Tag: Atlas Shrugged

As Conservatives, We Should Make our Own Movies, Music, and Social Media Platforms: I’m thinking seriously of becoming a movie producer

After this week I am seriously thinking of becoming a movie producer for my next big project. After considering the astonishing success of Rosanne’s return to television, the box office take of Tomb Raider overseas—especially in China, the controversy of Facebook data theft and the general liberalism of all the tech companies from Microsoft to Twitter—I am thinking that there is a serious need for a conservative voice in the world filling these entertainment markets. That is the ultimate solution after all. I have all these scripts sitting around from my Hollywood pitch days which went on from roughly 1995 to 2006 that I have sat on for a long time because only liberals were putting money into films. It was obvious to all of them that they wanted to go in this liberal direction and I didn’t fit at the time. But it hasn’t worked out for Hollywood and there are a lot of lost opportunities to make a lot of money and to make people in the world generally very happy. It really hit home for me this week while Steven Spielberg was doing press for his upcoming Ready Player One movie. He is well aware that he has lost his touch, because essentially epistemologically he has change. Spielberg directed some of the greatest gunfights in cinema history in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but he never has since as he found friends in Hollywood that he didn’t want to piss off. He is now one of those people who put $500,000 behind the March for Our Lives anti-gun march which was an excessively liberal crusade. As conservatives feel vindicated somewhat that Disney put Rosanne back on television as a “Trump supporter” there is an obvious starvation out there for the kind of movies that Hollywood used to make, to be made again, and rather than complain about it, some of us should just get together and fill that market void.

As a Star Wars fan I had to get The Last Jedi Blu-Ray when it came out this past Tuesday. I liked the movie and I thought Rian Johnson did some really good work as the writer and director. But, it has epistemological problems with its foundation philosophy. These new filmmakers are just so San Francisco liberal that it gets in the way of their stories. George Lucas when he made the original Star Wars movies was not a liberal. He might have spent all his time around liberals, but he had enough small-town conservative in him to detest Hollywood. When he took a big chance and went to the bank to fund The Empire Strikes Back with his own money—that was not a Hollywood communist doing the work, it was a passionate filmmaker and that effort showed up on the screen. Lucas may have had liberalism on his mind as a Vietnam protestor, but he like his friend Steven Spielberg grew up on classic westerns that were about good guys against bad guys and he wanted to tell a modern story about those ideas—so they followed the well stated philosophy to great box office success. But George Lucas is obviously missing from The Last Jedi and it was excessively noticeable in the bonus footage this time as opposed to The Force Awakens by J.J. Abrams. Abrams at least is something of a protégé of Lucas and Spielberg so he was able to recapture some of that on-set magic. Rian Johnson was simply a fanboy of Star Wars who was a modern Hollywood Trump hating liberal that was taking the foundations of Star Wars and making a progressive film on top of that foundation.

With all the attempts to show women empowerment and to put Asian actors in various roles in The Last Jedi the film was rejected by Chinese audiences, which Disney and Lucasfilm were obviously trying to cater to. All the female roles in The Last Jedi were liberal embodiments of what the political left thinks feminism is all about, and it comes across uncomfortably political, and it certainly hurt the film. Yet Tomb Raider is all about the magnificent empowerment of Lara Croft and she has guns in her movie, and she kills people and enjoys it—and the Chinese went crazy over it rewarding it surprising in oversea sales. I listened to the bonus footage of The Last Jedi and carefully noted that Rian Johnson thinks the Force is all about altruism and sacrifice, and that his good guys in this movie were all about blowing themselves up for a greater cause—he obviously missed the point of what heroics are classically about in movies. Han Solo is one of the most powerful characters in Star Wars, and he’s all about possession, he loves his ship, he loves his friend Chewbacca, and he loves his friends and would do just about anything for them. Even though in a pinch he is a giving character he is still portrayed as someone who has personal value for things and people due to his selfish need to be attached to them. But the Jedi as Lucas and many other filmmakers struggled with are supposed to get rid of attachments otherwise they become like Darth Vader and this is where their epistemological liberalism destroys their concepts. Those things aren’t at odds with one another, they are connected—personal value and heroics. If the Chinese wanted to hear a bunch of liberal propaganda they’ll just turn on the state-run television—so they weren’t excited for this latest Star Wars movie. But with Tomb Raider, now that is something they can’t get in China and they soaked it up like there was no tomorrow.

Like I said, I think Rian Johnson did a good job with The Last Jedi. It’s good science fiction. It’s no instant classic that people will love way into the future. But its better to have a world with Star Wars in it than not to have it at all. I know Rian Johnson is a Joseph Campbell fan—as I am. But I want to remind everyone that deep down inside, Joseph Campbell was a conservative—and very much an individualist. He would often say, “are you the light or are you the bulb” which liberals immediately associate with values of collectivism. Without the bulb, the light doesn’t come into the world, so the value in story telling is and should always be on the nature of the bulbs. When a light bulb goes out, the liberal thinking is that you just unscrew the old one and put in a new bulb and the light continues. But in reality, the bulbs of our lives are missed. At the end of The Last Jedi you can see the struggle the filmmakers have on this very subject—they are missing the light of Han Solo not just in the story, but in the Star Wars franchise itself. You can’t just unscrew Han Solo and screw in Poe Dameron–then have him get thrown around the room by a bunch of girls and expect audiences to go along with things. It doesn’t work, as liberalism doesn’t work in the world because of the epistemological failures of the basic concepts of the story telling process.

I will continue to cheer on the efforts of filmmakers like Rian Johnson and Lucasfilm in general. And hopefully Disney learns something from their production of Rosanne on television. But I think we as conservatives could make better movies, better music, and even better social media platforms. I certainly know I could. That’s why I’m thinking of doing just that for my next big thing. I’m in the middle of one of those big multimillion dollar projects now, but I’m coming up on a time where I want to do the next big thing in my life, and by the looks of things, I may just start producing some movies. Not from Hollywood mind you, I’d do it from Cincinnati. Back ten and twenty years ago that was an impossible idea, but these days, the rules have all changed. So why not?

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Foundations of Good Government: It’s time to take a hard look at American politics

When a person is in the United States they should have some idea of what an American is. It doesn’t matter what sex a person is, what age or country of origin, an American should conger up some image of a common value system that is immediately recognizable. For instance, there are lots of different people in England who have lots of opinions that differ, but there is a kind of basic foundation of value that all English people share and we can term them as people of Britain. We could say the same about China, Japan, India, Mexico—pretty much anywhere in the world. Only in the United States is there an expectation that diversity is the key to a successful society when it clearly isn’t. And to that effect, Republicans and Democrats cannot live in the same country together and expect it to be run properly at the level of government so long as that American definition lingers. America is a big idea country but the nation cannot hold so many differing opinions about the very foundations of our thinking, as a people. It just doesn’t work and it never will. We cannot have such different political philosophies operating our country and expect it to survive. Further, it is easy to conclude that Democrats do not want America to survive as it has and they only care about changing the nature of the nation which is an assault on those who love it in the traditional sense so no matter what happens, somebody is going to be unhappy.

A common political philosophy is essential to any nation. Political philosophy is like the foundation of a house. With a foundation you know if you are going to have a basement in that house, and what the shape of the house will be based on how the foundation is dug out into the ground. You’ll know if the foundation is made of stone or is of poured concrete—but the foundation is something that everyone will have to agree on who are part of building the house that goes on top of it. Once a house is built people may differ on the kind of curtains that will hang in the house, what color the paint will be, what type of shingles will go on the roof. But the basic nature of the foundation of the whole building is constant and makes everything built on it possible. The political philosophy of our government has to have a foundation of belief that everyone can agree on otherwise building anything on top of it just isn’t possible.

Democrats don’t just want to argue over the nature of the cosmetics of a house of ideas, they want to change the fundamentals of the foundation itself. If our original house of our Republic was built-in Ohio for instance, complete with a basement Democrats want to move it to California and to have a slab foundation that makes the house much less stable but easier to rebuild after every earthquake. They have no intention of building a house on the foundation of our country, they want to change the location of it and change the basic design as well. We aren’t all talking about the same basic philosophy in how America should be run, let alone agreeing on even basic things because our value systems are just too radically different. Thus, there is no way to build a proper government for the people, by the people because all the people can’t agree on a basic foundation of philosophic thought. And in many ways, that is the point of attack that the political left has leveled at the United States. They never wanted to go along to get along. They always wanted to build the house in another place, a different way. They didn’t care to argue variations on a political philosophy such as a paint color, tile or wood flooring, or window shapes, they want a different house of political philosophy completely on an altered foundation and they are unyielding in that demand.

That is why I think war with those people is inevitable in America. We are currently in a new kind of civil war and both sides cannot and will not be able to live in the same house of a Republic together. It’s just not possible. We’re not talking about basic disagreements, we are talking about the most epistemological elements of a political philosophy. Every organized association regardless of the number of people within it requires a philosophy to unite their thoughts. It doesn’t matter if the organization is as small as a sports team, or it’s a community—there must be a basic philosophy that everyone follows. For instance, people know that if they move into a wealthy neighborhood, they will be expected to take care of their property, mow the grass, maintaining their cars and not run around naked in their streets. A poor neighborhood where people are addicted to government services would likely feature people who don’t care about how tall their grass is, or what they look like, or whether or not there are people running around naked. That’s why the neighborhood has a bad reputation because the people within it don’t have a philosophy that is conducive toward success. They are free to do and think what they want, but if they are competing in the world with a community that does have a foundation of successful thinking, they will lose in relation. If Democrats want to change America into something else while Republicans want to preserve the values that built the nation, how can the two function together?

There is always talk about how dysfunctional our congress is at not only the national level, but the state and local levels too. I doubt these days there is any city in America with reasonable council members who are plugged into reality on governing their municipalities. The reason is because they are not formed, and functioning based on the foundational philosophies that drive the capitalism of the rest of the nation. People who do not recognize the values of people who tend to live in America’s cities for instance, move out into the suburbs and essentially are running their own kind of country. This arrangement works until one group imposes itself on another and there is nowhere left to move to. Much or rural California is conservative, but the cities are very liberal taking the state into that direction governmentally and it has had a crippling effect on the state as a whole. They like Illinois have serious debt problems because they have governed themselves poorly in relation to the rest of the country and this is the essential cause of having two different political philosophies running the country. Its one thing to argue over curtains, flooring and paint the way the Founding Fathers envisioned. It’s quite another to argue foundations and the style of a house to live in. Our government could work if all Americans were functioning from a basic foundation philosophy—such as an agreement on the nature of our Constitution. But if one side wants to adhere to that foundational government and one wants to change the foundation of it, then there is no way the two sides can work out even easy problems because their philosophies are from different houses completely.

Before we can ask a government to work together well, we all have to get on the same page, and if we can’t do that, then we need to just admit that we are at war and one side will win and define the nature of America for all time. Dancing around the issue isn’t good for anybody. Pretending that liberals and conservatives can eat at the same Thanksgiving table is nonsense. Going along to get along isn’t solving anything—its just prolonging the inevitable. Before we can work down the debt, and even begin to ask congress to work together—we must all get onto a political philosophy that is built on a foundation we all agree to. Without that, we have nothing.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Wayne LaPierre’s April American Rifleman Article: We should take away federal money from any school who teaches Karl Marx

I get it. Not everyone was born into a nice family in a nice area with opportunities raining on them from access to prosperity. I am very forgiving of people who have a little liberalism in them from starting out in life not understanding the glory of Adam Smith’s capitalism, because their upbringing didn’t give them exposure to it. However, in America, even the worst prepared of anybody can climb to the tops of society if they are willing to work hard enough, and that is something worth fighting for—with guns protecting those basic foundations. It was with those ideas in mind that I was enjoying the latest American Rifleman magazine that I look so forward to each month from the NRA. I was reading Wayne LaPierre’s pg. 12 column titled “Our Colleges are Breeding Grounds for Socialists Who Will Take Our Guns.” I’ve been saying that for many, many years—well before mainstream commentators like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity have been willing to go so far. I’ve been saying it since the days when Ronald Reagan was president—yet nobody wanted to admit to it. Well, these days its pretty obvious and it was a little surprising to see the executive vice-president of the NRA state so much in writing. You can read the article for yourself at the link below, it is quite telling.

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/nra/si_201804/index.php?startid=12#/14

All education both public and private shared in common with guns the promise of equality. If guns gave people of all types, shapes, sizes, color and creeds the equal ability to defend their private property—most spectacularly their very lives, education was supposed to give everyone an equal shot at knowledge and wisdom, and it was a lofty idea to make it part of the American experience. Public education is paid for by the American tax payers off the backs of private property, so it was a socialist concept from the start, but of course it was started with the promise of big social rewards—like everything always is. Only in America within the context of our tradition of freedom, there was a chance to truly make education a good thing if students were taught the correct things.

Even for me I was shocked by a couple of things that Wayne LaPierre reported in his article, such that The Communist Manifesto ranks third among most assigned texts in college. I can see that happening yet hearing it as a statistic was astonishing. There isn’t any place in American culture for Karl Marx yet in colleges today he is the most referred to economist in assignments. I can see letting students study Marx in philosophy class along with other thinkers so that they can draw their own conclusions, but for economics, if you are trying to teach students how to function in the American economy you must start with Adam Smith and his Wealth of Nations. Without that starting point, the experience of teaching and learning is worthless. But according to LaPierre Marx is the go to guy in serious study of economic matters and that is actually dangerous.

I’ve read Marx—and I hated it, but I did it to learn how the other side thinks. To wash it out of my system I had to read Smith over again several times just to get the experience out of my mind. I think Karl Marx was an idiot and his philosophy is dangerous—dangerous to the world. I’ve been to the Great Reading Room at the British Museum where Marx worked, and I wasn’t impressed. I like the room, but the content studied there was not the right stuff and no university in the world should be studying it. Marxism is an economic philosophy of class warfare and poverty. It leads to repressed societies in every situation and should never be taught as the thing to do for a society.

I was also surprised that liberal college professors outnumbered conservative professors by a ratio of 33.5 to 1. I hadn’t checked in a while, but this was much higher than even I thought it was. That is a terrible statistic considering that many of our education institutions are funded with tax payer investments. Clearly what is happening is that we are funding these Marxist loving liberals to change our kids into socialists from the traditional backgrounds we instilled upon them as parents. It has been one of the biggest scams of our lives, to save up six figures worth of money to send to these colleges only to have them try to scramble the minds of our young people into this socialist indoctrination. I’ve written many articles about the start of the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, the Mexican Revolution—revolutions all over the globe and they all start with indoctrinated children not yet equipped with wisdom who take over political parties and destroy countries from within. What I saw in the March for Our Lives rallies over the last weekend of March 2018 were the same kind of brain washed masses taught incorrect concepts in public schools that we all paid for, only to have those kids turned into weapons of war to fight us ideologically in the streets of our neighborhoods. Wayne LaPierre wasn’t exaggerating—our schools have become institutions of socialism intent to change the way we live in America—everything from gun control to economic communism and socialism. It’s a bad situation with no clear way to turn back the damage.

However, I would start by saying this, any school that is teaching the works of Karl Marx should have their federal money cut—because they obviously aren’t preparing kids to live in an American economy. It’s not a free speech right to teach kids to be insurgents against the American Constitution and anything being taught by Marx, or Marxism in general should be considered anti-American in its basic intent. Colleges can teach whatever they want, but they shouldn’t get our money to pay for it. So long as we allow this socialism to go on in our schools, we will deal with a declining society—and its an avoidable situation. But first we have to admit that it’s a problem.

A lot of people, many reading this, have a little socialism in them. I happened to listen to Bill Cunningham on WLW radio talk about how emotional he was that his high school of Deer Park finally won a state championship. Cunningham thinks of himself as a conservative, at least he plays one on the radio, but his alliance to a public school—and all public education in general gives away the socialism that he was taught as a very young person who grew up without a father and a single mother trying to raise him. He’s in his late sixties now, but those emotions never really went away, so much so that several decades later, five to be specific, when Deer Park won a state championship, he felt he was one with the community. Many people think that’s a good thing, but it’s the entry to thinking like socialists. The reason we never deal with the socialism in our schools is because we fall in love with their sports programs and we spend the rest of our lives rooting for those programs long after we’ve graduated. Meanwhile, the institutions themselves have committed themselves to Marxism and the changing of students into radicals to do the work of collectivism around the world.

Yet the truth of what makes America great is not in its sports heroes that might play college football or basketball, its in the individuals who live and work where the cameras aren’t and what they protect with the guns in their homes. To really understand what makes America tick you must get rid of all references to socialism and to look toward the magic of capitalism—and it is the gun that makes capitalism possible. That is why the Marxists in these schools want gun control so bad, because they know what the plan has always been. To corrupt the youth into little bits of socialism until they march in the streets to give away their rights to defend themselves and to turn over their economies to the tenured professors who sip coffee all day and study the works of Karl Marx. Secretly they have always wanted to rule the world and they are taking that chance at the expense of the American tax payer. Now they figure they have enough students under their command to make their move—and they are doing it. Their first real target of course is the gun. They have to get guns out of American society before they can bring Marxism fully into America. They already have most of our population looking the other way by choice, because nobody wants to admit that their colleges and high schools were actually dangerous places destroying the future of mankind. But with a careful study of the students of our modern age, how can any conclusion otherwise be made?

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

There’s Nothing Special about the March for Our Lives Kids: They are tomorrow’s domestic enemies

I keep hearing how special these gun control activists are who protested in the many March for Our Lives rallies across the county—as if this were the issue of their day—that they were the future voters who were going to change it all. There is nothing special about these kids. They have been trained to execute a military objective as designed by the political left. They have been taught with our tax money in public schools to lash out at American society’s 2nd Amendment in the same way that we used to send kids off to war in Vietnam, Korea, and World War II. Over the years we have purposely stunted their growth in many ways to make it appear amazing that such young people would have such articulate thoughts on some social issue, but in reality, most people reach their peak years at the age of 15 and most of the adults herding these kids on television and around society in general are in the same condition. These kids are at their peak years physically and intellectually and they have been trained for this new war since the day they were born. The only people proud of their antics are the Frankenstein creators on the political left who are rejoicing at the little monsters they’ve made the way a mother goes crazy the first time their little babies shit on themselves—“oh look, they are alive. Isn’t that precious.”

What I see as I listened to the many speeches on Saturday, March 24 2018 are a bunch of future zombies who have some distant understanding that they are going to form the same kind of mobs to go to each of our homes in the future looking for food, shelter, violence. I see in them not the gangs in the streets that might be seen in big cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, or Detroit, but the young menaces from The Clockwork Orange prone to violence from years of playing Grand Theft Auto and watching society disarm themselves so that everyone is easy pickings and at the mercy of any mob. That is after all what kids do learn in public school—how to create mobs against those for which they disagree.

In the future of these very same young people will be an economy that will leave them behind. Being taught socialism and demanding high wages for simply existing, those entry-level jobs that were always there for you and I dear reader won’t be present. Robots will replace those positions because too many young people will have insisted on making $15 per hour that fast food chains looking to keep their margins and a steady workforce will replace those workers with automation—so there will be many such jobs that simply will not be staffed by a living person—because too many of them will have made themselves unemployable. So where will these youth, trained in violence and mob relations go to get their money? Well, they are going to rob it.

What is to stop an angry mob of young people from gathering in suburban neighborhoods just as they did for March for Our Lives and instead of asking for gun control, demanding all the food we have, or our electricity. Or even a spare room with an online connection so that they can play their video games? Already when adults live in areas of high concentrations of youth car break-ins are common, sharp words in the streets are frequent, and toilet paper hanging from porches due to vandalism are expected. Young, untested and with what they think are their entire lives ahead of them—young people can go from America’s most valuable asset to an internal villain that is a domestic threat to the Constitution of the United States in just a few short years. Their minds lack depth of knowledge so they have no context to reality—all they know is what they’ve been taught which in this case is leftist radicalism. It’s no miracle that they gathered to protest guns, it’s simply act one of a military strategy imposed by domestic terrorists hungry to overthrow the United States and reunite it with Europe after 200 years of jealous empathy. The only way that can happen and all of America’s enemies know it is to disarm that free country so that the youth can do what the armies of the world could not.

Yes they will be motivated to do so, the young people with many lost opportunities are coming into a world riddled with debt. They have no reason to work since home ownership and even having a car are no longer their prime objectives. They haven’t been encouraged to marry and start their own families and to put up a white picket fence to call their own. There is literally nothing for them to sink roots into intellectually. The only thing that they really care about are their video games and their cell phones, both of which change constantly. A video game played today will be considered old and outdated in just two years, and the same can be said for their phone apps and their Facebook friends which they invest far more into than real people. Take away opportunity, take away morality, and take away the guns of a society and what we end up with are a pack of wolves looking to take everything that America has built-in value over the centuries and leaving it a husk in ruin. Look at places like Venezuela, or even Detroit where hopeless youth with no future at all roam the streets raping and pillaging innocent people and you can see the future of America without guns. It’s what the political left wants, the Steven Spielberg’s, the George Clooney types, the little Arianda Grande chicks—what’s to keep her from licking all the donates at the local grocery in a world without guns? She has been known to do that—the answer is nothing. Even though it may appear to be a little thing, the ability to destroy property and terrorize individuals who are not associated with the latest mob goes completely unchecked and what may appear to be a civilized society today becomes a mob infested landscape overnight.

This future can be seen in any teenage infested house when the parents go for a vacation and leave the home to the youth. We’ve all seen what they do to it—the children have a house party where half the school shows up to destroy the dwelling slowly with malicious sex in the beds of the parents, every room fills with cigarette smoke and the side rooms become drug induced hells as the history of the house that raised that child is ceremoniously destroyed to initiate the youth into the welcomed arms of the mob. The parents halfway know that something like these parties will occur, they feel they need to sacrifice their assets to putting their children into the acceptance of group rebellion—so they go on vacation, do their duty and tell the young people not to have a party, and the moment the plane leaves the tarmac at the airport, malicious young people are in the home taking it over—pissing on the carpet, going through all the treasures of the family in their private places, and otherwise showing complete disrespect for everything the owners of the home worked their entire lives for. The whole “let’s party” idea wasn’t a creation of capitalism, it came from communist run Russia and was injected into American culture by KGB agents looking to infect the education system in the United States with a slow, controlled destruction from the inside out. Fifty years after the radical events of the 1960s the political left have their army and they are on the march for our guns, so that the next step is the overthrow of everything our nation has built, just like we see in a typical house party. The notion of such parties is never good, only a domination of the house culture to the whims of the mob.

When the question was asked many times over the course of the Fight for Our Lives event that we are supposed to care about the lives of these little menaces so much we are supposed to give up our guns. Well, speaking honestly, I don’t care about those young lives, they are likely the people I’m going to have to fight in the future. I can’t say that I honestly want to help them along to be able to gather in such a way where I have to fight them, because that is the only option for me. If I see a couple of dopy teenagers walking in front of my house I find some means to run them off, and they don’t get the point if you ask nicely. They may have the potential to be the next great mind in society, but if they are demanding our guns, and thus the things those guns protect, they will be useless to me in a social context. Hurt them now or hurt them later, regardless, they will be hurt if I have to make a decision between my personal assets or their life.

I raised two girls who suffered all the pressures of public school culture. And we never had an unsupervised house party for them—never. In fact, I did everything in my power—which was considerable—to keep them from making those mistakes just to be tossed into the category of “cool kids.” Now that they are grown up those pressures are no longer part of their lives as they are now mature, but when they were teenagers the peer pressure for group acceptance was incredible and to be a cool parent you were expected to yield to the wants of the mob. The same sweet kids who just a few years prior would come to your kid’s birthday parties with Smurf themes or some other cute pop culture reference now wanted to bring games from Spencer’s gifts selling adult sex toys and to dirty up your children with illicit sex practices and mind-altering substances. And as a parent we were expected to just go along to get along. If we let the mob into our homes to molest our children we’d be spared the eggs thrown at our cars and the cat calls from the streets. Well, I never yielded to those pressures then, and I certainly won’t now. Speaking for myself if a mob of young people show up in my neighborhood, they will be met with great force—and they won’t know what hit them. They’ll wish that life was so simple as it was in the days where each home was protected by the Second Amendment, because if they change the rules through future elections and expect people like me to go along with it—they have another thing coming.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Firing Andrew McCabe was a Great Thing: Restoring confidence away from a corrupt government for which he was just a part

It shouldn’t feel so good but it does. When it happened late Friday night on March 16, 2018 that Andrew McCabe was being fired from the FBI rather than just allowed to retire at the tender age of 49 years with a multimillion dollar pension, there was a sense of justice that flowed across our nation like a nice warm blanket on a snow filled afternoon. This is just another great reason for the election of Donald Trump and is what it looks like when a guy like him hits his stride in understanding how things work in Washington D.C.–or at least have worked. Of course, not everyone in the FBI was crooked, but due to the nature of such powerful employment positions it is clear from the love stuck text messages of FBI agents Lisa Page and Peter Strzok who worked directly under McCabe, who then worked directly under James Comey that the tax payer funded FBI had become radicalized toward a certain type of political party. I’m not going to say that their idea candidates were liberals like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, but the FBI idea of conservatives were people like the Bush family and John McCain—people they could control as an institution.

There was a time only a few years ago that the word RINO was denied to even exist among the voting public. But after the election of Donald Trump they are now very obvious. In local southern Ohio politics people who are obvious Democrats like Lee Wong who is running for county commissioner within Butler County as a Republican, are reacting to the national trend set by Trump. Lee wants to join the former Democrat Don Dixon there who is a politician that had to move to the political right to have a career as a politician—both of those guys are what could be termed RINOs because they are truly Republican In Name Only, because they know they could never win an election in those conservative areas unless they showed themselves more politically conservative than they were. And that was clearly the case with the young man elected in Pennsylvania this past week, Conor Lamb who essentially ran as a Republican only he called himself a Democrat which pulled the party in that direction to win against an entrenched Republican. The proper definitions for behavior has been put to the test and this has caused very positive consternation at the highest political levels. What was once covered in secrecy is now well out in the open and people can finally see the true nature of these political candidates for what they’ve always been. And in many ways the FBI was able to hide a lot of bad political radicalism behind a similar veil.

As the gun debate has raged over the last several months while liberals tried to use the usual tricks to spark emotions toward gun confiscation, we have learned why we really need to take guns in the opposite direction. We know that the top members of most of our government institutions have become radicalized against the type of life that formed in America, the yearning for freedom and independence that tend to be the foundations of Republican government. Only even under Republican government, there was an unquestioned trust in government officials that they would always do the right thing, even though it was incredibly obvious that they didn’t. Lois Lerner at the IRS was one of the first obvious signs of what was poisoning the well in Washington D.C. People in general were too busy to care that Lois Lerner had weaponized the IRS to work against political groups, and she was caught and plead the 5th, doing just what McCabe had tried to do, retire and escape into the background with a healthy government pension taking the crimes they committed for the “greater good” to the grave. Only that “greater good” had nothing to do with the American people, it was all about the collective entity of the various institutions they represented. Lerner with the IRS or McCabe with the FBI.

Then came the report also this week that involves the acting FBI deputy director David Bowdich testifying that the Dept. of Justice (headed by former AG Loretta Lynch) forced the FBI to delete over half a million fugitives from the gun background check system. Why you might ask? Well so that criminals could get a hold of guns who clearly shouldn’t have had them so that gun violence would occur, and the Obama administration could then use those deaths politically to advocate for gun removal from society. This was the type of FBI that Andrew McCabe and James Comey were running under the direction of Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder. And it was this kind of justification of resources that put the might of the FBI behind Hillary Clinton with all guns literally blazing. A corrupt government had put all their bets on the house winning the 2016 election and the house lost for a change exposing them all. That house didn’t care who it had to kill or harm to preserve itself, and it had been functioning that way for many years. Only the election of Donald Trump forced it out into the open. Who could count the amount of lives destroyed by the FBI over a long period of time who attack people like General Flynn when the government organization themselves were guilty of far worst, and many times over.

https://breaking.americanewscentral.com/2018/03/16/bombshell-500000-fugitives-deleted-gun-background-check-database-points-back-obama/?utm_source=anh&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=anhcampaign

What good is a FBI background check on firearms if an attorney general like Lorretta Lynch, under the direction of a president of the United States can manipulate the way the FBI does its background check in order to inspire more violence killing untold thousands of people with guns, so that they as a collective administration can move the political needle more to the left? If such a thing can happen on little things it can certainly happen on big things, like tampering with the election of an American president by the people who wanted a change from this behavior. And McCabe got caught, as did James Comey—and they were both fired. Comey was fired early by Trump himself. McCabe only when the evidence became so grotesquely obvious that action had to be made. To let McCabe ride off into the sunset the way Lois Lerner did would be a crime in and of itself. Without bringing justice to these obvious law breakers we could never hope to restore our trust into role the FBI was supposed to play in our government.

In regard to gun control, how can we even propose reasonable measures when it is clear that our government was running away from the American people and serving a tyrannical administration as activists? It is just against those types of corrupt elements that the 2nd Amendment was designed to protect us from them. We gave the FBI enormous power, and once that power was abused as it obviously was under James Comey then what is the next step? When the FBI can be directed to put guns in the hands of criminals so that gun violence can increase creating political pressure to confiscate guns as a societal norm, then how can there ever be trust? Then those same people tried to attack a president that half the country wanted as a solution to this mess using all the mechanisms of power to create a scandal—and they expected to get away with it because all their people controlled the power they used to commit those corrupt acts—and what did they think would happen if they were caught?

Years of service are meaningless of during those years a government employee becomes so out of touch that they can be used as extensions of criminal conduct by the hands of power in Washington D.C. The moment however long ago that McCabe and Comey allowed themselves to be instruments of manipulation by political power players they made their service to the FBI worthless. They certainly weren’t “serving” the needs of you and I dear reader, they served the instruments of political power which is why they felt justified in attacking the Trump administration with illegally obtained FISA warrants, illegal surveillance, and a network of fake news generation that was born out of their gun control methods of creating negative stories designed to move the political needle. McCabe was one big part of a weaponized FBI that was only stopped because of an election. If the election had not worked then many Americans would have been forced to entrench themselves in their homes with the Second Amendment as their last line of defense against an out of control government. Because as the FBI was under Comey and McCabe, it was clearly abusive, weaponized, and dangerous. The firing of Andrew McCabe felt good because it showed everyone that justice wasn’t out of the question for such abuses restoring some confidence that our system of checks and balances still work. Which was something that everyone who pays attention to such things needed to see.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Crime of the West Virginia Teacher Strike: Its time to replace radical school employees with Alexa

What a disaster that was in West Virginia. The teacher’s union strike that went on for 9 days as public employees used children to extort for themselves higher wages showed precisely why the Supreme Count is poised to outlaw public sector unions to begin with. The deal struck with the West Virginia governor is to give every public employee 5% in raises every year from here on which is a completely destructive approach to managing tax payer money. What the government of West Virginia signed up for are huge increases in pay for all their public employees that take no consideration into changing economic circumstances which essentially paint themselves into a long-term corner for which there will be no escape. The public-sector unions did the reprehensible, they shut down the productive tasks they were supposed to be commissioned to perform to demand out of tax payers a bottomless pit of income that essentially comes from every tax payer their system touches.

But what was the rush? The union radicles will say that their main issue is that they have poor insurance coverage but what they are clamoring for is something that doesn’t exist for people outside the public sector either. Insurance coverage in general is in a state of change and market forces are polished off and reintroduced to the process. What’s unusual in West Virginia is that the unions do not have collective bargaining power. Average wages for a West Virginia teacher are around $45,000 per year. With their sudden 5 percent increase that is several thousands of additional dollars per year for as long as they are employed, which is a lot of money. To many people that might seem like a lot, but public-sector employees complain about such high rates because they are comparing them to other places around the country—like across the border where average rates are about the same in Ohio, but in districts like mine at Lakota the average pay is much higher.

Really what should have happened was that every teacher who walked out and participated in the strike should have been terminated. Every public employee who helped with this mess should also be terminated, including the police. But in this case the employees felt they were in a do or die situation and their strongest position was now to take action so enough of them walked off the job across the state to shut down every school leaving kids stuck at home using them as bargaining chips to essentially extort more money away from the public trust. Because of the large increase that they received, school managements across the country will see more of this behavior in the coming months so a plan needs to be in place to deal with it.

The real pressure to act now is the knowledge that the Supreme Court is about to release a decision on public sector unions by June, and it looks like the strength of those organizations will decrease tremendously. That made West Virginia a strategic hot spot for a strike to attempt to get other unions to follow as a final protest hoping to rock the vote at the Supreme Court with this ominous warning. Since West Virginia didn’t have collective bargaining power what good would the upcoming Supreme Court ruling have to prevent similar strikes in the future? The leverage the unions wanted to put on display was that there simply wasn’t enough replacement teachers available to step into the classroom to cover for these striking teachers which is why West Virginia government buckled in just 9 days to the demands of their public-sector insurgents.

It will take time even assuming that the Supreme Court outlaws public union’s power to extort money from coerced membership, for the culture to change. Many of these striking employees don’t see themselves as radical insurgents, but as a culture they behave that way because teachers as a profession have been molded as progressive instructors so they don’t see any reason not to use children as bargaining chips for their own gains. That means that the profession of teaching needs to change into something else while these old relics are phased out and new, fresh thoughts can be introduced. States are going to have to prepare for massive walk offs from the teaching profession by these trained radicals. The West Virginia teachers knew that the vacancies for new teachers were low so what did they have to lose in walking off the job? Nothing. There just aren’t enough potential employees to threaten their employment with.

The way to break a strike is to replace the workers striking with new employees. When those employee positions are all getting their money from the same source—the tax payer—it gives them leverage for a walk off. The way to beat that is to decentralize those efforts into a more privatized endeavor. There should always be a certain percentage of non-union employees in schools ready to take over if the unionized teachers walk off the job to protest some turtle crossing—the business of teaching should never stop. And we do live in an age where teachers could be replaced by machines. And automated teaching system should be utilized in case a physical teacher isn’t in the classroom. If teachers refuse to work, then something like Amazon’s Echo or Google’s Home should be put into each classroom to replace those teachers while the non-union staff of administrators ensure that business as usual continues.

In a lot of ways, I think Amazon’s Echo is far superior to an average teacher in the classroom. Some teachers are exceptional, and I think those are people who wouldn’t chose to be protesting at a statehouse for higher wages anyway—they are probably worth whatever money we pay them. But for some slug like many of those teachers protesting in West Virginia I would encourage those school districts suffering to replace them with their own Alexa. If you know anything about those systems they are much better than a real teacher, and far cheaper. They can answer questions, provide scheduled assignments and collect information. They can even provide lectures for topics that are needed. If public schools utilized this technology better they wouldn’t be in such bad positions to waiting for teachers to fill their needed positions. With the economy producing such low unemployment anyway, the traditional way of staffing so many positions with live people really isn’t practical, especially if they are only going to go on strike anyway knowing that there isn’t a deep bench to replace them if they decide to walk off the job for 9 days demanding a pay increase. The great thing about Alexa is that it doesn’t have legs and will never run out of energy. It doesn’t take coffer breaks or bitch about their pay. They don’t eat and smell like coffee and decaying teeth when you ask them a question. In a lot of ways, I think they should be the future of teaching.

Since the teaching profession is changing anyway—as the Supreme Court will eventually mandate, we might as well come up with a plan to deal with the really good problems that we are facing. If there is a teacher shortage and the ones we do have want too much money and expect these extravagant insurance plans, let’s just use Alexa to teach classrooms. We don’t have to pay them insurance, heck, they don’t ever get sick and they do essentially the same thing. So what are we waiting for?

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Homegrown ISIS Terrorist Attacks High School: Corrupted youth show that gun legislation will never work

As gun grabbing organizations seek to use the Parkland shooting victims to advocate gun control measures by busing them into Washington D.C. for a rally to satisfy their strategic desires, a teenager in Utah inspired by the terrorist group ISIS attacked his school with a bomb—but nobody seemed to pick up on the story. The teenage kid put a homemade bomb in his backpack and tried to ignite it at Hurricane High School, in Utah in an area that usually contains a lot of people, but the bomb produced only smoke allowing bomb techs to arrive and disarm the device without injury or death. But not before the kid vandalized the school destroying American flags and spray painting “ISIS is coming” on the school’s exterior. That high school got lucky, because if the bomb had worked the death count could have been significantly higher than the Parkland shooting which has inspired the many anti-gun student protests around the country. Yet, the story gained little attention.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/07/isis-inspired-utah-teen-tried-to-blow-up-high-school-police-say.html

Obviously, we all know why. The bomb narrative doesn’t fit the anti-gun objectives of the liberalized media culture who desire to exploit every tragedy as a means to advance their progressive agenda. The students trained from nearly birth in those progressive sentiments are simple pawns in the great political game of gun confiscation and a complete rewriting of the Constitution by progressive activists—so they have no desire to deal with real solutions to real problems like the rise of radicalism among violent teenagers either inspired by ISIS propaganda or the psychologically dangerous erosion of values found in the many video games available to them at a young age—games like Grand Theft Auto. More than ever we have lots of young men being raised by single mothers who needed the help of a husband to properly raise aggressive sons. Lacking that firm parental structure some young men like this ISIS follower find their authority figures in radicalism, whether it be Islamic terrorism or anarchy such as the many ANTIFA groups. In the case of a removal of strong males in the home of these growing boys, group affiliations that show power become the substitute, like ISIS, ANTIFA or even Nazi radicalism. After all, we don’t typically see females doing these terrible things, so the primary villain is the son seeking father complex which many suffer from in our modern age.

There wasn’t a single gun involved in this attempted bombing of a Utah school, yet the desire to kill classmates and make a radical attention-getting statement was very much a part of the motive. Banning guns doesn’t stop these kinds of intentions—the desire to hurt others is the real problem and dealing with the cause of that desire. Until that issue is dealt with there will continue to be violence in schools and other public places. An assumption otherwise is to defer blame from the true guilty parties, those same progressive groups who have instigated the destruction of the American family unit, pushed strong men off the map of teaching and assumed that women could do it all by themselves. But even worse, they have assumed that the public education institutions themselves could serve as the primary parent and that group affiliations could replace the desire for individualized instruction. These social failures are at the heart of the very foundations of liberal epistemology. And to the credit of conservatives, we all tried as a country to bring all these different types of thinking together to give it a try. But the destructive results are now way too evident to ignore.

There isn’t any gun legislation that would have prevented this terror attempt, in fact we are likely to discover that the fewer guns there are the bolder these attempts become. In our present society a deranged kid like this Utah bomber doesn’t know how far they may get with some terrorist attempt. The kid obviously thought he’d get away with his actions long enough to create some vandalism prior to discharging his backpack bomb. If guns were to be removed from society at large there would be even a greater zone of no risk to this kid should he be intercepted going to or back from the school on this journey of intended death and destruction. Fewer guns in the world mean even more people like this young ISIS inspired terrorist are emboldened to live out their fantasies of corrupted ideology at the expense of the innocent—and that just isn’t acceptable.

Liberals in spite of considering them part of a debate in the friendly sense of rhetorical discussion are actually insurgents against American ideas and have long ago declared war on traditional founders of North American enterprise. I’m not talking about the nature loving savages of the Indian tribes, but those who brought from Europe the ability to read and manufacture who started their own country out of the ashes of kingdoms from across the Atlantic where kings and religion fought on the carcasses of innocent people just trying to live their lives. Liberals are part of that old-world mysticism where kings claimed themselves divine rods to the gods themselves and the church fought them for that same power for several millennia. When America finally came around to asserting itself we put into our Constitution the right to bear arms so that we wouldn’t have to listen to any kings or any authority figures who would love to rule our minds by force—and that was always the point. Liberals have sought to remove that tool and in so doing they have created an environment that has bred kids like this ISIS terrorist—home grown in the vacuum of destruction liberals imposed on the American family.

And to defer that blame liberals are attacking guns so that by the time we all as a society figure out who is really to blame for all the carnage we are experiencing, that we might not have the ability to take back our government from the people who have screwed it up. So they have no problem using children to perpetuate their erosion on American rights. They don’t care about those rights, they only want what they want using a philosophy that is not conducive to the way of life of what traditional America has always represented. And in that former understanding, there weren’t kids like this Utah terrorist being bred right out in the open, they were getting their asses kicked by a dedicated father who taught them better. Instead of those kids finding that needed authority figure in ISIS they had their sons at the kitchen tables telling them to do their chores or else. And those kids didn’t rush out into the night to tear down American flags and burn efficiencies against our nation, they were learning to love our country through the discipline of tough love—which a lot of young males needed to hold together a method of productivity into their own futures. Without it they become their own worst enemies.

It was those same guilty parties who sought to provide 24 hour a day coverage of the Parkland shooting and the Vegas massacre that gave almost no airtime to this bombing attempt in Utah. And that was because it didn’t fit their narrative. After all, it’s not the news they were after, it was the ability to use hurt feelings to drive an anti-gun agenda that liberals all share together. They did it because they fear Americans with guns because it’s quickly becoming obvious who is really to blame for all these national tragedies. It’s certainly not traditional thinking Americans waving red white and blue flags in the streets who are NRA members who are causing all these problems. It is the troubled youth of progressive creation who have turned into monsters that we now must all contend with. And its only getting worse.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Let’s Ban ‘Grand Theft Auto’: How many hours of video games did the Parkland shooter play?

After listening carefully to the Parkland school shooting victims and the many other high schoolers around the country that so quickly jumped on a proposed ban on “assault weapons” and took their anger out on the NRA specifically, then getting up close and personal with some of them at my local school board where their ideas were decidedly dangerous, I think its time we address the elephant in the room and come up with a real strategy. These same kids were all too comfortable with breaking Supreme Court decisions regarding the 2nd Amendment, but where quick to retreat to Supreme Court decisions protecting Grand Theft Auto under 1st Amendment considerations. The weakness of the entire progressive battlefield has been revealed—and as gun owners, moralists, and gun rights advocates, we’d be crazy not to utilize it—and we’re not crazy. So let’s let the ammunition fly, quite literally. Only this ammunition isn’t bullet trajectories coming from guns, but the great love and obvious corruption that fans of Grand Theft Auto—who are also some of these protestor kids, have for that most violent game in the gaming industry. It’s time we push for a ban of it—any store selling it, anybody buying it, any media given to it deserves the wrath of the NRA members.

I personally like Rockstar Games who makes Grand Theft Auto. I think their Red Dead Redemption games are fantastic, but they obviously meant to push every boundary possible with their Grand Theft Auto series of games which make murder and mayhem the essential plot points for young impressionable minds, and without question have had a degrading effect on our culture in general. Where is the proof you might say—where are the statistics? We’ll anti-gun advocates have no problem ignoring statistics when they preach for gun bans, but then cling to them like a baby clinging to a mother’s breast when the tables are turned toward the video game industry, something they care about. So why start now? Actually, speak to any teenager these days and in most cases, especially if they play Grand Theft Auto a lot, you can tell instantly that their minds are toast. The game certainly helps make them that way. I have no reservations about it. Grand Theft Auto is an evil game designed to bring out the dark side in its players and it’s not good to even allow yourself to think such things. The effects on our society have been devastating.

Well before there is ever a ban on AR-15s, which have a legitimate personal property protection necessity in some aspects of our modern culture, Grand Theft Auto should be banned. States should put proposals immediately to their state houses banning the sale of the product by Rockstar Games and if they want to take the case to the Supreme Court, then let’s take it to court. I have a VERY STRONG feeling that the Parkland shooter played Grand Theft Auto a lot. Early in the case USA Today reported that a neighbor of the kid played video games up to 15 hours a day, and I’m sure his gamer tag is well-known which games he played the most. How much do you want to bet that one of them was Grand Theft Auto. If that were the case shouldn’t that be part of the debate on the cause of school shootings. If we look at the gamer profiles of all school shooters what are the percentages of them who play more than 20 hours of Grand Theft Auto per week? I’m sure someone knows the answer to that question. Take that information to the Supreme Court. I have the privilege of knowing a few state Supreme Court justices and let me just say this—with such evidence presented, the video game industry would be toast. The only reason that evidence has not been yet presented in such a case is due to that lack of will from the progressive community—which the video game industry is filled with. They don’t want to know the answer to that question because once they know, they would be complicit with the knowledge provided.

I’m all for freedom of speech and I think most gun owners don’t call for such boycotts because they are respectful of the Constitution. They have no desire to impose their view of the world on people who might enjoy playing Grand Theft Auto even though I am certainly not afraid to speak my mind on the subject. I think Grand Theft Auto can only serve one purpose and that is to help make people inclined toward evil more of it. It reminds me a lot of the very good television series West World. Grand Theft Auto allows people an unrestricted way to be their ultimate self. If people are truly good Grand Theft Auto won’t make them evil. But if you are on the fence or have a few things lacking in your life regarding proper ethics, then that video game can allow you to exercise that deficiency without restriction making those traits much worse. The controversial orgy scene in West World I think shows best this nature in people. The good characters were not partaking in the truly degrading circumstances of their environment, but plenty of people were. They were thinking those things before they ever visited West World, but the park gave them an outlet, which is what Grand Theft Auto does for disturbed people like the Parkland school shooter. But if we sit on our hands and do nothing we will lose this 2nd Amendment fight so because of the aggressive actions of the gun grabbers, we must take aggressive action and attack something they enjoy. We cannot let the gun grabbers determine the ground for battle.

It’s not just out of revenge for trying to initiate boycotts against the NRA and pushing politicians into instant bans on AR-15 rifles, it’s because if there is a cause and effect, without question Grand Theft Auto has much more influence over young minds than any gun law. What good is gun control legislation if a huge part of our youth population is playing a video game that encourages breaking the law and murdering people as a way to get points? Guns by themselves do nothing. But this Grand Theft Auto game actually promotes illegal activity. Yes its free speech but if we are talking about social engineering than how can anyone propose banning guns without first talking about banning video games, because the games actually allow players to simulate violent tendencies.

I think the NRA would be wise to take aggressive action in this direction—take these cases to court and let’s fight. I want to hear the leftists from Silicone Valley try to provide testimony in defense of Grand Theft Auto when the data their companies have been collecting for decades say otherwise. I am pretty sure that the right to play video games which promote violence against our society is not in the Constitution. Murdering people for points, raping whores, and stealing cars may fall under the banner of free speech, but we are certainly free to decide if the harmful effects that such things do to our youth are worth avoiding legal entanglement, and I’d fully support more contributions to the NRA if they would take that fight to the enemy instead of waiting for the enemy, “the gun grabbers,” to come after our 2nd Amendment rights. Because if we do nothing and live and let live, they will stop at nothing until gun confiscation is the law of the land while our progressively raised youth sit around playing games all day fantasizing about murdering authority figures in a mess that will become our future if we fail to act. I’ll write a big check today to the NRA if they want to take up that fight and get the lawyers on the case. What is there to be afraid of. Pandora’s box has already been opened by the opposition.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Video Games are to Blame for the Parkland Shooting: A neighbor reported that Nikolas Cruz played online shooters 15 hours per day

Gun confiscation is a goal of the political left, but in regard to these school shootings any gun control measure will have little effect because as I’d argue, there is a new element to our society that is much more to blame. About twenty years ago a video game called Goldeneye, based on the recent James Bond movie of the same name hit the Nintendo 64 home video game console. It was considered the first real “first person shooter” game which changed the industry forever. For the first-time players could play multiplayer death matches in the way that is common today with poplar games like Call of Duty, Battlefront, and even Grand Theft Auto. Two years after Goldeneye was released, there was the infamous Columbine School shooting in Colorado—and there have been occasional mass school shootings since. The connection to the video game industry is much more guilt associated than with the gun industry because there were guns before all this happened. What was new and different was the ability of young people to shoot guns in the world of computer gaming where the typical skills of learning to shoot and the consequences that were once taught to young people have been removed. These modern video games are slick, and fast. The guns fire ballistically in a very similar fashion. I used to tell my daughters who grew up on the next generation of that Goldeneye game experience, Perfect Dark, that what they shot on video games was the cheapest shooting that they’d ever do. And for most kids, they can handle it—but they love to shoot at each other in first person shooters. I’d say that there is an intellectual need people have to play this way. But for a kid that is just a little crazy, it is far too tempting to live out the fantasy created in the video game culture of gunning down lots of people, because for a fleeting bit of moments, it makes them infinitely powerful. And for some kids trading that moment of power for their lives either in jail or in death is a worthy one.

We learned from USA Today that the shooter in Parkland, Florida was a heavy video game player. A neighbor of accused shooter Nikolas Cruz told the Miami Herald that Cruz “escaped his misery” by playing video games for as much as 15 hours a day. “It was kill, kill, kill, blow up something, and kill some more, all day,” he said. Well, that really hasn’t been talked about in the news—the only line of thought that has been this proposal to confiscate guns. The biggest problem with that besides it being flat-out unconstitutional is it’s also not relevant to solving the problem. What is even worse, the way the media used those kids from the Parkland shooting to advance their liberal gun agenda, in the same way that Michael Moore did when he released the film Bowling for Columbine hoping to press the nation into a gun confiscation policy similar to Australia—the media completely ignored the video game problem. Most of the kids they were parading out in front of the cameras were shooters themselves in the world of video games. Because these days, most kids are. Most young people don’t learn about guns from their grandpa or their fathers anymore where they really feel the gun shoot, understand the recoil, and the expense of firing a lead projectile at a target—they only see them in video games under the new social world of online multiplayer battles—which are as common as the milkshake was to teenage kids in the 1950s at the local car hoop. Talk to just about any high school kid and they are playing games online at home.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/20/after-parkland-video-games-back-critics-crosshairs/356654002/

I know a little bit about this world because I am still very much a part of it. I have always played lots of video games and I’ve watched this evolution, and personally I love it. The PlayStation network for which I’m a member reported to me the following stats for the year of 2017. I was a little shocked by them because as people know, I am a very busy guy. I work professionally 60 to 70 hors per week. I read at least one book every week. I shoot real guns often as well as fulfil many interests that I have. In addition I spend a lot of personal time with my family so I didn’t think it was possible to play as many hours as my PlayStation gamer tag said I did last year. Here’s a bit of the report:

Over the months of 2017, you played
768 hours

over 17 different games, while making the most progress in November with 118 hours of gameplay.
The average PlayStation gamer played for
218 hours

The most-active month in 2017 for PlayStation gamers was July with 1.13 billion hours.

So I played roughly three times more gaming on PlayStation than the average video gamer. And as seen by their own stats, people play about 1 billion hours a month in online gaming, most of which are first person shooters like Call of Duty. My thing is Star Wars: Battlefront. Now consider that these stats are just for PlayStation. Xbox has an equally vibrant following as does Nintendo. Presently in our house we have both the PlayStation and the new Nintendo Switch which get tremendous workouts all hours of the day. Video games are the number one past time of young people these days so if any reforms should be tackled, it is in what happens in the world of online shooters. That is the first place to start.

A gun ban will do nothing to curb the violence because the desire to violence is nurtured in online gaming. The need for a human being to decimate other live players is something very inherent in us all, which is what first person shooters are all about. Until that desire is eliminated from all human beings, there will be mass violence occurring. For well over 99% of the population they can play these games and not go out into the world and engage in mass violence. But for some the temptation to do in real life what they can do in the video game world is just too enticing—so they carry out the fantasy like Nikolas Cruz did in Parkland.

These video games are a global phenomenon, people are playing them in Europe and Asia as well, in live time. Guns aren’t so easy to get in those places so the killings that occur are other methods, knives, cars, bombs—whatever terrorists can get their hands on. I would be willing to bet that if most ISIS terrorists were tracked down to their gamer tags, we’d find that they play all these video games religiously in their countries of origin. I’m sure PlayStation and Xbox know who is playing what and how often. If they are tracking me, they are tracking everyone. And you can bet the NSA and the FBI have profiles on certain players and their online abilities and connections.

In real life one of the measurement systems I use to make multimillion dollar assessments of something is the lean manufacturing technique of Gage R&R which is a type of MSA—Measurement System Analysis. Gage R&R (repeatability and reproducibility) are typically only 30% to 50% accurate even with the best inputs that can be acquired so getting the best information to collect is of utmost importance. If I were to run a Gage R&R on mass school shootings putting all the data into a nice big beautiful spreadsheet taking into account the age of the shooter, the back ground of the shooters, the types of guns used, the social circumstances for which they functioned, the political beliefs, the amount of times they had sex with females—was their a father in the home, etc., we’d find that it was none of those elements that would point us to the obvious problem of what causes school shootings. What they’d all have in common to some degree or another was the direct result of the video game industry and the romance that gun violence has been perpetuated by the Hollywood product. Even the music industry would show up on our Gage R&R to show a repeatable influence over the last two decades for desensitizing people to the realities of the world and encouraging violence to instigate social change. The fault of school shootings statistically speaking have nothing to do with gun manufacturers or the NRA—it has everything to do with Nintendo, PlayStation and Xbox. The MSA analysis points only to the video game industry followed closely by movies and television as the prime drivers of social violence. Even if all guns were confiscated and the NRA were out of existence today, mass killings would still occur because the cause of the violence has not been yet dealt with. The desire to kill lots of people can be done with a gun or a car, but it’s the problem of our modern society that such desires are there to begin with—and video games assist that desire with a role-playing element that makes the weakest and less disciplined of us seek out that sensation in real life.

You will never hear from me to ban video games. I love them too much and I am willing to put up with the occasional violence that we see because I think there are benefits to what video games bring to people. Violence is a byproduct, but so is the thinking that goes on which is changing us as a species and allowing us to process information so much faster than we ever did before. There is much more good about video games than bad. But if there is something to blame for the Parkland school shooting, it was video games that Nikolas Cruz played which likely pushed him over the edge. If you are harboring resentments in an aggressive setting and losing grips with reality—killing hundreds of people a day online is likely to create the fantasy of doing it in real life. Most of us know how to turn off that switch and to only keep that desire in the video game reality. Obviously, Cruz didn’t have that switch. But if people really want to solve the problem of school shootings, you have to start with the video game industry. Because there are a lot of Nikolas Cruz kids out there just waiting to snap. I think we are headed for a period over the next two decades where there will be many more killing attempts—because kids like Cruz play kill so much online that they want to try it in real life. And because they don’t have strong fathers to hold them together, or a family structure, a church, or even good media influences to look up to, there is nothing to keep them from testing themselves in reality once they have grown tired of killing in the world of video games. Not being able to buy a gun at Dick’s sporting goods or the Kroger stores won’t prevent them from some other method. If they want to kill, they are going to find some way to do it, and when they do, we have to be ready for them.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Donald Trump is Smoking Crack: The case of Julius Malema–if I have to pick between the president and the NRA, I’m with the NRA,

As much as I like Donald Trump, if I have to pick between him and the NRA, I’m with the NRA.  If there was anything good in Trump’s move to the far political left with his fantasy talk about due process second after gun confiscation, it’s that he made the point for gun rights pretty apparent. What Trump had said to a bipartisan group of legislators during a White House meeting shocked me as it did many others and even considering that it might just be typical Trump talk to move an issue in debate, the fact that he even thought it proves a long-held understanding about the very nature of the 2nd Amendment. There has never been an administration that I trusted more, or felt that more closely represented my intersects than the Trump administration. I have maybe for the first time in my life a trust that my government will work for my interests as best as a Republic of representatives can. But even an administration, any administration, all through the history of our nation is prone to make mistakes and when those mistakes occur, it can’t be my life, or anybody else who should suffer. The gun protects private property—the efforts of a lifetime, whether it be a spouse, children, a dog or the contents of a home, car or business. Nothing in life supersedes the nature of our private property for which our lives are paramount in value.

Over the years there have been many instances where the federal or state governments have done just as Trump suggested, which is probably why he thought he could get away with saying it–that if the police or military is called out to your home in the small hours of the morning, that they have a right to confiscate all your guns and whatever else they may wish and that they have the right to take over your life for which you must surrender willingly to for the “greater good.” There is no greater good than my life, your life, and the life of our neighbors. Government certainly doesn’t eclipse our lives and our possessions which are the products of those lives. It is the mutual understanding that the protection of property is a basic foundation of American existence which keeps everyone from killing each other, which is a basic concept from Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and is the very structure of American society. And the great equalizer of protecting those values is the gun, which is how the Second Amendment ended up in the Bill of Rights to begin with. To take away that basic right is to essentially destroy the premise of American civilization—which is why foundationally the political left wants to abolish the Second Amendment. Even though the typical leftist doesn’t know why they think what they do–as they’ve been taught without truly understanding the concept—their epistemological understanding of the world as liberals recognizes that through mob rule at some point they are going to want what others have and they want those others disarmed so they can then seize that property for their own consumption.

For instance, in a surprising vote just a few days ago, South Africa’s National Assembly voted to evict white farmers from their land and seize their property, justified by the country’s past apartheid policies. The vote was led by Marxist activist Julius Malema, who is head of the political party Economic Freedom Fighters. They feel that the seizing of land is part of delivering justice to the discrimination black farm workers have faced in the past. Marxism has become a powerful political force in South Africa since the government abandoned its apartheid policies. Few realize it today but Nelson Mandela was a Marxist, and his political legacy that has continued among radical black activists who have followed him continue to erode away the basic foundations of South African society. Not that any form of discrimination is appropriate, but the lenses of history is always defined by the political groups that seize power at any given time. Thus, a weakness of any democracy is the concept that mobs can rule so far as a majority of everyone believes something, and they can then justify the acquisition of other people’s values at a whim—because they desire such things as a collective group. Using that logic what if a bunch of Seattle Starbucks customers sitting around sipping on their lattés decided that their lives were terrible because they spent all their time smoking pot, playing video games, and bitching about the world around them, and instead of taking action to improve their condition decided that they were going to storm out into the suburbs to take the homes of the wealthy people who lived there—because they had a need for which a majority of the losers desired? If they desired to do so, what keeps them from doing it? Not the police. Talk to a loser sometime, if you go into the inner cities and feel like killing a few hours of time, pick one and offer to buy them breakfast and listen to what they tell you. You’ll find that most people in such a state think just like Julius Malema does. Because of our liberal education institutions American society now has a lot of people who think in the way of traditional Marxists and if they want something, they don’t understand why they can’t just have it. Guns in our society allow for people to have different political attitudes without those forces being able to bulge into an ideology that robs individuals of their basic property rights—which represents foundational value.

https://silenceisconsent.net/south-africa-votes-seize-land-white-farmers-heres/

Without guns in America all the various groups that emerge under group association would impose itself on the unwilling without question. The wonderful thing about America is that just because there are elements of our society that is just as crazy as Julius Malema is, or Barack Obama, because we have guns and can protect ourselves from when those mobs of losers might arrive at our doorsteps wanting what we worked a lifetime to acquire, it is our guns which keep them from acting on their fantasies. The typical welfare recipient in America isn’t far from the thinking of even the craziest radical from around the world such as the South African Marxist leader. They want guns eliminated from society, they see bump stock bans, and assault weapon restrictions to be great policies in their favor of outright repealing of the 2nd Amendment. People in need, which is usually a condition derived from bad decision-making, always look with jealous eyes at those who have things in their lives worth protecting and without the ability of every individual from having the aptitude to protect themselves with lethal force, it is the only real stabilizing factor in our society that allows it to advance.

Even as Trump suggested that the feds would have the right to break down our doors in the middle of the night and have their way with us because the government represents something bigger than our collective efforts, he need to only look at the American FBI and previous justice departments for why such trust can never be extended beyond the possession of personal firearms. If my door gets broke open in the middle of the night I don’t care who it is, or what court might have given such a warrant to intrude on my life—people are going to get hurt because I don’t grant power to any outside force that seeks to dominate my existence through government interpretation of the basic philosophy of individual will which governs my life. We know that the FBI didn’t want president Trump to settle into the White House and they used their power to attempt to stop that process from happening—by illegally obtaining a FISA warrant to build a case for impeachment before he could even move into the White House. America is a first world nation—really is the best of the best and we can’t trust our own government, let alone others around the world. Not even the Trump government. Even though it might work better with Trump in the White House for the next 7 years, eventually he won’t be there and we could end up with someone like Julius Malema running the country. Honestly if we weren’t a society in America of guns and the Bible I doubt that Barack Obama would have been much different from Malema. Their basic desires for life were very much the same. The difference is that every American farm is likely protected by the firearms of the owners, and nobody is coming to steal a few pigs for slaughter without having their lives threatened—which is the only thing that keeps the peace in such a world.

This is a topic which could go on forever and I’ll likely explore it from many different angles. But the basic premise is that governments of any kind cannot be trusted and that they do not have the right to rule over us without some measure of checks and balances to counter their mistakes. Without that power to inflict pain back at those who are up to no good, any society crumbles. As gun grabbers point around the world to places like Europe and Australia and say that those places of gun restrictions are successful I would also point out that they have degrading societies that will not endure far in the future from this point in time because of the lack of value they have in the basic idea of private property. So as much as I like the Trump administration, Donald Trump is smoking crack if he thinks people like me who are his most solid base is going to stay with him if he talks like that. Rhetoric or not, talking about confiscating guns then entertaining due process is reprehensible. If that is the best that government can do, I’ll just take care of these problems myself, and because of gun ownership millions of us can say the same thing—which is why we have a society that is still functioning out of fairness, and kindness.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.