February 19, 2018

Ban Assault Weaponized Weather Manipulation

 

Share

Give Them The Wolves They Force On Others

*Editor’s Note* – The House of the State of Washington has approved a bill and sent it along to the Senate that would give the Department of Fish and Wildlife authority to transport some of the “too many” wolves in the eastern sector of the state to the western portions.

A bit ironic is the fact that the majority of those House members who voted for this action live in and represent urban areas and those opposed live in rural areas where it is known that wolves will destroy it.

But, perhaps this is a very good thing. It is difficult to figure out how to force wolves to live in city areas, but if there were enough of them it might happen. Consideration might be made of forcing the government to create “green” wolf places scattered strategically throughout each urban setting. Forcing wolves to “coexist” with those who are too stupid to understand the ramifications is exactly the remedy to cure their ignorance. Give them a taste of their own medicine and certainly, in short order, they might be looking at things a bit differently.

“The state House this week showed strong support for redistributing wolves in Washington, except from lawmakers whose districts could be candidates for taking in wolves.

The House voted 85-13 on Tuesday to direct the Department of Fish and Wildlife to study moving wolves from Eastern Washington to Western Washington. The “no” votes, three Democrats and 10 Republicans, were cast by westside legislators whose districts include expansive tracts of wildlife habitat.

Okanogan County Republican Joel Kretz pushed the bill to relieve his district from having a vast majority of the state’s wolves. His alternative proposal, giving wildlife managers more leeway to control the wolf population in four northeast counties, has gone nowhere.”<<<Read More>>>

 

Share

Mental Health and “Gun Violence”

From Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association:

Dear MSSA Friends,
All the talking heads are frothing over the Florida school shooting.  All this rabid attention only inspires copycat acts.
Of course school shootings and mass murder are terrible.  But, let’s ask some intelligent questions about what’s going on.
Many talking heads bring up various suggestions about mental health, from more taxpayer funding, to wider screening, to better record keeping and sharing, to using mental health evaluations to strip people of their civil rights.  So, what’s the deal with mental health and “gun violence”?  (I put “gun violence” in quotes because the issue is really about violence against people, by any method.  One of the largest mass murders in US history was done in a New York City nightclub with a quart of gasoline.)
Well, I have explored the intersection of mental health and gun violence.  I have written about that intersection and posted that Online.  Please review my analysis at:
There are important points in this analysis you need to be able to express to friends, elected officials, and in letters to the editor.
Why do most of these incidents happen in schools?  Well, duhhh!  “Gun free zones.”  I put that in quotes because these places are NEVER gun free.  They are only gun free for the law abiding victims.  But “gun free zones” are low-hanging fruit full of ripe, defenseless victims for a madman planning yet another copycat killing spree.
To cure this societal defect, MSSA proposed the Montana School Safety Act in the last session of the Montana Legislature, House Bill 385.  HB 385 would have allowed trained and qualified school employees to be armed at work, to protect themselves and our precious children and grandchildren.  See the bill copy at:
HB 385 didn’t pass.  Opponents said it’s just too dangerous to have guns in schools.  Leave defense of our children to the professionals, they said.  Oh, but keep the fire extinguishers in the buildings, they said, because the staff of a school with a beginning fire can’t wait for professional firefighters.  Yeah, right.
How bad can it get?  How many children could a madman shoot in the target-rich environment of a school?  Well, I tested that.  Read about and see videos of my test at:
It could be very bad – much worse than the recent shooting in Florida.
So, what’s the solution?  It certainly won’t prevent drunk driving to take cars away from sober people.  And, it won’t inhibit madmen to make it more difficult for law abiding people to purchase or own firearms.  That’s obvious.
One solution is to get rid of gun free zones – all of them.  They’re dangerous places and magnets for violent madmen.  When one of these incidents happens, what’s the first thing people on scene do?  They call for police.  Why call police?  It’s not because of the nifty clothes police wear, and not because of the fancy cars they drive, but because police have guns they can use to shoot the perpetrator.  The victims are calling for guns.  Why shouldn’t the intended victims have guns so they can shoot the perpetrator themselves rather than wait fatal minutes for police to arrive?
It seems that this problem of mass murder needs to be examined through the lens of sociology, rather than of law or psychology.  More gun control laws have not worked anywhere.  Calls for more or better mental health are likely to only obscure important aspects of the problem, and postpone workable solutions.
Enough rant.
Best wishes,
Share

Invasion Of The Tranny’s

 

 

Share

Give Up Second Amendment in Exchange for an “Upgrade” of the First?

You can’t make this stuff up.

I was sent a link to an article at Powerline, where the author made a valiant attempt to inject some semblance of rational discourse into a topic that never experiences anything close to rationality – school shootings.

To prove this point, simply read the comments that follow the article. I’d like to take a moment and address one of them. A commenter writes: “I suggest a trade-off: Conservatives support the deletion of the 2nd amendment in return for an upgraded 1st amendment which restores prayer and Bible reading in the public schools, and makes the graphic depiction of murder on TV, film, the Internet and video games illegal.”

I immediately wondered what world this person must live in. I know where I live and it’s seldom in and of this world but I think my reasoning skills are a tad bit better. Let me explain, even though our existence has driven us to a point where an explanation is actually needed.

This person suggests that “conservatives” support the deletion of the Second Amendment as part of a trade-off. I’m wondering why liberals, who have and will continue to enjoy their Second Amendment right aren’t included in this obvious ignorant attack? I guess I just didn’t know only “conservatives” support the Second Amendment.

Try, if possible, to understand the trade-off. Before I comment further, I hope that it is obvious that this person fails miserably in understanding the First and Second Amendments or even holding any discernment as to the difference between a God-given right, a Government-given privilege, and the freedom to make choices according to your morals and/or ideology.

The commenter suggests an “upgrade” to the First Amendment in exchange for a repeal of the Second Amendment. It is unbelievable, to the unlearned I suppose, that a person views a reduction in their rights as an upgrade. Once upon a time a right, in the context of the Bill of Rights, was constructed with the idea that a person was free to exercise that right while at the same time not infringing on the choices of others in exercising any right or choosing not to. The comment above surely delineates a lost understanding of something so basic.

For those in need, here is the First Amendment as it is written: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The “upgrade” is said to include: “…restores prayer and Bible reading in the public schools, and makes the graphic depiction of murder on TV, film, the Internet and video games illegal.”

For clarification, we the people and We The People, have butchered the First Amendment but not nearly to the extent of the Second. However, people mostly have the right to pray or read the Bible any place and at any time they so CHOOSE. I have yet to find written in the Bible where Yahweh says that prayer must be done openly in a public arena, in a formal and structurally organized way and included in the curriculum of public schools. In other words, because Government dictates that praying and Bible reading are not part of the public school curriculum, any student, for the most part, and while not disturbing others in their quest for an education, can pray or read their Bible if they so CHOOSE. I’ve never understood those that think they are denied their “right” to their established “religion” because prayer and Bible reading are not “REQUIRED.”

As much as what movies, music, video games, Internet, and all is a reflection of the decadent and immoral American society as a whole, last time I checked, a parent has a right to control what their children are allowed to see and listen to. Parents fail miserably in this but is that a good enough reason to pretend that making this crap illegal, in other words destroying another right of a person to CHOOSE, the right answer? Is that why the person called this an “upgrade.” Up is down, down is up…etc.

Supposedly, once we become “of age” we can CHOOSE to see and hear what we wish. As the Scriptures say: Bring up a child in the way in which he/she should go and he/she shall never depart from it. As much as some would desire, it is still quite difficult to control what a person thinks…short of lobotimization.

I would suppose that in this person’s mind, their “upgrade” was some kind of carrot at the end of a stick. It doesn’t work that way. Rights are about CHOICE not about being forced to have to abide by someone’s ideology, including governments’.

The Second Amendment doesn’t force people to pick up a gun and use it. The Second Amendment is about giving any lawful citizen of this country the option to do that if they CHOOSE. If I believe that Government is a serious threat to my existence, as well as my freedom to make choices, anyone mandating to me that the only gun I can own is a single shot .22 caliber rifle, isn’t allowing me full exercise of my right to self defense and/or the threat of tyranny.

What another commenter said was that there would be no First Amendment if the Second Amendment (or the principle on which it was founded) did not exist.

What man-governments have done to the Second Amendment, masked behind comments like, “reasonable controls,” is to continue to limit and restrict the choices of people in how they can defend themselves. Gun Free Zones outlaw freedom of choice. People who get shot and killed in a Gun Free Zone are the responsibility of every government and individual who demands and has been successful in taking away my freedom to choose how and where I can defend myself. Someday, you will have to answer for your totalitarian behavior, but for now, you will have to live with the reality of what you have done. There is blood on your hands.

Sleep well tonight, my pretty!

Share

Vanderhoffism

 

Bódi sátra, “Body Sat Ra”; or, “in the body sat Ra”–”in the body sits god”.
Meat Life; mundo carne: A psycho-synthetic experiential event sequence.
In the body of meat sits a psycho psyche with dingle balls rattling around in its head…

Living in a leftist exceptionalism delusional moral high ground bubble… Pop goes that bubble….

 

GAWBLESFKENMURKA!!!

 

21st Century Facebook Zombie

“No other civilized country on the planet has a wanton mass shooting problem like America’s. And yes, it is absolutely true that ( A) no other country has anywhere near the per capita ownership of guns and virtually unrestricted availability of guns , and (B) the NRA used to be a great organization dedicated to education , training, inclusiveness, and above all responsible gun regulations. The NRA used to support gun control measures. But that was before 1970 . It is patently obvious that the rise in wanton mass shootings in America is hardcoupled to the NRA’s ascension as a political force to be reckoned with after they set aside their mission statement and began the relentless push to indoctrinate America that the 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct and gun ownership is an absolute right über alles. Thus the upward death spiral began, and the NRA is the vertex of the vortex. We all look back fondly on days in our own lifetimes when gun ownership was no big deal and mass shootings didn’t occur. What changed ? The NRA, that’s who . Then along came the internet, right wing talk radio and conservative news fabrication factories . The NRA not only did NOTHING to stop the irresponsible chain reaction of ‘gun rights trumps all’ , the NRA encouraged wholesale openended unrestricted gun proliferation at exactly the time we needed to rein in guns and ramp up responsibility and regulation. Social networking and pathogenic politics were unleashed as carriers of the plague. Somehow the NRA felt they were suddenly threatened by the backlash to the early gun rampages and calls for new rules , so they spend millions on propagandizing and political push , and they buy Congressmen. “ Thou shalt not infringe the right to bear arms “ became the 11th Commandment. The NRA got into the industrial strength brainwashing business. The number of active members in the NRA who are in lockstep with the organization’s mandates is far less than one percent of the American population, but that small percentage includes policy makers who have been corrupted to the cause. Thus the rest of us are held hostage to the NRA ideologic nightmare, whether overtly or secondarily so. And people die…. a wanton mass shooting every 2-3 days now. The rise of the NRA’s radical indoctrination of gun absolution and the rise of mass shootings is not a coincidence. The NRA’s giant circle jerk is both Cause and Effect of mass shootings in America. They punked us. The results speak for themselves. The Grim Reaper is grinning.“—Dewey Vanderhoff

People may as well paint their windshields flat black, get drunk and go for a speed ride. They seem stupid enough…Psychos with jinglebells going off in their heads…

Just remember you’re the ones who wanted the police state…

Share

The Insanity of the Insane

Once again insanity is on full display. Not simply because some child programmed with anger and hatred by a society riddled with anger and hatred, but because those who hold at least some of the responsibility for the anger and hatred cluelessly promote more anger and hatred by attacking the wrong source of destructive behavior.

Our world is insane, incapable of rational thought. You kid yourselves to think otherwise. We are slaves to the Global Power Structure and are trapped helplessly in it. But, we must love it or we would do something about it. Our programmed insanity, brought on entirely by our refusal to seek Yahweh for real answers and real direction, only seeks solutions that will provide for the continuance of our self-chosen immoral and decadent lifestyles.

Not unlike the false issue of AIDS, where we seek a “cure” rather than address the sin that is at the root cause of the affliction, when a person who has been taken over with anger and hatred, much of which is promoted out of Washington by the Media, resorts to violence, real or staged, the ignorant, blinded masses begin screaming for gun control as though it was some kind of cure for the problem. The belief is that if we take away the guns, we can continue to live the disgusting lifestyles we so much are in love with.

But like with everything else, our insane society attacks the wrong thing and seeks the wrong answers. If there is violence, many attack the existence of guns, stating it is the cause of violence. No matter how often you attempt to set them straight with facts, their insanity has such a deep and strong grip they refuse to listen. They love their immorality. They love their decadent lifestyles and will do anything to protect it. This is proven on a daily basis.

This insane society feasts and thrives on violence, anger, and hatred. This insane society is constantly brainwashed with the rhythmic cadence they call “music” that is loaded with filth, sexual abuse, violence and all things of no socially redeeming value, and yet it is always something else that must be attacked as the root of the problem. The same is true for movies. Bombarded with constant images of evil, violence, sex, and drugs and all we can come up with is to attack guns. Our addiction to social media has become a tool to perpetuate the filth, sex, abuse, violence and is the birthing grounds of more anger and hatred. And the best we can come up with is to attack guns.

And yet, when, as a result of the insanity of our society, a mentally deranged, angry and hate-filled child, our very own product of an insane society, picks up a gun and kills a bunch of children in a school setting, all that can be suggested is that we need to do something about guns.

It is not the answer!

Yeshua’s disciples asked Him how they would know when the “Latter Days” were upon them. He told them that things would be as they were in the days of Noah. We are living in the days of Noah, where all that is known are falsehoods, deceptions, filth, decadence, anger, hatred, greed, lust, disrespect, idolatry, murder, violence, sexual abuse, child molestation, and all things that are the product of Satan. Is it enough like the days of Noah for Yahweh to put an end to it?

You are what you eat! This insane society fills up on Satan. It cannot get enough. This insane society is so badly tainted they cannot witness their own insanity. And the best anyone can come up with is that we need to control guns.

What further proof is needed that the world is insane. It is ripe for Yahweh, as in the days of Noah, to put an end to this disgustedness.

Yeshua, COME QUICKLY and save us from our insanity!

Share

Advice to a Professor Wanting a Meet and Great Before Making Wolf Documentary

*Editor’s Note* – With the permission of the author, I redacted some elements of the original email for obvious reasons. Knowing the names of some involved does nothing to alter the message in the advice given. The focus and intent of this publication is a delivery of the important message. 

As a preamble to the content of the written work of Jim Beers, let me set the stage as best I can. A university professor contacted an editor of a Western ranch magazine seeking advice as to whom he should contact before making a movie about wolves. According to the original email, this professor, along with a group of university students, intend to travel to Wyoming and Colorado to “explore the question of whether wolves should be allowed to re-populate wild areas in Colorado.”

In asking who they should talk with before making the film, James Beers offered the below advice. This advice has already been told to me that it should be “required reading for every Wildlife Management Student” as well as hunters.

Dear Professor XXXXXXXX,

I see that you are from a Jesuit school named after the great Jesuit _______________.  I further see that your Animal Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation program is ten years old and that you are evidently quite honestly enough concerned about this modern Gordian Knot of American wildlife that you asked [Western ranch magazine’s editor] for both her advice and perhaps her presence to be interviewed by you and your students.

You cannot know how refreshing and hopeful your simple request may be to millions of Rural Americans either affected by or familiar with the wolf phenomenon of the past 40 years.

First of all a word about who is writing this.  I am a retired US Fish and Wildlife Service employee.  I can send you a resume but the simple ‘Bio” I put after most things I write is posted after these remarks.  I am a graduate of a Benedictine High School where, 60 years ago, the excellent teacher/monks communicated their misgivings that I still hold about Jesuit schools, although my son is a graduate of Wheeling (WV) Jesuit University.  I spent my first year of college in the late 1950’s at DePaul University where I learned a good deal about philosophy.  Today, I have a low opinion of DePaul that has, like Georgetown, become a hotbed of animal rights jurisprudence.

Why, you must be thinking, would someone like me be enthusiastic about a professor and some students from a modest Eastern (where the federal and state bureaucracies have not taken up the rural cudgel of wolves with all its hidden agendas as they have done in the rest of the Nation, HHHMMM) College are taking a summer field trip in 2018 to investigate, study and integrate the American wolf experience into their lives and the school’s academic life.  Quite simply, you bring “fresh eyes”, not to a biological issue but to a political/social issue that is even more basically an ethics issue.  You are like St. Peter Canisius journeying from Holland to Germany during the Reformation and after years of work there generating a Catechism that went on to evolve over 200 editions in less than 40 years.  Would that you and your students bring some resolution to this issue that so many from those affected and those wise enough to see the impacts of wolves on so many things have been unable to resolve.

My advice –

Everyone you meet or speak to, with any bona fides about wolves, will have a basic belief that is set stone.

You will meet “hunters” and “ranchers” that will appear to be pro-wolf but who upon investigation will be discovered to be politically active progressive reformers that support all manner of transformative political ends with the same sort of “think of me as neutral” approach.

You will meet both state and federal politicians that will be as duplicitous about where they “stand” and what they “believe” as they would if you were asking them about the latest budget battles or a proposed bill to place “All Waters of the USA” under federal authority.  Investigation will reveal the “golden egg” from the “Goose” of wolves to be urban votes (assuring re-elections) and lots of money from environmental/animal rights’ coffers to politicians that meet the agendas and daydreams of those unaffected by or familiar with the effects or truth about what they are creating.

You will discover that the vast majority of academics will be as enthusiastic about wolves as they are about tenure and grants that generate graduate student stipends.  Careful reading of the academic studies and pronouncements of the past 50 years about wolves and their impacts will show them to be reflections of the bureaucratic need to justify regulations, court case and Budget Requests.  They are the result of those bureaucratic needs, paid for by government funding, rather than the assumed other way around, “science” guiding concerned bureaucrats in search of wise decisions on behalf of all Americans.

You will meet many deceitful federal and state bureaucrats: I say this as a whistle-blower and “reforming” bureaucrat.  They have agendas these days as diverse as covering up autopsies of bodies taken away quickly without investigations, and spinning nonsense about a wolf attack being due to a “deformed wolf brain”, or the Minnesota moose population (so decreased by wolf predation) disappearance and moose hunting being closed (probably forever) as due to climate change and deer (coexisted for centuries) brain worm; to concern for kid’s college bills and paying for daughters weddings.  I cannot overstress the very real adverse consequences (as bad as using a forbidden word or of being accused of sexual harassment) to any government employee not being completely “in” on wolves.  Wolves allow them to decrease land values to enable government purchase or easement.  Wolves establish precedents for eroding the Constitutional concept of animals as private property thereby enabling agendas from prohibiting killing and eating them to making products of all kinds or even keeping them as watchdogs or pets.  All of these things in this short and incomplete list are grist for more government land control and more people control but most importantly more bureaucracy with higher salaries, higher retirement pensions and increased status both professionally and within various communities.

Lastly, you will meet very radical (the correct word) ideologues that work for and volunteer with a plethora of “environmental” and animal rights NGO’s (non-government organizations).  I have a long lifetime of experience with such groups and their treachery (again the right word).  I am reminded at this point of what my Irish grandmother that raised me during WWII told me while Dad was driving a tank in Africa and Europe; “Jim, if you can’t say anything good about someone; don’t say anything at all.”

Think of what you are about to do as interviewing people going to and from a Planned Parenthood Clinic and interviewing people in a Church parking lot after a 9:30 Mass on Sunday morning about abortion.  Others without the basic belief and experience are a “general public” whose thoughts and ideas are little more than indications of how any future vote is likely to come out.  So what to do?

I would hope you see your opportunity to collect your data, impressions, facts and references as you travel about and meet who you will.  Then go back to Buffalo, sort it out, and discuss it.

Then assign some students to investigate and document the abundance of wolf history from the Greeks and Romans to modern day Siberia, Russia and Kazakhstan. Look into why wolfhounds were invented and what they did.  Look into metal dog collars and spike dog collars so popular in Medieval England and why walkers always walked between villages with dogs and why Dalmatians often accompanied carriages.  Read about America settlers from Colonial times in isolated cabins to the spread of smallpox in Plains’ Indian Villages to the problem of rabid wolves invading US Forts.  Read Will Graves’ Wolves of Russia especially about a Russian sawyer bitten by a rabid wolf WHILE RUNNING THE CHAINSAW.

Look into the 30 + diseases and infections carried and spread by wolves.  Be honest about wolves frequenting farmyards at night and tapeworms and be honest about the danger wolves present if anthrax or smallpox (both in current bio-weapon inventories) is released or if foot-and-mouth or Mad Cow Disease outbreaks occur.  Note the absence of any veterinarians willing to say anything or to be quoted as someone says, “what does he know, he’s not a veterinarian!”

Draw a picture of the “costs” (government, social, and business-wise) of introducing and protecting wolves from the millions stolen by federal bureaucrats from state fish and wildlife funds to introduce them back into Yellowstone to all the salaries, admin support, equipment, office space, grants, legal support, enforcement support, public “information”, meetings, travel, etc. spent and being spent at the state and federal level to concoct and enlarge the wolf debacle for 40+ years.  Take a shot at the costs that lie ahead.  Debate how we are to live without control of wolf numbers and how we will do it when things get intolerable

Calculate the costs to rural communities losing animal husbandry, hunting, camping and associated funds from guiding and locker plants to taxidermy and businesses from hardware to restaurants and motels as a result of wolves.  Do not be bamboozled about “eco-tourism” and “biking/hiking” et al.  That tourism is a chimera and the first time a wolf runs down a biker (like a dog chasing a bicyclist or a wolf engaging some lady with a leashed dog, etc) or kills a kid in a backyard all that euphoria will disappear in a New York second.

Document the truth about wolves and “species”.  If a wolf breeds with and has viable offspring with coyotes, all dogs and dingoes (given the opportunity) is it really a “species”?  How absolutely crazy is it to (as is happening as I write in NE South Dakota and more often all the time everywhere) to give government the power to “rescue” free-roaming dogs that disturb the neighborhood; allow legitimate and necessary managed control of coyotes; and simultaneously the power to “protect” a wolf when all three or many of the millions of genetic combinations their interbreeding begets look as much alike as clones?  How is it even conceivable, much less occurring, that a NE South Dakota coyote hunter may go to prison, pay a large fine, lose the right to vote and lose the right ever own a gun again BASED ON SOME DNA ANALYSIS CONDUCTED POSSIBLY BY SOME IDEOLOGUE (environmental/animal rights) ANALYST based on sketchy parameters and definitions?

Then compare things about where wolves are now, where they can be expected to be (don’t be hoodwinked about “pack animals” avoiding suburban/urban areas: undiscouraged wolves will look for food at night in a Denver suburb as quick as they will a Montana farmyard or a dumpster behind the pizza joint in the shopping center) and just how any likelihood of wolves killing a kid by a bus stop or some grandma walking out to the rural mailbox is worth whatever nonsense being peddled like “willows along the stream” (if that was important, simply allowing hunters to reduce grazing game populations would have been done but it wasn’t; so ask yourself, why?)

If you get this far, take this from the biological/political/hidden agenda realm to an Ethical perspective.  This is the tough part since our modern secular society has demolished most common moral understanding and replaced it with a “whatever floats your boat” morality: ethics is today a relative matter where your right is my wrong and vice versa but given the University approach to relativism, you might find a way to apply a common standard as to what is ethical about aspects of wolves et al.  Nevertheless, attempt to form a basis (like Peter Canisius’ did with his Catechism(?) for dialogue and debate that avoids harm and leads a way out of a worsening  situation for millions of Americans and American Wildlife.  You and this are needed more than you can imagine.

When you are in Yellowstone you might call on Mr. Bill Hoppe, a third generation Montanan from that area.  He lives near Gardiner at the N end of the Park.  I suspect his views would be a welcome relief if you have been subjected to US Park Service bureaucrats by that time.

Good Luck.

Jim Beers

12 February 2018

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He is an advocate for a Rural American Renewal that benefits rather than ruins the culture, economy and surroundings of rural American communities and families. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Remington Bankruptcy

It’s common knowledge now that Remington Outdoor Company, the maker of Remington firearms, is seeking protection from creditors for the company’s near one billion dollar debt. Much speculation is going on and some of it is nonsense.

For example, Outdoor Hub is trying to tell their readers that the reason Remington is going under is that when Trump took office, everybody stopped buying guns because he was not a threat to take them away: “Like most in the gun industry, Remington’s sales have dipped because there is no longer fear that guns will become more heavily regulated by U.S. government. President Trump has made it abundantly clear that he never plans on impeding “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

What nonsense! Remington’s billion-dollar debt didn’t happen because some Leftist wants to claim gun sales have stopped because Obama left office, Trump is in and we’re all gonna die. It takes a bit longer than one year to amass a billion dollars in debt no matter how big you are.

Besides, according to Ammoland, the number of background checks for January of this year was identical to that of January the previous year when Obama was in office. Perhaps the “panic buying” of guns will abate somewhat, but certainly, only a fool would think this is the cause of Remington’s debt.

Guns have been made and sold in America for a very long time. Politics have been around even longer. Presidents have come and presidents have gone, some having more influence than others on the Second Amendment and the effect of gun manufacturing and sales in this country. No one president’s position on the Second Amendment is going to force a major gun manufacturer to go broke. That can only happen due to very poor management – whether that management is due to stupidity or is a planned event. More on that in a bit.

Jim Shepherd explains Remington’s debt and proposed reshuffling of finances here.

A day earlier Shepherd wrote the following interesting tidbit: “It’s no secret that Remington has been hamstrung by a mountain of debt – $950 million dollars worth, courtesy of the leveraging expertise of Cerberus Capital Management -and said management’s abandonment of the company after the Sandy Hook murders in 2012.”

Are we seeing the Global Power Structure (GPS) at work here?

If the GPS cannot, at least at this moment in time, waltz right in and disarm every man on this earth, there are other ways to do. Many of these incremental events have been spoken of and written about for a long time. But what of this sort of thing? Has the GPS so heavily infiltrated every aspect of our lives that, one, they could orchestrate a Sandy Hook event in order to manipulate public perceptions about guns, and two, do they also control the Financial Industry and Remington Arms so well that they can create the bankruptcy of a major gun manufacturing company forcing them out of business? You can believe what you will about whether or not this is who was and is behind any of this, but I happen to know the GPS wields enough power to do a lot of things and pulling this off would be no big deal. What might become complicated (to me anyway) is how they would do it in order to not feel the effects of lost debt.

However, when you consider how they pulled off the “too big to fail” heist of the American Taxpayer, citizen serf, something as tiny as Remington Outdoor Company would be a sinch.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

 

 

 

Share

Maine Bobcat: The Only Wild Predator in the East That “Regularly” Kills Deer?

I was reading an article this morning from Mount Desert Island, Maine about how the presence of bobcats helps to control the deer population on the island. Puzzling was this comment: “This interesting member of the cat family is our only wild predator in the east that regularly kills deer.” 

Like with any words in a written document and no author to explain, we are often left with guessing what certain words were intended to mean. Such is the case here.

First, is the author intending to refer to “our only” as meaning the bobcat is Mount Desert Island’s only large wild predator? Second, we are uncertain whether the author’s reference to “in the east” means in eastern Mount Desert Island, eastern Maine or the eastern United States. Third, what is meant when the author says “regularly kills deer?”

Guessing the precise definition really doesn’t matter in the accuracy of the claim. Either way you look at this, the statement is incomplete, at best, and also misleading, whether intended to be that way or not.

I would have serious doubts that Mount Desert Island has only bobcats as a large predator. As common as coyotes are in Maine now, it is almost certain they can be found there.

There are several “wild predators” in the east of Maine or in the east, that regularly (that’s a value-weighted perspective so this is my perspective) kills deer, although many refuse to acknowledge and understand the fact.

Excluding man, black bears, coyotes/coyote-wolf hybrids, bobcats, and Canada lynx regularly kill deer in Maine. Black bears regularly kill deer in Maine. This happens most often during the springtime when doe deer are fawning. Bears learn where deer go to fawn, as do all other predators. However, we must also remember that when any predator gets hungry enough they will take up doing things they might not normally do when food is plentiful. Black bears, under the right conditions, have been known to “ambush” a deer, sometimes taking one deer out of a traveling family of deer.

Maine’s coyotes, which we now have learned are actually a cross-breed mix of assorted coyotes, wolves, and domestic dogs, kill deer sometimes at rates that leave us astonished. For ease of writing, I’ll just call them coyotes.

Coyotes and bears both can smell a fawn soon after it has been born. They often move in and take the fawn while it is basically helpless. In winter, coyotes regularly visit winter deer yards. When conditions are right, a winter deer yard can take on the appearance of a bloody battlefield.

I once spoke with a Maine Warden who told me that one particularly “harsh” winter, while conducting aerial fly-overs, several areas were shockingly awash in blood on the white snows. His comment was he had never seen anything like it before.

When coyotes move into deer wintering areas, often they hamstring the pregnant does and, while still alive, eat through the vaginal canal of the deer and extract the unborn fetus. Evidently, this is a bit of a delicacy for the wild dogs.

Video exists of coyotes taking down adult, healthy deer. Partly because of genetic exchanges, these coyotes have learned to hunt in packs and, while perhaps not the method of choice, have proven they can take down a fully grown male deer.

The same is true for bobcats. The bobcat has a different method of killing a deer, but lethal nonetheless. Once again, photos and video readily show a bobcat latching onto an adult deer and persisting until the prey is killed.

The Canada lynx has been known to kill deer as well and shouldn’t be discounted as a threat at certain times to the deer.

Maine has several large predators and those predators will kill deer…regularly. Depending upon the conditions, a large predator may or may not kill deer. Depending on the conditions, a large predator may or may not attack a man. Nothing within a wild ecosystem is all that predictable. There are so many instances that are driven by conditions at present.

One thing is for certain. The bobcat is NOT the only wild predator that kills deer regularly.

Share