Author Archives: Joe

What they really want

Posted on by

Every once in a while they admit what they really want:

Nowhere is the defeatist liberal approach to American politics more evident than in the post-Newtown campaign for gun control. Liberals are rushing to repeat, like a devout incantation, hand on one’s heart, that “we believe in the Second Amendment” — in an “individual’s right to own a gun.” Half of the legal and moral battle is lost right there and then.

…

the right to own guns is a communitarian right, not an individualized one.

…

A true liberal position, the place to start, is to call for domestic disarmament. That is the banning of the sale of all guns to private parties coupled with a buyback of those on the street (Mexico just moved to so control guns). Collectors can keep their guns as long as they remove the firing pin or fill the barrel with cement. Gun sports can be allowed — in closed shooting ranges. And hunters can be allowed to have long guns (if they pass background checks) with no scopes, which are not sporting. But, these exceptions aside, liberals should call for a gun-free nation

That individual/collective argument was settled before it was proposed and the Heller decision just confirmed it. This guy, a “true liberal” in his not so humble opinion, has no regard for the constitution or court rulings.

A true liberal is one who wants everyone disarmed? Got it. That can and will be used at their trials.

Pepper spray effectiveness

Posted on by

If you think pepper spray will stop an attack then shouldn’t it also make it impossible to drive a car after being sprayed?

At approximately 6:18 p.m. two women in their 50′s were traveling in a car that was stopped at a red light northbound on Martin Luther King (MLK) Jr. Way South at South Graham Street.  Two unknown male suspects approached the victims’ vehicle and assaulted both women with pepper spray in an attempt to steal their car.  The victim driver ran the red light in order to escape, which was successful.

If a middle-aged woman is hosed down with pepper spray and has the presence of mind, will power, and pain tolerance to drive away and call the police then someone intent on doing harm to you can probably continue the attack. Pepper spray will reduce functionality but it will not put healthy adults out of commission.

Giving an attacker the universal hand signal for “LIE DOWN” may still be required even if you carry pepper spray and should be available if needed.

Quote of the day—John Yowan

Posted on by

An explanation for Markley’s Law

Posted on by

Via email from Mike B. (AlphaMike in Idaho) who reports his wife thought it was good reading. I agree. We have a possible explanation of the mindset of anti-gun males:

He’s scared of the thing. That’s understandable–so am I. But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don’t have to masquerade squeamishness as grand principle-in the interest of mankind, no less.

A man does. He has to say things like “One Taniqua Hall is one too many,” as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing with his uncle’s gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self-esteem.

He often accuses men with guns of “compensating for something.” The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren’t intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can’t touch a gun, he doesn’t want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he’ll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.

There is a lot more. Good stuff.

Biden may be onto something

Posted on by

Biden may actually be giving good advice to his audience. Double barrel shotguns are simpler than an AR-15. So simple that given enough time and an instruction video even anti-gun Democrats could probably fire off a shot or two.

His advice is entirely consistent with Security Theater advocated by most government types. He is suggesting people “Do Something” and they will feel better even if it accomplishes nothing that helps your situation.

Or instead of being onto something he could just be on something. Was he in Colorado testing out the local herbs when he shared his stupid thoughts with us?

More on gun "buybacks"

Posted on by

Via email from Willi S.:

Participating in a gun buy back because you believe that the criminals have too many guns is like having yourself castrated because you believe that the neighbors have too many kids.

Willi doesn’t know the originator and a quick search revealed it’s been around for a while with no good attribution.

And on a more serious note don’t ever forget this one from Steve Levitt:

Gun buybacks are one of the most ineffectual public policies that have ever been invented in the history of mankind.

Quote of the day—mikeb302000

Posted on by

Linoge, You and Joe are too strong for me. By that I mean a great compliment. Your knowledge of the subject is too great for me to compete with. I’ve said this to Kevin a while back. Yet, as prolix and fact-laden as you guys are, I don’t find the argument convincing. I honestly read what you write, but I cannot answer your first question about what it would take to convince me.

mikeb302000
Comment on February 15, 2010 to Direct confrontation with the Brady Campaign
[mikeb302000 is one of the few anti-gun bloggers in existence. He used to frequently comment on here on my blog. I was one of the few bloggers that didn’t ban him.

He also doesn’t know how to determine truth from falsity.

A response such as his is fairly common when I debate this face to face. Those that remain stuck to their fallacious beliefs cannot tell me what it would take to change their beliefs and furthermore cannot tell me how they determine truth from falsity. That should be very telling.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Rivrdog

Posted on by

Do NOT be deluded into thinking that this push for gun control is about CRIME control. It isn’t, it’s about removing the guns from ALL of the society so as to make way for an uncontested dictatorship.

The only thing we can’t know yet is how benevolent the dictatorship might or might not be. In other words, will our enslavement be easy or harsh.

Also, do not be deluded that we aren’t already in the fight. The line between us being considered as dissidents exercising our rights and the putative dictatorship considering us insurgents is but a line in the sand, and the blowing wind will soon cover that line.

Rivrdog
February 17, 2013
Comment to Quote of the day—Nicholas James Johnson
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Incident number 2013-8424

Posted on by

Remember the guy that threatened me with, “If you know whats good you will keep your fucking mouth shut about Obama or you will come up missing on the news.”?

Yeah. Real piece of work. He called me. I was on the phone with daughter Kim at the time but I got a garbled voice mail and I called him back a couple minutes later.

After talking about a minute I hung up on him. It was difficult to even figure out what he was talking about and I couldn’t get a word in edgewise. He called again, and again, and again…

He left a second voice mail which was as follows (reading my blog post for the first part):

  • Any place that I frequent should be considered a known distance gun range.
  • If I can see you then you are within range.
  • My eyesight is quite good.
  • Don’t mess with me.

Yeah. I’m pretty sure those are threats. You looking at some jail time buddy. Have a good day.

He also sent me text messages. Actual time of calls (PST) and text messages were as follows. After the first two calls I did not respond to anything. Typos, punctuation, and grammar errors in the text messages are his:

  • 12:49 (missed call)
  • 12:51 (my outgoing call)
  • 12:55 (ignored call)
  • 12:56 (ignored call)
  • 12:56 (ignored call. Yes, every few seconds)
  • 13:02 (ignored call)
  • 13:02 (ignored call)
  • 13:07 (Text: 206-622-0460 seattle FBI’s number and I also logged a restraining order through the San Diego office next call is to my lawyer to file a suit)
  • 13:11 (Text: I tried to be nice and let you delete it yourself now Im leaving it to the courts. You breaking federal laws Joe not just state.)
  • 13:14 (ignored call)
  • 13:18 (ignored call)
  • 13:18 (ignored call)
  • 13:23 (ignored call)
  • 13:23 (ignored call)
  • 13:23 (Text: and if anything should happen you are held directly responsible. Enjoy the next 4 years of Obama you nazi republican jackoff)
  • 13:25 (ignored call)
  • 13:26 (ignored call)
  • 13:29 (ignored call)
  • 13:29 (ignored call)
  • 13:30 (ignored call)
  • 13:30 (ignored call)
  • 13:31 (ignored call)
  • 13:33 (Text: Thought so you fucking pussy republican asshole. . I KNOW WHERE YOU ARE AND WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE NOW MOTHER FUCKER!! Thanks)
  • 15:26 (Text: I dont even own a single weapon. I dont hide behind a gun or computer screen like some conservative pussy from seattle washington. Sleep tight.)

After the message at 13:33 I went to the Bellevue, Washington Police station. I talked to Officer Dill who gave me the incident number 2013-8424 and gave my new “friend” a call. I only heard one side of the conversation but it sounded a lot like my conversation. Officer Dill couldn’t complete a sentence and sometimes even a word without being interrupted. At the end, after maybe a couple minutes, Officer Dill was almost yelling at him in a vain attempt to get him to call the Bellevue police department with the incident number. But he was unsuccessful and my “friend” hung up on the officer.

Officer Dill told me (paraphrasing some), “Yeah. Same as what you described. He is clearly irrational.”

[Stuff deleted on the advice of a psychologist.]

About 15 minutes after I left the police station the 15:26 text message came in.

Liberals are violent. We are better than this.

Update 2/19/2013: I don’t know that either is related but I received a call from a Brooklyn, NY number at 12:52 AM this morning and one from an Illinois exchange at 8:26 AM. Both calls hung up when I answered.

I would like to add, up front, that I cannot recall saying anything more offensive about Obama than I wasn’t going to vote for him and that I believe he is anti-gun. And furthermore I don’t even consider myself a Republican. This guy threatening me is nuts.

Quote of the day—Tom Tatum

Posted on by

Is there a way to substitute a different compensation item instead of guns for insecure young and middle-aged men? #guncontrol #alexjones

Quote of the day—Nicholas James Johnson

Posted on by

Without a commitment to or capacity for eliminating the existing inventory of private guns, the supply-side ideal and regulations based on it cannot be taken seriously. It is best to acknowledge the blocking power of the remainder and adjust our gun control regulations and goals to that reality. Policymakers who continue to press legislation grounded on the supply-side ideal while disclaiming the goal of prohibition are deluded or pandering.

Nicholas James Johnson
Fordham University School of Law
December 1, 2008
Imagining Gun Control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem
[H/T to eriko in the comment to this post.

Just reading the abstract is scary eye-opening. Here are just a couple sentences:

the temptation is to view Heller as the central obstacle to effective gun control. This is a mistake born of our failure to confront the incoherence of pre-Heller supply-side controls. This article elaborates the supply-side ideal as the foundation of our most ambitious gun control proposals, explains the remainder problem and the defiance impulse as both cultural and physical phenomena that block supply-side rules, and evaluates a series of familiar gun-control proposals in the context of these structural barriers in order to identify which can work and which cannot.

Some of our opponents are far more intelligent than we give them credit for. Not all of them are the almost useful idiots like MikeB302000 and Japete.—Joe]

Alcohol is a carcinogen?

Posted on by

I did not know this:

…when it comes to cancer, there is no safe level of alcohol consumption.

There are other sources that appear to agree with this conclusion.

There have been times in the past when I would have a few ounces of red wine before going to bed on a regular basis. Recently I only occasionally have a sip of wine from the glass of Barb L. Hence my lifetime alcohol consumption is very low and now I can be even more self-righteous about it.

Quote of the day—Kurt Hofmann

Posted on by

If the Obama regime wants to “buy” our guns, it had better be prepared to pay in blood.

Kurt Hofmann
February 14, 2013
NIJ memo shows new gun laws can only ‘work’ with registration, confiscation
[H/T to David Hardy.

The memo referred to, and marked up by, presumably, the NRA is extremely revealing. It is mandatory reading for insight into the Obama administration. They know the laws they propose are and will be ineffective. They aren’t stupid. They aren’t ignorant. They are evil.

Update: This NRA video should have been part of the original post:

—Joe]

Collective identity

Posted on by

One shouldn’t be surprised, shocked, or indignant that leftists claim “We are all Chris Dorner.”

Taken out of context his claims of injustice sound credible and if the claims were correct I can understand his rage and could even let pass a statement of “We are all Chris Dorner”. But he murdered innocent people who had nothing to do with his complaints against the Los Angeles police department. He, an individual, did this. He did this to innocent individuals.

People on the left have a mindset bordering on and many times crossing well into a personality disorder such that they cannot readily distinguish between themselves and others who share some or most of their beliefs. “Individual” is a term that, in their mind, translates into “not one of mine”. This is why they are confused by and ignore the concepts put forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

This is why they speak of a “right to health care”, a “right to a job”, and even “freedom from want“. Individuals, for all intents and purposes, do not or should not exist outside of the collective. Leftists cannot easily distinguish between their “one true collective” and themselves. And the collective should care for itself just as we believe an individual should care for itself and their immediate family. Those outside the collective or belonging to a different collective are to be shunned if they are no consequence. If they impede its objectives they should be reeducated, put in mental institutions, or disposed of.

Dorner did not view “the collective” that supposedly wronged him as individuals. The families of supposedly racist police officers and of his lawyer were just as deserving of punishment as the primary actors who perpetrated the injustices upon him. In his mind all members of a collectives, either his or of another, are equivalent.

The leftist collective identifies Dorner as one of theirs and hence “We are all Chris Dorner” makes perfect sense in their mentally disturbed universe. There are tens of millions of examples in the 20th century where leftists used violence to dispose of “not one of mine.” That leftists identify with him and cheered him on should only be a surprise to those that do not understand the mind of the leftist and/or are ignorant of history.

Wistful thinking

Posted on by

When I first glanced at this tweet on my phone I read it wrong:

I read “Liberia” as “Liberals”.

It was either the old eyes or wistful thinking.

Why are there so few?

Posted on by

Via email from Mike B. (AlphaMike in Idaho, not the other one) I received a link to this episode of Freakonomics: How to think about guns.

It starts out with a different question about mass murders than the media and most politicians, “Why are there so few?” With 300+ million people in the U.S. and a similar number of guns (not to mention many other ways of being able to commit mayhem and murder) why is it so “far out on the tail” that these incidents occur? Think about that. Typically it is about two mass murders (4+ people killed) a year with guns. Out of 300 million people? Only one out of 150 million people per year go nuts enough to kill a bunch of people? That’s pretty amazing if you think about it.

Notable quotes:

  • “Gun buybacks are one of the most ineffectual public policies that have ever been invented in the history of mankind.”
  • “I think people are confused with respect to how dangerous a particular gun is. If I’ve done my calculations right, any particular handgun in the United States will kill a person about once every 10,000 years.”
  • “In order to prevent one homicide in a year, you would need to get 10,000 guns brought back in a gun buyback. Okay, but the thing is you don’t get 10,000 guns, and they’re not the guns that are used to kill people. So the typical gun buyback program I would guess saves approximately maybe 0.0001 lives.”
  • “But why is it in the context of guns we don’t think of guns as deterrents, we think about guns as, being this, causing the violence. And the idea here comes out of Canada’s book, Fist, Stick, Knife, Gun, which honestly I’ll say is one of the best books I’ve read in my life, and if it’s still in print I would just encourage people to go find it. It’s fantastically insightful.”
  • “Anyone with any sense looks at the current political climate, thinks about the kinds of proposals that are being made and accepts the fact that none of these proposals are going to have any real impact at all.”

The recommended book is available via Amazon:

It is next in my queue after I finish The Android’s Dream (son James thinks it is awesome and I’m liking it a lot).

Come and take it

Posted on by

Via email from Carl H. on the gun email list at work:

You can listen to the full version of the song here or buy it from Amazon.

Quote of the day—Bernardine Dohrn

Posted on by

There’s no way to be committed to non-violence in one of the most violent societies that history has ever created. I’m not committed to non-violence in any way.

Bernardine Dohrn
In the 2002 documentary film The Weather Underground. Get the movie from Amazon here.
[From the Wikipedia entry:

Dohrn with ten other SDS members associated with the RYM issued, on June 18, 1969, a sixteen-thousand-word manifesto entitled, “You Don’t Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows” in New Left Notes.

…

The manifesto stated that “the goal [of revolution] is the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism.”

Leftists know their agenda can only be implemented with violence. Government is violence and the threat of violence. They wish to use government to create their utopia. To advocate non-violence and have a leftist philosophy is a contradiction. To allow people not of the government to have the means to resist government is to allow their idyllic future to be denied.

The murdering, anti-gun, pro-leftist, ex-cop, from Los Angeles who was killed this week is just one in a long line of his type.—Joe]

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of association. This is an obstacle in enabling “common sense gang laws”. If New York treated the First Amendment like they do the Second Amendment then anti-gang legislation would include the following:

No new social organizations having more than seven members would be legal. Existing organizations of eight to ten members would be still be legal but no more than seven members could be in the same room at any one time. Existing organizations of greater than ten member would have the option of moving out of state or turning themselves into the police for Soylent Green feedstock.

Quote of the day—Michael Williamson

Posted on by

Who do I have to hate to be considered tolerant?

Michael Williamson
February 13, 2013
Comment to The Closet of Self-Censorship
[Liberals consider themselves tolerant but many hate people on the right and gun owners in particular with a burning passion that includes a desire for our deaths.—Joe]