Quote of the day—Trace (@teamtrace)

Guns have an almost supernatural potency to change the people who possess them into unethical agents.

Trace (@teamtrace)
Tweeted on April 22, 2019
[I suppose it’s technical possible. People who possess guns are inclined to be more self-reliant. In the mind of the authoritarian this would be considered an “unethical agent”. It all depends upon your ethical framework.

However, I’m of the opinion that if @teamtrace believes this then they should invoke their own supernatural potency to protect themselves.

I would like to suggest the first thing they protect themselves from is extraordinary stupid ideas.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Hogg @davidhogg111

White people genuinely think that police make kids safer when in reality at most schools the police ARE the threat.

David Hogg @davidhogg111
Tweeted on April 19, 2019
[None of the dupes in the anti-gun movement are particularly bright but the stupid is exceptionally strong in this one.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brianna @BriannaWu #EnjoyYourTrial

I had an opportunity to fire a fully automatic M16 assault rifle today under professional instruction. This is the same weapon US Armed Forces use. The experience made me feel even more strongly there is no reason for a civilian to have access to this weapon, or one like it.

For starters, growing up in the South, I took an NRA safety class as a teenager. I spent many an afternoon as a kid in target practice. But this assault rifle is a different beast. It would take A MINIMUM of 30-40 hours of professional instruction to learn to operate safely.

It shoots a 5.56 mm bullet. You can feel the wind of it firing three feet behind the shooter. The gun is very difficult to control. I’ve seen these fired thousands of times in games and movies. In real life you understand the devastation even being grazed would cause.

Brianna @BriannaWu
Candidate for US House of Representatives in MA District 8 for 2020.

Brianna Wu

Tweeted (and here and here) on February 26, 2019
[She feels strongly. Apparently she is also an extremely slow learner because the first set of Boomershoot 101 students did just fine with only a few hours of instruction and practice.

There are no strong feelings or imaginary excess wind exceptions to the 2nd Amendment. http://bit.ly/EnjoyYourTrial1.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Our planet is going to hit disaster if we don’t turn this ship around and so it’s basically like, there’s a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, ‘Is it okay to still have children?’

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
U.S. Representative (D-NY)
February 24, 2019
Ocasio-Cortez: People Maybe Shouldn’t Reproduce Due To Climate Change
[Via email from Lyle.

With such crap for brains one could make the case our country would be better off if her parents had not had children. But there is also the case to be made that we would not have such wonderful political entertainment and in-fighting in the Democrat Party if it weren’t for her.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Colion Noir

But then, progress to what? Progress to Hell?

Colion Noir
At 23:20 in Seattle: The Utopian Lie | NOIR S7E8
[Via email from Stephanie.

I knew there was a big homeless issue. Until the weather got cold late last fall there was a guy you lived on a bench in Bellevue next to the street which I drove by on the way to work. In downtown Seattle you can see tents next to parking areas on the streets. But I didn’t realize there were piles of used needles on some streets and schools had to pick up needles from the sports fields before they could use the fields.

Government officials are enabling these things (watch the video). Someone in the area dies from illegal drug use every 36 hours. And the politicians want to demonstrate their hatred, prejudice, and bigotry of gun owners who are among the most law abiding and productive members of society. Screw that. We aren’t a problem. But if they keep it up, we could be. And the police are likely to look the other way when we ignore the politicians stupid and hateful laws.

The video is a bit long and is mostly about heroin use with a little bit of gun rights stuff mixed in. But the points that really stuck with me is that Seattle city officials:

  1. Have a set of beliefs which they they cannot or will not reconcile with reality. And/or:
  2. Are deliberately attempting to destroy society.

My guess is that “progress to hell” isn’t the intent they discuss even when they talk among themselves. But they do know that is where they are headed. They are almost certainly suffering from their own addiction. An addiction to power and an addiction to a failed belief system and it’s difficult to kick their habits. And as one of the people in the video points out, 95% of junkies cannot get cleaned up until they hit bottom. And politicians are a long way from hitting bottom. They will die of old age while still a junkie.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brinda Karat

The tremendous achievements of the first Socialist State beckon us to understand what was possible and what is possible to create today. The Soviet Union created records, equally relevant today in wiping out poverty, backwardness, and illiteracy, in establishing equality among peoples and nationalities, between men and women. It is an inspiration of what was and what can be, and that is why we say that the era it established of the transition from capitalism to socialism is as relevant today. Capitalism is not the end of history.

Brinda Karat
November 9, 2017
The Russian Revolution Is Still Relevant Today
[Via email from Chet.

Delusions are often functional but I’m struggling to find the function in this whopper of a delusion. Perhaps Karat thinks they would be one of the leaders who would be in control.

I can’t imagine they believe conclusive evidence supports the claims they made. Just reading a few chapters of The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) would dissuade anyone of sound mind that this is a path a society as a whole would knowing and willing venture.

And yet, via another link from Chet, we have Teen Vogue discussing the differences between resistance, rebellion, and revolution while speaking fondly of the Russian and Cuban revolutions.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Noah Smith

What if the government doesn’t have to pay back what it borrows, now or ever? This is the provocative thesis of an unorthodox economic theory that is rapidly gaining credence on the political left called modern monetary theory, or MMT.

Noah Smith
January 10, 2019
Don’t Be So Sure Hyperinflation Can’t Hit the U.S.
[Delusions are often functional. This particular delusion will give the political left a good shot at gaining absolute power over and destroying the United States.

Prepare for a civil war and/or buy gold and secure it in some other country.—Joe]

Illustrating their extreme ignorance

Via Jacob Parajecki‏ @Jacob_Parajecki:


The text is in error. It’s a rare cartoonist which makes laws. And there is no :allowing” required for a cartoonist to make a fool of themselves.

However, I would agree that those who make this gross of mistake regarding their subject matter should be shamed and then ignored.

When will they figure out they are stupid and give up?

It happened again:

Police in Vermont say they can’t conduct mandated background checks required by a new law on private gun sales. The Department of Public Safety last month told lawmakers they are not allowed to access the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System used to vet gun transfers by licensed firearm dealers.

Signed by Vermont Gov. Phil Scott last year among a spate of gun control laws, Act 94 requires virtually all gun transfers, including those between private parties, to first clear a background check. The problem is that Vermont is one of 36 states and territories that do not have a “point of contact” access to NICS, forcing them to rely on the FBI for all firearm background checks performed in the state. While federal firearms license holders can run their checks through the system, the state cannot.

This also happened in Nevada too.

Some of these people pride themselves on their ignorance of guns and gun laws but you would think after one major blunder they would cure their ignorance. One has to conclude they are stupid. I suspect the problem is that as people capable of remedying their ignorance do so they have a high probability of changing sides.

This doesn’t mean they aren’t dangerous. But it does mean it is a weakness that may be vulnerable to attack.

Quote of the day—Eric “Nuke ‘em” Swalwell

I talk to young people across the country, and they say we have consensus on what to do about gun violence. We have consensus about what to do on immigration and the Dream Act. We have consensus on what to do to address climate change.

I don’t know if those pieces of legislation will make their way to the president’s desk, but once in for all, you’re going to see votes in the House of Representatives on issues that the American people have consensus on. So we’re going to start to go big.

Eric “Nuke ‘em” Swalwell
U.S. Representative
December 24, 2018
House Dems to focus on gun control, immigration and climate change, Swalwell says
[Yes, this is the same guy who said a conflict between the government and gun owners would be decided by the nukes.

I find it telling that he get his “consensus” on these extremely controversial subjects from “young people”. Does seek foreign and economic policy advice from children too?

Being as it is unlikely anything along these lines will make it through the Senate and to the President this might be a good thing. All the politicians with “young people” as their top policy advisors will expose themselves for targeting in the next election.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joon B‏ @JoonB3

Here is a new idea, somebody should start a new responsible gun owner organization which will support 2nd amendment and strict gun control.I swear NRA members will leave NRA by droves and sign on with new organization.

Joon B‏ @JoonB3
Tweeted on November 28, 2018
[And someone should start the sister organizations:

  • Which supports the 1st amendment and strict speech, religion, and personal association control.
  • Which supports the 3rd amendment and troops living rent free in your home.
  • Which supports the 4th amendment and unannounced searches of your property, computers, and underwear.

Either Joon B is clueless or they are trolling us. Probably a fake account trolling for the fun of it. They only have four followers after being on Twitter for a year so you know they can’t have significant content of interest to anyone.—Joe]

Their goal is clear

Here is the Washington State Alliance for Gun Responsibility agenda for 2019:

RESTRICT ACCESS TO HIGH-CAPACITY MAGAZINES: High-capacity magazines make  shootings more deadly and allow shooters to fire more rounds, faster. Recent reviews of mass shootings showed that 50% involved high-capacity magazines and, in shootings where high-capacity magazines are used, more people are shot overall and more people die. Keeping high-capacity magazines away from people looking to cause harm would reduce risks and help limit the scope of mass shooting tragedies in Washington.

“Keeping high-capacity magazines away from people looking to cause harm”? If you know someone is looking to cause harm why are they not in a cell or getting psychological help? And how do they think they can determine this? What are the details of a law they think will accomplish this? Reviewing your social media history? Interviewing your friends and neighbors every time you want to buy a spare magazine?

If they were serious about wanting to “limit the scope of mass shootings tragedies” they would encourage the one thing known to work over 90% of the time. Since they will never suggest that you know they are lying when they say they want to “limit the scope of mass shooting tragedies”.

Joining the 27 states and the Distict [sic] of Columbia who require safety training for a
concealed pistol license;

This isn’t because there is a problem with people with CPLs being a hazard to public safety. We are already much less likely to shoot an innocent person than a police officer when confronted with a deadly force situation. This is about making it more expensive and difficult to get a CPL.

Updating our list of people prohibited from possession firearms to include additional
crimes that are indicators of future violence and individuals found incompetent to stand trial.

It isn’t good enough that convicted felons and domestic abusers are prohibited persons. They want to expand it to those convicted of “additional crimes that are indicators of future violence”. Misdemeanors which happened 40 years ago? Public intoxication 20 years ago?

For over 30 years, our local towns, cities, and counties
have been blocked from taking action to prevent gun violence own [sic] their own because
of the statewide preemption law. Local leaders are best positioned to know how best
to protect their communities.

They want to remove preemption. The crazy patchwork of laws that will be impossible to remember will make it a high risk adventure to travel across the county with a gun let alone across the state.

Today, we take steps to keep
our kids safe by making schools gun-free zones. It just makes sense to extend these
gun-free zones to child care and early learning centers.

They want more “gun-free zones”! It is the existing “gun-free zones” where something like 90% of the mass shooting occur. And they want to create more of them. This cannot be for any other reason than they want to make it more and more risky to own and carry a firearm. This is not about keeping “kids safe”.

Crime guns are a major problem and a
contributor to gun violence across our state. There are common-sense steps we can
take to keep crime guns off our streets and make our communities safer.

Allow the State Patrol to destroy confiscated crime guns, rather than require them
to auction or trade them.

This is almost baffling. One way to interpret this is that they believe that once a gun has been involved in a crime they think it is more likely to be used to commit a crime in the future. Don’t laugh! This is what some people believe (see also here).

Another way to interpret this is that they believe this is, in essence, a zero sum game. They may actually believe that every time a gun is destroyed that is one less gun in existence. This is, of course, not true. It just increases the market size for new guns. Is this what they really want?

Considering the usual lack of sophistication I don’t think this is the most likely thought process but they may think that raising the price, by decreasing the supply, of guns can be achieved this way. Increasing the price means that fewer people can afford them making it more unlikely people will exercise their rights. The problem with this line of thinking is that the number of “crime guns” is so small compared to the total new gun sales, less than 1%, that any change is in the noise.

Ensuring we are able to respond to new technology by closing loopholes that
currently allow sharing and downloading designs for untraceable weapons that can
be printed or manufactured anywhere.

They want to infringe on the First Amendment as well as the Second. Got it. That’s not going to work any better than the war on drugs. When law enforcement can’t keep high school dropout from getting illegal drugs from South America 24×7 via boats and airplanes there is no chance of keeping encrypted files from sneaking in from anywhere in the world at the speed of light.

Their goal is clear. In the short term they want to make gun ownership difficult, risky, and expensive. Long term they want to eliminate it.

We can’t out vote them. We have to stop them in the courts. They won’t stop unless we stop them. Help stop them.

Quote of the day—Drew Rinella

So average New Jersey residents and veterans have the skill to safely fire 10 lethal rounds at a time in self defense, but if they fired 11 lethal rounds at a time without POST training it would create a dangerous situation? Am I understanding all of this correctly? And this law upheld by judicial apologetics is causing a reduction in violent crime in New Jersey, right?

Drew Rinella
December 6, 2018
Comment to New Jersey must have a stupidity force field
[Yes. Yes. And yes.

Any more questions?—Joe]

New Jersey must have a stupidity force field

From pages 41 and 42 of the ruling in Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Inc.; Blake Ellman; Alexander Dembrowski, Appellants v. Attorney General New Jersey; Superintendent New Jersey State Police on appeal from the United States district court
for the district of New Jersey (see also A Powerful Dissent Charges Judges Who Casually Uphold Magazine Restrictions With Disrespecting the Second Amendment and Third Circuit upholds NJ’s ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds.). “LCM” means “Large Capacity Magazine” which in this context is anything greater than 10 rounds. This is a decrease from the previous restriction on magazine capacity which was 15 rounds:

Plaintiffs assert that the Act violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause because it allows retired law enforcement officers to possess LCMs while prohibiting retired military members and ordinary citizens from doing so. N.J. Stat. Ann. 2C:39-3(g), 2C:39-17. Plaintiffs have not shown that retired law enforcement officers are similarly situated to other New Jersey residents. Retired law enforcement officers have training and experience not possessed by the general public. Kolbe, 849 F.3d at 147 (holding that retired law enforcement officers “are not similarly situated to the general public with respect to the assault weapons and large-capacity magazines banned”). Police officers in New Jersey must participate in firearms and defensive tactics training, including mandatory range and classroom training, under a variety of simulated conditions. App. 144; see, e.g., App. 1361, 1369, 1368, 1383. Law enforcement officers are also tested on a periodic basis after initial qualification and must re-qualify twice a year and meet certain shooting proficiency requirements. App. 144-45; see App. 1322-410 (describing standards, requirements, and full courses for law enforcement firearms qualification). Retired law enforcement officers must also satisfy firearms qualification requirements. N.J. Stat. Ann. 2C:39-6(l). Moreover, because the standard-issue weapon for many New Jersey law enforcement officers is a Glock 19 with a loaded fifteen round magazine, App. 116-17, these officers have experience carrying and using LCMs. Thus, law enforcement officers, both active and retired, have training and experience that distinguishes them from the general public.

Law enforcement officers are also different from members of the military. Unlike military personnel trained for the battlefield, law enforcement officers are trained for and have experience in addressing volatile situations in both public streets and closed spaces, and they operate in noncombat zones where the Constitution and other rules apply. App. 148-49. Even if some military members receive firearms training comparable to the training law enforcement officers receive, App. 140-41, the scope and nature of their training and experience are different, App. 141, 147-49.

For these reasons, retired law enforcement officers are not similarly situated to retired military personnel and ordinary citizens, and therefore their exemption from the LCM ban does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Also of note is that New Jersey residents have until Monday to get rid of all their magazines with a capacity of greater than 10 rounds.

Interesting logic going on here. I didn’t know that people in New Jersey were so stupid that the difference between using a 10 round magazine and a 15 round magazine required so much training and experience. And that, furthermore, no matter how much training you had in the military to use magazines with capacities greater than 10 you still aren’t capability of using one once you set foot into New Jersey. It must be that New Jersey has some sort of naturally occurring “stupidity force field” where people become stupid and incompetent once they step across the state border into their political jurisdiction.

But it must be true. How else would legislators and judges dream up and insist everyone believe something so stupid as the above?

Quote of the day—Tom Arnold (@TomArnold)

This explains why 80% of gun owners shoot themselves or members of their own families.

Tom Arnold (@TomArnold)
Tweeted on November 30, 2018
[See also, Math is hard by Carl Bussjaeger.

As we have known for a long time, anti-gun people have problems with numbers and arithmetic. Arnold is just reminding us of that and that Hollywood types do not have any special knowledge in anything other than pretending to be something other than what they are and reciting lines from a script.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb

It’s written in a way that puts a chilling effect on gun ownership, but quite frankly, it’s unenforceable. There’s a giant loophole in this law. If they go to Oregon or Idaho, they can bring [a rifle] back. It’s totally legal. They just can’t buy it in Washington state.

Alan Gottlieb
Founder, Second Amendment Foundation
November 7, 2018
Second Amendment Foundation: Loopholes aplenty with I-1639
[There are other loopholes as well. I was at a gun store recently and suggested a loophole they might use. The clerk behind the counter said, paraphrasing, “That should work. But most of the time I expect we will just do it like….” and he explained a simpler approach. I had considered his suggestion weeks ago but figured it was clearly violating the spirit of the law even though it was complying with the letter of the law and that might be too risky. But, he didn’t seem bothered by it so I’m not going to worry about it. I make so many trips to Idaho I will just buy my guns there and not subject myself to the risk.

I’m a bit torn between keeping loopholes like this quiet and openly mocking the ignorance and stupidity of the people that write these laws. On the one hand we get more time to get more guns into the hands of more people. On the other we embarrass the anti-gun activists and cause them to lose face and status in the eyes of those who donate millions of dollars.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ann

I’ve always pictured a gun ban looking like this in the United States.

It would be so great. No more violence. Just peace and trees.

February 19, 2018
Comment of February 19, 2018 at 10:11 AM.
[Delusions are often functional. In this case, however, it’s just a delusion.—Joe]

Not helping

From MSN:

A man in Florida has been arrested after he threatened to shoot senators who don’t support Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court, authorities said.

The narrative against the political left which seems to be most effective in getting people to put distance between them is that they are crazy and violent. There is a lot of evidence to support than.

I want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court because I believe he is much more likely to support the rule of law than a justice appointed by someone from the left. An advocate for Kavanaugh who advocates murder is counterproductive.

Update: Here is someone from the political left to illustrate my point:

Dr. Carol Christine Fair, an associate professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown said white GOP Senators deserve to die miserable deaths “while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps.”

This wasn’t enough for Dr. Fair, she said once the white Republican Senators die miserable deaths, their corpses should be castrated and fed to pigs.