Not Conflict Resolution

The author of this piece is Dr. Tom Hastings, the conflict resolution coordinator at Portland State University. Portland. Enough said, but let’s look closer at his nonsense anyhow.

It is long past time to repeal the Second Amendment.


To strengthen democracy.

I don’t want democracy. With democracy, 50.1 percent of the voters would be able to legalize slavery. The voters could easily vote to euthanize everyone over the age of 65, or even confiscate the property of everyone who has a net worth of more than $500,000 so that it can be redistributed. The beauty of our system of government is that, while they are democratically elected, our representatives can’t violate the rights of the individual.

Already in 2022, as of Sept. 25, there have been 32,643 gun deaths in America from a variety of causes, including murder, homicide, accidents and suicides. Many of these deaths were in places that attempted strict gun control, including a ban on assault rifles, but were successfully sued by the NRA or other gun rights groups and their local or state laws vacated by rulings prompted by the Second Amendment.

Let’s start with the “gun deaths” metric. First, a “gun death” is a stupid metric. An early death is no more tragic if carried out by cancer, diabetes, being tossed out of a helicopter, or simply beaten over the head with a hammer.

Second, more than 26,000 of those “gun deaths” were actually suicides. A person intent on killing themselves could, if guns were outlawed, simply step in front of a train, leap from the window of a tall building, or overdose on sleeping pills. Getting rid of the Second Amendment would not save the lives of anyone intent on suicide. The fault in logic here is stunning- the left contends that people who wish to take their own lives would not do so if there were no guns in the home. Ridiculous and easily demonstrated as a false premise. In the United States, over 48,000 people take their own lives each year, and there is no reason to believe that things would improve with the outlawing of guns. Take Guyana as an example, where the government has passed every single dream of gun control proposed by the left.

In Guyana, Category B firearms are only available to sport shooters who hold a license to practice for at least 6 months, with a medical certificate, without a criminal conviction, and additionally require at least three shooting sessions with an instructor. Specific purchase and possession permits can then be applied for from a local police department, are valid for 5 years and can be extended. These weapons can then only be used for sport shooting in shooting ranges, never for hunting. Category B includes all assault rifles such as AK-47/AKM, AK-74 or AR-15/M16/M4, as well as all similar weapons, even if they are chambered for rimfire (.22 LR) cartridges. These can only be semi-automatic. All handguns, including those using rim ammunition, are classified as Category B. It is illegal to possess these Category B weapons after the expiry of a specific non-renewed license: the weapons must be disposed of (e.g., sold to a firearms store or otherwise destroyed).

Meanwhile, Guyana has the highest suicide rate of any nation in the world: 40.8 suicides per 100,000. That number represents a suicide rate three times that of the United States. So gun laws have no effect on suicide rates, which are more of a mental health issue than they are a firearms issue. In Guyana, the suicide problem is related closely to alcoholism, not guns.

Civilized countries enact laws that actually protect their children. Unlike every single other developed or large country in the entire world, the number one cause of death for children in the US is firearms. 

Wrong. Homicides don’t even come close to being the number one cause of death, even including homicides by all mechanisms. Unless you consider 15-24 year olds as being children.

The simple fact is that more than half of the homicides in this country are actually due to street gang activity where one gangs are resorting to violence in order to protect their drug dealing turf. I don’t need to go any further- this guy’s post is filled with enough factual deficiencies that we already know he is lying to support his agenda.

To prevent Civil War 2.0.

With approximately 400 million guns floating around US society and an armed MAGA-driven polarization met by an increasingly armed leftist radical wing, along with evermore virulent rhetoric and escalating numbers walking around open-carrying war weaponry in public, half of America believes that civil war is coming. Tossing out the Second Amendment would free legislatures and city councils to begin seriously ending such belligerent displays of combat weapons. 

During Vietnam, the left thought they were clever by asking “What if they threw a war and no one showed up?” The more important question is “What if they threw a war and only one side showed up?” The answer to that is, of course, genocide. Disarming one side allows the other side, still armed, to do with the unarmed as they please.

It’s as if he thinks that getting rid of the Second Amendment would cause the 600 million plus guns already in US hands to simply disappear. Instead, the repeal of 2A would cause many of those 600 million guns to be used against the very people who would be attempting to confiscate them, guaranteeing the onset of an American civil war.

This guy, who is supposed to be interested in conflict resolution, is advocating for the one thing that is guaranteed to cause more conflict than any other single thing that the government could do. Clueless, but the left’s ideas usually are.


A little over a month ago, I pointed out that five men spent hours erecting a gallows in front of the Capitol in the early morning hours of January 6, with one of them making a coffee run at the shop closest to the FBI’s headquarters. This to me indicates that the Feds know who these men are, because they are likely FBI informants or agents.

Now the B-list media has begun to notice.

Martin believes that the gallows were constructed by those wishing to paint President Trump and his supporters in a bad light. Specifically, Martin wonders why police did not stop its construction. So far, there is no evidence to support Martin’s claims.

False. There IS evidence.

  • The police didn’t stop the construction. That is a known fact that can’t be disputed. The area of DC around the Capitol and Whitehouse is one of the most heavily policed and surveilled areas in any American city.
  • Likewise, the FBI is a counterintelligence agency. They have every inch of the area around their headquarters monitored by security cameras. There is no doubt that there is closeup video of at least some of these men.

So why aren’t they looking for them? It is reasonable to infer that they aren’t looking for them because they are already known. If the press in this nation was actually doing its job, they would be asking these questions and finding the answers.

Using Statistics to Mislead

Take a look at the National Safety Council’s statistics on your odds of dying.

I’m not even on the “guns” yet. There is a basic flaw with this chart, and that flaw is the assumption that the event that causes your death is random- that is, they are assuming everyone is equally likely to experience one of the events. So looking at “opioid overdose” for example, if you don’t take opioids, your chances of dying of an opioid overdose are exactly zero.

Now that we have exposed the flaw, note that “guns” is the only cause of death that is listed as an object, and not an event or action. You will also note that the math doesn’t work. Firearm assault and accidents aren’t even close to equaling your odds of dying from “guns.” Doing the math, there is a 1.1 percent chance of being killed by “guns,” but your chances of dying from a firearm assault or accident are only 0.049 percent. The other 0.61 percent? That is from suicides. So you cut your chances of being killed by “guns” if you take the simple step of not comitting suicide. We see that on the next line, where you have a 1 percent chance of killing yourself.

Taking other steps, like not being a gang banger, a drug dealer, or a violent criminal likewise reduce your risk of death by “guns,” but we won’t mention that because it doesn’t fit the agenda. This is a great example of how people can be mislead by what appears to be solid facts and mathematics applied in a scientific appearing article, when it is really just hokum that is designed to manipulate the reader.

Smart Guns, Stupid Reporters

This market report claims that smart guns are the future of firearms. I don’t think that they are. This report can be believed, since the reporter also claims that:

traditional iron sight, which can also help shooters look through an optical telescope for aim, red dot sights project a small light directly onto a target.

So iron sights help you look through a telescope for aim, and red dots project light? How can I take financial advice from someone who obviously doesn’t know what they are talking about?

Then the story goes on to be a bit more misleading.

gun owners overall are 63% male and 73% white, the study found.

Gun owners being 73% white actually means that whites are slightly underrepresented as gun owners, since whites are about 76 percent of the population. Math is a thing.

I don’t see how you can claim that 63% are male, since we don’t seem to know what male or female is any longer.

Unbiased Polling


The company that did the poll? Let’s look at their about page.

Navigator is a trusted resource for developing and distributing winning progressive messages and polling on the most pressing issues of the moment.

Read the bios of the people who work for the company:

  • Margie Omero is a Principal at GBAO Strategies, with over 20 years of experience working for Democratic candidates, progressive causes, and corporations.
  • Bryan Bennett is the Senior Director of Polling & Analytics at The Hub Project, overseeing research to strategically inform progressive campaigns.
  • Prior to joining the Hub, Rachael worked in targeting and data analytics for the National Domestic Workers Alliance 
  • Christina Reynolds is the Vice President of Communications at EMILY’s List. She was most recently the Senior Vice President at Global Strategy Group and served as Deputy Communications Director at Hillary for America. Previously, she served as the White House Director of Media Affairs, Director of Rapid Response at Obama for America,
  • Jesse Ferguson is a veteran Democratic Strategist. Most recently, he served as Deputy National Press Secretary and Senior Spokesperson at Hillary for America.
  • Jessica Floyd is the Executive Director of The Hub Project. Prior to that, she was most recently President of American Bridge 21st Century. Following several successful campaigns in New York and New Jersey, she managed Congressman Ron Barber’s winning congressional campaign and served as Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords’ political director. During the 2014 and 2016 cycles, she worked for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s Independent Expenditure
  • Joel Payne is the Chief Communications Officer at MoveOn. Previously Joel served as the Managing Director, Communications at The Hub Project, was the Director of African-American Paid Media & Advertising for the 2016 Hillary for America campaign
  • Melanie Roussell Newman is the Senior Vice President of Communications and Culture at Planned Parenthood Federation of America
  • Mike Podhorzer is the Political Director of the AFL-CIO
  • Most recently, Nayak served as the Director of Opinion Research for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign,

Truth? Or Muckraking?

Remember back during the Chauvin trial, when people were threatening witnesses? The defense attorneys in the trial received death threats? Or when the jury members were found to be members of BLM and Antifa marches? All of that was not a problem.

Now that news outlets are claiming people are doing the same in the Trump case, it’s a problem again. I hope they are. Goose, gander, all of that. However, I don’t believe that it’s happening. This is the tail wagging the dog- the news is creating content to get people riled up.

If I *do* locate such a website, I will of course link to it.