So here goes, and my apologies in advance for omitting any due hat tips:
From Chris Hernandez: Healing the Rift Between Police and the Public. Three simple steps: Ditch the mil-surp gear, wear/carry cameras, and end the War on (Some) Drugs. On that third, he gives marijuana special mention, but I might extend this logic to other substances, too.
At The Bang Switch: It's Not About Safety, It's About Control and Confiscation. (Allegedly) true story of the progress of "gun control" in France, from someone who lived it. The similarities between where they were then and where we are now are almost creepy.
From Bloomberg.com (yeah, I know): You Want to Go Out With Your Colt. Will America Let You? Carrying a gun in public may be the next big "gun control" battle in the courts, in light of the Peruta v. Gore decision in the Ninth Circuit, putting it in agreement with the Seventh Circuit (albeit for different reasons), and at odds with the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits. It's also amazing how many California Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police still think carrying a gun for self-defense outside the home is a strictly-regulated privilege.
Joe Huffman: Not Getting It. I'd add a "Still" on that. From an article on a "promising new approach on assault weapons [sic]", but none of the proposals are anything but tangentially related to "assault weapons", which, BTW, the anti-rights folks still can't define.
Esquire.com (again, yeah, I know): Everything We Know About Mass Shooters is Wrong. Interesting insights from someone who was almost there, if you can get past the anti-gun slant the author brings.
Two from Dave Workman: Newspaper Endorsements Reveal Anti-Rights Bias Against Gun Owners and 2A May be "Secret Weapon v. Terrorism" Says Business Publication. On the former, the media has been against private gun ownership for quite some time, but it still needs pointing out. On the latter I'd say, "Duh", but it's good that non-gun publications like the Investors' Business Daily are realizing that armed self-defense saves lives.
Over at The Captain's Journal: Why Are the Anti-Gunners Such Racists? Herschel links to this Salon article about black men being shot by police, ergo blacks shouldn't own/carry guns, and whites owning/carrying guns is a meaningless gesture so they shouldn't do it, either. Believe it or not, lady, rights — including gun rights — are color-blind; you injecting your version of racial politics doesn't automatically make it a racial issue. Herschel has more examples, too.
Speaking of anti-rights people, via Anthony Martin: Moms Demand Action Urges Murders of Open Carry Gun Owners. Endorsing the despicable tactic known as "SWATting" as a political tool is just as morally repugnant as doing the deed yourself; calling in a "SWATting" is just committing violence/murder by proxy. Are the higher-ups in Bloomberg's Demanding Moms group really so violent, or did a wayward intern get the keys to the social media accounts again? I'm not sure which is worse.
At Wired.com: The $1,200 Machine That Lets Anyone Make a Metal Gun at Home. OK, not any gun; this newest offering from Defense Distributed seems specialized to finish AR-15 lower receivers from an "80% complete" lower. Cody Wilson is treading dangerous ground, but his purpose slams home: "gun control" is being rendered obsolete and impossible by technology.
I don't usually link to him (he posts so often I have trouble keeping up), but Mike Vanderboegh has a good one up about government turning to tyranny: Government Must Act by Law or Terror or Some Combination of Them. So who still thinks the "government monopoly on force" is a good idea? (Interestingly, the author MV is quoting used nearly identical terminology ... in 1990.)
Slightly off-topic, but … the Daily Caller: Sandy Hook Commission Calls for Government Crackdown on Homeschools. Am I remembering wrong, or was the "Sandy Hook Commission" formed to figure out how to detect and prevent future mass shootings in schools? Their "findings" initially focused on "gun control", but are now officially being used to call into question other rights, including whether parents should have the right to educate their kids at home. The justification is tenuous at best, nonsense at worst. More proof that "x control" is not about the x; it's about the control.
Whelp, my browsers are happier now. Stay safe out there!