Why Bernie Sanders doesn’t concede

Have you ever been questioned by the FBI? Do you personally know anyone who has been questioned by the FBI? The presumptive Democratic nominee for President, former First Lady, former U.S. Senator for the state of New York, and the former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI yesterday.

From the New York Times:

The voluntary interview, which took place over three and a half hours at the F.B.I. headquarters in Washington, largely focused on the Justice Department’s central question: Did the actions of Mrs. Clinton or her staff rise to the level of criminal mishandling of classified information?

A voluntary interview? Is there any other type? The FBI can’t force anyone to talk to them. The U.S. Constitution states that you cannot be compelled to witness against yourself in a criminal case. If you speak with law enforcement about yourself, it’s always voluntary.

Has the New York Times never heard that people have the right to remain silent?

What strikes me as the most surprising thing about Hillary Clinton is how she seemingly can’t avoid stepping in it. Her most notable achievement is that she was First Lady for eight years. She parlayed that into being a U.S. Senator and then eventually, Secretary of State. Without being First Lady, she never would have been able to achieve these accomplishments. With her experience in the White House and the Senate, she didn’t realize having her own private email server as U.S. Secretary of State would be problematic?

What a rookie move. The thing is, Hillary Clinton isn’t a rookie. I’d wager nobody knows what it’s like to be held up to a high level of political scrutiny more than Hillary Clinton. Yet somehow she thought it would be acceptable to conduct official Secretary of State business on a private email server.

I don’t get that.

Yesterday’s “voluntary” interview with the FBI is the reason Bernie Sanders doesn’t concede to Hillary Clinton. He’d be crazy to call it quits now.

The assault rifle, the safest of all guns

Assault rifles, semi-automatic rifles designed for use on the battlefield, have been in the news as of late. They were the type of weapons used by Islamic terrorists in San Bernardino and most recently in Orlando. An assault rifle was also used by non-Islamic terrorists in Aurora and Sandy Hook.

Assault rifles are generally easy to use, feature a high-capacity magazine, and can be quite lethal. With that said, the common belief that they are responsible for a large number of gun deaths nationwide is wrong.

According to the FBI, in 2013 (the most recent year reported) there was a total of 12,253 murders. Of that number, 8,454 involved a firearm. A majority of those murders were carried out with a handgun, 5,782 to be exact. That works out to be 68.39% of all firearm murders. When it comes to killing people, handguns are used more than any other firearm.

The assault rifle, the safest of all guns - Bent Corner

What I found quite remarkable with the FBI’s numbers is how few deaths are attributed to assault rifles. They don’t even get their own category. They’re grouped in with rifles. An assault rifle is a rifle, but not all rifles are assault rifles.

Even if you pretend that each and every rifle listed on the FBI crime report is a banana clipped, pistol griped assault rifle, they only account for 3.37% of all murders committed with a firearm.

If you really want to do something to curb gun-related murders, then you have to look at handguns, not assault rifles. Statistically and historically speaking, assault rifles are the safest of all guns in that they pose the smallest threat to public safety.