Quote of the day—John Walsh

I’ve suggested to the NRA that if they continue to terrorize Congress and they want everyone to have an AR-15 or an AK-47, that in the stock of that gun you should implant a GPS chip. It has nothing to do with civil liberties — just put in them what I have in my cellphone and what you and everyone has. When I lost my iPad they activated it and tracked it down and I went, ‘This works.’ So if you put this GPS in that AK-47 and a responsible owner gets robbed, now you can catch the dirt bag selling it to the illegal gang-banger, the guy who committed those 11 murders in Chicago. Forget about civil liberties — if you use a credit card, you’re already in Big Brother’s computer.

John Walsh
July 11, 2014
10 things John Walsh said about gun control, the NRA and more
[GPS chip? And then what? It also needs the cellphone modem, the battery, the antennas, and the account with the cell phone provider. This is so easy to defeat that a fourth grader could do it. And that assumes the battery wasn’t already dead when the gun was stolen.

Which is it “It has nothing to do with civil liberties?” Or is it “Forget about civil liberties?”

The government having your credit card history is small potatoes compared to the government being able to track the movement of your guns in real time. And who says it’s okay for Big Brother to have your credit card history?

The other nine things Walsh said were just as stupid as this one.—Joe]

18 thoughts on “Quote of the day—John Walsh

  1. It seems that Mr. Walsh has an inflated view of himself and the value of HIS thoughts, opinions and experiences.

    I, I, I, me, me, me is a recurrent them throughout the interview and his answers.

    What happened to his son was tragic and nobody should have to endure that, but that doesn’t make him an oracle or elevate his opinion to a greater value than anyone else’s. I also see him in a similar light to Mark Kelly, who has created a career off of the misfortune of his wife, the former Representative Gabrielle Giffords.

    Remember the saying about remaining silent and letting everyone think your stupid instead of opening your mouth and removing all doubt? Walsh seems to have missed that one.

    Jeff B.

  2. John’s operation reminds me of the old March of Dimes polio thing. They got rid of polio but had this great operatiuon that was paying a lot of administrators a nice chunk of change so they just moved on to something else to “fight” – something that will never be “fixed/cured” – birth defects.

    • That’s true across the board for government programs. They don’t “solve” what they pretend to be trying to solve, either because it can’t be, or because *they* can’t, or because they could if only they did the right thing but they won’t do the right thing. And then to make things worse, that failure is not seen as the reason to cancel the program, but rather as a reason to throw more money and zombies at it.
      “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.”

  3. Gettin’ a lot of 503 errors when I try to acces your site, Joe. Don’t think it’s on my end ’cause the other sites that I visit don’t have that problem.

    • There is nothing I seem to be able to do on my end except transfer all my websites to another hosting provider.

      Sorry.

      I’ll be contacting my provider one last time over this as soon as I have some time…

  4. So… he wants to make it so that all phones have tracking devices in them which are criminal to remove and that the goverment can activate at any time?

    Okay then.

    • He wants guns to have tracking devices in them. He knows cellphones already have them and doesn’t have a problem with that.

      • But here’s the distinction. Its not mandatory for cellphones to have citizen trackers in ’em.

        You won’t get thrown in jail if you disable/remove the GPS tracker in your phone.

        I somehow doubt Walsh wants a volentary system for guns.

        Which means he either doesn’t know it’s not mandatory for phones, or he wants it to be mandatory for phones too.

        Or he’s a liar.

  5. “Its not mandatory for cellphones to have citizen trackers in ‘em.”

    I’m of the understanding that it is indeed mandatory for cellphones manufactured after some (unknown to me) date to have “citizen trackers” in them.

    As to it being “illegal” to disable them, I have not a clue. As a practical matter, I suspect it is damn near impossible to “disable” them — and by that I mean make them not work no matter what the cell provider might do via software. If you know different, I would certainly like to know how to disable the one in my phone and still leave the phone usable.

      • There are metalized baggies made for this purpose, so it still fits in your pocket. Probably should turn off the phone first, as it will kill the battery fairly quickly as it ramps up it’s tower search for a connection. (I’ve seen them do this when staying at a location that has no service)

        • Ah, that accounts for why the battery goes down quickly when I forget to turn it off when I’m on the far side of beyond (the boonies, the sticks, wayoutheckandgone).

          Otoh, I have gotten cell reception in the campgrounds at Yosemite Valley. They’ve really done a good job of hiding the cell towers there from the schizoid tree huggers who want cell reception but no evidence of how that’s accomplished.

      • It’s mandatory for the manufacturer to PROVIDE tracking “for E-911” purposes.

        It is not mandatory for you to RETAIN that tracking capability, should have have the desire and ability to disable it.

  6. “Terrorize Congress”?

    Who’s doing that?

    Congress is terrorizing me … in both senses of the word!

    I’ve never seen a man so “deeply affected” by the loss of his child that he turned it into a Career Opportunity. That speaks to his character. Everything that follows is not surprising.

  7. “There were eleven murders in Chicago this weekend…so we need to implement European-style gun control!”

    This type of reasoning always makes me twitch, at least a little. Ok, a lot. Yes, I understand that such places are so very attractive for bringing attention to gun violence! But can’t you, for once, point to a city that has low gun control, but high violence, and then say they would be better off if they had gun laws like a city with high violence, and low gun control?

    If I recall correctly, there are such examples, if you look hard enough! But, noooo, everyone knows about the violence of Chicago, New York, Los Angelos, and Washington D.C., so they are so very tempting to trot out! Unfortunately, everyone also knows that these places also have the stringent gun laws these people are asking for…

Comments are closed.