letting honest law-abiding people do the same?

You can read Edwards' article and of course watch his interview with Grass Roots North Carolina founder and fearless leader Paul Valone. He makes a convincing case for doing it this year. But they should have done it years ago. After all, if the criminals can run around essentially Constitutionally carrying, why can't we?

Time To Prosecute the Anti-Gun Lobby?

At Ammoland today Dan Wos asks a serious, and interesting question: Should Anti-Gun Lobbyists Be Prosecuted for Restrictive Gun Laws? We sometimes talk about the fact that both lobbyists who advocate for, and politicians who pass rediculous gun control have blood on their hands, but that is usually rhetorically. But do they really? Wos presents a case for doing just that.

Now, it is one thing to advocate for an unpopular position. Sometimes such advocacy is the right thing to do. For instance, advocating for the unborn is the right thing, although the abortion lobby would have us believe that abortion is the popular thing. Should pro-life people be prosecuted? No, of course not. I feel that the unborn is a human life that should be protected the same as those born. But we can only change peoples' hearts by convincing them, not forcing them.

But of course, the gun banners do not want to wait to convince us, probably because they know we can not be convinced. There is too much experience of the average person to convince them they don't need guns. But there is also so much scholarship; writings of legal experts, of historians, of criminologists, even of statiticians and plain old observers of life in general to tell us that disarming is a bad idea. We know, for instance, that criminals will always be able to have guns when they need them.

It’s ironic how the anti-gun crowd tries to hold firearm manufacturers responsible for deaths that involve their guns but claim no responsibility for the deaths of innocent people who were rendered unarmed and helpless due to restrictive gun laws.

The political left is always using “mass shootings” as justification for more gun control laws. The propaganda and media hype behind so-called “gun violence” is nothing more than fake rhetoric created for the purpose of gaining support for more gun regulations. The idea that the gun-grabbers continue to push is that “if the killer didn’t have a gun, he wouldn’t kill.” This couldn’t be further from the truth and has been proven to be a false claim time and time again.

And there is the difference between honest debate between two sides who see the same issue differently, and the bad faith efforts of the anti-gun lobby and anti-gun politicians. They deliberately cherry pick data, highlight some and cover up others to present their view. But the truth is that guns are not the problem, nor knives, nor even rocks. The problem, as always has been since man first walked the earth is that people kill other people. You will not stop them by taking away tools. They will simply find another way.

What the media won’t tell you is that violence is never the result of a gun, but anytime a gun is used, they will position it as the cause. There is no such thing as “gun violence.”

For example, Australia had two major gun bans under the guise of preventing suicide, yet after the bans, the trajectory of the suicide rate didn’t change. Giffords is notorious for pushing a false narrative that guns shoot all by themselves.

...See the tweet from Giffords about guns shooting themselves in Wos's article...

In the face of such bad faith rhetoric, shouldn't Giffords, Moms Demand Action, Everytown and Brady be held just as responsible as they try to hold gun manufacturers? If a zone is deemed "gun free" then don't police or the entity controlling that "gun free zone" have a duty to protect those in that zone? Perhaps, when there is a mass shooting at a school, those who proposed to make the school "gun free" should be brought up on charges as accomplices before the fact?

I will let Wos have the last word:

If someone cuts the brake lines on your car, should they be held accountable for any death or injury that occurs? That death or injury was a direct and intended result of their actions. Their actions caused you to be unable to stop your car. The same is true for gun control laws. The actions of the anti-gun activists and lobbyists are intended to keep you unarmed and result in you not being able to protect yourself in public. Anti-gun activists keep Americans unarmed, and criminals take advantage of the situation.

Tennessee Passes Bill to Allow Teachers to Carry at School

 According to a post, by Madeline Leesman at Townhall.com, Tennessee has now past a law allowing staff at schools to carry guns. It remains to be signed into law by the Governor. The post can be found at Lawmakers in One State Pass Legislation to Allow Teachers to Carry Guns in Schools. The bill also calls for strict privacy of carriers from parents, other teachers and school staff, and students. Only the administrators would know.

If the Governor signs the bill, Tennessee will join Texas, Florida and a few other states in allowing this common sense way to protect students. Does that mean we will never have another school shooting? Of course not. But as with all deterrents, those who would target students will have to factor in the possibility of being stopped before they can get started by a teacher with a gun. These shooters hope to gain fame, though not fortune, by having the highest body count before they are killed. Sick, I know. But we are not dealing with rational actors here.

Note too that this is an entirely voluntary program. People who want to carry at school will go through extensive training. They will have to be very responsible with their weapon. Carrying every day is both physically and mentally draining.  It requires a person to be on alert at all times.  No one who doesn't feel like carrying a gun will be required to do so, and no one will be made to feel less than if they don't.

Further, all of the angst about students feeling "threatened and unsafe" with guns around is pure hogwash, a talking point. I suspect that not one in a hundred students will care on whit. They are too wrapped up in themselves, their relative status, what the kool kids are doing, what's in and what's out, to worry about their teachers. They are kids after all, not little adults.

I applaud Tennessee legislators for their guts and forsight. Would that all states had similar laws.