The Truth Is Out There

Posts tagged ‘news’

You’re Not Crazy: Study Proves Legal Gun Owners Are the Sane Ones. ‘Gun Crime’ is the Fault of Psychopaths.


Women Shooter at Ready Range Ladies Lady Gun Holder IMG NRA-ILA
You’re Not Crazy: Study Proves Legal Gun Owners Are the Sane Ones, ‘Gun Crime’ is the Fault of Psychopaths File Photo IMG NRA-ILA

If you only get your news from the biased mainstream media, you might think that gun owners, especially those who carry concealed, are one step away from being labeled a “crazy gun nut.”

It’s practically guaranteed that after every new concealed carry law is passed, there’s no shortage of headlines warning us that the sky is about to fall, violence will run rampant, and “law-abiding gun owners” will soon be indistinguishable from dangerous criminals.

But what if I told you the truth is far less dramatic? According to a recent study, it’s not legal gun owners we should be worried about—it’s the psychopaths.

That’s right, a new study titled Psychopathy, Gun Carrying, and Firearm Violence by Sophie L. Kjærvik and Nicholas D. Thomson turns the tables on this narrative. Contrary to what mainstream media would have you believe, the study found that psychopaths—not your average law-abiding citizen—are far more likely to be involved in gun violence and illegal gun carrying.

The “Crazy Gun Nut” Stereotype

Before we dive into the facts, let’s talk about how mainstream media loves to sensationalize anything related to guns. According to a McLaughlin survey“71.9 percent of Americans are concerned that the national media and news organizations such as ABC, CBS, and NBC are biased when it comes to reporting about gun violence and Second Amendment issues.” And honestly, who could blame them?

From labeling semi-automatic rifles as “assault weapons” to making wild predictions about the chaos concealed carry laws will unleash, the media has a long history of misleading the public about gun ownership. But as AmmoLand News has pointed out before, Careful CNN, Your Bias is Showing. The media doesn’t really care about accuracy as long as they can connect gun sales to rising violence—even when the truth is far more nuanced.

Psychopathy, Not Legal Gun Owners, Drives Gun Violence

Now, let’s get to the meat of the study that flies in the face of all the mainstream media’s fearmongering. Kjærvik and Thomson found that “firearm violence was positively related to the affective and antisocial facets of psychopathy.” In plain English, people with emotional coldness and a disregard for social norms are far more likely to commit acts of gun violence. But here’s the kicker—none of those psychopathic traits were linked to legal gun ownership.

In fact, “gun carrying with a concealed permit was not related to any of the facets” of psychopathy. Legal gun carriers, the ones who follow the law and obtain permits, are not driven by the same impulses as those who commit violent crimes with guns. In other words, legal gun owners are, as the title suggests, not crazy.

This study slams the door on the idea that expanding concealed carry laws will somehow lead to widespread violence. The researchers found that “only the antisocial facet statistically predicted gun carrying without a concealed permit” (KJÆRVIK AND THOMSON Page 6), and not a single psychopathy trait was associated with those who carry guns legally.

The ones causing the chaos are those who break the law—not law-abiding gun owners.

The Media’s Obsession with Fear-Mongering

Yet, despite the clear evidence that psychopaths are the driving force behind unlawful gun use, the mainstream media continues to conflate all gun ownership with gun violence. As highlighted in AmmoLand News’ article New Media Group Has Formed to Push the Anti-Gun Narrative, there are now entire organizations dedicated to framing guns as a systemic problem, ignoring the fact that responsible gun owners exist.

Groups like the Association of Gun Violence Reporters (AGVR) are out to “shift public perception about firearms,” framing the conversation in a way that makes legal gun ownership seem dangerous. This is the kind of narrative the media latches onto, painting every gun owner as a ticking time bomb while conveniently leaving out research that contradicts their bias.

Concealed Carry Laws: The Reality vs. The Hype

Every time new concealed carry laws are passed, the media goes into full-blown “the sky is falling” mode. But what does the study say about those who legally carry guns? Absolutely nothing alarming. Legal gun owners who carry with a permit are not prone to violence or psychopathy.

This is in stark contrast to the portrayal in the media, which—as AmmoLand News pointed out in Where Stupid Meets Phobia: A Finger-Gun Update—loves to blow things out of proportion. Finger guns, pastry guns, and even kids playing cops and robbers are treated as threats, while real threats, like people with antisocial tendencies who carry guns illegally, go largely unnoticed.

The Real Problem: Psychopathy & Illegal Gun Use

Psychopathy Gun Carrying, and Firearm Violence by Sophie L Kjrvik and Nicholas D Thomson
Psychopathy Gun Carrying, and Firearm Violence by Sophie L Kjrvik and Nicholas D Thomson

The real issue here is that the media’s obsession with fear-mongering is clouding the facts. The study found that “firearm violence was positively related to the antisocial and affective facets” (KJÆRVIK AND THOMSON Page 1) of psychopathy. Those with these traits are more likely to engage in illegal gun behavior and violence.

American Gun owners who obtain permits and follow the law? They’re not part of the problem.

But don’t expect to hear that on the evening news. Instead, you’ll get stories that link rising gun sales to violence, ignoring the fact that gun purchases have surged because people are worried about protecting themselves from crime—a crime committed by the very psychopaths the media doesn’t talk about.

The Irony of It All

In the end, this study proves what many gun owners already knew: legal gun carriers aren’t the problem. It’s ironic, really, that the media spends so much time vilifying law-abiding citizens when the real focus should be on identifying and addressing the mental health issues that drive unlawful gun violence. But, as the McLaughlin Poll reveals, a vast majority of Americans have already caught on to the media’s bias.

So, next time you hear someone rant about “crazy gun nuts,” just remember: the real threat isn’t concealed carry permit holders—it’s the psychopaths committing crimes while the media continues to push its tired, inaccurate narratives.

Yet Another Conspiracy Theory Bites the Dust!


Tin foil hat wearers, unite!

The Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz has not yet issued a report on the DOJ’s role in the events of January 6. Horowitz announced on January 15, 2021 that he would conduct the inquiry; the DOJ is the only government agency that hasn’t published the findings of an internal investigation.

Now we know why. Or at least the official excuse.

Horowitz informed the House Weaponization subcommittee on September 25 that he had paused his investigation for an unspecified amount of time so as to not interfere in the department’s “ongoing criminal cases” into January 6. “We reinitiated it last year and I’m in the process of reviewing a draft report,” Horowitz told Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky) during a hearing on FBI retaliation against whistleblowers.

Setting aside the dubious explanation—the DOJ’s criminal investigation continues to this day with new arrests announced each week—Horowitz used the delay to explain why the report won’t be released before Election Day.

But the legitimate reason why the report will be more than four years in the making represents another example of election interference by the Justice Department. Promoting the false narrative about the “insurrection” and placing blame at the feet of Donald Trump is central to the Democrats’ winning election strategy this year. The Biden/Harris regime and their bootlickers in the corporate media consistently portray suspicions that the federal government played an animating if not lead role in the Capitol protest as the stuff of “conspiracy theories.”

So thanks to Horowitz’s foot dragging, arguably the biggest unanswered question of January 6—how many FBI informants were involved—will remain a mystery until after Americans vote this fall and possibly until after Inauguration Day.

Hints and Clues Amid the Subterfuge

Horowitz, however, did tip his hand in terms of whether his report will address the role of FBI informants. Under further questioning by Massie, Horowitz said he intends to reveal the number of FBI informants, officially known as confidential human sources, on Capitol grounds that day. His report may also disclose expenses paid to informants by the FBI:

Horowitz’s comments finally caught the attention of media outlets and lawmakers who’ve ignored this scandal for nearly four years. During a segment on Fox News, which largely stopped covering January 6 following the departure of Tucker Carlson in April 2023, legal analyst Kerri Kupec called Horowitz’s testimony “the sleeper story of the day.”

Kupec told reporter John Roberts that “so many lawmakers and pundits were decried as crazy for suggesting that there could be confidential human sources involved in January 6th and it looks like there might just have been.” 

Roberts responded: “A lot of us were told if you think this you’re crazy, you’re a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist but a lot of it turned out to be true so we’ll see how this goes.”

Perhaps more telling than the coverage at Fox News is the lack of coverage by regime media. Neither the Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC reported on Horowitz’s testimony; the New York Times, which in a 2022 article confirmed the government’s acknowledgement that at least eight FBI informants were planted inside the Proud Boys, also failed to cover Horowitz’s comments.

Where Ya’ Been, Guys?

GOP leaders in Congress also took note. Calling Horowitz’s testimony about FBI informants an “alarming bit of information,” House Speaker Mike Johnson claimed his office will push for answers. “I’ll be requesting classified briefings,” Johnson told Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram after the hearing.

One could commend Johnson for finally speaking out. A classified briefing will likely yield the same non-answers by the FBI that Director Christopher Wray offers in public. But at least such a briefing generates headlines and keep the story alive.

Pergram then posted a lengthy response from Weaponization Subcommittee Chairman James Jordan (R-Ohio):

How [Horowitz] answered Mr. Massie’s questions, sounds like there were confidential human sources at the Capitol that day. Sounded like it was plural. Like he said, sources. But the part that bothers me is, does it sound like they’re going to be a report on what actually happened? How many? What they were doing. We’re not going to have a report…until after the election. This seemed like news that the American people [have] been seeking for almost four years.

Based on Mr. Horowitz’s testimony, based on the work the committee has done over the last couple years, looks like there were confidential human sources at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. We want to know what took place. We want to know what they were doing. We want to know all the answers to the key questions, and we’d like that information soon.

While Republican interest in the matter is welcome albeit long overdue, there simply is no question FBI informants were involved before and on January 6. It is well known that the FBI embedded informants in both the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers prior to the events of January 6; some participated in pre-planning meetings as well as the protest itself.

During a transcribed interview with the House Judiciary Committee last year, former Washington FBI chief Steven D’Antuono also appeared to confirm multiple FBI offices sent informants to the nation’s capital for January 6. D’Antuono told House Republicans last year that he polled all 56 field offices in 2021 to determine how many FBI informants were involved.

And it is quite possible informants were not the only FBI assets at the Capitol on January 6. Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund estimates “multiple” FBI undercover agents tracked suspected “domestic terrorists” in the city that day. Sund told Tucker Carlson in an August 2023 interview that deploying FBI undercover employees, which are different from informants, represented “regular standard police work.” Sund, however, expressed concern the bureau did not share any information with his office about the use of FBI informants or undercover agents.

None of this passes the smell test. And it never did. Which is why it’s long past time for Republican leaders in Congress to pressure the inspector general to release his report immediately.

If the report is in draft form as Horowitz stated, Republicans must demand an immediate classification review and instruct Attorney General Merrick Garland to post the report by November 1. All demands will be ignored but that should not stop Congressional leaders from doing so. If anything, it will make it harder for the rest of the GOP in Washington—and the regime media—to keep ignoring this major scandal.

The WHO continues its march for power


Back in June, there was encouraging news that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) pandemic agreement failed to pass. This agreement would have surrendered American sovereignty to unaccountable and unelected international bureaucrats operating at the behest of special interests. Thankfully, this agreement failed to pass.

But the WHO isn’t giving up. It is continuing its march for power.

The issue was brought up to members of Congress for a press conference on the Hill to raise awareness about the ongoing power grab attempt by the United Nations (UN) and the WHO.

The globalists at the UN and the WHO want power over America’s public health policy. If they are successful, their proposed pandemic agreement will irreparably harm American national sovereignty. Family Research Council Action (FRC Action) has been working on this matter and keeping you updated over the past year. Would you consider supporting our work by making a donation today?

This past weekend, the UN hosted a conference called “Summit of the Future” where certain international agreements, including the Pact for the Future, were discussed. The Pact would give the WHO power over the response to future pandemics, large-scale climate events, major events in space, and much more.

During the press conference, Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) told reporters there were “enough examples and enough reasons” listed in the Pact for the Future’s emergency platform “for them to get involved pretty much whenever and wherever they want to.”

He later said on Washington Watch, “They want authority. They want global governance. And they’ll do whatever they can to achieve that. This agreement that we’re trying to stop would give them authority, global authority, in multiple categories of catastrophic events that might happen around the world.”

Congressman Crane also pointed out that Americans will not be able to vote the WHO’s bureaucrats out of office, meaning they will not be held accountable to we the people. This would be a terrible infringement upon American sovereignty, which is why FRC Action has been sounding the alarm for quite some time.

Recently, the U.S. House passed the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act. This important bill would require the Senate to ratify the WHO’s pandemic agreement since it would function as a legally binding treaty. The Senate should also pass this measure to protect American sovereignty.

That’s one reason why the upcoming election is so important. Our nation needs leaders who will protect American sovereignty, not those who will hand it over to bureaucrats overseas. After all, our elected members of Congress are supposed to be the ones who represent the people of the United States.

Also discussed during the UN conference was the UN’s Global Digital Compact, which would require member states to control misinformation and disinformation. Under said Compact, even communications critical of the WHO could be characterized as “misinformation.” The UN’s Common Agenda document would provide “accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content.”

We cannot allow this dangerous power grab to go unchallenged. I am convinced that the UN and the WHO think we are not paying attention to what they are trying to do. They would be mistaken.

Tens of thousands of you have already signed petitions to Congress urging them not to allow Washington to cede American sovereignty to the WHO.

The United States should defund the UN and the WHO, and any pandemic agreement or treaty should be submitted to the Senate for ratification.

While many ignore the WHO’s continual march for power, actions will continue sounding the alarms and work to stop it. Our members of Congress must act to protect American sovereignty from the WHO.

The “Financial Coup” That Seized America


In the wake of the 2008 Financial Crisis, former chief economist of the IMF Simon Johnson warned that the same dysfunctional policies he saw in his basket case banana republics had taken hold in the United States.

Johnson warned that if America didn’t act fast, we would plunge into a “Quiet Coup” as the American financial system effectively captures the government, bailing itself out until we run out of money.
Well, we didn’t act fast. In fact, we got worse.

And here we are.

Our Bankrupt Financial System

In recent videos I’ve talked about the trillion of distress in the financial system, the common thread being that you, the taxpayer, will be bailing them all out — we saw this in the 2023 bank bailouts, pre-paid in the dark.

Of course, given our $35 trillion in national debt we can’t afford it. But pay it we will, driving that 35 trillion to, according to the CBO, 50 trillion plus.

At some point, it gets too big to bail out. Meaning either hard default — they stop paying interest. Or the more likely soft default — they let inflation rip, melting away the national debt along with our life savings. And between here and there is a wholesale fleecing of the middle class and the working class who relies on them for a job.

The Ignored Warning

So, first, the ignored warning by Simon Johnson. I’m no fan of the IMF — their role is essentially feeding their client dictators fresh drugs at massive taxpayer expense. But one thing the IMF does know is dysfunctional governments.

In his warning, Johnson detailed the typical pattern when countries collapse — when they come in desperation to the IMF.

First, a small group of powerful elites takes over policy. This is typically financial elite, or large companies when the country has them.

Because these elites know they’ll be bailed out, they take excessive risks in good times. An iron law of finance is that risk pays reward. Meaning if you know you’re going to get bailed out, you’d be a moron not to take on too much risk.

If every hand at the poker game is all-in, inevitably you lose. You pass your losses to the taxpayer, and start over with fresh chips, courtesy of the suckers.

The Quiet Coup

Johnson lays out his numbers: from 1973 to 1985, America’s financial sector never earned more than 16% of domestic corporate product. But by the early 2000s, it was earning 41%.

It turned a chunk of these profits into lobbying, repealing Depression-era prudential regulations separating banking and investment banking. In other words, freeing banks to gamble with taxpayer-guaranteed funds.

Then it lobbied to raise leverage — meaning how much the financial sector could borrow. So it could make large gambles with a small amount of money — again, all taxpayer guaranteed.
The end result was the 2008 crisis, where banks made trillions in risky loans to people with no income, no assets, and no credit.

The leverage meant they had bet the farm and then some — keeping all the profits. Then when it turned south, they sicced lobbyists on Washington to line up bailouts, using the real economy as a hostage to wring out yet more lobbyist favors.

The Washington-Wall Street Racket

In return, they gave politicians and their staff plum positions or even outright bribes.
Ben Bernanke got $250,000 for a single speech at a financial conference.

Janet Yellen was paid *$7 million in speaking fees by Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks — hedge fund Citadel paid Yellen $292,500 for a single speech.

London-based Standard Chartered paid $270,000 for one speech — interesting for a foreign bank when we can only imagine what favors were done in return.

Johnson sums it up: the American financial system is “desperately ill,” kept alive only by an endless series of bailouts, like the ones that headed off bank failures last year.

He says the only solution is forced recognition of bank losses — which would bankrupt them — then selling them to new management that will not have access to bailouts.

What’s Next

Given their lobbying power, the odds of breaking up America’s megabanks are slim to none.
Meaning unless Washington reins in the banks, we’re in store for more existential financial crises, more bailouts and national debt, more running out the clock to financial catastrophe.

We missed our chance in 2008, and in all likelihood, it will take an even bigger crisis before politicians turn on their lobbyists and the financial coup that has seized our republic.

Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire


Treasury just had its worst August ever and things are getting worse

Janet ‘Inflation-Is-Transitory’ Yellen once again has egg on her face. After laughably low deficit projections for the current fiscal year, Treasury has now blown past those forecasts, and we still have a month to go before the end of the current fiscal year. Worse yet, the latest monthly Treasury statement set several record “firsts” — none of which were good.

Janet Yellen economics for dummies - Imgflip

While people already knew that annual interest on the debt was heading to $1 trillion, this was the first time it had ever been recorded. As of August, the 11th month of the fiscal year, the government has spent over $1.049 trillion just to service the $35.3 trillion debt. What makes it scarier is that we still have another month to go in the current fiscal year.

It didn’t even take all 12 months to prove wrong those folks saying interest on the debt wouldn’t break the $1-trillion threshold.

Even with interest rate cuts, there’s no significant evidence that the problem is slowing down. That’s because interest on the debt is a function of BOTH the average interest rate on securities AND the total debt outstanding. Well, the latter is exploding.

Keynes Is the Freddie Krueger of Economics

We’ll add about another $1 trillion to the federal debt before the end of the calendar year, and then likely continue adding about $1 trillion every 100 days or so from there on out.

This was also the worst deficit for the month of August ever—including the blowout spending years of 2020 and 2021 when Congress pushed through all kinds of bloated pork. In fact, at $380 billion, it’s larger than any other monthly deficit of fiscal years 2024 or 2023.

Image

And this isn’t a revenue problem—it’s a spending problem. Despite concerns of a recession, tax revenue has actually held up, so the burgeoning deficit is clearly coming from the other side of the ledger.

In the first 11 months of the current fiscal year, the federal government took in almost as much revenue as in the entire prior fiscal year. If we look at the comparable period (first 11 months of both FY’s) then we see revenues have increased from $4.0 trillion to $4.4 trillion. Spending, however, has increased even faster.

This past August, federal outlays were $687 billion, compared to $194 billion in August 2023 — more than tripling in just one year. Outlays in the comparable period between both years have gone from $5.5 trillion (2023) to $6.3 trillion (2024).

Image

Clearly, the ballooning deficit is a spending problem. And what a problem it is.

Specialists and skeptics were very critical of Treasury’s overly optimistic projections on the current fiscal year’s deficit and, sure enough, we were right. The deficit has already blown past the projection for the fiscal year and—as we’ve already said—there’s still another month to go.

The $1.9-trillion deficit will break the $2-trillion threshold with ease once September is in the books.

And there’s no reason to believe multi-trillion-dollar deficits are going away anytime soon because the runaway spending continues. In fact, mandatory spending and interest on the debt together will exceed government revenue for the foreseeable future. So, literally all discretionary spending will be deficit spending.

The monthly Treasury statement for August bears witness to this sad situation: 55 cents of every dollar the federal government spent last month was borrowed. Spending was more than twice all government receipts.

Image

While the profligate spending out of Washington, DC has certainly exploded over the last four years, the interest on the debt is now also a major contributor to the deficit. The increase in the trend of discretionary spending is now less than the increase in the trend of interest on the debt.

In other words, depending on how you want to measure it, interest on the debt is now the largest contributor to the deficit.

For the fiscal year to date, interest on the debt is the third largest line item in the Treasury’s August statement, behind only the Social Security Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, both of which have increased relative to their pre-2020 projections, but by much less than interest on the debt.

Image

Federal finance is clearly in shambles, but where do we go from here? Are we actually already in the fiscal doom loop? Yes, and it’s complicated.