Quote of the day—Mariel Alper, Ph.D., and Lauren Glaze

An estimated 287,400 prisoners had possessed a firearm during their offense. Among these, more than half (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at the scene of the crime (7%), or obtained it of the street or from the underground market (43%). Most of the remainder (25%) had obtained it from a family member or friend, or as a gift. Seven percent had purchased it under their own name from a licensed firearm dealer.


Mariel Alper, Ph.D., and Lauren Glaze
BJS Statisticians
January 2019
Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016
NCJ 251776
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
[Using the percentages from Table 5, they add up to more than 100% (about 102%). I could find where this was explicitly stated but it seems this is because some prisoners (about 2.5%) obtained guns from multiple sources. Also note that it is possible, likely even, that those who obtained them from a gun store, gun show, or pawn shop were not prohibited persons when they purchased them.

So… the question is, “If anti-freedom people believe they can create a law to prevent gun possession by convicted felons what law would accomplish that?”

What would “Universal background checks” accomplish? At most, this would affect 25% (obtained from an individual) of the transfers. But how many of those transfers occurred before the person became a prohibited person? And if they are a prohibited person obtaining them from a friend or family is already against the law! Making it doubly illegal is nothing more than nonsensical.

And even if those transfers were completely stopped how many of those same criminals would then obtain their gun from different source such as the underground market or theft?

If the intent of “universal background checks” is to reduce access to guns by prohibited person it is clear it cannot make much, if any, difference. This is backed up by recent research as to the actual effects of background checks on violent crime. Hence, there are three possibilities:

  1. That is not the intent and these advocates are evil.
  2. The advocates are ignorant.
  3. The advocates are stupid.

Apply logical “and” and “or”s for the combinations of the possibilities however you deem appropriate.—Joe]

Translation of The Gods of the Copybook Headings

Via a comment from bob r is this translation into modern day English of Rudyard Kipling’s poem I quoted from yesterday:

The simple substitution of a couple phrases made a huge difference in my understanding of this poem. Listen and marvel at so much substance packed into so few words and rhyme.

Quote of the day—U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez

There is absolutely no reason at all for anyone to buy an assault weapon. These high power firearms have one sole purpose — to commit mass murder.

U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez
January 19, 2019
Gun control push is back in Washington, and N.J. lawmakers are all in
[Interesting. Since there are tens of millions of these guns in circulation in the U.S. and only about 400 murders committed each year with rifles of all types we have a limited number of possible conclusions:

  1. Those tens of millions of “assault weapons” are almost all being misused for peaceful purposes.
  2. Menendez is lying.
  3. Menendez is living in an alternate universe.

I’m going with #2 with the added extrapolation that he probably has evil intentions as his motivation to pursue this legislation.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Noah Smith

What if the government doesn’t have to pay back what it borrows, now or ever? This is the provocative thesis of an unorthodox economic theory that is rapidly gaining credence on the political left called modern monetary theory, or MMT.

Noah Smith
January 10, 2019
Don’t Be So Sure Hyperinflation Can’t Hit the U.S.
[Delusions are often functional. This particular delusion will give the political left a good shot at gaining absolute power over and destroying the United States.

Prepare for a civil war and/or buy gold and secure it in some other country.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jacob Sullum

Once you realize that “assault weapons” are in the eye of the beholder, it’s hard to take seriously the extravagant promises of legislators who want to ban them. Feinstein claims her bill would “put a stop to mass shootings.” Yet even if it eliminated the millions of “assault weapons” that Americans already own (something it does not even purport to do), mass shooters would still have plenty of equally lethal alternatives.

After three decades of this nonsense, Americans may be starting to wise up. According to Gallup, support for legislation like Feinstein’s fell from a peak of 59 percent in 2000 to 40 percent last year.

Jacob Sullum
January 16, 2019
The Whimsical Illogic of ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans
[At a national scale I think we are making progress. At the state level we are losing. Ultimately it will be decided in Federal courts. I think we need to fight a holding action at the state level and put as much resources as we can into winning in the courts.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership

You can’t arm slaves and expect them to remain slaves, and similarly, you can’t disarm free citizens and expect them to remain free.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
January 7, 2019
Misguided effort to disarm Jews and the public is wrong
JPFO Statement for the Pittsburgh Rally

[There is nearly incontrovertible evidence that is the point. It is a feature, not a bug.

Respond accordingly.—Joe]

Six round magazine gets you 364 days in jail

Via email from Drew.

Oregon is demonstrating what they want for the future of gun ownership. These legislators are the want-to-be tyrants sponsoring Senate bill 501:

Senator Rob Wagner

Representative Andrea Salinas

They are proposing you spend 364 days in jail and/or pay a $6250 fine if you are caught in possession of a magazine which holds more than five rounds. No grandfathering. Furthermore, you would be prohibited from purchasing more than 20 rounds of ammunition in a month unless you purchased it and used it at the range.

I remember when the 1994 AWB was being proposed. It restricted magazine size to 10 rounds. Gun rights activists pointed out that if it was constitutional to limit the magazine size to 10 rounds there was no real limit and that in the future we would see seven, five, two, and zero magazine size limits. The anti-rights people dismissed the concerns.

The New York SAFE Act restricted magazine size to seven rounds or put a maximum of seven rounds in larger capacity magazines but the courts struck that down and “allowed” people to load ten rounds into ten round magazines.

We now have a state, in the more “liberal” 9th Federal Circuit, proposing a limit of five round magazines and that you destroy, permanently modify, turn over to police, or transfer any higher capacity magazines out of state.

The 20 rounds per month limit is totally unenforceable. Each dealer is supposed to keep track of each of their customers to make sure no more than 20 rounds are sold to them each month. The customer can just go to the store next door and buy another box (or part of a box in the case of many types of ammo). There are numerous other loopholes as well.

The five round magazine limit makes nearly all semi-auto firearms into single shot firearms because there are no five round magazines for most semi-autos. This is the slippery slope we predicted in 1994.

This law cannot possibly be viewed as serving any compelling state interest. It can only be viewed as a deliberate infringement upon the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

These people need an legal education. I propose prosecutors educated them by enforcing 18 USC 242.

Quote of the day—Doug Casey

Nobody, except for a few libertarians and conservatives, are countering the ideas AOC represents. And they have a very limited audience. The spirit of the new century is overwhelming the values of the past.

When the economy collapses – likely in 2019 – everybody will blame capitalism, because Trump is somehow, incorrectly, associated with capitalism. The country – especially the young, the poor, and the non-white – will look to the government to do something. They see the government as a cornucopia, and socialism as a kind and gentle answer. Everyone will be able to drink lattes all day at Starbucks while they play with their iPhones.

That’s not even the best part. She’ll be idealized, lionized, and apotheosized by an adoring public. The media will hang on her every word. That’s pretty rich for a stupid, evil dingbat. Other young socialist idealists will try – and succeed – in replicating her success. Congress will increasingly be filled with her clones.

Frankly, at this point, resistance is futile.

Doug Casey
January 11, 2019
Doug Casey on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
[Certainly there are lots of paths to a very bleak future. However, I’m not sure resistance is futile. The courts are being filled with people much more inclined to declare her ideas unconstitutional than courts of the last 20 years. And one can make a reasonable case the courts will continue in this pattern for another five or more years. And SCOTUS could easily be originalist leaning within a year.

And even if the courts don’t “save the country” there are a lot of states that could “just say no” and ignore a significant part of the nonsense thrown at them as the Feds and other states nosedive into the dark pit of socialism. Resisting can take the form of moving to those states which can most effectively avoid the socialist influence. If the union fails being geographically and politically isolated is going to be to your advantage.

The Feds have a 22 trillion dollar debt with no plan to even slow the descent into catastrophe. When hard core socialists go toe-to-toe with reality, reality ultimately wins. This time will be no different. The biggest questions are, “How long will it take?” and “What is the best way to avoid the implosion?”—Joe]

A financial prediction

Get Ready for a Financial Assault on the Second Amendment:

California Democrat Maxine Waters is the new chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee. To judge from the party’s past behavior and the various proposals emanating from the left, Waters’s Democrats are going to pressure banks, credit unions, and payment companies to severely curtail and even terminate their relationships with firearm manufacturers, licensed gun retailers, and law-abiding citizens exercising their right to purchase and own firearms. In other words, they will use political pressure to force private institutions into creating social policy that threatens constitutional rights.

I’m a little skeptical. If they thought they could get the legislation through, sure. But just through “political pressure” without the support of the Whitehouse seems like a stretch. Still, it might be worthwhile to consider moving your accounts to a friendly bank or credit union if some banks bow to “political pressure”.

Quote of the day—Patrick J. Buchanan

In identity politics, loyalty to race, ethnic group and gender often trump the claims of party. The diversity Democrats celebrate is one day going to pull their party apart, as the social, cultural and racial revolutions of the 1960s pulled apart the party of FDR and LBJ.

Patrick J. Buchanan
December 28, 2019
2020: Year of the Democrats? Maybe Not
[Via email from a reader.

It’s something to think about and act upon when the opportunities become available. The reader also suggested some possibilities to help with the conflict:

  1. Get prepping articles in left wing web sites. If there are left wing groups saying not so fast with gun control we win. We could write leftist views of the need to prep not emphasizing defense. Then send it to starving leftist writers to rework and publish (perhaps with a small payment). Once people think about prepping (e.g., lack of police protection) that defense will follow.
  2. Target selected identity groups that have natural conflicts with other groups. Eg. Jewish white women are not welcome at the women’s march.
  3. Target intergroup conflicts. For example, Muslim groups are inherently anti-gay. Lesbians don’t want to have sex with transwomen. Freedom for one means less freedom for others.
  4. Advocate for causes that will cause internal conflict within the left. Example pregnant women are being discriminated against by planned parenthood.
  5. Develop supporting memes.

The best defense is a good offense.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Damon Root

Since joining the Court in 1993, Ginsburg has, in case after case, proven herself to be a reliable champion for the liberal side. When the Court declared the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program for undergraduate admissions unconstitutional in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), Ginsburg accused the majority of turning a blind eye toward “the stain of generations of racial oppression [that] is still visible in our society.” When the Court came within one vote of declaring the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), Ginsburg denounced the “stunningly retrogressive” idea that Congress might lack the lawful power to force individuals to buy health insurance.

Damon Root
January 5, 2019
The Case of the Notorious RBG
Examining the life and legend of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

[Barb and I recently watched both of the recent movies about Ginsburg (RGB and On the Basis of Sex). Assuming the movies are mostly true, she did some really good work knocking down numerous sexual discrimination laws. We really enjoyed them. And gun rights advocates can learn from her strategies—pick your battles, clients, and venues carefully.

What the movies didn’t even hint at was some of the Constitutional warping, and mutilating, decisions she participated in. See the source for the quote above for more on that.

In somewhat related news:

Ginsburg misses third consecutive day at Supreme Court

Her absence Monday marked the first time in more than 25 years on the court that she missed an oral argument due to her health.

Perhaps she will consider retiring. She has earned the rest.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Roberta X

If you need some damn leader to follow or loathe, please look for a new hobby and/or a better religion: this is the United States and our “leaders” are supposed to be doing the legislative and executive grunt work or making sure the streets run on time and the criminals are kept on the run, not to mention avoiding foreign entanglements and providing for the common defense.  They’re not supposed to be shining examples on a hill in the sunlight whom you should aspire to emulate.  Most of them are lawyers who weren’t all that good at practicing law and thought writing laws might be easier; the evidence suggests they don’t have much knack for that, either.

Roberta X
January 7, 2019
Populism And The Cult Of Victimhood
[Articulating it perhaps a bit more succinctly, I think of them as “public servants.”

Whether you thing of them as “leaders” or public servants completely changes how you think about their role in society.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Associated Press

Prosecutors told the judge that Burke, who has publicly opposed the National Rifle Association and proposed multiple gun-control ordinances over the years, had 23 guns at his offices alone.

Associated Press
January 3, 2018
Powerful Chicago council member charged in federal probe
[You probably will have to put some special effort into finding where it says which political party Alderman Ed Burke belongs to. But you can take an educated guess and almost for certain get it right in about 100 milliseconds.—Joe]

Quote of the day—William Strauss and Neil Howe

An impasse over the federal budget reaches a stalemate. The president and Congress both refuse to back down, triggering a near-total government shutdown. The president declares emergency powers. Congress rescinds his authority. Dollar and bond prices plummet. The president threatens to stop Social Security checks. Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling. Default looms. Wall Street panics.

William Strauss and Neil Howe
The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy

Via email from Chet.

Extremely “interesting times” ahead—if the prophecy is correct.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Robert Spitzer

They’re not going to attract women, they’re not going to attract ethnic minorities, they’re not going to attract mainstream Americans, because they’re too far down the path of kind of rabid, apocalyptic, angry, defensive style that has increasingly been their meat and potatoes for 20 years. I don’t think the needle’s going to move a whole lot in the year to come.

Robert Spitzer
December 30, 2018
Professor at SUNY Cortland
2018 Was A Bad Year For The NRA, And The Worst Could Be Yet To Come
[Those who call the NRA extreme always make me smile. Just keep thinking that.

I know lots of gun owners who refuse to join the NRA. Without a single exception it is because the NRA gives in too easily.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew M. Cuomo

Ladies and gentlemen, this nation is in crisis. The social fabric is fraying and it is nearing its breaking point. We must stand up to this tyranny once again. Not with muskets the way our founders did. But with our voices and our votes and with the power and example of our action here in New York.

Andrew M. Cuomo
Governor of New York
December 17, 2018
Cuomo declares NY independent from federal government
[From the same article:

His agenda, which includes marijuana legalization, gun control measures, and environmental protections, is New York’s Declaration of Independence, Cuomo said.

I like this response:

The new state motto could be Freedom through Over-Regulation. Or, how about, True Liberty Flows from Tyranny?

It’s like Lyle says sometimes. Cuomo wants independence from the Federal Government so he will have, “freedom to do wrong.”—Joe]

Quote of the day—BJ Campbell

Germany has almost eight times more guns than Ireland, but Ireland has three and a half times more gun homicides than Germany, by rates. Why is that? Well, let’s be honest with ourselves for just this once on the internet. It’s because Germany is full of Germans, and Ireland is full of Irish. Culture.

Consider some off-graph data for a moment. If we combine the USA suicide rate and homicide rates into one rate, of all methods and not just guns, we get 4.9 + 13.4 = 18.3. South Korea’s suicide rate alone is 24.1 per 100k, and they’ve got almost no guns. Waive it away though, because oh, that’s cultural.

Now let’s look at Ye Olde Red White and Blue Outlier: The United States of America. Let’s compare our country to the other countries in the plot. We got the country kicked off by repeatedly coating tax collectors with searing hot tar and covering them with chicken feathers, moved on to shooting them, and then we won the war in no small part by applying the emerging concept of “interchangeable parts” to firearms. You’ve heard that AR-15s are basically build-a-bear rifles made of interchangeable parts, right? Since our storied and violent beginning, we’ve been at war 225 of our 242 years of existence. We nuked two cities. We have troops stationed in 150 different countries. When we want to eradicate poverty, or illicit drugs, or terrorism, what do we do? Declare “waron them. At the beginning of every baseball game, we hoist a flag with a star for every territory taken by force from the natives and singing a song about rockets and bombs.

BJ Campbell
March 30, 2018
The Magic Gun Evaporation Fairy
[Interesting insights.

Campbell also made QOTD with his post from March 13th as well.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jonathan Wolf

As many as 520,000 Americans own bump stocks, according to ATF estimates, meaning that Trump’s most significant gun control policy achievement to date outstrips Obama’s by nearly a full order of magnitude, as measured by the number of individuals affected.

Jonathan Wolf
December 26, 2018
Second Amendment News By The Numbers: Bump Stock Ban Makes Trump More Of A Gun Control President Than Obama Ever Was
[When talk of the bump stock regulation “review” came out I was certain that it was just a delaying action to let the noise die down. At worst I thought a bump stock ban would be traded for carry reciprocity and maybe even removing suppressors from NFA34.

I’m extremely irritated that we have to spend scarce resources fighting this in the courts. I would much rather those resources be directed at removing restrictions on semi-auto firearms at the state and local level.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Eric “Nuke ‘em” Swalwell

I talk to young people across the country, and they say we have consensus on what to do about gun violence. We have consensus about what to do on immigration and the Dream Act. We have consensus on what to do to address climate change.

I don’t know if those pieces of legislation will make their way to the president’s desk, but once in for all, you’re going to see votes in the House of Representatives on issues that the American people have consensus on. So we’re going to start to go big.

Eric “Nuke ‘em” Swalwell
U.S. Representative
December 24, 2018
House Dems to focus on gun control, immigration and climate change, Swalwell says
[Yes, this is the same guy who said a conflict between the government and gun owners would be decided by the nukes.

I find it telling that he get his “consensus” on these extremely controversial subjects from “young people”. Does seek foreign and economic policy advice from children too?

Being as it is unlikely anything along these lines will make it through the Senate and to the President this might be a good thing. All the politicians with “young people” as their top policy advisors will expose themselves for targeting in the next election.—Joe]


Operation Choke Point was an attempt to cut off gun (and other politically disfavored) related business from financial services. Operation Choke Point has “effectively” ended but that doesn’t mean the fascists have given up. Andrew Ross Sorkin is advocating another angle:

How Banks Unwittingly Finance Mass Shootings

The New York Times reviewed hundreds of documents including police reports, bank records and investigator notes from a decade of mass shootings. Many of the killers built their stockpiles of high-powered weapons with the convenience of credit. No one was watching.

Mass shootings routinely set off a national debate on guns, usually focused on regulating firearms and on troubled youths. Little attention is paid to the financial industry that has become an instrumental, if unwitting, enabler of carnage.

A New York Times examination of mass shootings since the Virginia Tech attack in 2007 reveals how credit cards have become a crucial part of the planning of these massacres. There have been 13 shootings that killed 10 or more people in the last decade, and in at least eight of them, the killers financed their attacks using credit cards. Some used credit to acquire firearms they could not otherwise have afforded.

The credit card companies aren’t jumping on the fascist bandwagon yet:

Banks and credit-card networks say it is not their responsibility to create systems to track gun purchases that would allow them to report suspicious patterns.

“We do not believe Visa should be in the position of setting restrictions on the sale of lawful goods or services,” said Amanda Pires, a Visa spokeswoman. “Our role in commerce is to efficiently process, protect and settle all legal payments. Asking Visa or other payment networks to arbitrate what legal goods can be purchased sets a dangerous precedent.”

A spokesman for Mastercard echoed that sentiment, emphasizing its protection of “cardholders’ independence” and the “privacy of their own purchasing decisions.”

John Shrewsberry, chief financial officer of Wells Fargo — which counts the National Rifle Association as a client — has dismissed the notion that banks should regulate the use of its credit cards for gun purchases.

While no friend of gun owners, the ACLU appears to be on our side on this one:

And a policy expert at the American Civil Liberties Union recently expressed concern about how efforts to prevent mass shootings could infringe on individual rights.

“The implication of expecting the government to detect and prevent every mass shooting is believing the government should play an enormously intrusive role in American life,” Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst at the A.C.L.U. Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, wrote in July.

But, of course, the fascist dismisses these concerns:

Not all the concerns involve privacy or politics. Some are practical.

Would they dismiss freedom of (some) religions or association on a “practical” basis? For example, people in prison who identify as Democrats outnumber all other political affiliations combined by a factor of two. Wouldn’t it be “practical” to preemptively put scarce law enforcement and surveillance resources on Democrats?

In October Gab was targeted for supporting free speech. Among other things that happened Pay Pal would no longer do business with them. Boomershoot processes credit cards through Pay Pal. This has long been something that bothered me because Pay Pal won’t allow you to us them for gun sales but other options went away (Google) or were very difficult to implement (Amazon).

After Pay Pal shutdown Gab I started looking for another credit card processor. I ended up with Wells Fargo. It’s more expensive than Pay Pal but they didn’t have a problem with Boomershoot. I didn’t know the NRA was their customer too. Good to know.

I’m on “vacation” until after the first of the year to, mostly, work on converting the Boomershoot entry processing to use Wells Fargo so I can dump Pay Pal. I just hope it is easier to implement on my web site than Amazon.