Quote of the day—Chelsey Gentry-Tipton

Watching the congressman crying on live tv abt the trauma they experienced. Y is this so funny tho?

The very people that push pro NRA legislation in efforts to pad their pockets with complete disregard for human life. Yeah, having a hard time feeling bad for them.

Chelsey Gentry-Tipton
Nebraska Democratic Party Black Caucus Chair
June, 2017
Via Omaha World-Herald
[This is what they think of you.—Joe]

Prediction: Gimps, Dinosaurs, Crazies Are Next

First, they came for the Jews.
Then, they came for the women.
Next, they came for the blacks.
Thereafter, they came for the queers.
Moving forward, they’ll come for the gimps.
After that, they’ll come for the dinosaurs.
Subsequently, they’ll come for the crazies.
In the end, they’ll come for the Commies — because, logically, that batch can’t last.

The self-defense movement’s coming for you, too. Yes, you.

Yesterday, Nicki Stallard of the gay gun group Pink Pistols had an op-ed featured in The New York Times. Yes, you heard me right, The NYT. The Gray Lady. The Lefty Rag.

Nicki nailed it. The L.G.B.T. Case for Guns is quite possibly the most crisp, concise, salient piece I’ve ever read about marginalized classes and their right to self-defense. I’m not exaggerating.

Says Stallard:

This is a call to L.G.B.T. people to take their own defense seriously, and to question the left-leaning institutions that tell them guns are bad, and should be left to the professionals. Become a professional. You’re allowed. That’s what the Second Amendment is for. We can fight back when our lives depend on it.

Big steps happen when gun packs branch out.

Prediction: The next specialty gun groups to mobilize will be, in descending order: disabled people, seniors, and “the mentally ill”. (The latter being all of us, except for the busybodies who define insanity, but those folks wouldn’t be reading this blog, unless they’re paranoid and planning to terrorize all of us gunfolk.)

Together, let’s see how this story unfolds. Send a thank you note to Nicki and the New York Times, while you’re at it.

Lastly, I’m not forgetting about the white guys. It goes unsaid: you’re already at the tippy-top of the endangered species list.

Quote of the day—Michael Tomasky

Now, the next eight times some right-wing nut goes on a shooting spree, they’ll have “but James Hodgkinson!” at the ready.

So be it. I abhor this shooting, and I abhor all such shootings. And while I would agree that it was a damn good thing that the police were there, I would not agree that that just proves that more people should have guns so that more Hodgkinsons can be stopped before inflicting the maximum damage. Teachers and regular citizens aren’t cops. They don’t do repeated drills on taking down perps, and they shouldn’t.

Michael Tomasky
June 15, 2017
One Left-Wing Gunman Doesn’t Make a Movement
[I found it very telling that he went through a long list of political assassinations. He correctly labeled almost all the assassins as left-wing. He exempts John Wilkes Booth from the left-wing label even though he almost for certain was a Democrat and murdered a Republican. Not one of the assassins listed is “right-wing”, and I can’t think of any of the many mass shooters in our country one could call “right-wing”. In fact they almost all clearly identify as Democrat with some being apolitical.

Tomasky then predicts something about “the next eight times some right-wing nut goes on a shooting spree”… Well, if past performance is an indicator of future results then there will be about 500 left-wing mass shooters before we get eight right-wing shooters. And this doesn’t even get into the leftist governments who were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century.

It’s true, teachers and regular citizens aren’t cops. But it is clearly false that we don’t do repeated drills shooting bad guys. There were 90 people doing essentially that at the match I was at last Sunday (I came in 9th out of 24 in my division). And the weekend before there were 26 people doing at the match I participated in (I came in 1st out of 10). Every weekend and many week days there are matches in my area where hundreds of people practice shooting bad guys. Some of us are very, very good at this.

So, why does he claim we shouldn’t be doing this? The only reason I can think of is that he wants us to feel, and be, defenseless against both the left-wing individuals and the left-wing governments.

At one level it amuses me to see someone relate a large body of substantially correct data and then have that person arrive at a conclusion completely at odds with their own data. But on another level it’s a very sad commentary on the irrationality of the ordinary human.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Chris Collins

Capitol Police officers were heroes last week — their bravery and quick thinking probably saved the lives of Rep. Scalise and my other colleagues — but self-defense is my responsibility, too.

As Americans in my district and across the country know well, responsible, legal gun owners have every right to protect themselves, and that applies to members of Congress as well. I’ve worked to make sure these core values, preserved in the Constitution, are upheld. For my own protection, and for the protection of those around me, I’m putting these values into practice. Now, more than ever, I truly believe that the best place to be, during a terrible episode like the one in Alexandria, is next to a good guy with a gun.

Chris Collins
June 19, 2017
I’m a member of Congress. I’m going to start carrying a gun.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

And their point is?

From The Washington Post:

The gunman who opened fire on a GOP baseball team in Virginia had a local storage locker with more than 200 rounds of ammunition that he visited daily, including less than an hour before he shot more than 60 times at the team during a morning practice June 14.

I sometimes reload 200 rounds in the morning before I go to work. And then I shoot that many or more at the range at lunch time.

This explains why he got so few solid hits. He didn’t practice enough. But they don’t even suggest anything along those lines.

[sarcasm] I wonder what their intended point is? [/sarcasm]

To me this demonstrates their ignorance and/or maliciousness.

Quote of the day—Justice Anthony Kennedy

A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content discrimination,” which is “presumptively unconstitutional.” … A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

Justice Anthony Kennedy
June 19, 2017
MATAL, INTERIM DIRECTOR, UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE v. TAM
[H/T to Eugene Volokh and Say Uncle.

This should give gun owners protection against having their Second Amendment rights infringed upon because they belong to some extremist group such as the NRA or the Republican party.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Howard Hyde

The idea that right-leaning citizens, let alone congressmen, should have a right to defend themselves against left-wing antifa thugs, whether on a baseball field, in a mall, in a nightclub, or on a college campus, leaves them cold.

Howard Hyde
June 18, 2017
Gun control for thee, not for me
[One can easily make the case that leftists want gun control because they and their criminal, violent, constituents fear getting shot. Surveys show that criminal prisoners who identify as Democrats outnumber all other political affiliations combined by a factor of more than two to one. Leftist, by their very nature, are the type of people who have few inhibitions about using force against others.

So, it comes as no surprise that Democrats are opposed to people being allowed to carry guns for self defense. They are at risk of, literally, losing voters.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Peter Dreier

Incidents like the Virginia and San Francisco shootings inevitably lead to a debate over gun control. Here again the media, politicians, and advocacy groups play their scripted roles. The media quote Republicans and conservatives repeating their claims that tougher gun-control laws wouldn’t have prevented the Virginia shooting, because the shooter could have obtained the gun illegally. And, they add, gun control undermines our liberties. 

To provide “balance,” the media quote Democrats and gun-control advocates, repeating their claims that this specific shooting, and the epidemic of mass shootings, would be dramatically reduced if we restricted the sale of guns and ammunition, including sales across state lines, because shooters often obtain guns in states with lax laws and bring them to states with tough laws.

Peter Dreier
June 16, 2017
The Virginia Shooting Isn’t About Bernie. It’s About the Right’s Embrace of Guns.
[I’m more and more convinced that, as Michael Savage says, Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder. I haven’t read his book but I took a college class on, and have experienced enough, abnormal psychology to recognize it. In this case it is conclusive because he cannot see that his political beliefs contributed to the bad results. One thing common to all personality disorders is that, in their minds, they didn’t contribute, in any way, to a bad outcome. It is always someone else’s fault.

With that mindset he goes on to describe a delusional world that is nearly unrecognizable to normal people.

This nut job, Dreier, not only gets things wrong, but he gets his “facts”, essentially, backwards. In this case the guns were purchased legally in a state, Illinois, with some of the most strict gun control laws and brought the gun to a state with much more relaxed laws. Although I didn’t quote that portion of the article, he repeatedly claims the gun was an AR-15 (it was actually an SKS). Furthermore, gun sales across state lines are already restricted.

This idiot thinks he knows what his writing about but his story is very nearly wrong in a fractal way. There is no attention given to fundamental principles, he does not address the infringement of specific enumerated rights, his conclusions are wrong, the theme is wrong, the paragraphs are wrong, nearly every sentence is wrong, and some of the words are wrong.

He has crap for brains.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Hardy

[A]bout the nominee for the Secretary of the Army, Mark Green. All I need to know is that he believes an armed citizenry is a check and balance on the government, and that therefore citizens should be allowed to own anything the military has, including ships of war.

David Hardy
June 11, 2017
Army Secretary nominee sounds first rate
[Sounds right to me.—Joe]

Numbers aren’t their thing

Sometimes we point out anti-gun people and those on the political left not being able to do math or even arithmetic. But, as I have pointed out before, it’s worse than that. It’s numbers they have trouble with:

Terry McAuliffe (D) called for gun control. McAuliffe called for more background checks and ending “gunshow loopholes.” McAuliffe said 93 million people are a victim of gun violence a day.

“This is not what today is about but there are too many guns on the street,” the governor said Wednesday morning. “We lose 93 million Americans a day to gun violence.”
“It’s not just about politicians, we worry about all of our citizens,” he said.

“Why are you bringing it up? People are going to criticize that you are bringing up gun control at this time?” a reporter asked.

“I’m talking about it today. This is a very serious issue,” he replied.

McAuliffe repeated the 93 million number once more before he was corrected by reporters.

“With 93 million people a day it’s just something,” McAuliffe said before reporters jumped in.

Even if you give McAuliffe some serious slack and let him get away with saying he really meant 93 per day then he is including suicides and legal shootings by police and private individuals protecting innocent life. This is deliberate deception on his part.

When someone is anti-gun then numbers, arithmetic, and math, not to mention constitutional law and political philosophy, are a threat to what is really important to them. That is their delusions and their desire to control other people.

Quote of the day—Toastrider

Once people start taking responsibility for their own safety, they begin to move away from the progressive lie. Even if they still hold such beliefs, they will find themselves labeled as heretics because personal responsibility is anathema to progressivism.

The good news is that those of us who value autonomy and liberty will welcome them in with open arms.

Toastrider
June 13, 2017
Comment to Pulse: One Year Later
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Wanted: Million Mom March Media Kit From 2000

2000 Logo of Million Misinformed Mom March Attempted Gun GrabCalling all Internet Wayback Gun Rights History Nerds:

In the spring of 2000, Million Mom March (an extension of Brady Gun Control & Co.) published a media kit on their website, MillionMomMarch.org.

The kit contained talking points for even organizers, fact sheets (wrong, of course), and other guidelines. Most notable was a clear warning to never debate pro-gun opponents.

The Million Mom March took place on May 14, 2000. Unsurprisingly, a million people did not showup. Not even close.

I used to have a copy of their 2000 media kit (maybe it was called an “organizer kit” or something like that)  on my computer waaayback, but that’s long gone. Can someone out there dredge up their media packet from ages ago? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Heston? Bueller?

Thanks!

Quote of the day—ren

10 shots in 3 seconds from a 6 caliber magazine revolver.

That is a ghost gun.

ren
April 18, 2017
Post to “…gunman fired 10 shots before stopping to reload his six-shot revolver…”
[Mocking the ignorance of the anti-gun crowd can be quite entertaining. Just don’t forget that it is mostly entertainment. Taking a new shooter to the range is more productive in the long term.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Chelsea Handler

It’s about the gun lobbies, the people who — you know, it’s all about money in people’s pockets — the people who argue this and say, “We want our rights to guns.” Nobody is trying to take away your guns. If you want to go shoot, you know, whatever, in the woods, that’s fine, but it’s a hobby. If your hobby is [affecting] innocent people being killed all the time, children included, don’t you think you should reconsider the lack of restrictions placed on your hobby?

Chelsea Handler
June 6, 2017
Chelsea Handler Talks Gun Violence, Activism and Kathy Griffin
[Amazing! The stupid and/or ignorance is so abundant she has trouble expressing it.

The gun lobbies she refers to represent gun owners, not gun manufactures. How can it be “all about money in people’s pockets”? It’s not.

“Nobody is trying to take away your guns”? Wrong.

“It’s a hobby”. No. It’s a natural right which is specific enumerated for protection against government infringement.

“Don’t you think you should reconsider the lack of restrictions placed on your hobby?” No. Don’t you think you should reconsider your speaking in public when you are so profoundly stupid and/or ignorant?—Joe]

Update: I’d like to add that it’s called The Bill of Rights. Not The Bill of Hobbies.

There is no substitute for testing

Hypothesis are easy to generate for almost any topic. And in a surprising number of cases people are so confident in them they think testing them is pointless.

“The earth is flat, if you sail far enough you will fall of the edge!” Odd, that didn’t happen to the Chinese in 1421 or 100 years later to Ferdinand Magellan’s and his crew.

“If people carry guns there will be blood in the streets!” Nope, not really.

“A ban on ‘assault weapons’ will make people safer!” The data indicates otherwise, “the ban might reduce gunshot victimizations. This effect is likely to be small at best and possibly too small for reliable measurement.”

“The more education about sex and birth control the lower the teen pregnancy rate.” Surprise! Maybe not:

The reigning orthodoxy among public health officials is that the more government spends on sex education the fewer teen pregnancies there will be. Now, however, British researchers have found empirical evidence that appears to demonstrate the exact opposite.

In findings published in the Journal of Health Economics, Nottingham University Business School Professor David Paton and Liam Wright, a research assistant at the University of Sheffield, found budget cuts to sex education classes may have contributed to lower rates of teenage pregnancy in England.

Paton’s study compared changes in the rate of teen pregnancy with the change in the annual funding of teenage pregnancy services for 149 English local authorities between 2008 and 2014.

To their surprise, the researchers found that after sex education budgets were slashed, teen pregnancy rates fell by 42.6 percent.

Of course if you read that closely you should notice the data it is not about “more education” but “more government spending on sex education”.

I’m reminded that for many decades the USSR attempted to increase farm production and failed. While, during the same time period, the US government attempted to decrease farm production and failed.

I am of the opinion all laws intended to modify human behavior should be tested to make sure they achieve the stated benefits with minimal undesired side effects and are an effective use of resources. If they don’t, then the law should be repealed. But, as we know, politicians are more interested in increasing power and virtue signaling than in using government to improve the lives of citizens.

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. to appeal Couric decision

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. has announced:

The VCDL Board of Directors, after careful consideration, has decided that the recent ruling dismissing the VCDL case against Katie Couric, et al, CANNOT STAND!

The lawsuit has far reaching implications for all Americans. If the media can be allowed to change a person’s words to suit the media’s own needs or beliefs, then a grievous blow will have been struck against the very core of the freedom that the United States stands for!

NO! We are going to fight this because too much is at stake.

Today, I have directed VCDL’s attorneys to move forward with the appeal to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, where it will be heard by a three-judge panel “de novo” (which means the merits of the case will be heard anew with no consideration of the judge’s ruling that recently dismissed the case).

If you wish to contribute to help covering VCDL’s legal fees, click here:

http://vcdl.org/Donate

I’m not a lawyer but it would appear to me that it’s going to be a tough case to win. Apparently the bar they have to get over is:

Despite Couric’s admission, Judge Gibney dismissed the defamation suit against her last week. He ruled that the depiction of VCDL members did not meet the threshold of making them appear “unfit as a gun rights advocacy organization.”

I’m all for making anti-gun people pay a price for their lies and deception and I don’t know of any better hills to take a stand on, but it would be best if you had a good chance of winning the battle.

Deception through framing

As we have been saying for a long time, they have to use deception to advance their agenda:

It’s never a “used car’’ but rather a “pre-owned vehicle.’’ Instead of “torture,’’ it’s “enhanced interrogation methods.’’ There are some things you just don’t say — and Rep. Elizabeth Esty is here to tell you why, at least in terms of the gun debate.

Esty told audience members at a Pride Fund event Wednesday to always sub in “gun safety’’ for “gun control,’’ lest you lose the support of 15 percent of men.

By framing the issue as “safety” they avoid the negative connotations of “control”. Nevermind that it is extremely rare any of them have ever taken a gun safety class, let alone advocate that people take such a class.

They have a culture of lies and deception, so, what do you expect?

Quote of the day—David Hardy

What we’re seeing is a long term trend as Americans rediscover their love of guns and shooting. This is catastrophic for the antigun movement.

David Hardy
June 5, 2017
Additional confirmation of a theory
[At the USPSA range officer class last weekend a data point was mentioned that supports this view. The observation was made that local USPSA matches have a lot of people in them. The last match I was at (May 21st USPSA match at the Marysville Rifle Club) had 108 shooters.—Joe]