Another day, another dead gun law

Quote of the day:

A federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oklahoma has concluded, citing last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights.

Nate Raymond
February 6, 2023
Ban on marijuana users owning guns is unconstitutional, U.S. judge rules

If one gun law were to bite the dust every day we would be down to the number where we should have always been in about 55 years. That’s slower than I would like but the up side is the slow torture for the anti-gun people.

They are stupid on purpose

Quote of the day:

It is willful ignorance. They are stupid on purpose. By not knowing how things work, they can propose the silliest things and still pat themselves on the back for “doing something.” Gun laws don’t care about history, reality, or even basic physics. Usually the stuff they propose will actually be backwards and make the problem they supposedly want to fix worse. That’s a feature to them, not a bug. Because as long as the problem keeps getting worse they can keep voting themselves more power and authority.

Larry Correia
January 21, 2023
Gun Wars: An Interview with Larry Correia

This interview is about Correia’s book, .

I have a copy. This is a book to read, loan out, and give to others.

Delusional, ignorant, stupid, or evil

Quote of the day:

In April, the CPRC also hired McLaughlin & Associates to survey people’s estimates of the percentage of violent crime that is committed using guns. They found that those most strongly supporting gun control dramatically overestimated the percentage of violent crime committed with guns. While the average Democrat estimates that 56.9% of violent crimes involve guns and the typical Republican gave an answer of 37%. (The actual rate is less than 8%.) This suggests that Democrats, who are more likely to favor gun control, are particularly ill-informed about the realities of gun violence.

John R. Lott, Jr.
President, Crime Preven9on Research Center
December 15, 2022
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security

Via David Hardy.

Only the delusional, the ignorant, the stupid, and the evil support gun control.

The anti-gun culture of lies and deception

The anti-gun culture of lies and deception is universal. It’s not just those in the U.S.

Quote of the day:

The way the Liberals introduced this amendment after we had completed our witness testimony, I think was a sign of bad faith.

Alistair MacGregor
January 19, 2023
Opposition MPs united in ensuring Canadian hunters aren’t disarmed by Liberal government

From the same article:

Conservative MP Glen Motz said comments by both the prime minister and Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino suggest the two men know little about firearms or the legislation that currently regulates their use.

“If the prime minister and Liberals were actually serious about public safety, they would be focusing on criminals, sentencing with the use of firearms for the commission of offences, or gun smuggling,” he said.

“Not the easy way of going after hunters, sport shooters and farmers who have not, are not, and never will be threats to public safety.”

Motz said bureaucrats who testified before the committee all but admitted the bill was politically motivated, and said what eventually ended up before the committee was nothing like the bill debated in the House.

“It was first introduced as a handgun freeze, if you will, that’s was what people coined it,” he said.

“At committee, the Liberals introduced a whole bunch of amendments, almost 50, which included this whole focus on centre-fire firearm and semi-automatics — basically hunters and sport shooters’ firearms.”

Motz said the bill is out-of-scope to be dealt with at committee, describing it as “underhanded” and lacking basic parliamentary procedure.

“They didn’t have the courage to have this debated in the House of Commons,” he said.

These people are evil.

Prepare and respond appropriately.

Anti gunner ignorance on display

Quote of the day:

With the right technology enforcing gun control and safety would be an easier task for Law enforcement.

Currently All guns manufactured have a serial number on them, this process takes much longer when trying to identify who owned the gun, who sold the gun, etc. This is where an app for a smartphone could truly make a difference. Of course this app would be available to law enforcement only and not the general public. With this mobile app, Law enforcement would have the ability to tag guns in real time. Such as when a gun is purchased the name of the owner, and the store from where it is sold is put in to the system, as well as the date and time.

With this information, a recognition system could be used for guns. Maybe along with the serial number etched on the gun, NFC (Near Field Communication) chips could be embedded in the metal. Thus Law enforcement could simply wave their device (smartphone) over the gun and would immediately receive data to aid in the case.

Vedant Chaudhari
August 16, 2012
How To Make Gun Control More Efficient Through Better Technology

<heavy sigh>

There are so many things wrong with this it would take me more words to describe the errors than it took him to demonstrate his ignorance. Here is a sample:

  • He assumes that guns used in crimes were purchased by the criminal committing the crime rather than stolen or multiple private sales later.
  • He assumes the NFC chip would not be removed.
  • He is unaware that the NFC chip would be shielded from the reader by being embedded in metal.
  • He assumes the criminal leaves the gun at the scene of the crime rather than keeping it or disposing of it miles away from the crime.
  • He assumes gun owners will be accepting of this technology.
  • He assumes the technology will pass constitutional muster. When the express purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is the prevention and/or remediation of a tyrannical government keeping records of individual guns and tracking those guns would significantly degrade this express purpose.

Not only is the technology suggested impractical. It probably would be found to be illegal. And, in part, is physically impossible.

Nice job Chaudhari! Your ignorance is truly impressive. Thanks for sharing with us.

Are they getting a clue?

Appeals court upholds restraining order on Illinois gun ban

An Illinois appellate court on Tuesday upheld a temporary restraining order on enforcement of the state’s three-week-old law banning semiautomatic weapons, enacted largely in response to the mass shooting at an Independence Day parade in the Chicago suburb of Highland Park.

A three-judge panel for the 5th District Appellate Court affirmed the restraining order issued Jan. 20 by a circuit judge in Effingham County.

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, a Democrat, plans to appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court.

The Protect Illinois Communities Act prohibits the manufacture or possession of semiautomatic handguns and rifles. Those who owned them before the Jan. 10 effective date of the law must register them with the Illinois State Police by Jan. 1, 2024.

You would think the Heller Decision would be sufficient information for these people to know a ban on all semi-automatic handguns would fail to pass constitutional muster. But no, either they are doubling down on their failure to connect with reality, or they believe they are above the law.

That the courts are imposing restraining orders on them only shortly after the ink is dry on their legislative turds should give them a clue. But I don’t think they will respond in a rational manner. I believe they will continue insisting 2 + 2 = 5 until law enforcement is approaching to put the cuffs on them and haul them away for contempt of court.

They are just that delusional and/or evil.

Quote of the day—George Skelton

It is very rare that anything monumental gets done in America’s political system without strong public support. That’s certainly the case with gun control.

The emphasis here is on strong support.

What we need to attain that is a hefty gun safety TV ad campaign.

Polls have consistently shown that the vast majority of citizens support gun control — but not strongly enough to force meaningful bills through Congress, such as requiring universal background checks and banning assault weapons, particularly their high-capacity magazines.

It’s not at the top of voters’ priority lists — and hardly thought about between mass killings at schools, churches, bars and dance halls.

That’s not true, however, of hardcore gun addicts. They’re single-issue voters whose candidate choices often depend solely on a politician’s uncompromising allegiance to unrestricted gun rights. That enables them and the gun lobby to wield extraordinary influence over members of Congress, especially Republicans.

And it’s why America’s national firearms restrictions — unlike California’s — are pathetic.

George Skelton
January 30, 2023
How do you win voters over on gun control? Meet them where they are — in front of the TV
[I find it very telling that the question of minority rights never come up in his proposal. Would if the majority of citizens supported the deportation of communists? Or lying in public? Or the banning of abortion? Or citizenship and government ID to vote? Or a tax on your skin color based on the number of “your kind” in prison?

This is not a majority rule country. And to suggest a majority supporting the denial of everyone a specific enumerate right is sufficient basis to do that is either a demonstration of profound ignorance or evidence of evil intent.

One of the things I have observed in the last few years is our opponents are far more open about their intentions. In the 1990s and through the 2000s as they were advancing they kept “reassuring” us they didn’t intend to take our guns. And they “respect the 2nd Amendment”. The big players make almost no mention of the 2nd Amendment now. It is further conformation of the observations made in the When Prophecy Fails book. When their prophecies fail (the 2nd Amendment doesn’t apply to individuals, gun control saves lives, blood will flow in the streets with concealed carry, etc.) instead of revising their beliefs to match the facts they proselytize all the more vigorously. They are “doubling down” on their failures to connect with reality.

Notice also that people who vote for the protection of civil rights are “addicts”. That is what they think of you. That is their dehumanization in preparation for the next big “reveal” of their true intentions.

Prepare and respond appropriately.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew Mitrovica

Innocent after innocent has been murdered. Burial after burial has been consecrated. Eulogy after eulogy has been delivered. Tear after tear has been shed. Vigil after vigil has been held. Plea after plea has been made. Solution after solution has been offered. Column after column has been written.

Still, nothing changes.

Today, this much is clear if it wasn’t apparent before: most of America has conceded. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has won.

The slick defenders of America’s absurd addiction to guns have prevailed. The NRA’s victory over scores of unarmed Americans – including grade-school children – who have forfeited their lives to the astronomical arsenal of guns that litter America is as complete as it is emphatic.

The merchants of mayhem are no longer obliged even to feign concern for the latest casualties of the latest carnage or to trot out the familiar, trite catch phrases to defend what enlightened Americans consider indefensible.

Andrew Mitrovica
January 28, 2023
The NRA has won
[The comments have quite the ratio in favor of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But Mitrovica is one of the “enlightened” ones who believes they should be allowed to infringe upon that right.

But how “enlightened” is he really? Does he know how many people have been murdered because they didn’t have access to a gun? Does he know how many of those mass shootings were in “gun free” zones? Those victims were, in some sense, created by “enlightened” people like him. And tens of millions of others were murdered by their own government by similarly “enlightened” people who first disarmed.

Just keep saying, “No!” to those “enlightened” people who insist on infringing your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. They are not “enlightened”. They are ignorant and/or evil. Just keep saying, “No!” until you run out of ammunition.—Joe]

Quote of the day—L. Neil Smith

I’ve heard that phallic symbol argument before, and always from ineffectual people driven to make everyone else as helpless as they are. Who’s more confused, those who think weapons are sexual organs, or those who want to take everyone’s sexual organs away?

Clarissa Olson
1979, “The Probability Broach”, p.120 By L. Neil Smith
[Via email from PKoning.

Quote of the day—Hannah Cox

It’s worth noting that the PEW Research Center reported in 2021 the household gun ownership rate in rural areas was 79% higher than in urban areas. Gun control proponents will have a hard time explaining why their existing efforts don’t work, but beyond that—and moreover, more importantly—there’s really nothing they can do to combat the fact that rural and suburban areas where gun ownership rates are much higher saw so many fewer homicide deaths in the years studied.

Hannah Cox
January 23, 2023
NEW crime data shows cities with strict gun control laws responsible for most gun homicides
[They won’t bother trying to explain it. They will just ignore it. Facts which don’t match the narrative are irrelevant to them.—Joe]

Quote of the day—D2HackerHunter @D2HackerHunter

We can’t meet the coward rednecks halfway.

We must say what needs to be said, and do what needs to be done:

Ban ALL guns, take ALL guns.

Invite those WEAK pussy cowards to resist when we do.

D2HackerHunter @D2HackerHunter
Tweeted on January 22, 2023
[Via a tweet by Law Firm of SolitaryPoorNastyBrutish&Short @AubreyLaVentana.

I suspect D2HackerHunter was overwhelmed by the response.

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

Quote of the day—Keri Szatkowski @KeriBear22

1890 and Ruby ridge was an arrest warrant.. get real dude. You just want them to make you feel good about your dick lol.

Keri Szatkowski @KeriBear22
Tweeted on November 25, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

Via In Chains @InChainsInJail.

Remarkable! So much fail in so few words.

An arrest warrant is not justification for shooting a 14-year old boy in the back and an innocent woman in the head with a baby in her arms.

Believing you can read the minds of others is a indicator of a personality disorder.

With political opponents like this it is no wonder we have SCOTUS decisions and they have childish insults.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John R. Lott, Jr.

While the FBI claims that just 4.4% of active shootings were stopped by law-abiding citizens carrying guns, the percentage that I found was 34%. We had more lucky finding recent cases, and the proportion of cases stopped in 2021 was even higher – 49%.

In places where law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry firearms, the percentage of active shootings stopped is above 50% for the entire 2014 to 2021 period. And, again, we are more confident that we have more of the cases from recent years. The figure reaches a lofty 58% in 2021.

In order to follow the FBI’s definition, I also had to exclude 24 cases because a law-abiding person with a gun stopped the attacker before he was able to get off a shot.

But there is a more basic problem in the reliance on news coverage to determine whether an active shooting was stopped by an armed civilian. The news media has a clear bias for covering cases where bad things happen over cases where bad things are prevented.

John R. Lott, Jr.
President, Crime Preven9on Research Center
December 15, 2022
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
[Via David Hardy.

I’m not sure where I heard it, but someone else commented on a related matter that they asked a reporter or editor why they didn’t report on successful self-defense use of guns. The answer was, “We don’t want to encourage that.” Yet, they apparently have no problem reporting on, also known as “encouraging”, mass shootings.

That should tell you all you need to know about the character of such people.—Joe]



As a combat veteran, I don’t believe anyone, including the cops, should have an AK-15 or AR-47. They’re not good for defending your overpriced rental property and nothing you own is worth someone else’s life anyway.

Maybe they are just doing a bad job of trolling.

Quote of the day—Eric King

Before the existence of the state of Israel ever since the diaspora Jews have lived in small areas of other people’s countries. Among American Jews this now typically means great grandparents who lived in shtetls or ghettos, segregated, isolated rural or urban areas in Europe. One of the major hazards of this situation was that occasionally a few Cossacks would get drunk, ride over to the nearest shtetl, rape a few women, maybe murder a man who protested rather than begging for his life and then ride off into the sunset, big fun… for the Cossacks.

It had to be inescapably clear to these Jews that there were dozens if not hundreds of them, able-bodied and sober, surely a match for 8 or 10 drunk Cossacks. It would have been easy, even for people not trained in arms, to kill them and bury them someplace, but it is obvious why they did not. If they had done so, all the Cossacks would have come to the shtetl fully armed for battle. They would have massacred every Jew in this shtetl and every other one within 100 versts. Defense was just not an option, not a survival trait. The women raped and the men murdered had to be seen as the price Jews paid for living, for surviving as a people. Since no Jew ever even remotely considered the possibility that without some major provocation someday the Cossacks would try to kill them all, it seemed like a reasonable if awful compromise.

Such a compromise must have taken a devastating and horrific psychological toll on the people forced to make it. Sooner or later someone among our traumatized ancestors had to make the following rationalization to justify this situation: “We are better than those people because they are violent and we are not. They handle weapons, and we do not.” In order to maintain self-respect people in such a condition had to explain it as the result of something that made them better than their oppressors. This was the notion that they voluntarily (rather than of necessity as was the actual case) eschewed the use of weapons of any sort because they understood that violence was evil while their tormentors did not. It was the key to survival, self-respect and eventually the shtetl mentality which American Jews, far removed from the shtetl, still carry with them despite the fact that it has long since lost its utility.

Eric King
The Shtetl Mentality
[Interesting hypothesis. It is better than any I have been able to come up with.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Linsky

While the Massachusetts Legislature has been a national leader in passing effective legislation that addresses gun violence prevention, there are more measures that can be taken. I am proud to file bills that would make important and crucial steps in reducing gun violence and preventing further tragedies from occurring.

David Linsky
MA may now ban all semi-auto rifles and shotguns
[He has to know this is unconstitutional. He can’t be that stupid and/or ignorant. He is just evil.

I wonder how proud he will be when he is facing life in prison for his crimes.—Joe]