There’s no question that gun rights groups like the NRA are winning the battle for hearts and minds.
March 5, 2015
America has more guns in fewer hands than ever before
[H/T to SayUncle.
This is in the Washington Post!
It makes me sad to say this but humans, in general, have a herd instinct. They want other people to like them and to be like other people. Facts, logical support, and consistency tend to be of less importance than being a member of large herd.
We have the facts, logic, and SCOTUS decisions on our side but for decades they had the herd. That is slowing changing. Their claim of “few hands than ever before” is probably false do to the justifiable concern by gun owners that gun ownership polls may be an intelligence gathering subterfuge by criminals (by this I intend to include people working for the government). There is also some funny business with the wording of things. If we are clearly winning hearts and minds then I find it difficult to believe that we aren’t increasing the size of the gun owner herd as well.
I can say, with increasing confidence, that my dream may one day come true.—Joe]
Bogus premise. False conclusion. 100% prejudice and paranoia against the inalienable right to self-defense.
The plaintiffs in these cases are suing because democracy failed them. They didn’t have the votes in the places where votes count: the ballot box at referendum time, the state legislature. They turned to the courts because the Constitution, and the judiciary that is supposed to enforce it, must check democracy’s excesses. Majorities are only entitled to have their way when they aren’t having their way with someone’s rights. But if constitutional interpretation is all about who has the most votes for a policy, why should the Court care about votes on an internet brief when it can look to the result of a real statewide election?
There are plenty of places for you to pitch your soapbox, court ain’t one of them.
March 4, 2015
[While in this instance Gura is not referring to gun rights litigation the principle is the same. This principle, as well as many others, appears to be lost on our opponents. It may benefit us to remind them of this at appropriate times.
It wouldn’t matter if 90% of the population were in favor of enslaving the other 10%. The U.S. Constitution does not allow for that and any laws enabling it can and should be struck down. The same applies to laws infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]
This certainly isn’t the way the cartoonist intended it but when I saw this I thought, “I’m all for saner gun laws. Guns are how mothers protect their children.”
If the cartoonist had realized people would so drastically misinterpret it would they have expressed it like this? I assume they would not. If this assumption is true then doesn’t that say something about the mind of the cartoonist?
They must have difficulty in comprehending the mindset of others, right? Is that the type of person who should be driving our public policies? I say no. If they can’t comprehend there even exists another viewpoint how can they possibly weigh the pros and cons of an issue? They can only be advocates for their narrow-minded views.
Defendants cannot support their position with any factual data regarding machineguns with respect to law abiding citizens. It cannot be done and there is no justification for § 922(o)’s prohibition with regard to a law abiding citizen…
Stephen D. Stamboulieh and Alan Alexander Beck
February 27, 2015
JAY AUBREY ISAAC HOLLIS Individually and as Trustee of the JAY AUBREY ISAAC HOLLIS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, Plaintiff,
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of the United States; B. TODD JONES, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearm and Explosives, Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[H/T to Ry for the Tweet.
Work is in progress on making new manufacture machine guns available to the general public. I am not a lawyer but it seems the ATF made some serious forced errors in regards to trusts. While legally a very narrow window of opportunity these may bear fruit when leveraged with the Heller, McDonald, and Mance decisions.
This is consistent with what we were thinking seven years ago while waiting for the Heller decision.—Joe]
Because it is applicable to current events I’m posting a gun cartoon that is actually more pro-gun rather than the anti-gun type I usually do.
Our opponents think they are clever but they are simply wearisome. Ammo bans don’t pass constitutional muster any more than gun bans do. It just costs us time and money to slap them down. Again.
We really need to prosecute these people and put an end to this type of nonsense.
This is deliberate deception on the part of the cartoonist. Over half of the deaths by bullets are self inflicted and there is no gun specific preventative that could successfully reduce the number of suicides. Beyond that death by bullet is not an “epidemic”. Both the absolute numbers and especially the raw numbers have been dropping during the last couple of decades despite there being more guns and bullets in circulation, more people having easier access to them, and more people being able to carry guns in public.
The cartoonist furthers their deception by ignoring the potential risk of Ebola. Some strains of Ebola have a 90% death rate. Even if it were as low as 25%, as one might speculate it would be with first class medical care, with infection rates as low at 5% of the population this could result in four million deaths in a year in the U.S. You would be hard pressed to imagine scenarios involving bullets that cause that many deaths unless the government were to try confiscation of guns (H/T to Don K. for the link). Which one might imagine the cartoonist is suggesting. Hence we can tentatively conclude the cartoonist is advocating for policies which will increase not only the death rate from Ebola due to resources being moved from mitigation of the Ebola threat but increasing the probability there will be an increase in the the death rate from bullets. That demonstrates crap for brains. But as we can see it is common in their profession.
#tinycockclub aka nra lapdogs, twist is a pleasure and a joy. Good times. #chickenshitcowards #gunsense #fuckthenra
Tweeted on December 23, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
Via a Tweet from BFD @BigFatDave.—Joe]
Physicians should continue to ask patients to immunize themselves against gun violence by getting rid of the guns.
Mike the Gun Guy
February 23, 2015
A Gun Violence Vaccine
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
When the government has a dog of a case, someone has to draw the short straw and argue it. In Henderson v. United States, Assistant to the Solicitor General Ann O’Connell drew that straw. It seems clear that the Court will side with petitioner Tony Henderson – a felon seeking the right to sell or otherwise dispose of firearms that he owns but can no longer legally possess. In offering concession after concession and various fallback options, the government offered a case study in controlled implosions.
Richard M. Re
February 25, 2015
Argument analysis: A controlled implosion
Via Firearms Policy @gunpolicy
[As we build a stronger and stronger foundation of case law more and more of the unconstitutional firearms laws and regulations will result in these sort of implosions. They are defending a house of cards and ultimate nearly all of it will fall to the fundamental principles.—Joe]
No. Take it from the women of America. Should a woman, wearing poor shoes for running, or with a young child, be required to attempt escape from one or more attackers rather than standing her ground and defending herself and other innocent life with the best available tools?
Notice the overweight, small headed, “angry white male”, gun owner? The cartoonist is demonstrating their prejudice and bigotry as well as their ignorance of who actually benefits from such laws.
So, rather than allow a woman to actually defend herself, the University of Colorado believes a woman can urinate her way out of a rape or she might just have to sit there and take it.
When will this madness end? And when will feminists demand that women on college campuses be allowed to protect and defend themselves against sexual assault?
February 23, 2015
Guns for women on campus make sense
Via a Tweet from Kevin Naugle @NaugleKevin.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Someone should point out to the cartoonist that guns are an evolved issue and that it is easy to demonstrate the gun is civilization. Furthermore at the time of the wooly mammoth weapons of the day were spears, bow and arrows, and clubs. It would appear the cartoonist would prefer we revert to such primitive times. I find this very confusing. But then, I frequently find people with crazy ideas confusing.
New Jersey authorities operate like the state is their personal fiefdom when it comes to gun permits and that needs to change. The rights of people like Mr. Almeida should not be subject to the arbitrary discretion of public officials for whom no reason will ever be good enough.
February 23, 2015
SAF Funds Challenge to New Jersey Carry Law
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Aside from the false stereotype of the overweight, goofy looking, flannel shirt wearing, gun owner there is a fair amount of truth in this.
Well-regulated as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Heller decision is close to what the cartoonist says (Heller pages 23 and 24) :
… the adjective “well-regulated” implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (“Regulate”: “To adjust by rule or method”); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to “a wellregulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”).
Of course the cartoonist intended to portray the NRA as ignorant and ridiculous but instead demonstrated their own ignorance and prejudice. You should not be surprised. It is “par for the course”.
I bet your motorized wheelchair & floral colored moomoo’s are off the hook. U got any in camo?@BigFatDave big fat sloppy tub of dickless goo
Donnie Brasco @D0NNIE_BRASC0
Tweeted on December 19, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from BFD @BigFatDave.—Joe]
Ry sent me an email with a link to this collection of gun cartoons. A few are duplicates of my collection but there a bunch of new ones as well. I’m going to be posting the ones I’m fairly certain are new to this blog starting with:
Not-so-smart? So perhaps our brainiac cartoonist could answer the following questions:
- What happens when the batteries go dead when the gun owner is in a life or death situation needing the gun to save their life?
- What happens when the gun is in the opposite hand from the watch, wrist-band, or hand with the RFID embedded chip which is occupied holding their child’s hand or a phone with which they are trying to call the police while in a life or death situation?
- What happens when the bad guy has a transmitter broadcasting on the same frequency as the RFID chip and the gun owner is in a life or death situation?
- Why do no law enforcement organization or military use this technology on their guns?
The answers are:
- The gun owner and perhaps other innocent life die because of a dead battery.
- The gun owner and perhaps other innocent life die because the RFID chip is out of range.
- The gun owner and perhaps other innocent life die because the RFID chip is blocked from authorizing the gun to shoot.
- Because they are smart enough to know the technology will put them and other innocent life at risk.
And furthermore the NRA and most gun owners don’t have a problem with the existence of “smart guns”. They have a problem with and correctly do object to the mandating of “smart-guns” on Second Amendment grounds.
“Smart guns” aren’t smart except in some very limited circumstances. This cartoonist isn’t very smart and should seek help for their prejudice.
As late as 1733 gentlemen of Virginia were said to be naked when they went in public without their swords. They appear not to have gone naked in this sense very often.
David Hackett Fischer
Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (America: A Cultural History)
[What does this tell you about the original intent of the Second Amendment?—Joe]
The worst part of the US is that even though the mass voices arguing against you have the combined IQ of a toddler, their votes are worth just as much.
That country needs some actual leadership to remove the guns and violence. Let the retards revolt and shoot them down with the very weapons they love so much and save countles innocent lives for the future.
January 6, 2015
Comment to 3D-Printed Guns Are Only Getting Better, and Scarier
[I would like to suggest Sir Malta improve his spelling, grammar, and measurements before he insists those opposing regulation of 3D printed guns “have the combined IQ of a toddler”. But perhaps if he persists in his desire to murder us it is better that he just keep thinking that.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
Via email from Jack M.—Joe]
Conflating crime and individual rights is a sign of hoplophobia, a serious mental illness. This calls for an intervention and medical treatment for PBS staff, not propaganda film production. Maybe they could show good faith and publicly sign up for a permanent personal felony-level gun ban, just to be safe.
January 12, 2015
PBS scraps ethics, assaults civil-rights group (NRA)
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]