Quote of the day—Full Fathom Five (@FullFathomFive1)

[It's another Markley’s Law Monday! Via One Of Them (‏@tazcat2011).

No data, no logical argument, just insults. It’s the best they have to offer.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Gary Kleck

By definition, it is logically impossible to commit a firearm homicide or firearm suicide without using a firearm. Even if the availability of guns had no bearing on whether they were used in homicides, you’d expect a significant positive association between guns per capita and rates of gun-related deaths.

Gary Kleck
University of Florida Criminologist
September 18, 2014
Do guns make us safer?
[This is why gun owner rights advocates talk about violent crime instead of “gun deaths”. We are concerned with violent crime and how to make people safer.

And this is why the anti-rights people insist on talking about only about deaths that involve guns. And that is why they include suicide and justifiable homicide. It is only by coming up with misleading statistics that they can arrive at numbers that seem to justify their anti-rights agenda.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gura

In America, the police don’t determine what rights we have good reason to enjoy. You don’t need a good reason to speak, to worship, to vote or to carry a gun for self-defense.

Alan Gura
September 17, 2014
Lawmakers grudgingly draft bill to authorize concealed carry of guns in D.C.
[But guns are different than speech or religion! No one is harmed by speech!


Ideas are more powerful than weapons. How many innocent people have been murdered on the basis of books like Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, The Bible, and The Qur'an? Compare those numbers to the number of individual criminal uses of firearms and then get back to me.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ronald Reagan

It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun-control laws. I happen to know this from personal experience.

Ronald Reagan
May 6, 1983
Speech at the Annual Members Banquet of the National Rifle Association. Phoenix, AZ.
[From Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor.

Reagan was shot March 30, 1981. James Brady, the other victim on that day, just recently died. Their shooter still lives and although he spent a lot of time in a psych ward he never went to prison.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Vincent Gray

Guns are not the answer, ladies and gentlemen. Guns would not have saved the victims of the Navy Yard.

Vincent Gray
Mayor of Washington D.C.
September 17, 2014
Gray Calls For ‘Real Gun Control’ At Navy Yard Ceremony, Says D.C.’s Laws May Be ‘Relaxed’
[Then what was the purpose of the guns in the hands of the responding police officers? And why do many of the politicians in his jurisdiction have armed guards?

This guy has crap for brains. Or else he thinks you do.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aaron Peori

No handguns.

No automatics of any kind.

Single action long arms will fulfill all the needs of home defense, hunting and sport.

Aaron Peori
September 11, 2014
Forum post in Your Ideal Gun Control Method
[It’s a Bill of Rights, not a Bill of Needs. And the Supreme Court of the United States says the Bill of Rights protects the type of guns this idiot would have other people take away from you.

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

Quote of the day—RocketMedic

I am no great orator, thinker or politician… I do not know or care for the ins and outs of public policy, suicide risks, criminal motives and I care not for morality. I treat my firearms as tools for self-defense. Nothing more or less. They are expendable, but they are not to be traded away for empty promises of cowards and nebulous promises of “safety”. Provide me everlasting invincibility, immortality, and impunity from danger and I will happily melt my guns into ornaments. Until that day, though, I will place more trust in cold steel and hot lead than the empty promises of cowards.

September 12, 2014
Forum post in Your Ideal Gun Control Method
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Bill Whittle

And of all the promises broken by this man, surely none is more heartbreaking than the one promise that got him elected in the first place: the promise of a post-racial future. He and his progressive cohorts can never surrender the weapon that has gotten them everything, not the least of which is personal political power and trillions of dollars of redistributed wealth. And this latest outrage in Ferguson is yet another example – as if another was needed among the economic wreckage, creeping totalitarianism, and foreign-policy disasters — that he and his leftist cohorts would rather rule over ruins than disappear into the dustbin of history of a healthy and racially healed nation.

Bill Whittle
August 20, 2014
[H/T to Kevin.

I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—NRA-ILA

Gun control supporters would like nothing more than for gun owners to think that resistance to the anti-gunners bottomless pocketbooks is futile. But, we know that no matter how much money the anti-gunners spend, they can’t buy our freedom, because it’s not for sale. Let the anti-gun billionaires know that by Voting Freedom First on November 4.

September 12, 2014
Harvard: Millions of Dollars More For Gun Control
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—orpheus762x51

A Form 1 came back approved for a new Machine Gun. Jaqufrost was quickly contacted by the ATF saying he has to send back the stamp.

This thing is growing legs and will probably go to court. Stand by, because we will surely need contributions to a legal fund if it goes to court.

All things considered, this looks like a realistic opportunity at taking back out rights to Machine Guns. If this fight starts moving forward, it’s going to tale a monumental amount of commitment to see it through. Hold fast, everyone. We’re going to need all hands on deck for this one.

September 10, 2014
ATF ruling may have opened door to new machine guns–Pg9 Form 1 APPROVED Pg18 ATF call audio
[Background material is here.

Audio of the ATF phone call:

Interesting. Very interesting!—Joe]

A different culture

I visit family in Idaho about once month. Something that I frequently notice is the huge difference between being on the farm in Idaho and working in a high rise office building in Seattle. I am sometimes driving truck, combine, or a bulldozer in Idaho one day and looking out over the Puget Sound from behind my computer in a skyscraper the next.

There are other profound differences as well.

Here are my daughter Kim and Jacob at their home in Idaho. I took this picture on Saturday:


The sign isn’t anything particularly special. It is sold at Michaels, a national chain store for arts and crafts, where Kim works as she finishes her accounting degree at the University of Idaho. Yet the odds of seeing a sign like that in the Seattle area are asymptotically close to zero.

I imagine this sign would put people of the anti-gun crowd into an apoplectic state. It appears to me that the concept of property rights and being able and willing to defend those property rights is alien to them. They might give lip service to the concept of diversity and tolerance of other cultures but they make it very clear by their actions they are actively attempting to destroy certain cultures. They want to destroy one of my cultures.

Quote of the day—Benjamin Wittes

It’s time for gun-control supporters to come to grips with the fact that the amendment actually means something in contemporary society. For which reason, I hereby advance a modest proposal: Let’s repeal the damned thing.

Benjamin Wittes
March 19, 2007
Ditch the Second Amendment
[“Modest proposal”? I wonder what a “radical proposal” might be. Ownership of a handgun means an obligatory conviction for terrorism? We know what that leads to. But, in his world view, that might be a feature rather than bug.

He does recognize that repealing the Second Amendment is not currently politically feasible. What I don’t think he realizes is that even without a Second Amendment it would be “problematic” to enforce the gun bans and confiscations that he envisions would follow. Somehow the lessons of prohibition and the “war on drugs” are beyond his imagination.

But probably the most important takeaway from Wittes’ opinion piece is that you should never let someone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ron Hart

Recently in Atlanta, a stripper was followed home by two guys.  When they started to attack her, she pulled a gun.  They ran. So why don’t these stories make headlines? Because they don’t fit the left’s narrative on guns. They don’t even ask the questions we want to know — like just where does a stripper carry a gun?

Ron Hart
September 7, 2014
HART: Gun control debate re-emerges
[Of course it’s a rhetorical question. I don’t have firsthand knowledge but I think it is a safe bet strippers rarely go home without putting on their clothes.

But if you really want to give it some thought nudists have a similar problem. It’s really not that hard of a problem to solve. Fanny packs and purses work well enough even if the draw is slower than with a belt holster.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Sandford Levison

For too long, most members of the legal academy have treated the Second Amendment as the equivalent of an embarrassing relative, whose mention brings a quick change of subject to other, more respectable, family members. That will no longer do. It is time for the Second Amendment to enter full scale into the consciousness of the legal academy.

Sandford Levison
The Embarrassing Second Amendment
Yale Law Journal 99.3 (1989): 637-569
[Via Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor.

And not just the legal academy, but society at large must recognize and respect the Second Amendment. We all have a job to do in making this happen. There are many ways to contribute. Do what you feel most comfortable with.—Joe]

Quote of the day—I-84

The open carry crowd. Their guns have more bullets in them than they have IQ points. They consistently demonstrate that they need a gun to walk out into public places. Frightened, scared and cowardly they parade their failings for all to see. What’s next? Open carry their penises to prove they have one?

June 17, 2014
Comment to Gun-control, open-carry supporters stage dueling demonstrations one week after Reynolds shooting
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

Quote of the day—Stanley Bonk

The fastest way to lower crime rates is to get rid of guns.

Stanley Bonk
September 4, 2014
Comment to Moms’ Group Calls Out Kroger’s Gun Policy In Unprecedented New Ad Campaign
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.

Bonk needs to compare crime rates inside and outside the formally gun banning regimes of Chicago and Washington D.C. But I expect facts are outside his area of experience.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Scott Connors

If judges can pontificate on questions of firearms engineering, then I can write legal decisions legalizing the possession of fully automatic firearms and rocket propelled grenades by the unorganized militia (ie, us). That’s fair, isn’t it?

Scott Connors
September 4, 2014
Comment to Judge Tries His Hand at Engineering
[Yes. It is fair.

It’s also just as likely to be faulty as the judge’s engineering efforts. This, of course, was his point.

What the judge and other “smart gun” advocates apparently don’t or can’t understand is that engineering against an intelligent adversary is dramatically different and more difficult than engineering devices to reduce the probability of accidents or the mitigate the effects of such an accident.

Turn signals and brake lights reduce the chance of accidents. Seatbelts mitigate the effects of accidents. There has been little need to significantly improve the technology of these in the last 50 years.

The technology of antitheft devices has seen dramatic improvement in the last 50 years. This is because in the case of the theft of a car the engineer has an intelligent adversary working against them. Both the thief and engineer attempting to protect the car innovate nearly constantly.

And even that analogy is weak because:

  • Guns have the contradictory criteria of failing to fire if the thief removes or disables the power supply and being useable by the owner in an emergency situation if the battery or electronics have died.
  • A inoperable gun is far more transportable than an inoperable car.
  • A car has large and reliable power supply.
  • A car can be disabled for many seconds or even, in extreme cases, a few minutes without serious consequences.
  • A few pounds of anti-theft technology added to a car are not an obstacle to its use.
  • Two way communication technology is common and relatively difficult to defeat in a car. Not so in a gun.

If you are going to pontificate on “Smart Guns” you should get the advice of an engineer with experience in security.—Joe]

Quote of the day—harrington

Who else wishes Pres Obama would force through gun control before he leaves?

I wish he would force it trough like he has done other things. The NRA has the cons/tea partiers worshipping them like Christ and the entire country wants more, strict, comprehensive gun control at a rate of 94% support. I think this would be an amazing humanitarian move by him and a gift he could give the children of this country.

September 4, 2014
Yahoo! Answers
[This fails on so many levels it’s difficult to even address.

“Force through gun control”? Apparently this person doesn’t have a clue about the U.S. Constitution or more likely just doesn’t care. They want a king or dictator not a constitutional republic.

The constitutionalists and Tea Parties worship guns? The entire country, 94%, wants strict comprehensive gun control? Citation needed.

Humanitarian move and gift? Forcing people to be defenseless is not humanitarian. It’s not a gift if it wasn’t something you owned to begin with.

Hasn’t this guy heard? Gun control kills kids! Here’s the story in comic book form so maybe he can understand.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Robert J. Avrech

Western civilization is at war with the IslamoNazi world.

The problem is that Barack Obama, allegedly, the leader of the free world, does not recognize this simple truth. And that’s because he is a radical leftist who is incapable of recognizing, much less confronting, true evil.

Imperial Japans was defeated by killing lots and lots of Japanese, and incinerating their cities.

Same for the Nazis.

And that’s how we are going to defeat IslamoNazism. By eradicating these human monsters and their sanctuaries. There is no talking to them. There is nothing to negotiate.

They must be hunted down and killed.

Robert J. Avrech
September 3, 2014
How to Defeat IslamoNazism in One Easy Lesson
[Negotiating with them would be like negotiating with someone who wants to murder you. There is no compromise available.

The sooner and more vigorously we get started on this unpleasant task the lower the death toll for everyone.—Joe]