Quote of the day—Stephen Gutowski

Gun sales soared in Virginia as Democrats passed several new gun-control measures during February, according to an industry report.

Nearly 66,000 background checks were performed in Virginia in February as the state’s Democratic-controlled legislature weighs a number of strict background checks—a steep increase from the 40,381 checks performed in February 2019. Virginia experienced one of the most dramatic upticks in background checks—a strong indicator of total sales—in the nation, according to data released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). Gun sales are up nationwide with average growth rates of 16.7 percent, according to the report, but the surge was especially dramatic in Virginia where checks rose by 63.4 percent compared to 2019.

The spike in Virginia gun sales, which have increased for four consecutive months, shows that guns remain at the forefront of many residents’ minds.

Stephen Gutowski
March 5, 2020
Virginia Gun Sales Surge as Dems Pass Gun Control — Monthly sales up 60 percent from 2019
[If the anti-gun people were data driven and really believed “there are too many guns in the hands of private citizens” their behavior would be just the opposite of what they have been doing for decades. This is just one more datum demonstrating the error of their ways.

Spelling it out for them:

Every time there is serious talk, or the actually passage , of a law increasing the restrictions on the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arm the sales of firearms increase.

This was true during the Clinton administration and passage of the Brady Bill and the “assault weapon” ban.

This was true during the Obama administration and their frequent attempts to increase restrictions.

This was true in the fall of 2016 when it appeared Hillary Clinton was going to win the presidency and increase restrictions on gun ownership.

Increasing restrictions on guns cause people to buy guns!

The rate of sales would decrease if restrictions were to decrease because people would think they could always get a gun later if they really needed one.

One has to conclude they are not data driven and/or they don’t really want a decrease in the total number of guns in circulation.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good, or else that it’s a well-considered act in conformity with natural law. Fortunately, it is in the nature of the human being to seek a justification for his actions

Ideology – that is what gives the evildoing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination.

Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) page 174.
[Via Extreme Retribution Punishment Orders: ‘Red flag’ laws are the death of due process and the Constitution.

We have some extremely evil ideologies in the world whos followers believe they are the good guys.

Nearly 170 years ago Thoreau put it more succulently.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tana Senn

I’ve never thought about it.

Tana Senn
Washington State Representative, 41st District
February 22, 2020
This was in response to the question, “What sort of gun law do you think would violate the Washington State constitution?”
[The Washington State constitution says:

SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

My guess is that she has never read it. Another guy at the town hall meeting asked a related question and she went off with something about the militia. Which, of course, might have been relevant if we didn’t have the Washington State constitution protection for the right to keep and bear arms clause and the Heller decision. The Heller decision, of course, making it very clear the militia clause does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to the militia.

I got the last question of the meeting and I decided to directly ask her to address the Washington State constitution clause. The QOTD above was the beginning of her response.

The rest of her response was about hunters, she has “no problem” with hunters—as long as they don’t use “military type guns” which are only for hunting humans. She was a bit more hesitant but also said she didn’t have a problem with people who wanted to have a gun to defend themselves.

But, of course, the Washington State constitution does not give lawmakers a “military type gun” loophole to write laws restricting individual possession and use of firearms.

I find her response very telling.

If she has never concerned herself with the limits to the power she has under the constitution this isn’t going to stop. Whatever restriction she and her type can get passed this year or next, or the year after is just another step toward the practical, if not literal, elimination of the right.

I was telling someone else about what Senn said and I got a surprising response:

Crazy must run in the family.

It turns out that Senn is is a first cousin, once-removed of former Washington state Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn. Deborah Senn had a reputation such that many people suspected she was a sociopath and perhaps had other psychology issues.

My live tweeting of the meeting:

This should be good evidence. I hope she enjoys her trial.—Joe]

Political alignment

Will asks:

It has been my personal observation that people who support Democrats tend to be much more likely to have flexible morals than those on the other side. I am not at all sure if it is a case of cause or effect. Is the political position chosen because it fits their internal morals better? Or, does associating with that political thinking lead to moral decay?

It’s more than a personal observation: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats. More than twice as many felons identify as Democrats than all other political affiliations combined.

I can’t say for sure what is cause and what is effect, if any. It could be some independent vector causes both.

I have another observation that might be related. I managed to get myself on fundraising email lists for both Democrats and Republicans. I probably get a half dozen emails from each every day. There are some themes both have in common such as they both try to invoke fear. Here are some examples:

Our conservative values are under attack, Joe, which is why I have teamed up with loyal conservatives who have agreed to DOUBLE every donation.

my campaign manager says we need to raise $24,864 in the next 48 hours, or we won’t be able to continue this campaign to protect the American Dream.

Mitch McConnell’s conservative mega-donors are dead-set on CRUSHING our momentum and keeping McConnell in power so he can confirm more justices like Brett Kavanaugh and dismantle even more of Barack Obama’s legacy.

We have to fight back immediately! I set a make-or-break goal of raising $150,000 by midnight tonight, and I need your immediate help to hit it.
Please, Joe Huffman, click here to give a triple-matched contribution of $5 (it’s worth $20) or more to help Democrats flip the Senate.
I need to make this clear for you: Our country’s future is at stake!

There are things each side does which the other does not do. Republicans appeal to rule of law, respect, and principles. Examples:

The progressives in Washington are acting like grade-school children with a substitute teacher. It’s time to send them home, restore dignity and responsibility, and stand with President Trump in keeping America great.

Schiff has been at the center of every investigation, witch hunt, sham trial, and false whistleblower outrage. He even lied about the President on national TV to deceive the media and the American people. There is no bottom for Adam Schiff.

The future of conservative values is on the line in 2020, Joe. It’s up to YOU to help keep our values alive.

Pelosi threw a temper tantrum and ripped up the copy of the President’s speech. She didn’t just deface the President’s speech; she spat on our nation’s history, the Tuskegee airman, Rush Limbaugh, a little girl from Philadelphia, a mother weeping for her child, and a soldier returning home to his family.

While the Democrats are focused on bringing our country— and its policies— to the far left by embracing socialism, we are striving to go back to the basics on which our party was founded: “Government of the people, by the people, for the people.” – Abraham Lincoln

Democrats tell people they are special:

Hi, Joe Huffman — We’re shaping our strategy to elect more Democratic women to the Senate in 2020, and we need your help. Please, will you give your strategic input before our official focus group closes? You can use this link: http://www.dscc.org/wsn-focus-group

Right now Democrats have seven amazing women candidates running against Republicans in key battleground states. And as the chair of the DSCC, I’m personally reaching out to a few highly-informed, dependable supporters like you for input.

This is your chance to directly influence our 2020 strategy and play a crucial role in electing more Democratic women to the U.S. Senate. So please, Joe Huffman…

As the DSCC’s Executive Director, I want to invite you to join a small and exclusive strategy group by taking a survey that will provide crucial input to our Senior Leadership Team.

The responses from the handful of Democrats who join this strategy group will provide a critical grassroots perspective, which we will use as we develop the Democratic Party’s strategy to flip the Senate and remove Mitch McConnell from power.

Joe Huffman, I want you to know that you are one of the DSCC’s most informed supporters and I am confident your input will make a real difference for us.

Please, click on this personalized link before midnight tonight to accept my invitation and enter your members-only strategy survey…

**We respectfully ask that you do not share this link with non-members.

Joe Huffman — Time is running out to vote for your favorite design for our BRAND NEW 2020 DSCC Membership Card!

Top Democrats all across America have already voted and reserved their personalized card, but we just double-checked everyone’s voting record and here’s what we have on file for you…

Hey Joe Huffman,
I’ve been searching through our database of Washington supporters, and I selected a few highly-informed and very active Democrats to get input from. I’m happy to let you know that you are in this group, Joe Huffman.
More than 437 of the Democrats I selected have agreed to be interviewed — but our team’s data analyst tells me we need 10 more responses before we can consider these results for our party strategy.

Your input is crucial as we finalize our strategy to help Democrats flip the Senate from Mitch McConnell’s control in the next election!

This is consistent with what I observed in reading The Communist Manifesto a few years ago:

The Communist Manifesto tells its readers that supporters of Communism are the intelligent people. They deserve, are destined to, and the good of all human kind depends on them, being in charge. That they “understand” the benefits of Communism to the bafflement of others is probably proof to them that they are the intellectual superiors of those that think Communism is, at best, prone to abuse.

In other words the second plausible answer to the obvious question is that those that advocate Communism are not very bright people who want to believe they are the brightest of all people. And that The Communist Manifesto tells them they are the brightest enables them to then claim themselves as intellectuals.

That Democrats think the law and rules do not, or at least should not, apply to them is consistent with the messages they tell their followers—they are special people.

Quote of the day—Fred Guttenberg

Under no circumstance in no place in this country is the Second Amendment under attack.

Fred Guttenberg
February 11, 2020
CNN Gives Anti-Trump Heckler Forum to Bash Trump
[Delusions are often functional.

The reality is:

  • Laws which ban the possession of firearms by adults over 18 years old are infringements.
  • Laws which ban the public carry/bearing of arms in public are infringements.
  • Laws which require the permission of the government before purchase are infringements.
  • Laws which require registration of arms are infringements.

There are 10s of thousands of such laws. Someone who claims there is no attack on the Second Amendment is either delusional, ignorant, stupid, and/or telling a deliberate lie. In this particular case I’m going with delusional.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeffrey M. Jones

The new poll finds 50% of Americans disapproving of Trump, leaving just 1% expressing no opinion. The average percentage not having an opinion on Trump has been 5% throughout his presidency.

Trump’s approval rating has risen because of higher ratings among both Republicans and independents. His 94% approval rating among Republicans is up six percentage points from early January and is three points higher than his previous best among his fellow partisans. The 42% approval rating among independents is up five points, and ties three other polls as his best among that group. Democratic approval is 7%, down slightly from 10%.

The 87-point gap between Republican and Democratic approval in the current poll is the largest Gallup has measured in any Gallup poll to date.

Jeffrey M. Jones
February 4, 2020
Trump Job Approval at Personal Best 49%
[94% versus 7%. Two movies. One screen.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Wendy Patterson @Jetsgurl46

Iran killed 1,500 protesters and the American media yawned. Iran ordered everyone to attend the Terrorist Generals funeral and 56 Iranians were killed in a stampede. The media gave it an honorable mention. Iran shot down a plane killing 176 people and the media tried to blame it on President Trump.

How can any sane person vote Democrat after witnessing Democrats defend the Iranian regime after they caused so many deaths?

Wendy Patterson @Jetsgurl46
Tooted on January 11, 2020
[As Seventeen76 @Factnews replied:

@Jetsgurl46 you answered your own question with “any sane person”

Harsh. But fair.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jon Hauptman

I’d be on the side of fact checking if facts actually had anything to do with what people believe. Given the relationship between values, beliefs, and facts, “fact checking” is values enforcement, even if it’s accidental. This is going to reveal itself to be a way to “check” people who believe unapproved facts, more than it’s a tool for improving the information diet.”

Jon Hauptman
December 31, 2019
The Perils of Social Media Fact-Checking
[The points Hauptman makes aren’t always true. Beliefs can be change rather easily if the believer doesn’t have a commitment to the belief. Someone could believe they had plans to have lunch with a friend on on Monday and then check their calendar and find out it was actually Tuesday. It’s a rare person who is going to continue believing the lunch date is on Monday.

On the other hand suppose a person believes the water gods hold up living things like wood, leaves, and small mammals and send things of the earth such as rocks and dirt to the bottom of the rivers and lakes. And further suppose they have been teaching their beliefs to others for many years. Giving the a demonstration of a pumice rock (which floats) and a piece of ironwood (which sinks in water) is likely to cause them to create some explanation which preserves the existence of the water gods.

Also, there exist certain conditions, which can be created, where facts matter and people frequently do change their minds. See When Prophecy Fails for the basis of my claim. My summary of those conditions are:

  • Unequivocal disconfirmation of the false belief must occur.
  • Social support for the false must be minimal or non-existent.

This is how “deprogramming” someone from a cult works. They are removed from their social support network and the flaws in their belief system are presented to them with undeniable certainty.

Conclusion: Mostly true.

H/T to Rolf for pointing it out to me before I caught up on my RSS feeds.

In email Rolf also points out:

What’s interesting to me, after reading it, is the meta:  the author’s bias doesn’t appear to allow him to consider the possibility that the actions of Google, Facebook, etc., are done knowing full well the reality of the situation, and their goal is to shape and form the narrative that people will be conditioned to accept, and are intending to fragment the citizenry, and marginalize specific chosen sub-groups. Subgroups we happen to belong to and are aware of because we’ve been targeted for so long.

Interesting hypothesis. If this is true then I would suspect there would be people who would have leaked this conspiracy. I recall a similar thing has been leaked regarding Google (a video of some sort of an executive) but I don’t recall the exact details even though I know I at least started a blog post on it. I think it had to do with creating a false reality where the uploaded minds of the believers could exist inside their utopian virtual world.

An alternate hypothesis is that determination of reality is really hard problem and it’s irrational for use to expect people to be rational.

And a final hypothesis is that these people just need to be exposed to alternate viewpoints while isolated from their social networks.—Joe]

Update: Phelps points out that Google at least did research on, if not adapted, a policy of “well-ordered spaces for safety and civility”. This is a decent synopsis:

The briefing argues that Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are caught between two incompatible positions, the “unmediated marketplace of ideas” vs. “well-ordered spaces for safety and civility.”

The first approach is described as a product of the “American tradition” which “prioritizes free speech for democracy, not civility.” The second is described as a product of the “European tradition,” which “favors dignity over liberty and civility over freedom.” The briefing claims that all tech platforms are now moving toward the European tradition.

The briefing associates Google’s new role as the guarantor of “civility” with the categories of “editor” and “publisher.” This is significant, given that Google, YouTube, and other tech giants publicly claim they are not publishers but rather neutral platforms — a categorization that grants them special legal immunities under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Elsewhere in the document, Google admits that Section 230 was designed to ensure they can remain neutral platforms for free expression.

The original document is here.

Quote of the day—Leesa K. Donner

Irish author James Augustine Aloysius Joyce once wrote, “In the particular is contained the universal.” Mining the gold of “the particular” can be especially helpful when seeking to understand a seemingly incomprehensible event. In the Dayton, OH, incident, an examination of 24-year-old Connor Betts reveals a psychological profile startlingly similar to that of other shooters:

  • He is a single male.
  • He was a troubled teen.
  • He once drew up a “hit list” of students he wanted to kill or maim.
  • He experienced serial rejection from the opposite sex.

A leading forensic psychiatrist and expert in mass murders, Dr. James Knoll, says that “most perpetrators are young males who act alone after carefully planning the event,” according to Psychology Today. These people, Knoll asserts, are “injustice” collectors – that is, they spend a good deal of time living in a world of rejection and past “humiliations,” real or imagined. In other words, these men are world-class grudge-holders fueled by “social persecution or envy.”

Leesa K. Donner
August 6, 2019
The Mind of a Mass Shooter or Why Gun Control Won’t Work
[Interesting read.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb & Dave Workman

Nothing so vividly illustrates the delusional state of the gun prohibitionist’s mindset than the stubborn defense of the so called “gun-free school zone.”

Alan Gottlieb & Dave Workman
Good Guys With Guns, page 105

[You would think they would give it up after being shown that 95+% of all mass shootings occur in “gun-free” areas. Or just pointing out that if “gun-free” areas worked making banks “gun-free zones” would eliminate bank robberies. Or making schools “drug-free zones” would cause recreational drug to cease.

But it is irrational to expect people to be rational. And those rational enough to know the truth but evil enough to further their agenda with the deaths of innocent children use this lack of rationality in the masses to their advantage.—Joe]

Quote of the day—James Howard Kunstler

What is the Democratic Party today? Well, it’s the cheerleading squad for “seventeen” government agencies that add up to the craftily-labeled “intel community,” a warm-and-fuzzy coalition of snoops, false witnesses, rogue lawfare cadres, seditionists, and bad-faith artists working sedulously to hide their previous misdeeds with ever-fresh ones. They’re the party against free speech, the party against due process of law, the party determined to provoke war with Russia. They’re the party of sexual confusion, sexual hysteria, and sexual conflict, the party of kangaroo courts, cancel culture, erasing boundaries (including national borders), and of making up rules for all that as they go along — like the Nazis and Soviets used to do. The ideas and policies they advocate are so comprehensively crazy that their old support of slavery looks quaintly straightforward in comparison.

James Howard Kunstler
December 6, 2019
A Fraught Moment
[Harsh! But fair.

Via email from Chet.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Trump is a Sociopath @sharcat12

Those 53% of Republicans probably don’t even know who Lincoln was and they would kiss Trump’s feet if he asked them to.

Trump is a Sociopath @sharcat12
November 30, 2019
[This is in response to a tweet which said:

Democrats sure better nominate someone we’re excited about.

53% of Republicans polled think Donald Trump is a better President than Abraham Lincoln.

We sure as fuck better be energized and unified.

I find it interesting so many people on the left think insults are an effective response to serious thought they disagree with. Simple things for simple minds I guess.

But of course one should never underestimate the power of simple, powerful, and absurdly stupid concepts to persuade the masses. Never forget that The Communist Manifesto was simplistic, filled with absurdities, claimed communists are intellectual superiors, and persuaded millions to murder hundreds of millions of innocent people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tayacan

In order to obtain the maximum results from psychological operations in guerilla warfare, each combatant must be highly motivated to engage in propaganda face to face, to the same degree that he is motivated to fight.

Sanitized Copy of CIA’s Psychological Operations in Guerilla Warfare
[Confrontation is what the political left does. If we are to win we must do the same.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ben Rhodes @brhodes

It’d be nice if one left of center billionaire recognized the glaring need for investments in progressive media platforms to counter the Fox-Sinclair-Breitbart-right wing propaganda machine.

Ben Rhodes @brhodes
Tweeted on November 7, 2019
[Delusions are often functional, but so are lies. Rhodes was part of the President Obama administration and knows how the “progressive media platforms” dominated and covered for their misdeeds.

Lies are an extremely strong indicator of evil intent. Respond accordingly.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Elizabeth Warren @ewarren

Thank you, @BlackWomxnFor! Black trans and cis women, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary people are the backbone of our democracy and I don’t take this endorsement lightly. I’m committed to fighting alongside you for the big, structural change our country needs.

Elizabeth Warren @ewarren
Tweeted on November 7, 2019
[I wonder what color the sky is in her universe.

We have long had hints she has mental problems. She once had the delusion she was of native American heritage.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Prosper

There are zero reasons to believe a gun offers personal protection against a felon or any protection against any attack. Normal people don’t have the disregard for life to pull the trigger against a threat. The felon enters the scene prepared to shoot at the slightest resistance. Guns are virtually useless for personal protection.

Posted at Democratic Underground on November 2, 2019
[Interesting. Apparently in this world view the police and military are not “normal” people. Nor are the thousands of ordinary citizens who fire their guns in self-defense each year. I think the more likely case is this is a troll.

If someone with children tries to make a such a claim ask them if they would be unable to shoot someone about to beat their young child with a club.

If they have no children of their own then ask about a mass shooter at a children’s school. Do they think they would be unable to pull the trigger if the alternative were to run away and/or watch a dozen or more children be killed?

If they are unable to pull the trigger when confronted with murderous evil in action then it is they who are not normal and should be treated as such.

Continuing on a different path…

Even if we were to grant the absurd proposition that 90% of the population can be characterized in this fashion there is still a problem. The statistics of the masses cannot justify denying the individual their right to defend themselves using the most effective tool for the job.

This type of person belongs in a collective of some sort. They apparently have no concept of the individual or individual rights.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Douglas Murray

Kanye had tripped over the same wire as [Peter] Thiel.

At some point minority political grievances transformed into minority political activism. And from there moved into just politics.

Claiming the existence of voting blocks along minority group lines benefits certain politicians looking for voter blocks. And it can benefit professional middlemen who present themselves as speaking for entire community in order to gain their own forms of preferment.

But this, is an exceptionally dangerous juncture. And one that each rights issue in turn has arrived at. It suggests, that you are only a member of a recognized minority group so long as you accept the specific grievances, political grievances, and resulting electoral platforms that other people have worked out for you.

Step outside of these lines and you are not a person with the same characteristics you had before but you have something differently from some prescribed norm. You have the characteristic taken away from you.

So Thiel, is no longer gay once he endorses Trump. Kanye West is no longer black, when he does the same thing.

This suggests black isn’t a skin color or a race. Or at least not these things alone. It suggest that black, like gay, is in fact a political ideology. This presumption goes so deep and is so rarely mentioned that is generally simply assumed.

Douglas Murray
September 17, 2019
The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity

[I am extremely impressed with this book. Murray researches and explains, with great clarity, some of the things I have been calling mass delusion (see also here and here). Amazon describes the book as follows and with the diagnosis of “mass hysteria”. Perhaps that is a more correct phrase than I use:

In his devastating new book The Madness of Crowds, Douglas Murray examines the twenty-first century’s most divisive issues: sexuality, gender, technology and race. He reveals the astonishing new culture wars playing out in our workplaces, universities, schools and homes in the names of social justice, identity politics and intersectionality.

We are living through a postmodern era in which the grand narratives of religion and political ideology have collapsed. In their place have emerged a crusading desire to right perceived wrongs and a weaponization of identity, both accelerated by the new forms of social and news media. Narrow sets of interests now dominate the agenda as society becomes more and more tribal–and, as Murray shows, the casualties are mounting.

Readers of all political persuasions cannot afford to ignore Murray’s masterfully argued and fiercely provocative book, in which he seeks to inject some sense into the discussion around this generation’s most complicated issues. He ends with an impassioned call for free speech, shared common values and sanity in an age of mass hysteria.

Along the same lines as in the QOTD above he reviews Rachel Dolezal’s claim, and agreement by others on the political left, that she is black because she “identifies” as black even though she is of German and Czech heritage.

He describes some of the many ways Google search results demonstrate some sort of bizarre bias. For example, do an image search for “white couples”. About half of the results will be interracial. A image search for “black couples” shows something approaching 100% black couples. Similar results occur when doing image searches for “heterosexual couples” versus “gay couples”. This has to be deliberate. And to what end? It has to some sort of insanity.

He describes the 2017 protest at Evergreen College in far more detail than I had ever heard before. Amazing stuff. Over the top, unbelievably bat-shit crazy stuff. The things the students were saying and doing would have had me drawing my gun and, had I been unable to withdraw from the insanity, shot my way out of it. Those people were, and probably still are, living in an alternate universe that only has peripheral connections to ours.

Via his research and analysis I find myself hopeful that we will soon have a critical mass of people which will stop the tide of near insanity washing over us and some semblance of normality will be restored.

I expect that when such restoration occurs it will take far less time than what it did to get here. Perhaps only months as the delusion fades into obscurity. Also expect people who had once appeared to be in full alignment with the insanity claim, “I always had my doubts and never really believed it.”

It could be said these are the “crazy years” Heinlein spoke of in his books To Sail Beyond the Sunset (although this was in a different timeline than what you and I are traveling through).and in passing in Methuselah’s Children.

I just wish I was reading a science fiction or even psychological thriller novel rather than current news stories. But such books would never be successful. In order to be mostly believable fiction has to make sense.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lawrence H. Climo, MD

My tipping point was the clinic’s emergency protocols for what to do in the event someone did enter our clinic with a handgun. The protocols were clear. Immediately notify the psychiatrist on duty. That psychiatrist would approach the gunman and, in a “quiet, non-threatening voice,” ask for his gun. I recalled my medical school classmate who had done that very thing some years earlier at a different mental health clinic. He was shot dead on the spot.

Lawrence H. Climo, MD
October 23, 2019
What Do Mass Murderers Have in Common?
[The “tipping point” he is referring to is when he decided to get and carry a gun.

Yeah, one would think this would be more than enough to tip people over the edge into the realization that the best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But that’s not the way it plays out in a lot of cases. Some people tip in a different direction.

Aside from the tipping point and direction the doctor has an interesting hypothesis. Perhaps instead of mental illness being the common issue with mass shooters it is frustration:

But, what if there is this other commonality, this frustration goad or tipping point? What if the tipping point for those with urges and obsessions about delivering justice, restoring honor, pride, and the natural order, defending America, destroying evil, and serving patriotism, justice and God, or just the desire to end pain, isolation, insignificance, and loneliness and feel at peace—or at least feel safe and in control—is an overpowering and unbearable frustration? What are the implications?

It’s sounds plausible in a lot of cases. If true, then a partial remedy would involve something different than drugs and/or confinement such as might be the case with true mental illness. It would also point at a different indicator of potential danger.

Ignore his suggestion. He lives in Massachusetts and probably doesn’t realize that firearm licenses aren’t a requirement in free America.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andy Wilczak (@heyDrWil)

They locked down 5’s school today because they found ammunition on the ground. She’s in kindergarten. Ban guns. Ban all guns. I don’t care. Ban guns.

Andy Wilczak (@heyDrWil)
Tweeted October 23, 2019
[He has since deleted the tweet.

Interesting school response to ammunition. Makes for an easy “denial of service attack”. Some kid wants to be a jerk and they throw a handful of .22 cartridges over the fence into the school yard and the kids have to go into lock down rather than get a recess.

It’s an even more interesting response of Mr. Wilczak. A presence of a few loose rounds of ammunition with no injuries and extremely unlikely potential for injury is enough for him to justify the elimination of 10% of the Bill of Rights. What kind of mental issues, besides Hoplophobia, does he have? One could justify the elimination of the entire Bill of Rights with whatever criteria Wilczak is hallucinating.

Note that in addition noting the crap for brains exhibited by Wilczak you should also never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeff Snyder

Kellermans statistics do not prove that guns cause crime. But neither do Kleck’s statistics prove that guns provide protection. Kellerman’s statistics, even if faultless, provide no justification for a decision to own or use a gun. But neither do Kleck’s statistics provide a justification for owning or carrying a gun.

Admittedly, this sounds strange. Gun owners would like to believe the assertions about Kellerman’s statistics, because we believe they are seriously flawed, but disbelieve the assertions about Kleck’s statistics. Yet asserting that Kleck’s statistics justify owning or carrying a gun commits the same error that asserting that Kellerman’s statistics justify not owning or banning guns. Both treat the gun as an agent, with independent power to effect results. In both cases, the gun has become a force, like a chemical, a drug or microbe, with independent power to cause results apart from our decisions, our character and purpose.

People, we are the agents. Guns are inanimate tools that serve our purposes.

Jeff Snyder
Nation of Cowards, You’re Doing This Because of the Numbers? page 97.
[He goes on to say, paraphrasing some, that the numbers prove guns are useful for criminal acts and the numbers prove guns are useful for self-defense. They don’t “cause” violence or “result” in self-defense.—Joe]