The Truth Is Out There

Archive for May, 2024

IO Episode 246 – Rob Cunningham – Tower Of Babel Is Collapsing 5/27/24 (and growing false Christianity)


There is an interesting interview (link below) with Rob Cunningham about the collapse of the World Banking System (of governments & Central Banks making “money” from nothing a/k/a fiat [ Latin subjunctive verb: “let it be made”] money) that is ongoing, yet not many know or care about the consequences. 

Note also the comment about learning what stocks Nancy Pelosi (b. March 1940; age 84) and other Congressional people are buying. They are the most successful (insider) traders since they make the ir spending decisions from which specific corporations will benefit.  That, said Cunningham, is how Congressional seats making $175K @ year grow their net worth to $75-125+ millions.  Pelosi aggrandized her own net worth far more than any other person in Congress at almost $900 million.

Another comment from Rob Cunningham is that the King James “Bible” (KJV) is based upon the earlier Geneva “Bible” but made over 20K edits to the Geneve “Bible”.  Then Protestant King James banned the Geneva “Bible” so there would be no competition to his kJV that was issued in 1611 when the seven years King James allowed for its production expired.  King James wanted this work to help strengthen his political hold on England as head of the schismatic & heretical Church of England of which he was the the present head of this man-made Protestant religion.

In 1534, King Henry VIII, lusting over Anne Boleyn with whom he was already committing adultery with, demanded from the Pope an annulment of his Catholic marriage of many years to Catherine of Aragon.  Henry threatened to break England away from the Roman Catholic Church if his demand was denied.  And when Henry VIII did leave the Roman Catholic Church, he named himself the religious head of his newly man-made religion which he called the “Anglican Catholic Church of England.” And though various attempts had been made to have England amend the schism, it could only happen when all the Church properties were returned, which the elite who had been given them by Henry VIII still refuse to relinquish them.

The error both the interviewer & Rob Cunningham make is in agreeing that Christ, said the interviewer, never gave us a “religion.”

Christianity a/k/a Catholicism founded by Christ is not a religion??!! huh?

Even Martin Luther, 1483-1546, the “Father of Protestantism,” said the only Church that can be traced back to Christ is the True Roman Catholic Church which Jesus Christ founded upon St. Peter and his Apostles.

All the inspired writers of the New Testament  – Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc. –  are Roman Catholics. Most Protestants fail to know or remember that. Christ gave His authority to St . Peter, His Apostles, and their valid and lawful successors of His Catholic Church. Only that One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church did Christ empower go to all nations and teach ALL that He had taught and did  (including the Unwritten WORD a/k/a Divine Tradition.)  And in Matt. 18:17  Jesus Christ commands that one hear (completely obey) the authority of His Church or be treated “as the heathen and the publican (ed., liar, deceiver, defrauder. “

The doctrine of Christ includes so much more than what is contained in the New Testament, says John the Evangelist, that he doubts there is enough surface on the earth to put all the  books that could be written about it. But Martin Luther & subsequent Protestants reject both Divine Tradition and the Authority of the Church as metaphorically represented by the keys given to St. Peter as the pope (i.e., Vicar of Christ and Chief Bishop on earth of all other Catholic Bishops.) Protestant, Non-Denominational, and Evangelical “ministers” deceive their followers into believing Martin Luther’s lie that the Bible alone (“Sola Scriptura”) is the complete & sole Authority.  Therefore, they have neither stayed in the Mystical Body of Christ (i.e. the True Roman Catholic Church) nor continued in holding the complete, uncorrupted doctrine of Christ. 

God unambiguously states in the Second Epistle of John 1:9

“1:9 Every one who recedeeth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, HATH NOT GOD”

 (Source: Haydock Douay-Rheims Bible & Commentary [1859] . Https://johnblood.gitlab.io/haydock

Emphasis added.)

When tracing back through their histories, the following religious sects have receded from the true Roman Catholic Church  – including  today’s approximate 1.5 billion-membership-strong Vatican II (V2)Counterfeit “Catholic” Contra sect via the Oct. 26, 1958 Papal Conclave Coup d’Etat; the QUO PRIMUM-condemned 1962 removal of the true Latin Mass; and the October 13, 1962 beginning of the EXECRABILIS-condemned Second Vatican Council. In addition to the V2 sect members,  there are approximately one billion members that collectively comprize the Protestant, Non-Denominational, and Evangelical sects.

Thus, the total of baptized people today not hearing/obeying the true Roman Catholic Church founded by Christ, and not continuing in the complete, uncorrupted doctrine of Christ, totals approximately 2.5 billion people. They call themselves “Christian.”  God calls them heathens and publicans, as they initially broke from the true Roman Catholic Church when Martin Luther was excommunicated January 25, 1521.

 All the above schismatic, heretical, and apostate religious sects have in common the follows:

1) they do not hear (obey) the true Catholic Church founded by Christ upon St. Peter;

2) they do not continue in the complete, uncorrupted doctrine of Christ;

3) they do not have the true God; 

4) dying outside the unity and bosom of the true Catholic Church, they shall not have salvation. 

(Source: Denzinger’s “The Sources of Catholic Dogma.” 30th Edition. 1957. Paragraph #714. Council of Florence 1441. Pope Eugenius IV. )

The first canonically complete Bible based on the Greek Septuagint  (73 Books [46 in OT as used by the Hebrews [today’s Talmud-controlled Judaics (false “Jews”) corrupted the Hebrew OT and reject 7 books, same as the Protestants]; 27 Books in NT) is the Latin Vulgate completed by; St. Jerome in 395 by authorization of Pope Damasus.  After ten years of meticulously verifying that the meaning of the original languages (Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek) had been accurately translated into Latin, The Roman Catholic Church released its 405 to be hand copied by Catholic monks until the invention of the commercial printing press in the year 1485.

Although translated by the Church into many other languages, just in Germany there were in use 80 hand-written, very costly copies translated into German before Luther’s revolt in early 16th. century.  But English only began in the 13th century as a combination of 50-60% Latin primarily and German secondarily, plus the adoption of words and neologisms from many other languages. Thus, the the first Catholic Church of authorized translation of the Latin Vulgate into English is the Douay-Rheims Bible (New Testament, completed 1568; Old Testament completed 1609.) and even then, the illiteracy rate was very high.

Jesus never commanded the Church to send her authorized missionaries to just hand out bibles for the uneducated to read and figure out on their own the meaning of the Scriptures, especially when so many verses are hard to properly understand. They will struggle with such hard to comprehend verses to their own destruction, warns Scripture. 

Christianity must be preached and taught by those officially sent only by The True Roman Catholic Church’s Magisterium, not self-taught by private interpretation.  Protestants do that all the time, while claiming the “Spirit” helps them to understand the verses. For proof that the true Holy Ghost is not the “spirit” helping them, the result is that today there are over 50K mainline Protestant sects all calling each other “heretics!,” yet saying that collectively these contradicting sects constitute being the “Church.” They are not of one faith, one-fold or one shepherd, but claim because they have “fellowship,” therefore, they are “the Church.” 

That is not how Jesus defined His Church.

The non-Catholic may be influenced or inspired by some spirit, but it is not the Holy Spirit from heaven. Jesus Christ gave mankind a Teaching Church built upon Peter and His Apostles that He said could never failed.  Luther, in direct contradiction to Christ, said 1) Christ’s Roman Catholic Church failed, 2) that you are saved by faith alone (Sola Fide), 3) that one can never lose sanctifying grace despite how many grievous sins committed after baptism, 4) that you only need Scripture the way he re-wrote it as the only complete authority ( Sola Scriptura), 5) that you don’t need all of the Seven Sacraments instituted by Christ, 6) that you don’t need the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass instituted by Christ at the Last Supper.7) that one can divorce their spouse at will, etc.  

Persons

1) believing any of the heresies of Luther, 

2) refusing to hear and obey the true Roman Catholic Church that even Luther said is the only Church founded by Christ, and 

3) using unauthorized, incomplete and corrupted non-Catholic “bibles”  

– such as the King James, New American, Revised Standard, English Standard, Gideon, Geneva, or any issued since 1943 by the American “Catholic” Bishops Confraternity or any “Catholic bible” issued after the Talmudist-controlled Freemason/Modernist infiltrator success at the Oct. 26, 1958 Papal Conclave Coup d’Etat – are not receiving the grace of the “Holy Spirit” to “enlighten” the reader when the claimed ” spirit” is actually imbuing them with perverted, contradictory interpretations of the meaning of Scripture. Any such “spirit” that renders contradiction to God’s WORD cannot and is not from heaven.

Claimed (Unholy) “Spirit-enlightening” private interpretation is the cause of the never-ending fragmentations ongoing among man-made religious sects, especially for the past five centuries since Luther’s revolt.  There was no “Restoration” of “Reformation” since those words imply bringing back something of a Church that existed earlier. And even Luther admitted that the only Church founded by Christ upon St. Peter and His Apostles that can be traced back to Him through history is the Roman Catholic Church which Christ promised can never be prevailed upon by the “gates of hell” (i.e. fall to heresy, schism, or any other darkness launched against it by Lucifer.)

So the continued reference to “Restoration” or “Reformation” back to a “church” that never existed in history as having been founded by Christ before His establishing the Catholic Church is a demonic subterfuge. It is a deceiving stratagem of Satan to which approximately 2.5 billion “V2 Catholics” a/k/a Novus Ordo “Catholics, Protestants, Non-Denominationals, and Evangelicals adhere to today. These are the end times “Christians” who receded outside the true Catholic Church (i.e., the Mystical Body of Christ) with their perversely corrupted, incomplete, Modernist doctrines in their unauthorized KJV, NAB, RSV, ESB, Confraternity, etc. “bibles” of whom God states in 2 John 1: Everyone who recedeeth, and continueeth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God:” 

What then are these Apostate, Agnostic, and Atheistic times of false Christianity, if not what Scripture forewarned as a sign of the end times: the Great Apostasy?

Martin Luther, whom historians entitle the “Father of Protestantism,” admitted on his death bed that everything he did against the Roman Catholic Church was inspired in him by Satan. This former Roman Catholic Augustinian friar priest died in defiance of the Catholic Church Jesus Christ founded upon St. Peter and His Apostles as the unrepentant heresiarch of Protestantism on Feb. 18, 1546 (age 62) in Eisieben, (now named Lutherstadt Eisieben, Germany,) County of Mansfeld, Holy Roman Empire. 

The destruction of body & soul by Luther’s heresies continue to send those dying within the Vatican II Counterfeit “Catholic” Contra sect, Protestantism, and its Non-Denominational and Evangelical offsprings, into the bottomless pit of eternal perdition.

God has already told us that very few will make it through His Gates to sit beside Him.

You have been warned which falls under God Fearing Christian.

Instaurare Omnia in Christo

Category:

Uncategorized

COVID FACTS, TRUTHS AND FLAT-OUT LIES


310-619-3055COVID WHO
“Strong leadership is essential in the face of health crises” -Tedros Ghebreyesus

Per the WHO, “On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China.”¹

Two weeks later, the organization published “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR”² to its website, a non-peer-reviewed paper whose authorship had massive undisclosed conflicts of interest. It was later fiercely critiqued by a slew of preeminent scientists.³

For better or worse, the paper would serve as the primary basis for the notoriously irregular PCR testing of the ensuing pandemic.

Over the coming weeks, Tedros would repeatedly praise China for “the transparency they have demonstrated”⁴ and their “commitment” thereto, which Tedros said to be “very impressive, and beyond words” in his January 30th Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) declaration.⁵

In its piece on the matter, the Associated Press wrote, “But behind the scenes, it was a much different story, one of significant delays by China and considerable frustration among WHO officials over not getting the information they needed.”⁶

Roughly a year later, Tedros would send Ecohealth Alliance’s Peter Daszak, longtime Wuhan lab collaborator and perhaps the world’s most interest-conflicted figure on the topic⁷ to be the de facto face of a notoriously China-curated investigation.

At a certain point during his subsequent 60 Minutes interview, in which Daszak described China’s responses to his team’s questions, host Lesley Stahl burst out, “But you’re just taking their word for it!”
Daszak replied, “Well, what else can we do? There’s a limit to what you can do. We went right up to that limit.”⁸

Most notably, in his initial speech declaring a PHEIC, Tedros would single-handedly set the tone for the pandemic response by praising China for its “extraordinary measures”.⁹ At that time, footage was already circulating of Chinese citizens being welded into their apartments,¹⁰ a practice that would continue in the coming months,¹¹ aided by Tedros’s staunch reaffirmations.¹²

The ensuing promotion of the shutdown of entire economies manned and frequented almost entirely by people under the age of 70 for an illness classification that was statistically a threat only to those above it has been said likely to be “the biggest policy mistake in modern times.”¹³

Tedros would grandstand as an advocate for poor countries, largely ignoring the global ramifications he was, in theory, supposed to care about, such as that no less than 150 million additional children were plunged into poverty as a result of pandemic measures,¹⁴ dying at a rate of roughly a quarter million biannually from the consequent hunger alone, according to UN reporting.¹⁵ As for broader effects, another report from Unicef found that same number, a quarter million, died as a result of the lockdowns in just half a dozen South Asian countries in 2020 alone.¹⁶

The fight against tuberculosis, the global overall deadliest infectious disease¹⁷, was set back a dozen years.¹⁸ Similar setbacks had occurred in the domains of malaria (which witnessed an additional 13 million infections¹⁹), nutrition-related diseases²⁰, child marriages²¹ (which doubled²²), and child labor worldwide.²³

In terms of life years, a measure of the amount of time relative to life expectancy that is lost, none of these policies were rational for the first world either, as a multitude of studies have demonstrated.²⁴ ²⁵ ²⁶ ²⁷

…cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 finds that lockdowns are far more harmful to public health (at least 5–10 times so in terms of wellbeing years) than COVID-19 can be.²⁸

Even in the short term, the rate of death from all causes for younger adults rose by a bigger percentage than the rate of death from all causes for the elderly, first proven by NBER²⁹, and verified by the New York Times.³⁰ The Times’s acknowledgement was not trivial. Just one year prior, the paper had evangelized pandemic measures to the point of publishing an article titled, “Actually, Wearing a Mask Can Help Your Child Learn” by psychologist Judith Danovitch.³¹

A few months after the harrowing NBER study, however, national testing data was released.³² The Times put out a somber article titled, “The Pandemic Erased Two Decades of Progress in Math and Reading.”³³

The issues for young children were not merely academic. Per the CDC, roughly 30 percent of students said one of the adults at home lost their job.³⁴

A record 420,000 children a month in England were treated for mental health problems,³⁵ and in the United States, the suicide attempt rate among teenage girls jumped 51%.³⁶

MIT found an increase in youth suicides carried out in 2020³⁷ and the CDC found a substantial increase in 2021 for young adults, especially in 15 to 24 year old males.³⁸

Unfounded rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding, state-by-state analyses repeatedly showed that lockdown policies didn’t work even for their intended short-term purpose of reducing COVID deaths.³⁹ ⁴⁰ ⁴¹ ⁴²

Even if they had, they would have still produced “more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults” as the Time’s David Leonhardt ceded⁴³, which in virtually all circumstances is wrong on its face. Moreover, this publication is not aware of a single survey in which the typical COVID victims, statistically elderly and moribund, were polled demanding for young people to make sacrifices on their behalf.⁴⁴

Thousands of medical and public health scientists⁴⁵, including some of the world’s most distinguished immunologists,⁴⁶ were censored in Google’s search results and on other platforms for attempting to raise just this issue so as to advocate for a more nuanced approach.⁴⁷ ⁴⁸ ⁴⁹

This censorship, too, had roots in WHO statements from the earliest days of the pandemic.

Already in his initial PHEIC declaration, Tedros called for “combat[ting] the spread of rumors and misinformation.”⁵⁰

He would double down strongly on this rhetoric in short order, using the term “infodemic” as early as February 2020. This sort of equation of speech with disease served as a rallying cry for an unprecedented wave of censorship going forward.⁵¹

By April 2020, Youtubes’ CEO Susan Wojcick announced that “Anything that would go against World Health Organization recommendations would be a violation of our policy.”⁵²

The WHO subsequently bragged that close to a million (850,000) videos were removed from from February 2020 to January 2021 alone as a result of WHO-crafted misinformation policy.⁵³ (More broadly, WHO claims to work with “YouTube, Google, Facebook and several other partners” on a weekly basis to identify and target misinformation.)

Those who assume that whatever was censored must have been flagrantly wrong are mistaken.

Tech company policies included “reducing the virality of content discouraging vaccines that does not contain actionable misinformation.” More specifically, this consisted of “often-true content” that “can be framed as sensation, alarmist, or shocking.”⁵⁴ ⁵⁵ ⁵⁶

None other than the British Medical Journal, one of the oldest and most prestigious peer-reviewed journals in the world, was censored for revealing data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.⁵⁷

Even photo-sharing platform Instagram got in on the action, censoring the hashtag #naturalimmunity⁵⁸. This, too, was directly reflective of WHO policy.

Reminiscent of its antics leading up to 2009 H1N1, late in 2020, the WHO would go about changing its definition of herd immunity, previously, “when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection”⁵⁹ to “a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached. Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.”⁶⁰

Just as absurd as changing what was supposed to be a scientific definition to one of policy-promotion was the policy itself; that of pursuing herd immunity with overtly non-sterilizing vaccines, especially given that herd immunity had never been achieved via vaccination for any cold, flu, nor analogous respiratory infection⁶¹, and certainly not for any coronavirus, for which there’d been no prior vaccine, period.⁶²

Moreover, transmission prevention was not even tested for in the trials.⁶³ ⁶⁴ ⁶⁵ ⁶⁶ 

As a general rule of thumb, pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to reach standards they’re not held to.

Of course, none of this mattered. The WHO knew that vaccines were the answer.

In April 2020, as some governments floated the idea of immunity passports, which would affirm the status of those who had had previous infection so as to allow them greater mobility in the face of increasing restrictions, the WHO shut it down, asserting that there was not enough evidence to support a pass based on natural immunity.⁶⁷ By stark contrast, in 2020 the organization was already working with countries to develop digital vaccine certificates for vaccines that hadn’t even been released yet.⁶⁸

The idea, spearheaded by Mr. Gates, that, “you don’t have a choice… normalcy only returns when we’ve largely vaccinated the entire global population,” reached a sort of religious fervor amongst officials.⁶⁹

Even after it became clear in the summer of 2021 from data out of countries with nearly all adults vaccinated such as Israel⁷⁰ and Iceland⁷¹ ⁷² that vaccinated herd immunity was not tenable, countries (including the US) still pushed for mandates. (Iceland, an island nation, even at its most lax, had only allowed entry with proof of vaccination or previous infection. It was as clear-cut a real-world experiment for which one could hope.)⁷³

The CDC’s own data at the time⁷⁴ showed the vaccines were not preventing against infection, something White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Deborah Birx later admitted she knew would be the case from the beginning.⁷⁵ ⁷⁶

Some attempted ex post facto justifying mandates based on the idea that the unvaccinated would “overwhelm” hospitals⁷⁷, but save for the elderly, who had virtually all already been vaccinated, this was largely a non-sequitur; working age people were never at a significant risk of hospitalization.

From the get-go, at his initial January 2020 PHEIC declaration, Tedros set the tone for the headlong attitude undergirding Project Warp Speed and similar programs, being one of the first to call for countries to “accelerate the development of vaccines” without issuing a world of caution about safety.⁷⁸

This attitude had harrowing precedents. A CNN headline later that year criticizing then-FDA commissioner Steven Hahn blared, “Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be ‘colossally stupid’”.

Pointing out that there have been “bad outcomes” when the vaccine-making process was rushed, CNN provided a quartet of US incidents; the 1976 swine flu fiasco (which had been the last time the CDC rushed a pandemic flu shot), the Cutter incident, simian contamination in polio vaccines, as well as the anthrax vaccine that was forced upon soldiers.⁷⁹ (The last time the WHO itself had rushed a pandemic vaccine was the 2009 Pandemrix disaster⁸⁰)

Accelerated drugs are a notoriously risky enterprise in general⁸¹, and the push to get a novel nucleotide chain, genetically modified to maximize expression,⁸²⁸³ in a polyethylene glycol⁸⁴ (petrochemical⁸⁵) envelope designed to penetrate cellular membranes into billions of people is something for which the long-term ramifications remain unknown, and may never properly be, as the placebo groups were eliminated after mere months of trials.⁸⁶

Moreover, such discovery is up against the notorious reluctance of regulators to implicate themselves⁸⁷⁸⁸ for a set of uniquely novel vaccination products that were stumped for as never before.⁸⁹

The public was woefully uninformed of acute vulnerabilities such as during cell division.⁹⁰ ⁹¹ In fact, the notion of risks was largely a priori dismissed, as the drugs were immediately universally advertised as “safe and effective.” Dissenters found it objectionable to take a new drug mechanism with no long-term testing and summarily market it to the public as “safe”.

The pharmaceutical industrial complex whitewashed this lack of long-term testing by peddling the idea that the decades during which the products were routinely too dangerous to test on humans made them “well-researched”, thereby taking the time period during which the drugs were too hazardous for long-term data and absurdly using it as a promotional substitute for it. It was the most profoundly unscientific spin imaginable.

“[Moderna] still does not have a single drug candidate in human clinical trials.” (Fortune Magazine, 2015)⁹²

“It never proved safe enough to test in humans” (STAT, 2017)⁹³

Lurking in the background, the companies that stood to gain the most from the frenzy, and would do so with record-breaking profits,⁹⁴ were names like Pfizer, objectively the world’s largest criminal organization (having paid the world’s largest-ever criminal fine⁹⁵), Moderna, which never brought a drug to market before relieved of the burden of durational safety testing,⁹⁶ and AstraZeneca, a company that got the exclusive rights to its vaccine formula from Oxford, which had initially promised to donate the rights of its coronavirus vaccine with an “open license pledge.” This was abandoned after a meeting with WHO-mega-funder Bill Gates in which he self-reportedly told them, “you really need to team up.”⁹⁷⁹⁸

You have been forewarned. Again!

Category:

Uncategorized

5 Myths About “Gun Free” Zones


There’s been a lot of talk recently about “Gun Free” zones and, frankly, a lot of it has been useless blather from people who know nothing about guns and reveal more and more of their ignorance with each additional word they speak.

With that in mind, I want to share 5 “Gun Free” zone myths and responses you can use when you hear them.

Myth . Gun Free Zones make us safer and reduce crime. It should be obvious by now that gun free zones don’t make us safer. Any time you hear this argument, ask the person who makes it if they have “gun free zone” stickers on their cars to stop carjackings, “gun free zone” signs in their yards to stop home invasions, and wear “gun free zone” shirts and hats to stop muggings, robberies, rapes, etc.  If they balk, remind them that “Change starts with me” and that they should “Be the change you want to see.”

If “gun free” zones make us safer, suggest that they tell that to the Secret Service and the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. I’m sure they’ll change how they protect people right away.

The fact that these signs don’t exist in large numbers is a tacit admission that gun haters and people who are ignorant about guns KNOW, at some level, that gun free zones don’t work.

Equally silly is the thought that gun free zones reduce crime…they simply change the location.

First off, someone who intends on murdering large numbers of people will commit 5 or more misdemeanors and/or felonies in the process of firing their first shot. Do you really think that someone intent on murdering innocent people cares about breaking 1 additional law? Do you really think that someone who intends on killing themselves or committing suicide by cop cares about additional penalties from a judge? Of course not.

Next, gun free zones don’t reduce crime because they change the behavior of moral and ethical people who carry guns more than the behavior of murderers.  In fact gun free zones are a common factor that mass murderers cite for how they picked the locations of their crimes.

Concealed carry permit holders tend to be law abiding citizens…both because it’s their general nature and it’s kind of a requirement to get the permit. As a result, a higher percentage of concealed carry permit holders obey gun free zone signs and laws than murdering psychopaths.

Myth . Highly Trained Law Enforcement Will Arrive Immediately And Save You. Law enforcement is my literal and figurative family.  They are short-changed when it comes to the training they get and what’s expected of them.  The average officer receives about as much firearms training as a dog groomer before starting work.  MANY patrol officers across the country only do their 1 day of mandatory training and qualifying per year and do zero practice with their firearms the rest of the year.  Other officers are world class shooters who regularly do extensive reality based training and are training for the fight every day.

On average in the US, it will take 11 minutes for law enforcement to arrive (assuming that someone is connected with a HUMAN 911 operator the instant that the murdering starts).  If a motivated murderer is unchallenged, they will historically shoot an average of 6-20 victims per minute.  When law enforcement arrives, you may get an officer who shoots once a year and doesn’t really like guns or you may get an officer who does dry fire before every shift and has mentally rehearsed and prepared themselves for this situation.  They have trained themselves to fight through the pain of minor gunshot wounds (like the officer in Uvalde).  They have no quit in them and will finish the fight.

It is rare that a school resource officer has both the temperament to be a school resource officer AND be able to flip the switch and pursue a lethal aggressor.  It happens and I’ve trained with one, but it’s rare.  It’s much more likely that in a school full of teachers, administrators, and support staff that there will be a frustrated warrior or two who will already have the mindset and training to solve the problem…we just need to make sure they aren’t prevented from having the tools they need.

Myth Common sense laws will stop mass shootings. We have more than 20,000 gun laws on the books in the US. What’s the magic next law that will make all of the bad people stop doing bad things?

The only thing that would take care of gun crime would be to eliminate guns. By definition, a country with zero (not even 1 gun) guns would have zero gun crime.

We’ve got more than 300 million guns in the US. They’re not going away. If they’re outlawed, then the law would disproportionately affect law abiding citizens. (remember, murderers don’t care about laws or the consequences of breaking them.)

But if we look at how this has worked out in DC, Chicago, Australia, the UK, and other places with strict gun laws, we see that it doesn’t work out well for law enforcement or the general public.

It didn’t work out well for Jews in Germany in the 30s, or minorities in ANY country throughout history that has been disarmed.

Look at Austria…one recent Muslim extremist mass murderer ran his car into a crowd and then got out and started stabbing the survivors.

Look at China…in the last few years, they’ve seen almost a dozen mass school stabbings and hammer attacks, including one where the attacker beat preschoolers in the head with a hammer and then lit himself on fire. Within 24 hours of the Sandy Hook attacks, one murderer stabbed 22 children in an attack in China. In another attack, 4 Muslim extremists used knives to kill 29 civilians and injure 140 others at the Kunming railway station.

Look at Northern Ireland…when gun ownership was prohibited for certain groups, those groups became targets of violence from the groups who could still own guns. Explosives, knives, rocks, and deadly modifications to potato guns took their place to fill the role of the gun. Violence didn’t go away with gun confiscation.

When someone thinks that gun laws will solve the problem of mass shootings, they need to ask themselves what the point is, to protect innocent people or convict guilty people more harshly after they’re dead?

Additional laws only allow for harsher penalties to be enforced, after the fact, on a murdering psychopath.

If you want to protect innocent people from murdering psychopaths who are comfortable breaking laws, you need to look to another solution than more laws. A solution like the most effective way to STOP the attacker.

Myth #4. Locking doors, hiding, throwing cans, and pleading/begging are effective strategies for stopping the threat.

We live in a time where we can find out an amazing amount of detail about EVERY active shooter situation that has happened in the US in recent history. We can see where these strategies were all tried and the outcome. None of them STOP the threat. They may delay death, reduce the number of innocent deaths, change who dies, create time and space for additional attacks, or change the location of deaths, but they don’t stop the threat on their own.

Myth #5. You’re unarmed if you don’t have a gun. This mindset is absolutely toxic. Poisonous. Corrosive. Venomous. Deadly. Wrong.

Yet it’s a common line of thinking for people who have it in their mind that a gun is a magical laser beam that gives the holder supernatural 1 shot killing ability that can only be matched by another gun.

The gun is just a tool that allows the mind to exert it’s influence kinetically at a distance.

The mind is the weapon that decides whether or not to wield tools in a moral and ethical manner or in a psychopathical/sociopathical manner.

As an example, what would have happened if some of the people who kneeled/layed down would have fought the attacker after he shot his first victim? Would they have been killed trying to stop him? Maybe.

We know that at the Umpqua shooting in 2015, at the first sign of armed resistance (from police in this case), the killer ran, hid, and shot himself in the head, ending the killing. If that would have happened after he shot his first or second victim, it wouldn’t have even been considered a “mass shooting.”

I need to be clear…I’m not surprised that nobody who was lined up to get executed fought back.

One soldier, Chris Mintz, actually did fight back at Umpqua…and a lot more. He set off fire alarms, directed students away from the shooting, and then headed towards the gunfire, and attempted to block a door so the gunman couldn’t get through.

He stopped fighting when he was mechanically unable to…because he had one or both legs broken from being shot.

But nobody joined him. And it doesn’t surprise me. And I wouldn’t have expected them to act any differently than they did unless they had different training. The phrase, “you’ll perform half as well in battle as you do in training” applies. If you have zero training, then your expected performance will be that you’ll freeze, cower, or run…and running is probably the best option for someone with no training, but history tells us that the untrained are much more likely to freeze or panic than deliberately run.

When someone who has no training cowers, it’s not cowardly. It’s a reflection of a lack of training. You can’t be expected to perform beyond the level of your training…and that’s why training is SO important, like the Praxis Dynamic Gunfight Training course that goes WAY beyond static, sterile, paper-punching skills that most gun owners call “training.”

But an effective response could have been simple, like grabbing fire extinguishers and, as Clint Smith says, “spray ‘em with the white stuff and then hit them with the red thing.”  It completely baffles me that every classroom in the country doesn’t have at least 2 fire extinguishers for this purpose.  It’s relatively inexpensive, most likely donated, not threatening, and it’s something that could be implemented any day of the week.  A big crowd-control sized pepper spray can may freak out parents, but would a fire extinguisher attached to the teacher’s desk?

It could have been deploying a concealed carry firearm. We have super-stupid federal “gun free zone” legislation that should be eliminated immediately, as well as state laws regarding carry at schools, but that brings up a VERY important point that few concealed carry permit holders know.

In many cases, it is “against the rules” but not illegal to carry a concealed carry firearm in a gun free zone. In other cases, it results in being asked to leave. In other cases, it’s a simple, minor misdemeanor, like trespassing. In other cases, it’s a serious misdemeanor. In other cases, it’s a felony. We have an inconsistent, illogical patchwork of gun laws in this country and you NEED to know the laws where you live.

You could be a teacher somewhere where carrying a gun in a gun free zone on campus might be legal but against school policy and just mean a firm talking-to or it could be losing a job or a serious crime with possible jail time.

If not a fire extinguisher or a gun, then Tasers (not stun guns), knives, pepper spray, or other purpose built or improvised defensive tools combined with offensive strikes can easily change the number of innocent people who were murdered.

But, again, these things are simply TOOLs. The only weapon is the mind. And an effective tool in the hands of someone with an ineffective mind is useless. You must train the mind.

You must train the mind to see targets on the human body.

Watch any UFC fight and you’ll see trained fighters hitting each other in the head and body for 5, 10, and 15 minutes at a time. This illustrates just how ineffective most strikes—even really hard strikes from professional fighters—are at stopping a threat.

A fighter will absorb massive kick after kick after kick and keep fighting, but if their left nut gets grazed, the ref will stop the fight and give them a chance to recover.

A fighter will absorb dozens of punches to the face, but if they barely get touched with a pinky finger in the eye, the ref will stop the fight and give them a chance to recover.

Fighters will try to “knock a guy’s head off” for an entire fight with strikes you can feel from home, but any one of these strikes delivered a few inches lower, to the throat or side of the neck, would instantly knock him out or crush their opponents’ windpipe.

Targeting matters, but conditioning the mind matters too. You must train the mind to be able to switch from the loving, caring, empathetic, socialized person that you are to a cold-hearted robot with ice flowing in your veins JUST long enough to stop the threat with the minimum force necessary to preserve human life.

And the most scientific and proven way that we know of to do this is with the Fight To Your Gun training

It’s based on gross motor movements and what’s in your environment, so it’s effective on younger, faster, bigger, and stronger attackers and it’ll allow you to stop a lethal force threat at bad breath distance faster than you could with a concealed carry pistol.

I’d suggest people buy it before they buy their first gun. You can learn more about it >HERE<

Thoughts? Questions? Comments? 

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with: