Quote of the day—Sir Launcelot

In your country, people who criticize the government can be arrested and sent to “re-education” camps. But over here, if government agents started trying to do stuff like that, they’d likely get blown full of holes by pissed off Americans with guns.

So our guns protect our freedom of speech.

I can criticize my government if I want to. I can say “Donald Trump is a corrupt pompous ass and his cabinet is full of lickspittles and toadies.”

Or I can criticize the Chinese government if I want to. I can say, “Xi Jinping heads an evil government that oppresses the rights of Chinese citizens while the Party lackeys grow rich from corruption.”

Now you try. Go on, post something critical about the Chinese government.

Sir Launcelot
July 1, 2017
Tomb Raider forum post in the The mass shootings and gun control debate thread
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Fred Schwaderer

I have a plan.

1.) Institute a ban & buy back for “play army” weapons.
2.) Automatic 5 year prison sentence for any “responsible gun owner” whose weapon is stolen because they failed to secure it.
3.) Mandatory reporting of any stolen, lost or destroyed weapon to police.
4.) Mandatory gun accident insurance on each and every weapon any person owns.
5.) Background check and 10 day waiting period for EVERY change in gun ownership.
6.) Enforce all gun laws currently on the books.
7.) Have the Supreme Court codify the meaning of “a well regulated militia”.

That’s my plan.

Fred Schwaderer
July 1, 2017
Comment to Democrats should rethink their support for gun control
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Colion Noir

Gun control is what you talk about when you don’t want to talk about the truth.

Colion Noir
June 16, 2017
NRATV
[This video also has Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) saying “We lose 93 million Americans a day to gun violence.” which I blogged about a couple weeks ago.

After explaining the 93 people per day includes self-defense shootings and suicides Colion concludes, “This should tell you everything you need to know about their integrity. Yes. Yes it does.—Joe]

Who will they blame?

A step in the right direction:

The Czech parliament is working to liberalize the country’s gun laws, allowing people to better defend themselves. The reason for this new policy is safety, as well as practicality; in light of recent attacks in neighboring countries, the Czech government recognizes that disarming people puts them in danger, and that broad European gun control policies are ineffective. The Interior Minister said it best when he asked parliament to “show [him] a single terrorist attack in Europe perpetrated using a legally-owned weapon”.

In response to terrorist attacks the EU is making it more difficult to get guns and the Czech Republic is making it easier. My hypothesis is that the Czech Republic will have few terrorist attacks and those places with increased restrictions on guns will have more attacks. I also expect those places with more restrictions will blame the increase in attacks using firearms on the Czech Republic just as Chicago blames their problems on places nearby with less repressive gun laws even though those places have less criminal violence than Chicago.

Projection. It’s rule #3 in SJWs Always Lie.

Training bears to be nice to people

Interesting research and hypothesis:

The patterns of attacks reported here may also reflect an increasing number of bold individuals in large carnivore populations, as this trait is often correlated with aggressiveness13,14, and this might lead to more aggressive responses when large carnivores encounter humans. We hypothesise that intense and prolonged human-caused mortality imposes selection pressures on target populations (selective removal of certain phenotypes) and might lead to rapid evolutionary changes15. Natural selection maintains a mix of behavioural phenotypes in populations16, the shy-bold behavioural continuum17; bold individuals thrive on risk and novelty, whereas shy individuals shrink from the same situations18. Persecution, however, is expected to result in the disproportionate removal of bold individuals, as they are less cautious19, and thus more likely to be killed. As a consequence, shy individuals might have been overrepresented in remnant large carnivore populations in the past17,18,20,21,22. Additionally, individuals may become more vigilant and actively avoid contact with humans during times of intense persecution23. Although the history of large carnivore persecution and conservation differ across regions9, the contemporary conservation paradigm emerged during the 1960s–1970s24, when most bounty systems were banned25 and large carnivores were reclassified from vermins or bountied predators to game or protected species. Since then, although large carnivores have continued to be hunted or managed (Extended Data Fig. 3), most populations have generally increased during the past four decades9,11,12. Increasing population trends in conjunction with relaxed artificial selection may potentially engender higher variation in behavioural temperaments26, which is likely to alter individual responses to human encounters22. This significant increase of large carnivore populations in both North America and Europe, and their consequent range expansion, also may contribute to explain the observed increase in the attacks on humans.

Basically, they are saying if people shoot the individual predators in a species that are on the aggressive end of the behavior spectrum the species population as a whole will be better behaved toward humans. We have had relatively good behavior toward humans from these predators for many years because we selected for good behavior decades ago and then the selection process was banned. Because we stopped shooting them this may be responsible for the recent increase in predator attacks on people.

Basically, we can train bears to be nice by shooting the not so nice ones. I’m pretty sure this same strategy also works with two legged predators.

See also Bear spray, yes or no? for further examination of the issue.

Quote of the day—Paul Koning

Constitutionally, speech is speech, and inquiring into the motives of the speaker is a legal absurdity. And speech is protected, period.

The root cause of course is that progressives hate free speech in all its forms, and invented the fake category of “hate speech” for the same reason they invented the fake category of “assault weapon”.

Paul Koning
June 28, 2017
Comment to Violence Alert: Communist Mr. Kit O’Connell’s Ready To Bash Back To Survive
[That is a very interesting observation.—Joe]

Are you tired of winning yet?

Another win for the Second Amendment:

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) today applauded the unanimous repeal of Tacoma Washington’s ban on the sale, use, and possession of electronic arms.

Attorneys for FPC sent a letter to the Tacoma City Council on April 10, which warned that the group was ready and willing to sue based on solid case law if the city refused to repeal the ban.

Said FPC attorney Stephen Stambouleih, “As the Supreme Court noted in Caetano v. Massachusetts it “has held that ‘the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.’”

There is a LOT more to do but having easy wins is a moral booster for us, demoralizes the freedom haters, and builds momentum.

Quote of the day—Calimero

Contrast between freedom-hating decrepit Western Europe and Eastern Europe is glaring. Eastern Europe still has vivid memories from what’s down the statist road.

This should be a warning to US gun owners. You’ve scored major victories through hard work, but freedom haters will always come back. Defend the culture (take non gun owners to the range, esp. in restrictive states) so that gun ownership becomes and stays mainstream.

Calimero
December 28, 2016
Comment to Courage
[Calimero lives in France.

There is another comment along the same lines from March 14, 2017:

There’s a strong divide, shown in today’s vote at the EU Parliament, between Western Europe and Eastern Europe.

Eastern Europe still has vivid memories from Soviet rule, while Western Europe is oblivious to (or downright embraces) the shift to leftism/statism. One may argue Western Europe never was all that much into individual rights.

Eastern Euros still have that yearning for freedom. And the West essentially fucked them over today.

I hope the Czech will be able to mitigate the effects of the updated EU firearms directive. Poland, Hungary aren’t really all that hot for gun control either.

France, UK, Germany, Holland all screwed the pooch.

Take a new shooter to the range. It’s a good first step down a slippery slope to a desire for individual freedom in general.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Redcap ReaverBait‏ @ReaverBait

Yes, because nothing is more important than your manly phallic symbol and getting to murder someone. No way that could possibly go wrong…

Redcap ReaverBait‏ @ReaverBait
Tweeted on June 16, 2017
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

This is what they think of people who exercise their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Via a tweet from BFD‏ @BigFatDave.—Joe]

Update: ReaverBait replied on twitter to this blog post. Absolutely amazing! It is a classic response as predicted by SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police in less than 140 characters:

Replying to @JoeHuffman

Yes, you reeaally needed to @ me with your bullshit “waaah I need a gun to feel manly” nonsense. Grow the fuck up.

The three rules of SJWs are:

  1. SJWs always lie.
  2. SJWs always double down.
  3. SJWs always project.

The initial tweet quoted above was a lie. Then in the response she doubled down on the lie and projected her immaturity onto people exercising their specific enumerated rights.

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]