We are not broke as a nation. We are not bankrupt. We can’t go bankrupt. We absolutely cannot go bankrupt because we have the power to create as much money as we need to spend to serve the American people.
If this were true then why not create enough money for every person in the U.S. to have an “universal basic income” of $100K per year? Everyone, if they wanted, could just retire in comfort and live happily ever after. And why stop there? Why not create and distribute enough money for everyone on the planet to comfortably retire?
One has to conclude he is one or more of the following:
Humanity needs to become a bigger priority in this state. This means that stricter gun control is necessary. Our government should listen to its people and make them feel safe, rather than allowing a law as dangerous as permitless carry.
So there’s a great deal of talk now about what can be done to stem the rising tide of pro-terrorism sentiment in the country, from individuals trying to “deprogram” QAnon family members to the Department of Justice, under newly confirmed Attorney General Merrick Garland, prioritizing anti-terrorism initiatives. But this Atlanta shooting, which so far has all the hallmarks of a self-radicalized “lone wolf” attack, is a reminder that the single best way to combat domestic terrorism is with a policy that’s both mundane and yet politically loaded: gun control.
Amanda Marcotte March 17, 2021 The best tool for fighting terrorism [Uhh…. wow! It is almost difficult to comprehend the level of her cluelessness. Has she any sense of history? Or reality for that matter.
If she begins to show signs of being connected to reality I would like to suggest she start her study of history with gun control in Lexington and Concord in April of 1775.—Joe]
With HR127 being brought forward in early February of 2021, somebody tipped me off to a very small page where the phrase of the Second Amendment was being censored. So we tried to replicate what we saw with an experiment. On Monday the 15th of February, First I posted a screenshot of the censored post, and it was fact-checked and censored behind the fact-check wall. Then I took a screenshot of the actual Second Amendment on Google and the same thing happened.
They were trying to tie it back to some misquoting of George Washington. They were saying the Second Amendment was fact-checked as not true.
Perhaps, in their reality, it doesn’t actually exist. I’m okay with that. But their friends and relatives really should see that they get the help they need rather than letting them let them cause others harm when they are experiencing such delusions.—Joe]
We propose to build directly upon our longstanding, prior r&d in AI/machine ethics in order to attempt to make real the bluesky idea of AI that can thwart mass shootings, by bringing to bear its ethical reasoning. The r&d in question is overtly and avowedly logicist in form, and since we are hardly the only ones who have established a firm foundation in the attempt to imbue AI’s with their own ethical sensibility, the pursuit of our proposal by those in different methodological camps should, we believe, be considered as well. We seek herein to make our vision at least somewhat concrete by anchoring our exposition to two simulations, one in which the AI saves the lives of innocents by locking out a malevolent human’s gun, and a second in which this malevolent agent is allowed by the AI to be neutralized by law enforcement. Along the way, some objections are anticipated, and rebutted.
“…some objections are anticipated, and rebutted.” Uhhh… No.
Here are the objections they anticipated, paraphrasing:
Why not legally correct AIs instead of ethically correct?
What about “outlaw’ manufactures that make firearms without the AI?
What about hackers bypassing the AI?
Their responses, paraphrasing in some cases:
“There is no hard-and-fast breakage between legal obligations/prohibitions and moral ones; the underlying logic is seamless across the two spheres. Hence, any and all of our formalisms and technology can be used directly in a ‘law-only’ manner.”
Even if the perpetrator(s) had “illegal firearms” in transit other AIs in a sensor rich environment “would have any number of actions available to it by which a violent future can be avoided in favor of life.”
“This is an objection that we have long anticipated in our work devoted to installing ethical controls in such things as robots, and we see no reason why our approach there, which is to bring machine ethics down to an immutable hardware level cannot be pursued for weapons as well.”
The first objection and rebuttal doesn’t really require any response. It just doesn’t matter to me. Sure, whatever.
They dismiss the second objection with a presumption of unknowable knowledge. People smuggle massive quantities of drugs in vehicles even though the vehicles are searched by any number of sensors, dogs, and dedicated humans. What makes them think a single firearm can be possibly be detected by semi-passive or even active sensors?
More fundamentally they are avoiding the objection and providing their critics with the response of “If there are any other number of actions available” without an AI controlling access to the firearm then you don’t need the AI in the gun to begin with.
The third objection puts on full display their ignorance of firearms and perhaps mechanical devices in general. To demonstrate the absurdity of their claim imagine someone saying they were going to put an ethical AI, at an “immutable hardware level”, on a knife so it could not be used to harm innocent life.
Such people should, and would be, laughed off the stage into obscurity. It should also happen to those who seriously suggest it is possible to do this for firearms.—Joe]
From the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSG). They claim to believe that the D.C. ban on open carry saved lives on Wednesday. They also claim to believe:
White supremacy and racism are inextricably linked with the gun movement and are used to stoke delusion and incite violence.
That’s a real laugh. I would like to suggest people that suspect that might be true visit their local gun range or store. Have a chat with my son-in-law, or just look through some of my new shooter reports such as:
MEDIA CONTACT: Andrew Patrick firstname.lastname@example.org (c) 828-712-7603
Insurrection is a Continuing Threat to Democracy; Urgent and Immediate Response is Needed Now President Trump Dangerous, Unfit to Lead; Law Enforcement Must Be Held Accountable; and Guns Must be Outlawed from Statehouses and Polling Places
WASHINGTON — As the United States grapples with the many disturbing truths that have been exposed in the aftermath of a violent, armed mob of insurrectionists besieging the United States Capitol — the very center of our democracy — the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is calling for emergency action.
This week’s events represent the disastrous culmination of decades of collusion between extremist and racist forces on the far-right and America’s gun lobby. Insurrectionism — the anti-democratic belief that armed violence is a patriotic and acceptable part of political discourse — has helped extremist elected officials, including President Trump, gain support by deluding their followers with paranoid conspiracy theories. The gun lobby was more than happy to contribute to sow the seeds of rebellion with outrageous theories that support more and more gun stockpiling. They are aided by a fringe, yet influential, far-right media ecosystem that profits from the misinformation and social media platforms that allow this treacherous ideology to spread unabated.
White supremacy and racism are inextricably linked with the gun movement and are used to stoke delusion and incite violence.
Finally, the disparities in policing tactics between the largely white mob at the Capitol and people of color legitimately and peacefully protesting police violence at the White House and other locations across America must be acknowledged as grossly inequitable and immediately rectified.
The attack on the U.S. Capitol provided stark evidence that citizens who for years have been told they needed to prepare to engage in overthrow of the government were not afraid to breach what should have been the most sacred barriers in order to use violence to affect an election. This week, the President and his private army showed us what happens when the insurrectionist idea becomes an insurrectionist reality — a physical and spiritual assault on American democracy.
As we move forward as a nation, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is calling for the following immediate actions:
The immediate removal or resignation of President Donald Trump to ensure the safety and security of all people in this country. President Trump has continuously incited and encouraged the insurrectionist movement and its embrace of gun violence, which endangers lives and threatens our republic.
The protection of the essential functions of government by banning guns from state government buildings and polling places. Without universal prohibitions on open carry such as the strong gun laws in Washington, D.C., state capitals across the country face armed threats and must protect their lawmakers and citizens. We must allow people to exercise their constitutional rights and debate our policy in the people’s houses, free of intimidation or fear.
Effective and equitable protection by law enforcement. As the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives said this week, “In a time when the public should rightfully expect and receive the fair and consistent deployment and execution of duties from law enforcement professionals, disparate operating procedures for like scenarios are unacceptable…”
Washington, D.C.’s strong gun laws were part of the reason we did not see more death and violence this week. Though rioters were armed, the city’s law banning open carry saved lives and saved democracy. But because insufficient protections exist across the country, lawmakers and citizens in far too many state capitals are at-risk. The months leading up to the 2020 elections were rife with examples of insurrectionists storming statehouses and engaging in political intimidation. Without protections in place going forward, we cannot know the additional carnage that could still come.
Urgent action is needed now. The threat is not over. Already, the same insurrectionists who attempted the failed coup at the Capitol are organizing on social media in preparation for inauguration week and the opening of state legislatures. The sooner laws are in place across the country protecting the people, lawmakers and democracy, the safer we will be.
Guns have no place in shopping malls or other places in which crowds of people gather. Mayfair has a strict no-gun policy. If the shooter had complied with that policy, no one would have been hurt yesterday.
New Leader in “Dumbest Statement By Elected Official” category. GFZ fail.
Yup. Incredibly dumb. At first I thought it had to be some live response to a question or something. I could see someone saying something like that while under some stress in a live situation. But no. This was a written statement released from the Mayor’s office.
The stupid, or perhaps chutzpah, really runs deep in these people.—Joe]
Why is the Second Amendment the single go-to amendment for the assault weapon-toting people concerned that gun regulations take away their constitutional rights? Why not take a moment to read a bit from the Ninth Amendment advocating for my constitutional right provided by our government for “…obtaining happiness and safety”? I am finding it difficult to feel any sense of safety knowing someone could be packing heat at my grocery store, movie theater or local bars. Any answer for me?
That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
But it was not part of the Bill of Rights in our reality. And, it had nothing to do with the government providing it.
Joan, please check with your mental health providers and see if your meds need to be adjusted.—Joe]
So we’ll lose 100k to Covid and another 100k to self-inflicted dumbass shootings.
STAY FKING HOME @flopperdog Tweeted on April 1, 2020 [I realize arithmetic, or in many cases even numbers, are not within the domain of knowledge for these people. So, I’ll take care of that for this numbers illiterate.
So, assuming a constant population, at that rate it will take over 218 years to achieve the 100k number asserted. Of course the population is almost certainly going to increase instead of remain constant. But, the rate of unintentional firearms deaths have been falling:
Assuming a linear* rate of fall that current 0.14 rate will drop to zero about half way through the year 2034 with a rate of 0.132 at the beginning of 2020. The area under that triangle from the beginning of 2020 until it drops to zero at year 2034.625 is 0.965 per 100K of the population. Assuming a rough population of about 280,000,000 that means about 2,700 people will die in the next 14 years due to unintentional firearm deaths before the rate drops to zero.
But, of course, the rate could increase some due to new ownership and potential lack of training. But with 100,000,000+ current owners the “worst” case is that the total number of gun owners increases to something like 200,000,000 adults.
Assuming the worst case, all unintentional firearms deaths are due to new owner gun sales inspired by COVID-19, and their rate of unintentional death by firearm is double the existing population for a few years before they are trained it is still far less than 100,000.
My rough estimate is that this dup (or evil) flopperdog is probably off by something like a factor of 25.
Not bad. I expected worse.—Joe]
* Poor assumption. It’s probably going to be closer to a decaying exponential but I don’t want to bother doing the curve fitting to find a better model. Besides, I doubt even one out of 1000 anti-gun people understand linear interpolation yet alone curve fitting and integration.
… a growing trend in Seattle: municipal employees increasingly seeing their work as part of a broader agenda of radical social change. Over the past five years, the City of Seattle has rapidly added personnel under the auspices of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Christopher Peguero, for example, manager of the equity program at Seattle City Light, views his role as much more than providing reliable electricity to utility customers. As Peguero explained in a recent interview on the City of Seattle blog, public utilities can be instrumental in the fight against white supremacy. “Race is most central to addressing institutional oppression since it is central to historical inequity in the United States,” he says. “I feel that an inclusive model is the only way that we will ever reach collective liberation from institutional oppression.”
There are several more examples but I particularly like this one:
The Seattle Public Schools’ Ethnic Studies Task Force has launched a new math curriculum based on the idea that the “Western” model of instruction has “[disenfranchised] people and communities of color” and legitimized “systems that contribute to poverty and slave labor.” To fight this injustice, the task force argues, schools must transition “from individualistic to collectivist thinking” and implement a new math curriculum that will “liberate people and communities of color.”
This is like something out of Atlas Shrugged or “The Crazy Years” as described in some of Robert Heinlein’s books. Stuff that was just too crazy to actually ever be real. But as I’ve heard people say before, “Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.”
I could never have even imagined this on my own for a fictional story. I think this is a sign I should move back to Idaho. I would rather they build their utopia without me and my tax contributions.
There are far better ways to protect your family than a gun. Get a life insurance policy.
Gabrielle Blair @designmom Tweeted on November 24, 2019 [If true, that also means there are far better ways to protect family from mass shooters and home invasions than gun control. Just get a life insurance policy.
This is what they think of you. You are nothing more than a source of income to your family.
Kanye had tripped over the same wire as [Peter] Thiel.
At some point minority political grievances transformed into minority political activism. And from there moved into just politics.
Claiming the existence of voting blocks along minority group lines benefits certain politicians looking for voter blocks. And it can benefit professional middlemen who present themselves as speaking for entire community in order to gain their own forms of preferment.
But this, is an exceptionally dangerous juncture. And one that each rights issue in turn has arrived at. It suggests, that you are only a member of a recognized minority group so long as you accept the specific grievances, political grievances, and resulting electoral platforms that other people have worked out for you.
Step outside of these lines and you are not a person with the same characteristics you had before but you have something differently from some prescribed norm. You have the characteristic taken away from you.
So Thiel, is no longer gay once he endorses Trump. Kanye West is no longer black, when he does the same thing.
This suggests black isn’t a skin color or a race. Or at least not these things alone. It suggest that black, like gay, is in fact a political ideology. This presumption goes so deep and is so rarely mentioned that is generally simply assumed.
[I am extremely impressed with this book. Murray researches and explains, with great clarity, some of the things I have been calling mass delusion (see also here and here). Amazon describes the book as follows and with the diagnosis of “mass hysteria”. Perhaps that is a more correct phrase than I use:
In his devastating new book The Madness of Crowds, Douglas Murray examines the twenty-first century’s most divisive issues: sexuality, gender, technology and race. He reveals the astonishing new culture wars playing out in our workplaces, universities, schools and homes in the names of social justice, identity politics and intersectionality.
We are living through a postmodern era in which the grand narratives of religion and political ideology have collapsed. In their place have emerged a crusading desire to right perceived wrongs and a weaponization of identity, both accelerated by the new forms of social and news media. Narrow sets of interests now dominate the agenda as society becomes more and more tribal–and, as Murray shows, the casualties are mounting.
Readers of all political persuasions cannot afford to ignore Murray’s masterfully argued and fiercely provocative book, in which he seeks to inject some sense into the discussion around this generation’s most complicated issues. He ends with an impassioned call for free speech, shared common values and sanity in an age of mass hysteria.
He describes some of the many ways Google search results demonstrate some sort of bizarre bias. For example, do an image search for “white couples”. About half of the results will be interracial. A image search for “black couples” shows something approaching 100% black couples. Similar results occur when doing image searches for “heterosexual couples” versus “gay couples”. This has to be deliberate. And to what end? It has to some sort of insanity.
He describes the 2017 protest at Evergreen College in far more detail than I had ever heard before. Amazing stuff. Over the top, unbelievably bat-shit crazy stuff. The things the students were saying and doing would have had me drawing my gun and, had I been unable to withdraw from the insanity, shot my way out of it. Those people were, and probably still are, living in an alternate universe that only has peripheral connections to ours.
Via his research and analysis I find myself hopeful that we will soon have a critical mass of people which will stop the tide of near insanity washing over us and some semblance of normality will be restored.
I expect that when such restoration occurs it will take far less time than what it did to get here. Perhaps only months as the delusion fades into obscurity. Also expect people who had once appeared to be in full alignment with the insanity claim, “I always had my doubts and never really believed it.”
I just wish I was reading a science fiction or even psychological thriller novel rather than current news stories. But such books would never be successful. In order to be mostly believable fiction has to make sense.—Joe]
They locked down 5’s school today because they found ammunition on the ground. She’s in kindergarten. Ban guns. Ban all guns. I don’t care. Ban guns.
Andy Wilczak (@heyDrWil) Tweeted October 23, 2019 [He has since deleted the tweet.
Interesting school response to ammunition. Makes for an easy “denial of service attack”. Some kid wants to be a jerk and they throw a handful of .22 cartridges over the fence into the school yard and the kids have to go into lock down rather than get a recess.
It’s an even more interesting response of Mr. Wilczak. A presence of a few loose rounds of ammunition with no injuries and extremely unlikely potential for injury is enough for him to justify the elimination of 10% of the Bill of Rights. What kind of mental issues, besides Hoplophobia, does he have? One could justify the elimination of the entire Bill of Rights with whatever criteria Wilczak is hallucinating.
Note that in addition noting the crap for brains exhibited by Wilczak you should also never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
State Estimators Struggle To Define Assault Weapon
“Whether I had a 5 round, 10 round, 15, whatever, I mean it would still be capable of holding, in theory, more than 10 that would then put it in the parameters of this ban,” explained Cunningham.
But that’s not how Gail Schwartz Ban Assault Weapons Now chairwoman sees it. She wasn’t at the meeting but last month in an interview month said the ban is an attempt to prevent weapons she says are designed for mass murder.
“What we’re trying to do is prevent the sale of military grade assault weapons such as the AR-15 and the AK-47 being sold in the state of Florida,” said Schwartz.
Putting aside the fact that no firearms matching the new AR-15s and “AK-47s” being sold in Florida have ever been issued to (probably) any military on the planet there is enough remaining nonsense to make a convincing case these people should be told they don’t know what they are talking about and then ignored.
We’ve been telling them since before the 1994 “assault weapon” ban that you can’t define “assault weapon” in an unambiguous way. They can’t grasp that reality. This is true even when unbiased experts tell them they are talking nonsense.
They are simply reality impaired. The grownups need to take charge here.
Regarding the Gibson bakery next to the Oberlin SJW college stuff from a over a month. The bakery stopped a couple of shoplifters and prosecuted them. They ultimately plead guilty. The college encouraged, and some professors participated in, protests of the racism of the bakery owners. This libel and slander resulted in great economic and reputational harm to the bakery and owners. They sued and won millions of dollars from the college. See also here.
I found this in my overloaded queue of things to blog about:
Here’s Oberlin’s litigation position, from its court filings: “Gibson bakery’s archaic chase-and-detain policy regarding suspected shoplifters was the catalyst for the protests. The guilt or innocence of the students is irrelevant to both the root cause of the protests and this litigation.” Get that? Whether the students accused of shoplifting had actually been shoplifting or not was irrelevant to whether it was fair to accuse the store of racism etc for detaining the students as shoplifters. The fault lay with the bakery owners for daring to actually stop and prosecute shoplifters!
Wow! The college lawyers actual said that. Not only is chasing and detaining shoplifters “archaic” but the guilt of the students is irrelevant. An ordinary person who would claim this in my presence would get a laugh and an immediate dismissal from me as having crap for brains. But a lawyer, supposedly trained to respect the law, claiming this is mind boggling.
What color is the sky in their universe? What sort of twisted world view thinks they can get away with this? These are the crazy years prophesized of by Heinlein. Either this is the end of times for rational thought or it is the wake up call for the adults to take charge.
Do all #Conservative men have down there and feel it’s necessary to compensate by having the biggest #gun possible? They sure get #Triggered when you point out that the Fore Fathers wouldn’t stand for the current relaxed gun laws in this country.
Those people who are online making fun of members of Congress are a disgrace, and there is no need for anyone think that is unacceptable [sic]. We’re gonna shut them down and work with whoever it is to shut them down, and they should be prosecuted. You cannot intimidate members of Congress, threaten members of Congress. It is against the law and it’s a shame in this United States of America.
She goes on to blame President Trump for the general disrespect of Congress and the media.
I would like to suggest that if Rep Wilson didn’t have such crap for brains as to not realize people have the right, guaranteed by the First Amendment, to make fun of members of congress then she might enjoy a little more respect. But since you can’t fix stupid it looks like she is going to have to suffer being mocked and disrespected as long as she continues to open her mouth in public.—Joe]
Update: Others have expressed similar opinions but Michael Z. Williamson wins the Internet so far. This is just part of one of the first paragraphs of Challenge Accepted, Congresswhore
Per the First Amendment, Common Law, and in fact, Common Sense, I have the right to mock you however I wish. If I think you have the manners of a Denebian Slime Devil, then that’s what I’ll say. If I think you’re a textbook Demorrhoid–ignorant, retarded, bigoted, stupid and humorless–I’ll say so.