The Cost Of Unarmed Citizens

On Saturday, The American Thinker posted an article about some of the events in Israel on October 7.

The article notes:

On October 7, the day Hamas attacked Israel, Inbal Rabin-Lieberman, a 25-year-old security coordinator at the Kibbutz Nir Am settlement located near the Gaza Strip, saved lives because she had a gun.  After the kibbutz came under attack, Inbal hurriedly opened the armory and distributed guns to the twelve-member security team.

She caught the Hamas murderers unawares because they were not expecting to meet armed resistance.  Lieberman killed five terrorists while the others gunned down twenty-five before the Israeli Defense Force arrived.  Because of her actions, Nir-Am was the only settlement bordering the Gaza Strip that did not suffer Israeli casualties during Hama’s attack.

The number of Israelis killed in the terrorist attack is over 1,400.  How many of those deaths could have been averted had more Israelis owned guns? Israel has draconian gun-control laws, worse than those in New York City.  Only three percent (3%) of Israeli citizens own guns (compared to about thirty-two percent (32%) of U.S. citizens). 

The NY Daily News reports that less than one percent (about 0.5%) of New York City residents have legal handguns.  Jews comprise approximately nine percent (9%) of New York City’s population, the largest Jewish community in the world outside of Israel. 

An attack on America similar to what happened in Israel should be unthinkable, but is it? We have no idea how many terrorists have come through our porous border and what their intentions are. It would be a good idea at this point to have all Americans trained in how to use weapons and having weapons in their homes. Obviously there are some restrictions on that–mentally ill, people convicted of violent offenses, etc., but we need to have an instant, well-trained militia that can be called into action in case of an armed terrorist attack.

Who Is In And Who Is Out At The White House Briefing Room

On December 17th, the new White House briefing room seating chart was unveiled. A website called Deadline posted the details. If this is the most transparent administration in history, they sure are transparent about removing press that does not follow the mainstream media narrative from the room.

The article reports:

On Friday, the White House Correspondents Association unveiled its new seating chart for the space, with such outlets as The Grio, The Washington Blade, local station groups and business networks are getting assigned seats. Outlets like One America News Network, BuzzFeed and The New York Daily News no longer have assigned seats compared to the last revision in 2017.

The changes will take effect as of Jan. 3.

In a letter to members, WHCA President Steve Portnoy wrote that criteria for seating assignments included long-standing service on the beat, “ensuring that the seats are dependably filled, as assigned” and “seeing to it that the briefing room reflects the country it covers.”

…“To enhance diversity in the briefing room, assignments have been given to organizations that target Black, Hispanic and LGBTQ audiences, as well as readership and viewership that lies across the ideological spectrum,” wrote Portnoy, White House correspondent for CBS News Radio. “The WHCA has also for the first time granted seat assignments to local television station groups, which reach viewers in markets across America.  Additionally, business networks that have covered the White House for years have finally been granted spots on our chart.”

The most visible seats are, obviously, in the first row, and those assignments have not changed: NBC News, FOX News, CBS News, AP, ABC News, Reuters and CNN. Nor has the second row: The Wall Street Journal, CBS News Radio, Bloomberg, NPR, The Washington Post, The New York Times and USA Today.

The organizations new to the seating chart from 2017: Telemundo, CNBC, The Grio, Fox Business, Nexstar, Newsy, Gray TV, EWTN, Cheddar, Hearst, Spectrum, Newsweek, The Daily Caller and The Washington Blade. All are sharing seats.

I wonder when the idea of diversity will actually include diversity of opinion.