Previous Post
Next Post

The San Bernadino killers

“The mysterious pal of Syed Rizwan Farook who bought the rifles used in last week’s deadly terror attack in Southern California has told authorities Farook aborted an earlier attack, Fox News has learned.” As of writing, there are no details on the unrealized attack. “Authorities had previously nid that Farook and Malik were planning a follow-up attack after the San Bernardino assault when they were killed in a gun battle with local authorities last week. However, they have been unable to identify what the target of that attack would have been.” What is clear . . .

Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are no longer confining their attacks to symbolic targets like the World Trade Center, Fort Hood and the Texas cartoon contest. While those sorts of propaganda-worthy targets are still in the cards, “lone wolf” killers are now looking for simple targets of opportunity. In other words, anywhere where groups of people gather.

If that isn’t enough to make you wary, a reliable source tells us that the number of Mexicans or Latin Americans crossing our southern border illegally has fallen while the number of other foreign nationals making the same journey – specifically Somalis and people of Middle Eastern origin – has increased. Also of note: the Texas DPS has testified that they’ve apprehended multiple people on the terrorist watch list entering the country illegally on the Texas border.

All of which means it’s even more important for Americans to arm up and be hyper-vigilant in crowds. (As if you didn’t know. As if that isn’t happening.) I highly recommend putting at least two tourniquets, a trunk gun and a cheap cell phone in your vehicle. Meanwhile, I’m thinking that open carry will become more socially acceptable as San Bernardino-style attacks become more common. In any case, keep your powder dry.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. This “mysterious pal” needs to be prosecuted under the full extent of the law for aiding and abetting.

  2. Round ’em up, ship ’em out and shut it down. “Ourselves and our posterity” does not leave room for interpretation.

        • Very, very, slippery slope, my friend. I am a staunch constitutionalist and I do not subscribe to the liberal/progressive addition of “Separation of Church and State.” However, to treat differently a segment of the population on a religious basis (much less expelling them) is an indisputable violation of the establishment clause. If the 2nd Amendment matters, so does the 1st.

        • So ignoring the existing law from 1891 that establishes a ban on any religions that subscribe to polygamy from being practiced in the United States

          And ignoring the fact that President Carter banned all Iranians from entry into the United States during the hostage crisis

          And also ignoring the writings of the founders on such matters….

          How many American lives are you willing to sacrifice so Muslims can enjoy religious freedom?

        • @Mack Bolan
          Yes, he banned *Iranians*, not *Catholics* or *Muslims*. One is a nationality, one is a religion.

          I wouldn’t be completely opposed to an immigration ban on certain countries (Syria, Pakistan, etc), but even then there are easy work around.

          Lets be careful to not be guilty of the same knee-jerk “MAKE THE GOVERNMENT BAN EVERYTHING” mentality that our less-rational Statist brethren.

          It is worth noting that immigration is NOT protected by the Constitution – it *is* Constitutional to block any immigrants for any reason, including religion. I’m just throwing that out there because people forget the U.S. Constitution only applies to U.S. Citizens, thought the principles it contains are mostly basic human rights.

          • Good points. I’d like to draw your attention to the part of the post revealing that potential terrorists are coming across our porous southern border without any government vetting (obvs.).

        • Polygamy is intrinsically a behavior, not a belief system, as is Islam. Not the same thing.

          Iranian nationals were foreigners who had no inherent right to be in the U.S., as U.S. citizens who are muslim do. Not the same thing.

          Founders’ writings are interesting, but conflicting, and not all Founders were Framers. The Framers had their opportunity to convert their or anyone else’s writings or musings into constitutional text and imbue it with the force of law. Banishing citizens wasn’t ratified.

          Such writings can inform us of their rationale where the Constitution’s text or intent is ambiguous, but they cannot substitute outright for that text. Likewise, we cannot substitute the Constitution they wrote, for the one they may have suggested.

          The overarching principle here is that regardless of how simple, satisfying or seductive a proposed “just this one time” end run around the Constitution might be, the reality is that doing so weakens the nation’s framework and strengthens the next tyrant.

        • And ignoring the fact that President Carter banned all Iranians from entry into the United States during the hostage crisis

          He didn’t ban them because they were muslims–or he would have banned a lot more than just Iranians–but because they were Iranians.

        • @ RF

          Point taken. Shut it down, Round ’em up and Ship ’em out is definitely the more practical order.

        • @ Johnathan and Steve

          OK I’ll ignore that the guiding principal for the Federal Government was for the protection and advancement of its people, along with the preamble, which again states Ourselves and Our Posterity. Its the only possible way I can arrive your position.

          What number of American lives are you willing to sacrifice for Islamic Religious Freedom? Throw out a number.

        • @ Ethan

          99% of Iranians are Muslims…so yes Carter did effectively ban Islam.

          Time to take that logic 101 refresher course. All ducks are birds. Not all birds are ducks. Even if almost all Iranians are Muslim, not all Muslims are Iranian.

        • Islam is a religion.
          So is communism.

          They are also both political systems designed to control a submissive population and eliminate anyone who disagrees with their belief system.

          Some religions fly in the face of everything American. Should they really be tolerated in America?

          I’m asking.

        • Mr. Bolan, this afternoon I had the great honor of speaking to a Muslim man who received asylum and is now living in Texas. He does this because, after saving the life of a friend of mine in Afghanistan, he was relentlessly attacked, his entire village terrorized, and his family members killed. He understands the value and sacrifice required of freedom. He has bled and sacrificed for America.
          Although I will fight to the death for your right to speak your mind, I find your ideas detestable and completely unAmerican. You ask for a number. If I had to put a number on how many Americans with your attitude have to die to protect a new American who who is a Muslim like my honored friend, I say all of you.

        • @JWT

          You hold up one man as a model Muslim when there are millions who will slit your throat if given half a chance? You are ignorant for focusing on the micro, when the macro is the issue. You are ignorant for ignoring history. You are ignorant of the fact that your state is being overrun by immigrants, cartels and terrorists who hate this country and don’t give a damn about liberty or the concept of my nation. That every immigrant you defend, robs an American of his prosperity, strips him of his freedom, and may ultimately cost him his life.

          Unlike you I don’t want any Americans killed. I also don’t want to see Muslims killed, nor Latinos, Nor Somalis. I am simply advocating that they be removed before there is more slaughter of innocents. Of course it’s too late for the 3000+ Americans killed by Muslims on American soil during the last 15 years or the countless others killed by illegals from elsewhere. Pay no attention to the thousands of Americas daughters who have been raped and terrorized by these same people. Yours is a twisted patriotism to barter the lives and virtue of so many of your countrymen.

        • Do you even 1’st Amendment or civil liberty? Why not throw out all the lefties, the snarkers, the Wiccans, fans of the Denver Broncos, guitarists…?

    • Correct me if I’m wrong, but there have been maybe 20 terrorists that have attacked on U.S. soil in the past 15 years, out of 3 million or so Muslims? I’d far rather live in a neighborhood of American Muslims than most of the Democrat controlled inner cities.

      • But it’s safer to just ban something out of fear that it could be used to harm people. After all, isn’t that why we so strongly support a total ban on civilian firearms?

        • The sad truth is that many here just pay lip service to the constitution. I wish they would admit they just like guns and don’t care about anyone’s rights but their own. You can not advocate for deporting American citizens on the grounds of their religion and at the same time claim to support the constitution.

        • “I wish they would admit they just like guns and don’t care about anyone’s rights but their own. “

          This is made very clear every time Open Carry comes up and out of the woodwork people openly denounce a method of carry.

          I mention it frequently because I think it is important, but it reminds me of the story (last year, I think) where the guy was going door-to-door passing out pamphlets and informing folks in a neighborhood that an Open Carry rally was scheduled for nearby in a week or so. He had an OC’d handgun, in a holster, on his hip.

          An astounding number of commenters on the story here on this site were of some variety of “some guy knocks on MY door with a gun on hip, I don’t care if it’s holstered, I’m blasting him.”

          There is a disconnect in the fundamental meaning of the word “Freedom;” too many people think it means “making the other guy stop doing something I don’t like.”

          Sometimes it’s irritating, like anti-OC commenters on a blog. Sometimes it’s outright dangerous and inhuman when individuals, through no actions of their own, are painted with a broad brush of condemnation due to race | religion | nationality | sex | hair length…whatever.

          Using “Group Identity” to pigeon-hole people for purposes of “control” is the realm of the Progressives. I’d hope liberty minded folks would be better than that.

        • The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is narrow minded to think only our own government can be tyrannical. Foreign cultures, religions and ideologies are equal in their ability to oppress American liberty.

      • Chyort, C.S., you’re right. And that’s versus how many just random mob attacks, gangland shootings, school massacres, and people killed in stickups? I’d rather have you and these Muslims for neighbors than the people here who rabidly scream about their second amendment, but won’t hear a word for Open Carry, and they’ll call for wholesale detention and deportation of all people professing Islamic faith. You and people like you who respect your neighbors and don’t shout down rights when you dislike something are the real Americans.

  3. “The mysterious pal of Syed Rizwan Farook who bought the rifles used in last week’s deadly terror attack in Southern California has told authorities Farook aborted an earlier attack…”

    …and he’s telling authorities this NOW?

      • Yea, and I don’t get this. So the eff what? He was the owner of the rifles, this was a straw purchase to enable a massacre of innocent lives in the name of jihad. This man is a terrorist himself, he had to know, if he didn’t he should have.

        Of course he should have notified authorities, but what does he do? Goes out and buys guns for the musloid nutjobs?

        This man is a terrorist and needs the death penalty, who cares if he checked himself into a hospital? Check him out.

        Where is the common sense?

    • I keep scouring the news for the “third terrorist” that supposedly fled the gun battle, but no mention…which make me incredibly suspicious! What makes it even worse, is that the media, doesn’t actually seem to be following up on it at all, which is down right conspiracy material.

      • According to the press release ATF distributed to media outlets prior to the attack, there was supposed to be three attackers. But the third guy chickened out, and/or reckoned he could pull a Snowden and become a hero, so he bolted without letting his handlers know. By the time the ATF was made aware, hip shooting media had already gone full hype. And now, it’s complete omerta, since none of them wants to be left out of the “heads up” group before future attacks.

    • The FBI was too busy running its entrapment schemes, where it pushes and threatens people into engaging in fake terrorist plots, to investigate real plots.

      But at least now that we have the patriot act and the NSA surveillance program, we’re safe from terror attacks.

    • I use to regularly carry a CM9 due to its ease of conceal-ability. However, in the last several years I have transitioned to a double-stack with at least one spare magazine.

  4. Carry everywhere. I will remain concealed, for the tactical advantage. End the threat while they are distracted by the open carriers.

    Ad hominem remarks removed.

    • Yeah I’d have to say that, while open carry could possibly cause a terrorist to pull back and switch to another target instead, I’m not willing to risk being notified of the attack by being the first person shot due to being obviously armed. I’d rather carry concealed and hope that I have the ability to surprise the terrorist with a well-placed shot. Now, if somebody else wants to potentially scare terrorists away and/or make themselves an obvious first target by open carrying, I’m all for it. Ideally they aren’t next to me.

      • 100% agreed. Tactically, conceal carry is king. Part of me, however, still wants to open carry to send that visual message that many of us are willing to fight back. But, probably wont work anyway, for the leftist media would twist the message.

  5. Is it possible that the San Bernadino shooters and the Bonnie and Clyde jihadists were two separate teams? Witness at the Christmas party said definitively that the shooters were 3 muscular men of Caucasian race.

    • Well the guy is light skinned enough to be mistaken for tan. And the woman could also pass for a man if she was wearing a tac vest with pockets/gear, pants, and a facemask. And in the confusion it’s possible that two people were mistaken for 3.
      Additionally, eye witness accounts are notoriously unreliable. Sometimes they’re spot on, and sometimes they’re so wildly inaccurate you’re better off counting footprints after the fact.

    • Two people in ski masks and bulky tactical clothing enter the room and start shooting – how accurate are the witness reports going to be? They didn’t even recognize a co-worker and his recently baby-showered wife!

      Recent reports say this was a “Training session”, not a holiday party.

    • A too full of mostly leftist leaning sheep who have never faced a bad guy before, they probably thought they were giants shooting artillery from the a$$es..

  6. Didn’t Timothy McVey have a suspected Haji grassy knoll co-conspirator that they stopped looking for when they arrested Terry Nichols.

  7. “All of which means it’s even more important for Americans to arm up and be hyper-vigilant in crowds.”

    FIFY. An office party like the one in Berdoo doesn’t really qualify as a crowd, but it was a killing field anyway. While terrorists want a big body count, there’s no reason why a small body count would not slake their blood lust for a day or two.

    Tool up and stay alert.

  8. Laugh at me if you want, but I have to ask….

    What’s the cheap cell phone (as opposed to your normal everyday “smart” cellphone) for?

    • Dead battery? Lost it/broke it while running away from something? Stops working for some reason?

    • Any modern mobile phone works, even without paid-for service, to call 911. That’s the phone you hand to someone else to call the police while you are busy moving and shooting. Attention is a finite thing. Or, it’s for when you lost or broke yours. There’s always a phone stuck in my gun bag.

  9. So, pump action 12 gauge or el cheapo assault rifle for a trunk gun? I am heavily leaning toward 12 gauge given my urban/suburban environment.

    • Folding stock, pump action, short-ish barrel 12ga with a tube full of shells (if legal) and a side saddle shell carrier loaded with buck and slugs.

    • I voted cheap AR-15. You can get the pieces for a PSA for approximately $500. Mount a Vortex Spitfire 1x and you don’t have to worry about batteries or turning it on, just grab and go.. Toss it into one of those nomdiscript rifle bags with three magazines and you’re all set.

      Granted, a Mossberg is a heck of a lot cheaper but the benefit of an AR is capacity and time not spent loading a shell at a time.

      • If you are going for cheep, why throw on a $200+ optic? I run a Bushnell TRS-25 on several different rifles on a high riser mount so that it is bottom 3rd co-witnessed with my flip-up irons. Never had a problem with it losing zero. You do have to turn it off when not in use to preserve the battery, but seriously, how long does it take to flip the dial to turn it on? Like 1 second? Best part is, it only costs $70 (+ $10 for the riser mount) and can sometimes be found for less. As to accuracy, it is billed as 3 MOA. Just last month I was shooting my AR, standing, off-hand, at 100 yards shooting green tips. I was putting 2 out of 5 rounds in the 2 inch center of the target circle and the rest in the larger 10 inch circle. That is more than accurate enough for defensive purposes, or even offensive for that matter.

        • You’re right, the Spitfire is a bit expensive. I picked one up from PSA for $150 and even I’ll admit that there are plenty of good quality low prices options out there. I went to the Spitfire because of a recent trip to the range with an EOTech 512.

          The rifle had been in my safe for several month and still had the original batteries install after less than a year and only minimal use. When I got to the range I turned on the optic and handed it to a buddy to look over. In the time that I turned it on and handed over the batteries died. Thankfully, I keep a spare set so I was up and running again in minutes. But that was a ‘lightbulb’ moment. What if I had pulled the rifle from the safe late one night in response to something going bump?

          Edit: Granted, like you I had a flip-up rear sight so I wouldn’t have been down an out. However, it was still a lesson learned.

      • If I’m going with an Ar it will simply be irons. I actually already have a beater Ar like that. I was planning on keeping it till the election and then making a profit but I might just make it a trunk gun.

    • Vhyrus,

      It all depends on what range you expect to engage an attacker. A shotgun isn’t much good beyond 20 yards … which is why so many people refer to them as “trench guns”. (Beyond 20 yards, a buckshot pattern is already something like 2 feet wide and putting slugs on target is, shall we say, “challenging”.)

      I really like an AR-15 with a 16 inch barrel and simple iron sights for engagements between 0 and 100 yards. They are short, light, accurate, and hold 30 rounds in a standard magazine. Grab two spare magazines and you are ready for just about anything. And “stopping power”, with optimum ammunition, is outstanding out to 50 yards.

      Alternatively, I like a lever-action rifle with 16 inch barrel in .44 Magnum shooting 225 grain Hornady LeveRevolution ammunition. That is one big, heavy, nasty bullet exiting the barrel at something like 1700 fps. That WILL put an adult down with authority out to 100 yards.

      • Love those lever guns. Nothing says “Don’t mess with the US of A” like open carrying a .44 lever carbine, to go with the matching 629 on the hip,…

        Does Remington (their site is down…..) still sell the “police versions” of their 7600 pump rifles? Those things are pretty much purpose built to be ‘trunk” guns. Sweet and simple shooters, works pretty much exactly like the 870 for those who can’t decide on rifle or shotgun, in both common “tactical” calibers, .223 and .308. No .22mm, though 🙁

    • I have started carrying a 12 gauge pump as my truck gun. I think I paid $175 for it at a pawn shop? It’s a good truck gun.

  10. Navy Yard? I think you mean Ft. Hood. Where as wasn’t the Navy Yard guy the one who was genuinely crazy, as in full blown auditory hallucinations?

  11. Even Fox News flubbed the description of the AR-15s used, calling them “assault rifles” in the article. I don’t bow down to any media outlet, but I wish the news folks at Fox, who are more often than not in the Second Amendment’s corner, would work harder to get firearm terminology correct.

    • There might be some gun-rights proponents at Fox, but by and large the network is a cheerleader for big government statism, which requires an unarmed populace. They just prefer a different form of statism than the MSNBC folks.

  12. Who couldn’t see THIS coming? Millions and millions of spanglish couldn’t be turned away. Situational awareness is called for at the very least…

  13. To the point about open carry becoming more socially acceptable. I regularly open-carry a double-stack in a leather thumb-break holster. I’m sure someone has noticed and felt uncomfortable, but I have yet to receive any direct negative responses. I’ve even had several cops strike up a conversation with me (which usually involves the words, “yeah, our Glock/M&P/SIG/Beretta duty guns suck and wish we could carry a Glock/M&P/SIG/Beretta instead).

  14. Three shooters was confirmed as tall white athletic men. The woman was 5 feet tall. She was not anecessarily initial shooter. There is either more T’s on the loose or its possible this was a false flag. I work just a couple miles from where this started and two blocks from where it “ended”

  15. Again with the trunk gun. There might be legit reasons to haul a rifle around in your trunk, but stopping a terror attack with it is pure fantasy. What are the odds that you’re going to be somewhere that gets attacked, manage to escape and evade the killers to make it out to your car, retrieve your rifle or shotgun, then return to the scene and stop the attackers? All without getting shot by the responding police officers and painted as an accomplice post-mortem, of course.

  16. Let’s see …. places they may have been headed to.


    Things hated by radical Islam.

    #1.Locations / schools that educate females
    #2 Educational locations that do not teach the Koran
    #3 Kite flying
    #4 Dances
    #5 Music

  17. Can we run a feature on trunk guns? All of the really nice AR’s and battle rifles shown here are a little too rich for me to leave in my trunk. Are we talking shotgun or rifle?

Comments are closed.