Quote of the day—Alex Arabian

A large group in our government and of our citizens still refuse to admit that gun control and gun violence are correlated; it’s an antiquated, backwards viewpoint that needs to be extinguished.

Alex Arabian
January 17, 2018
SHOT: A Gripping, Timely Pro Gun-Control Thriller
[This is what they think of you.

It would appear to be a safe bet that Arabian doesn’t understand that correlation coefficients can be negative or positive and what that would mean. It’s certain, from reading the entire article, they don’t know the facts about dramatically increased number of firearms in this country is simultaneous with dramatic declines in violent crime rates. With such an erroneous base Arabian then concludes that contrary viewpoints need to be extinguished.

What do you have in mind Alex? If the shadow banning doesn’t work will you move on to reeducation camps?

It doesn’t really matter. The answer is no. And long before we run out of ammunition saying no to Arabian’s plans their viewpoint will have grown dim and died.—Joe]

12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Alex Arabian

  1. i don’t much feel like digging through that kind of screed this early in the morning; did he show any awareness of correlation not implying causation?

  2. Oh, I feel triggered. I’ll have to go to my safe space, my local gun store, and buy a box of ammunition.

    • I hadn’t expected it, but since you mentioned it, I’m triggered too.
      And since Governor Moonbeam has seen fit to require we speak to the “Recoil Therapy Specialists” when we want to buy ammunition not merely firearms, I’ll stop by my local “Merchant of Death” later today and make a purchase.

      • Oooooo… how can I get a license to become a LRT*?

        I have a sudden urge to open up a ‘Wellness Center’ with a hoplopractor** to write prescriptions for people to get recoil therapy to address their myriad discomforts and ailments.

        * Licensed Recoil Therapist
        ** Latin: weapons practitioner, possessing a doctorate*** to that effect
        *** I also need to charter a firearms university to issue Bachelor of Science, Master of Science, PhDs in Firearms and our DH** medical degrees.

        • I don’t know, but Randy, Mark, Dan, Matt, and Dave have given me really good advice since I got back into this hobby 29 years ago.

          I admire your theories and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  3. “…it’s an antiquated, backwards viewpoint that needs to be extinguished.”

    Let’s be more open about it, shall we?

    “The American concept of liberty is an antiquated, backwards viewpoint that needs to be extinguished.”

    There, Alex Arabian; I fixed it for you, for clarity. Next time, don’t be so reluctant to say what you mean. Or as Dennis Prager put it; “I prefer clarity to agreement.”

    The kind of authoritarianism that Alex Arabian is promoting is actually far more antiquated and far more backward than the concept of self governance and of a limited government as outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

    Standing in opposition to that ancient authoritarianism is the American system, which declares that if ANYONE is to keep and bear arms it is the individual citizen. No Earthly authority exists by which that honest citizen may be disarmed. The authority to bear arms comes first from the Creator to the individual, and may then be granted by that citizen to government entities (which exist solely at his pleasure) at the citizens’ discretion.

    The citizens posess the rights, and the citizens hold the power, lending small bits of that power here and there to government, but always owning those rights and owning that power. Government has no rights. Rights are individual possessions only.

    Alex then, like all authoritarian thinkers (Herodians) (coercionists) has it precisely upside down. The authoritarian mindset will either be extinguished or it will rule the world in tyranny and thus extinguish itself. Either way it will be extinguished.

  4. The usual logical fallacy. Yes, violent crimes where firearms are utilized in the commission of the crime decrease when firearms are less available, in that the majority of the crime element are people of low character and low motivation. To use that myopic statistical corollary as evidence that anyone is safer is as dishonest as cloaking eugenics under the guise of women’s health. The ideologs who spew this garbage set de facto acceptable human losses in the support of their eutopic fantasy by clearing the neighborhood of any effective resistance to the then natural rise in stabbings, beatings, and acid attacks by low motivation shitbags who will use whatever is at hand to commit violence, nevermind the most motivated criminals or terrorists who still have access to whatever type of weapons they want anyway.

    • “… violent crimes where firearms are utilized in the commission of the crime decrease when firearms are less available…” — not necessarily. Possibly yes if “less available” specifically means “less available to criminals“. But definitely no, if it is “less available to the general public” or in particular “less available to law abiding citizens”. In those cases, criminals benefit from having their intended victims less able to resist, and criminals know this and act accordingly.
      I agree with your other points, but you still gave the enemy too much credit in your opening sentence.

      • Of course it is a complex issue depending more on cultural elements than rule of law, but this explains how ideologs can point to their overseas eutopias as gun control success stories, using terms like “gun crime” and “gun suicides”.

        The average criminal is a low motivation dirt bag with low inhibitions who’s kinda dumb, who attacks Tyrone because his wife Charlene told everyone in the park that Tammy is carrying his baby. Whichever widget he uses in the commission of his crime is going to be whatever is available in a method allowable by the rules of his culture. If firearms were never really very available in his country to begin with, the culture has little desire for gun ownership, and then a law is passed prohibiting firearms, then if course “gun crime” and “suicides with guns” will decrease and appear very low. The radical Islamic terrorist who then gets a black market fully automatic rifle and a case of hand grenades and slaughters unopposed is unaffected however because he is a very motivated criminal, but since those attacks occur relatively infrequently compared to overall every day crime, it does not greatly affect the “gun crime” statistics, and their defenseless victims become acceptable losses in the furtherence of the gun free eutopia cause.

        Regardless, “Gun crime” is still a logical fallacy as we all know. In the gun control eutopia the least motivated criminals will still use any widget they can find as a weapon, in increasing amounts due to the unarmed nature of their victims. Terrorists who can’t access firearms are using vehicles and explosives to kill with great effectiveness, and those with access to the black market are actually protected by gun control laws.

        But on topic, the movie Shot looks really dumb and actually seems to promote gun safety education rather than more legislation. The shooter broke numerous laws in the commission of his ND and not one more law would have stopped the scenario in the movie.

Comments are closed.