Ignorance and/or stupidity?

Via email from Bill J.:


Does that mean that this liberal wants…

  • Women to be banned from entering schools and college campuses?
  • Women to be banned from any establishment selling alcohol?
  • Women to be banned from polling places on election days?
  • Women to be banned from all government meetings?
  • Women to be banned from all airports?
  • Women to be locked up at all times that they are not in use?
  • Some women to be banned outright, simply because they look too scary?


  • Does she also think that guys should be allowed to have more than one?
  • And that you should be able to install a silencer on your woman?

Perhaps this was not well thought out.

Quote of the day—Sunny BoycottNRA ❤ @srfuzy

Why are we even giving her the time of day…@DLoesch is a female version of Hitler.. who knew in one Presidency term we’d have a male and female modern day HITLER


Sunny BoycottNRA ❤ @srfuzy
Tweeted on March 16th, 2018 and deleted by the morning of March 17th.
[You have to wonder… is it profound ignorance that enabled Sunny to concluded that HITLER is a generic insult like “pond scum” or “jerk”? Or do they live in some sort of delusional reality where Hitler didn’t confiscate firearms before sending “the deplorables” to the death camps?

In any case, two things are clear:

  1. It is very telling when they have insults and we have SCOTUS decisions
  2. Rule #3, SJWs always project.


Lies and ignorance are the best they can muster

Lots of examples here but the conclusion is:

If “gun control” extremists actually want to ban “weapons of war”… why are they not calling for actual weapons of war to be banned with their zombie “assault weapon ban”?

And if all they want to do with this rotting, shambling piece of legislation is only ban “weapons of war” – as they’ve been trying to proclaim for nearly a month now – then why is all that other stuff included in the blast radius?

Perhaps they have no idea what they are talking about.
And perhaps they are being… less than honest.

To answer the question, it is because lies and ignorance are the best they can muster.

Something new from an anti-gun advocate

Via email from Drew Rinella we have What I Saw Treating the Victims From Parkland Should Change the Debate on Guns:

On Wednesday night, Rubio said at a town-hall event hosted by CNN that it is impossible to create effective gun regulations because there are too many “loopholes,” and that a “plastic grip” can make the difference between a gun that is legal and one that is illegal. But if we can see the different impacts of high- and low-velocity rounds clinically, then the government can also draw such distinctions.

As a radiologist, I have now seen high-velocity AR-15 gunshot wounds firsthand, an experience that most radiologists in our country will never have. I pray that these are the last such wounds I have to see, and that AR-15-style weapons and high-capacity magazines are banned for use by civilians in the United States, once and for all.

I’m almost pleased the anti-gunners have come up with a new idea. After being involved in this issue for almost 25 years I have never heard this one before and it has become almost boring to slap down the proposals put forth. But, there is a reason this idea has never been openly proposed before.

This idea should work “well”. Almost all centerfire rifles produce velocities which cause the types of wounds she is concerned about. Banning all such rifles would produce an “interesting” response. The millions of hunters who have long thought “They will never come after me because <reasons>” will suddenly be activated, become vocal advocates, and vote with a ferocity we have not seen since the civil war. And if defeated in the political field, well, the ferocity might just continue to rival the previous civil war in other areas where the hunters have a significant advantage over their antagonists.

Einstein agrees

Sometimes you just have to shake your head in wonder and the inability of anti-gun people to process numbers:

Concerned for his life, he retrieved a 28mm pistol from his car, loaded it, tucked it into his waistband and returned to the waiting room, where he called police to report that he was in a dangerous situation and needed protection. His pistol was a model that fires high-velocity rounds, similar to a rifle.

Correction: An earlier version of this post mistakenly referred to a 28mm gun as a .28mm gun.

How difficult is it for the writer, proofreader, and/or editor to engage a little bit of common sense and think about what a 28mm gun would look like? There are 25.4mm in an inch, so this pistol, “that fires high-velocity rounds, similar to a rifle” would fire projectiles well over an inch in diameter at rifle velocities.

These people could not have possibly even seen a modest number of pistols. Furthermore if they had ever fired a common .30 caliber rifle they would know that a pistol firing a projectile greater than 3.5 times the diameter (and at least ten times the mass) would cause extremely serious injury to the shooter.

That they discovered they had an error with the caliber and managed to “correct” it with an even more egregious error indicts to me they do not care about the truth. Which leads me to something Albert Einstein said,

Wenn es sich um Wahrheit und Gerechtigkeit handelt, gibt es nicht die Unterscheidung zwischen kleinen und grossen Problemen. Denn die allgemeinen Gesichtspunkte, die das Handeln der Menschen betreffen, sind unteilbar. Wer es in kleinen Dingen mit der Wahrheit nicht ernst nimmt, dem kann man auch in grossen Dingen nicht vertrauen…

When the issue is one of Truth and Justice, there can be no differentiating between small problems and great ones. For the general viewpoints on human behaviour are indivisible. People who fail to regard the truth seriously in small matters, cannot be trusted in matters that are great.

The only reasonable conclusion is that Einstein would have agreed with us that anti-gun people are not to be trusted with truth and justice.

Quote of the day—Anonymous

THERE IS NO REASON TO OWN A GUN. The only thing a gun is good for is killing people. I am so happy to finally be rid of my Rifle and AR-15 and i think Trump is heroic for attempting to clamp down in guns.

March 1, 2018
I just proudly turned in my guns
[I guess this settles it then. Since I have fired, approximately, 150,000 rounds without killing anyone it proves my guns were malfunctioning the entire time.

And furthermore Anonymous apparently believes there is never any instances when it is praiseworthy or even appropriate to kill someone.

Anonymous has crap for brains.

Don’t ever let anyone tell you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Facts can be confusing

This post was inspired by a cartoon sent to me by Will S.


It was only in the last few thousand years that facts and logic began to have a toehold on our understanding of world around us. Even then rational thought would lose its footing and slide back down into the dark ages for a few hundred years at a time.

My hypothesis is that there is a reason for this. Reliance on facts and rational thought created an evolutionary advantage which allowed for the survival of a greater number of less fit people. These less fit, emotionally driven, people drag society down again.

The repeated rise and fall of reliance on rational thought is like a cleaning process. Each time the gene pool was cleaned it became a more biased toward rationality and human society became more advanced.

I had hoped that we need not go through another dark age but there are times when I fear we are nearing another downward slide. How else can you explain the continued infatuation with socialism? What other political system has experienced so many attempts and resulted in so many catastrophic failures? How else can you explain the masses of people who blame private ownership of firearms for the massacres of school children when government disarmed the adults, failed to prosecute the villain prior to his attack, and failed to come to the rescue even though they were close by? The government which failed at ever step of the way is now supposed to be tasked with the job of attacking those who held no responsibility for the creating the circumstance, or failing to stop the attack. This is not the result of a rational thought process. This is crazy talk and to me is a strong indicator that the slippery slope into another dark age is only a small misstep away.

Quote of the day—National Rifle Association

The law-abiding members of the NRA had nothing at all to do with the failure of that school’s security preparedness, the failure of America’s mental health system, the failure of the National Instant Check System or the cruel failures of both federal and local law enforcement.

Despite that, some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice. In time, these brands will be replaced by others who recognize that patriotism and determined commitment to Constitutional freedoms are characteristics of a marketplace they very much want to serve.

Let it be absolutely clear. The loss of a discount will neither scare nor distract one single NRA member.

National Rifle Association
February 24, 2018
NRA Statement on Corporate Partnerships
[I’m reminded of:

Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.

Niccolò Machiavelli
The Prince

Either our opponents are so desperate for a “victory” of any type they are willing to throw “pebbles” at people with guns, and/or they are ignorant of human psychology, and/or they have crap for brains.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Hogg

An 18-year-old that has a history of being a bad kid shouldn’t be able to get hundreds of rounds of a weapon in a matter of days.

David Hogg
February 25, 2018
Florida shooting survivor vows to stay out of school until pols pass gun reform at N.J. rally
[Even if we give the kid the benefit of the doubt and assume “rounds of a weapon” was a misunderstanding of the reporter he still is profoundly ignorant about how difficult it would be to prevent someone from obtaining hundreds, or tens of thousands, of rounds of ammunition. If he doesn’t understand this then he must also believe the war on drugs is working.

The kid must have crap for brains. But, what do you expect from a high school dropout?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Michael Z. Williamson

When someone attacks a school or other soft target, the response is going to involve people with guns. People with guns who are driving distance away are less effective than people with guns on site.

You cannot disagree with this. It is a fact. If you attempt to disagree, you’re just not living in the real world. Go see a professional, do not ever buy a gun, do not vote. You probably shouldn’t drive, drink or handle matches either. You probably need an audio track of “Breathe in, breathe out.”

Michael Z. Williamson
February 23, 2018
Why Liberals Are Wrong About School Shootings (And Everything Else)
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ben Shapiro‏ @benshapiro

Only the government should have guns to protect us. We can’t expect government employees to confront armed criminals. Pick one.

Ben Shapiro‏ @benshapiro
Tweeted on February 23, 2018
[Shapiro has a logical response and expectation.

Unfortunately this is not how the minds of many people work. I have posted about the problem many times before. Many people do not have a process to determine truth from falsity (see also these posts). The truth depends upon how they feel. I have a lot of experience with dealing with people like this. I literally have decades of experience.

In regards to the first two sentence quoted above, the way their mind works is as follows: They have a feeling in regards to each sentence independent from the other. They both feel true to them. Therefore both sentences are true.

It used to be that I literally would be told that I should do two different things which were mutually exclusive. I would have to be at two places at the same time to accomplish them. When I would point this out they would get angry and say things like, “You always have to get your way!” Their feelings trumped the laws of physics. If you look into the characteristics of some personality disorders you will find that they create situations where their associates/family/friends/etc. “can’t win”. They will demand others adhere to their rules/requests/whatever but when you look at the requests you will discover it is impossible to comply with all of them. You will always be in a position to be found at fault and punished.

My counselor when dealing with these things in my personal life, Staci, told me there are two characteristics that are common to all personality disorders:

  1. The more close the relationship the more severe the symptoms. A spouse and their children will have a more difficult relationship than extended family which will be worse than co-workers which will be worse than with strangers. They can frequent “hold it together” while at work or dealing with strangers and still make life a living hell for their spouse and children.
  2. They will not, or perhaps more accurately cannot, admit they are to blame for anything. If you point out to a normal person they could have handled a situation differently and that would perhaps have resulted in a better outcome they can reflect on it, think it through, and accept they may have made some contribution to the poor outcome. The person with the personality disorder is unable to do this. Among other things this results in the “can’t win” requests. They may have made requests that are physically impossible to comply with. Yet, it is your fault the requests were not complied with.

Hence, I see a lot of evidence that many anti-gun people have mental health issues. Look around with just a hint of the correct filter and you can see it too.

They created “Gun Free Zones” around schools and over the years hundreds of children and teachers have been murdered. This is your fault. It is beyond their ability to recognize they contributed in any way.

They banned guns in Chicago/D.C./etc and have horrific murder rates committed with firearms inside those political jurisdictions. Just outside those jurisdictions such as in Indiana and Virginia, where guns are legal, the murder rate is much lower. We conclude the laws where the crime rate is lower should be emulated in the high crime areas. The anti-gun people conclude their gun control isn’t working because guns are available outside their gun free paradise—it is the fault of Indiana and Virginia “lax gun laws”. This is your fault. Again, it is beyond their ability to recognize they contributed in any way.

These people are “nuts” and we should not be trying to negotiate or compromise with them. They cannot determine truth from falsity in a manner normal people would recognize as valid.

As I was advised by Staci, life with these people will never be easy. If you can’t terminate the relationship then you will always have a “fiery relationship” with them. It is beyond their ability to think and behave in a normal manner. The best way you can deal with these people is to set limits and enforce them. You tell them, “If you behave in this manner we will not tolerate it. This is what we will do in response.” Then, if they misbehave anyway, you do what you said you would do. They have to have consequences for their misbehavior.

The most appropriate limits I have come up with are 18 USC 241 and 242. It’s long past time to enforce them.—Joe]

Quote of the day—LucasJackson

We’re 17 children closer to the Australian solution. Unfortunately because of the pervasive gun cult of tiny-handed cowards, we’re not close.

February 14, 2017
Comment to The Latest: Student: Suspect in school shooting ‘weird kid’
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday.

This idiot thinks what they did to gun owners in Australia is plausible. It has neither legal or practical plausibility.—Joe]

Full dependence on the government enables evil

From the FBI today:

FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida

On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”

Good security depends on multiple independent layers. Law enforcement is one layer. Threat intelligence is another. In this instance law enforcement failed. This is how it should have gone down.

Denying access to the protected assets is another. This requires more than signs and stern words. It frequently requires people with guns. This is something the political left is fine with if the protected asset is a bank, government building, celebrity or politician, but it the protected asset is a common person and especially the children of a commoner then they go hysterical and demand even less physical security. This is clearly some sort of insanity and/or evil and should be treated as such.

It’s nice when they self identify

I’ve used this car wash many times. And I walked right by it today.

From the Bellevue Washington police blog:

What started as a routine trip to the car wash ended in a melee and an arrest this past Sunday in Bellevue. Yesterday afternoon shortly before 3 p.m., Bellevue police responded to a road rage incident in the parking lot of the Brown Bear car wash in the Factoria neighborhood of Bellevue. While responding, police learned that there was a minor rear-end crash involving two vehicles that were waiting in line for the car wash. One of the drivers got out of his car to take photos of the damage to the vehicles. The other driver then reportedly got out of his car, pointed a handgun at the victim, and made threats.

When police arrived, the suspect, a 40 year-old Bellevue resident, refused to exit his vehicle or follow the Officers’ instructions. Officers attempted to remove the suspect from the vehicle, and the suspect fought, punching one of the Officers in the face. The suspect allegedly threatened to kill the police and made disparaging comments about the victim’s perceived ethnicity. Police used a taser to subdue the suspect, who was arrested. The Officer that was punched had a minor injury and was transported to the hospital as a precaution. The suspect’s vehicle, a red Chevrolet Camaro with a custom license plate “DIRTBAG”, was impounded to the Bellevue Police Department for a search warrant.The license plate of the suspect's vehicle.

The suspect is expected to be charged today in King County Superior Court with first degree assault with a firearm, assault on a police officer, malicious harassment, obstructing police, and resisting arrest.

If all the dirt bags would identify themselves in such a manner it make so many things much easier.

Quote of the day—Patricia Eddington

Some of these bullets, as you saw, have an incendiary device on the tip of it, which is a heat seeking device.

So, you don’t shoot deer with a bullet that size. If you do you could cook it at the same time.

Patricia Eddington
Assembly Woman D-NY
July 2007
[Via a tweet from Firearms Policy Coalition.

See also:

I can be pretty creative if I try. But even if I was given weeks to try I don’t think I could come up with some of the crazy things the anti-gun people say.

I used to listen to a morning D.J. on the radio which regularly featured stupid stuff that people said and did. It had a soundbite of something like, “Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.”* The things these people come up with illustrate the truth of that statement.

At times it’s mind boggling that our enemies are this stupid and yet after the fifty years I have been aware of the battle they still haven’t been defeated.

But does does explain why they push for “smart guns”? Do they recognize they are too stupid to use them without technological assistance?—Joe]

* Mark Twain said something similar.

Anti-gun people say the strangest things

Via the FPC:


One might think this sort of thing was a “brain fart” or some slip of the tongue that occurs when under the stress of an interview or public speaking event. But I’ve seen these sort of things happen in written communication. They simply do not have the mental processes to handle rational thought. This happens so frequently we have a name for it. It is called Peterson Syndrome.

How’s that going to work out?

I have to laugh at this:

Until recently, sheriff’s deputies notified offenders they weren’t allowed to possess firearms but gave them 24 hours to turn them in.

There was no mechanism, however, to make sure that the gun was actually turned in. Local law enforcement and state law enforcement officials would go house to house to enforce the laws as resources allowed, but the
process was expensive, slow and potentially dangerous.

The sheriff’s office is now working with the Office on the Status of Woman and others to develop a comprehensive plan for making sure everyone required to surrender their guns does so in a manner that’s safe for officers, according to Suzy Loftus, assistant chief legal counsel for the sheriff’s office.

So, going house to house and confiscating is considered dangerous? Who would have guessed?

So, now, they are going to “develop a comprehensive plan” where people surrender their guns “in a manner that’s safe for officers”.

Wow! These people are really stupid.

Apparently they are unable to conceive of the response, “No. Your move.”

How gun control works

From Rolf:


As I have said before:

How long does it take the average high school dropout to find a way around the ban? Yeah, that’s right, Einstein. The average high school dropout can get all the recreational drugs they want within an hour anytime of the day, any day of the week. So just how effective you think a background check would be in reducing the abuse of recreational drugs?

Now apply what you know about the recreational drug issue to firearms. A background check is totally pointless.

A similar argument can be made for nearly all gun control. Nearly all politicians know this. They have to have some objective other than reducing violent crime because it just doesn’t work and the data supports this conclusion.

Most people who have studied this believe the real objective is to increased the dependency on government and increase the political power of government officials. This line of reasoning can be extrapolated to “so they can implement a socialist state”. YMMV.

Quote of the day—Bernie Sanders 2020‏ @Bernie2020X

You are literally promoting anti Semitism and white supremacy. Guns do not belong in the hands of private citizens. Shame on you.

Bernie Sanders 2020‏ @Bernie2020X
Tweeted on January 7, 2018
[This was in response to Maj Toure‏ @MAJTOURE tweeting the four rules of firearm safety.

Many anti-gun people literally do not have the ability to think logically. This is an example of that.

Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]