Quote of the day—Sherfinski and Dinan

Permit holders are exceptionally law-abiding — even compared to the police themselves, who he said are six times as likely to be convicted of misdemeanors or felonies as permit holders are. That’s true even for crimes involving firearms; permit-holders are one-seventh as likely to run into such trouble as the police.

Sherfinski and Dinan
July 26, 2016
Concealed carry permits at all-time high
[Via Say Uncle.—Joe]

9 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Sherfinski and Dinan

  1. Clearly we must target our laws against these law-abiding citizens to end the scourge of gun violence. /End Sarcasm

    Yet, here in California, our moronic governor signed into law the restriction on CCW carrying in school zones. There was no problem or issue. He stripped the schools of even a modicum of security and self-protection. The blood for every violent death in a California school is on his hands and the evil Democrats who voted for this restriction.

    Frankly, I am tired of the uneven application of the Constitution in the states. All of the states signed on to the Constitution to join the union. That means that the Bill of Rights applies in all of them. Every gun control law is unConstitutional since they all infringe on my RKBA. States like Massachusetts, Hawaii, Connecticut, New York, California, Washington, Maryland, and others with gun control laws are not obeying the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment does not apply and give them dispensation for gun control because ALL of the BOR applies, including the 2A.

    Let me give an example. We have the First Amendment with the freedom of the press. Imagine a state, say Montana, that says that they can ignore it and restrict it because of “State’s Rights!” via the 10th Amendment. Nope, it is what is not spelled out explicitly in the Constitution that is reserved to the People and the States. The Supreme Court MUST throw out all gun control laws. / End Rant

  2. Productive Citizens will not be protected by the Blue Wall that protects members of the Blue Badge Gang. They know that, and act accordingly. Those that desire The Badge often seek the power it represents (not all to be sure, but even one is too many) and the rest would rather cover for them than hold the bad apples accountable. The Ruling Class would rather wield the law and the Blue Badge Gang for fun and profit than obey the constitution because they don’t like the way it cramps their style. So the self-reenforcing selection process for the Badge Gang continues, while the consequences for Productive Citizens help helps them honest.

    The results should come as a surprise to nobody that is paying attention.

  3. “He shall be reckoned among the transgressors.”

    It’s right there in that one sentence, really; in a corrupt society the honest citizen becomes a target for destruction, of particular urgency. The more obviously innocent, the higher the priority your destruction becomes. Differences between the rival gangs will be put aside for the sake of attacking the innocent, for innocence is the direct affront to the authoritarian system and must not be tolerated, else the whole system is in danger. Awareness is even worse. Innocence, awareness and a strong voice combined make you public enemy number one.

    To plead your case then, that you are among the honest, the just, the innocent and the self sufficient, is to invite a particular ire of the corrupt which they reserve just for you. Everything about you, your mere existence, screams at them that you must be either assimilated, broken, controlled, smeared, discredited or destroyed. Still it has to be done, so that the world, or rather any who are paying attention, might see the contrast.

    The story of Jesus illustrates all of this quite well, but in this enlightened age no one pays it any mind.

    • So, the innocent must be proven to be as guilty, if not more so, than the corrupt. Hence the drive within Freudian pseudo-psychology to attribute everything to toilet training, desire for sex with mother or other men, and wanting to play with feces in ones hands (the explanation for creativity and mechanical aptitude).
      If the corrupt cannot suborn you, they must destroy you. In the days of the gulags written about by that Aleksandr fellow whose name I can’t spell without looking it up, the real criminals, the thieves and murderers, were permitted a higher status over the contemptible political prisoners. Why? As the old joke about why sharks don’t eat lawyers goes, professional courtesy.

  4. Permit holders are exceptionally law-abiding

    The article doesn’t reference where John Lott came up with the 6X and 1/7 number. Can someone please point me to where that statistic came from?

    • You might ask him. But as I recall, the bit about crime statistics came straight from state records, specifically records of CC permit revocations. In some states that number was zero; in others it was very nearly zero. Also, out of that very small number only a modest fraction had to do with any form of violence; from what I remember, more revocations were due to nitpicking stuff like mistakenly carrying a firearm into some place it wasn’t permitted.
      Google to the rescue: http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Concealed-Carry-Revocation-rates-by-age.pdf is a paper by Lott et al. on this exact topic, with data and source citations.

      • Many thanks! That sort of paper, and that sort of data, is indeed something I’ve been looking for.

        I’m troubled, however, by the apparently lax proofreading in the paper. This shows both in the language (e.g. “905 people had their permits revoke, …”) and, more disturbingly, in the numbers (e.g. the number of license revocations due to violent crimes in Florida appears once as 0.003% and once as 0.0003%, both on page 4).

        Does anyone know if Mr. Lott et al have addressed such concerns?

        • I assume the larger number (the second one) is the correct one. I don’t know if he has corrected this, so I sent the authors an email.

Comments are closed.