Oh, the irony. “A professor at the Southern State Community College (SSCC) in Ohio is currently under investigation for threatening to shoot up the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia and Washington lobbyists in order to increase support for anti-gun legislation.”
His FB post read, in part :
“Look, there’s only one solution. A bunch of us anti-gun types are going to have to arm ourselves, storm the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, VA, and make sure there are no survivors.
This action might also require coordinated hits at remote sites, like Washington lobbyists.
Then and only then will we see some legislative action on assault weapons.”
Not sure how someone with this tenuous a grasp of reality manages to become an adjunct prof, but there you have it. And while I’m sure that if he did do that, he might see some action on weapons, but I’m not so sure it would be legislative.
Don’t ever let them tell you nobody wants to take your guns.
Is NRA headquarters a disarmed victim zone? It seems like a silly question, but I thought I had heard rumors that it is.
Well, it is not in DC (a nearly guaranteed victim disarmament zone), it’s in Fairfax, VA. I’d be willing to bet they have at least some sort of security, even if it is not very high profile.
Ok, but having perimeter security, even if competent, is no substitute for a general bearing of arms. If it wasn’t clear enough already, Orlando has reminded us of that.
I’ll just say unequivocally it is not.
Also I wil note that there is a public shooting range on premises.
rolf:
alinsky. marcuse. marx. lenin. being educated by the remnants of the marxist cadres from the 1960’s.
oh, yeah, the answer to your question as to how people like that come to believe in what they believe. you are simply too hung up in your “bourgeois sentimentality” to see them for what they are. this is the trouble people have in comprehending nazi’s in wwii, who were educated, erudite, possessed of the finest sensibilities, and who were ruthless savages.
you see, when you are “better” than all the schlubs, it gives you a certain license to do things which are “repulsive,” and which you have lusted after your whole life.
john jay
I’ll re-post what I said here
https://blog.joehuffman.org/2016/07/06/quote-of-the-day-bill-twist/#comment-93245
“Yep, the anti-gun politicians are power-hungry gangsters.
The anti-gun lobby are a mixture of power-hungry gangsters and misanthropic sociopaths.
And most of the “Civilian” gun control activists are Misanthropic sociopaths or straight-up street criminals.
So yeah, they don’t want us armed because at some level they are concerned about being shot for justifiable reasons.
Also notice they are for stripping down self defense laws to UK levels.
They are rats and roaches pushing for pest control laws.”
This goon would fit the first description of a Civilian anti-rights activist.
My sample size is rather small, but my hypothesis is that it is a requirement, not a obstacle.
Could be. Maybe that’s why I need a new career: I can recognize the reality I’m surrounded by for what it is, most of the time.
Anyone got a job for a teacher-type person who’s reasonably smart, a horrible punster, a great generalist, and decent writer, but isn’t a specialized computer geek?
In about 20 years working for a state university, that’s the conclusion I reached. Glad to be out.
Don’t ever let them tell you that nobody wants to… kill you…
But wait, there is a third category; mere idiot.
True. There is that. Can’t forget that, however hard I might want to.
For a gaggle of idiots, the Progressives have managed to build a welfare state, get over 90% of black people to support the Party of the KKK, take substantial control of education, communications (FCC), transportation, energy, aviation, agriculture, food and drugs, the money supply, banking, alcohol tobacco and firearms, and news and entertainment media programming, to name just a few. That’s a lot for a bunch of blithering, slobbering idiots, isn’t it?
Who are the real idiots then; they who have built all that authoritarian infrastructure, or we who stood aside griping, and arguing about statistics, end results, and how best to “run” the country as though it were something intended to be “run”, while we’ve been losing a war we weren’t even aware was being fought for 100 and more years, while we fund it to the tune of three trillion dollars per year (plus what they make up via counterfeiting).
It could be one side or the other who are idiots, but if it’s one side, then it’s us. I maintain that it’s both sides though; they’re idiots for serving the Dark Side, and we’re worse idiots for tolerating their evil deeds while we know better.
Or do we know better? I wonder.
In a group comprised of wayward children and adults who see what the children are doing wrong, who then is ultimately responsible for amending the situation?
You probably all have known parents (or school teachers) who blame their children (or students) for things going poorly in their lives (or classrooms). That would be us in this situation.
Ayn Rand pointed out, decades ago, that she believed the American political “right” was as culpable for the rise of collectivism as anyone, for standing up as the representatives of liberty (and therefore capitalism) yet representing it so poorly, so pathetically, as to give it a bad name. I tend to agree. I know that to be the case with the so-called Christian religions also, and that sorry state of affairs goes hand in hand with our political failures.
I’m reminded of the common political roundtable on television, wherein they select an old, pasty-white, inarticulate, out-of-touch blubbering buffoon with hair spray to represent the “conservative” side. Somehow we’ve managed to do that as a country.
Not just America, the whole damn west.
Lyle, don’t forget; where you can go and how you will get there, what is correct to say, when you will submit, what property you shall rent from it, what you may build, what you can purchase, who may be your mate, what you may eat, what you can’t know about what you eat, what you may sell, how much of your income you will keep, who shall be our masters, who may and may not select our masters, where and how you shall have water, what your children will know, where your children will spend time, if men shall breath their first breath, what may be used as medicine and who may have it, who is and is not liable for the same action, who may defend themselves and who may not, what the temperature outside shall be, where and when you may pray to lesser gods, what you may leave (and how much) to your posterity, what business shall succeed or fail, air, water, sea, land, forest, plain, scrub, hill, dale, country, city and on and on. There is nothing this god does not claim unto itself. There is nothing that it does not regulate, outlaw, or tax. It even has granted to itself the authority to decide, without trial, which of the 7 billion of us shall live to see another day. It has many followers, true believers all. The worship of this god, State, is the most dangerous religion in the history of mankind.
Absolutely. And why was this allowed to happen?
The letter of the Constitution says something very different. If you haven’t read and fully absorbed Article 1 Section 8, you really need to do this. And use that knowledge at every opportunity.
Then again, there’s good reason to believe the intent was always different. Hamilton said so very clearly, when he proposed essentially what we now have as his “plan”. It was reportedly ignored, and when Hamilton wrote for The Federalist, he said very different things. But then again, he was a politician; his lips were moving.
Nor was he the only one; Madison’s “explanation” that the power of taxation is limited by the Constitution is a marvel of misdirection. It seems extremely unlikely that he didn’t know what he said was nonsense.
I’ve recently learned (from St. George Tucker, writing in 1802) that the attack on the Constitution started immediately. Many of us know about the Alien and Sedition acts, which were a particularly blatant example. But they were not an exception, not even close. There were lots of other laws that were similarly unconstitutional, just not as well known. For example, one which, in essence, authorized the President to create his own army, accountable only to himself. Similarly, there were a lot of court decisions that blatantly and obviously contradicted the plain words of the Constitution.
So the subversion of the Constitution is as old as the Constitution itself, and has gone on ever since with essentially no effective opposition. (Even the uproar about the A & S acts was just that, lots of noise but no action. None of the culprits were punished in the least.)
Paul,
The Constitution of the United States is, by way of fact, void. I don’t want it to be this way, I’m not advocating for this legal state of affairs we find ourselves in, but tough, here we are.
.fed ignores it, the people have never read it, our “leaders” do whatever they want, the churches are captured and interred, I swore an oath to uphold the constitution but it is now null and void. We need to face this fact and proceed accordingly. We are obligated to throw off these chains. A contract that nobody has read and nobody follows in no contract at all. The rule of law is dead.
I do take your point but think that ship has sailed.
That’s possibly correct. Possibly too pessimistic. I derive some small hope from the fact that Tea Party types tend to express an interest in, and concern for, the Constitution. Their understanding of it may be flawed, but at least some have the right intentions. That suggests they could be taught to read its plain English words correctly.
The one concern is that, even if you do, you’ll find it isn’t as good as it should be. While the actually granted powers are far fewer (by orders of magnitude) than what the government has usurped, nevertheless there are some nasty loopholes. Examples include the power to tax (Madison’s dubious “explanation” to the contrary notwithstanding) and the power to “regulate interstate commerce”. As we know, both have been perverted into blank checks, but that clearly can be blamed on the fact that they are vague and open-ended in the first place.
In leftist controlled academia, it’s precisely because he has such a tenuous grasp on reality that he’s assigned to indoctrinate the young … It’s a job requirement these days, and he’s probably on tenure track.