This was in response to:
This was in response to:
It’s a Markley’s Law Monday gun cartoon!
The real message of course is the same as if blacks, gays, women, or some other minority showed up to a “presidential event”. Gun owners are a minority and need to get out of the political closet and show their numbers. That this cartoonist thought it was appropriate to say something like this just shows what a prejudiced bigot he is.
Guys who need guns to impress typically are smalley endowed and afraid to be alone with themselves and their “things.” Big gun=Scaredy cat. Big gun=Little thing.
November 11, 2013
Comment to Texas gun advocates just “posing for a photo” in public–with rifles.
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]
I didn’t even need to read the article to absorb your so-called “opinion”. I can tell you need attention, and a gun to substitute for your underwhelming genitalia.
I was wondering. Since the name they are using is “Smarter Than a Bullet” and most bullets are made of lead are they trying to say they may be dense but not as dense as lead?—Joe]
I find it odd that many of the people who believe they are wise enough to know the world would be a better place if the second article in the Bill of Rights were eliminated choose the people they wish to associate with according to what they believe is a proxy for penis size.
I used to enjoy taunting my gun-nut friends about their psycho-sexual hang-ups – always in a spirit of good cheer, you understand. But letting the noisy minority in the National Rifle Association force us to allow this carnage to continue is just plain insane.
I do think gun nuts have a power hang-up. I don’t know what is missing in their psyches that they need to feel they have to have the power to kill. But no sane society would allow this to continue.
Ban the damn things. Ban them all.
You want protection? Get a dog.
Columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram
March 15, 1993
Taking A Stab At Our Infatuation With Guns
[She also says, “As a civil libertarian, I of course support the Second Amendment.”
Note that this is someone who lives in Fort Worth Texas in 1993. Those were very, very dark days for gun owners.
I could spend several paragraphs picking apart the quote above but I really don’t have the time or interest. I just want to address one point.
If you “get a dog” for your protection keep in mind that it has a mind of it’s own. It isn’t under your full control. A gun does not have a mind of it’s own. You can lock up the gun in a safe and leave it there when you are at work without worrying it will get cranky and bite the neighbor kid that is poking a stick at it if you left it in your yard. When you decide your life is in immediate danger of termination or permanent injury you can pull the trigger and be nearly certain your persuasive forces have been significantly increased when the dog could be thinking of begging for a treat.
If your dog is a weapon big and determined enough to pull down a large attacker do you really want that weapon to have a brain with that much independence, and that much less judgment controlling it’s actions?
If Ivins has evaluated the judgment of dogs versus her own and decided in favor of the dog I’m certainly not going to dispute her conclusion on the basis of the evidence I have seen so far. But she has no business making a similar decision for me or anyone else.—Joe]
I propose the federal government put several plastic surgeons on the payroll and offer free unlimited penis enlargement in exchange for giving up these rediculous (sic) weapons.
April 3, 2013
Comment to Debunking the Conservative Myth on “Assault Rifles”.
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!
H/T to Phil who sent me an email with the link.—Joe]
PETA is now promoting the idea that eating chicken will result in a small penis and other problems.
Well sure– If the idea that animals are essentially equal to humans doesn’t stop us from eating animals, then we might as well take the penis angle, because apparently people care more about penises (and sex) than practically anything else. It’s bound to get a few more, uh, members.
This is part of a long term trend. Leftists used to attack people they don’t like by calling us “fags” or “queers” but since they now have to pretend that they’re promoting the rights of homosexuals, they have to turn to other methods of distraction. Hence Markley’s law, and the recent PETA story is part of the same trend of using sex as a cultural/political lever.
A common phrase used back in the 1960s and early ’70s (the Vietnam war period) was “Girls say yes to guys who say no”. It’s an appeal to young, horny men, telling them straight up that they’ll get laid more if they at least pretend to help support the Progressives and the communists.
It’s a common theme among communists, to get the vulnerable young people on board, and sex is a powerful lure. Charles Manson used young women as bait to sucker young males into the group, and Sun Myung Moon, Jim Jones, the Heavens Gate Cult and others in a long line of socialist predators (but I repeat myself) followed very similar tactics. Islamists, we are told, will be treated to a harem of dozens of virgins if they die in the great and glorious jihad (and Allah will be super happy about your killing people too, but seriously; virgins!). They could just as well promote a new scientific study which finds that reading American freedom blogs will result in sexual dysfunction, and so the 72 virgins in heaven might go unsatisfied, and we wouldn’t want THAT to happen would we? If they haven’t done it already, they will.
Nothing changes. PETA has just put a slightly different twist on it, but their new spin has a lot of precedent. It is a good one though, as the left has also been trying to make us fear our food, our water, our air, and our neighbors, and this gimmick hits on at least two fronts.
And so I say to PETA; Good one, guys! Right on! You’re in good company. Keep up the good work. You’re completely insane, sure, but you’re giving it the old college try, you’re learning from your predecessors, and that deserves some respect.
Parenthetically; if animals raised for slaughter are as good and have rights the same as people, then people are no better and have no more rights than animals raised for slaughter, which is the whole point of organizations like PETA even if most of their members are clueless kids just trying to get laid. Remember it.
Trayvon Martin would’ve been 18 today, which is sad, but at least George Zimmerman was allowed to carry a gun to hide how small his penis is
The reality of it appears, at this time, that Zimmerman is alive today because his right to carry a gun was not infringed.—Joe]