Author Archives: Joe

Quote of the day—Gary Kleck

Posted on by

You can’t understand any significant aspects of the gun-control debate once you eliminate defensive gun use. It becomes inexplicable why so many Americans oppose otherwise perfectly reasonable gun-control measurements. It’s because they think it’s gonna lead to prohibition, and they won’t have a gun for self-defense.

It’s not complicated.

Gary Kleck
December 15, 2022
Emails Show CDC Removed Defensive Gun Use Stats After Gun-Control Advocates Pressured Officials in Private Meeting
[Before you get involved with a debate with someone about the CDC removing defensive gun stats from their website insist they answer a different question first. Why is the Center for Disease Control involved with private gun ownership?

Private gun ownership can be a legal issue. In this case the courts and/or the Department of Justice might have valid reason to weigh in on it.

If you want to push the envelope, gun ownership can related to criminal statistics and the FBI collects the data on that.

But the CDC? They have a long and dirty history of conspiring to deprive citizens of their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. They need to stay in their lane or plan on enjoying their trial.—Joe]

Another step in the right direction

Posted on by

Texas withdraws appeal to court order blocking gun law that banned adults under 21 from carrying firearms:

“We applaud Texas for doing the right thing and accepting the district court’s ruling against its law prohibiting 18-to-20-year-old adults from carrying firearms in public,” said Cody J. Wisniewski, FPC’s senior attorney for constitutional litigation. “Not only do young adults have the same constitutionally protected right to bear arms as all other adults, they are also among the reasons we have a Second Amendment, Constitution, and Country in the first place.”

…

Pittman noted the Second Amendment does not contain any mention of age as a restriction, unlike other portions of the Constitution.

“To start, the Second Amendment does not mention any sort of age restriction,” he wrote. “This absence is notable—when the Framers meant to impose age restrictions, they did so expressly.”

This only the Fifth Circuit. I would not be surprised to see the Ninth Circuit tap dance their way into believing they can set the age as 65 and over. Then the next day saying “Red Flags” laws allow confiscation for people over 60 because they are of unfirm mind.

Just use a whistle

Posted on by

Via Cal Skinner:

image

And from the comments:

I have 5 daughters that I have furnished rape whistles to… they all go Bang

That works for me. And except for the one in England, all my daughters have their whistles.

Quote of the day—John R. Lott Jr. and Holly Sullivan

Posted on by

A woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about three to four times more than a man doing the same.

And this message is getting across to women. Between 2012 and 2022, in states that provide data by sex, permits for concealed handguns increased 115% more quickly among women than among men. The percentage of women who say that gun ownership protects people from crime has also been growing faster than their male counterparts.

…

The high cost of permits disarms the very people who most need protection, including minorities who live in high-crime urban areas.

John R. Lott Jr. and Holly Sullivan
December 20, 2022
Why aren’t stalked women ever told to get a gun for self-defense?
[To answer the question, my hypothesis is that one or both of the following are the reason:

  1. Government employees have a vested interest in having more people dependent upon them.
  2. Predators are advising the women and prefer easier prey.

As pointed out in the above quote, women are getting it figured out and responding appropriately.—Joe]

Moving the Overton Window

Posted on by

This no surprise to anyone in the gun rights community, but it is still irritating:

Lamont seems intent on executing his plan to reclassify peaceable Connecticut residents lawfully exercising their constitutional rights as felons. His example illustrates very clearly what the reassurances of gun control advocates are worth and how anyone who thinks its safe to rely on such reassurances will be in for a rude awakening.

Indeed, the month after Lamont announced his intentions, an editorial in the Connecticut Mirror argued that constitutional assurances the right to keep and bear arms will be protected should themselves be repealed. “It is time to talk about repealing the Second Amendment,” the author insisted. But he made it clear that his plan wasn’t necessarily an alternative to incrementalism but a potential aid to it. “[T]he very existence of a loud argument about the larger issue of repeal will make those incremental proposals seem more moderate, and therefore ultimately more achievable,” the editorialist wrote.

Never forget, the only reason for gun registration is confiscation.

Good news

Posted on by

Via FOX News:

U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez of the Southern District of California issued a permanent injunction on Monday against the “fee-shifting” provisions of the state’s gun law – which empowers private citizens to bring lawsuits against manufacturers of illegal guns – declaring it unconstitutional.

“‘It is cynical. ‘It is an abomination.’ ‘It is outrageous and objectionable.’ ‘There is no dispute that it raises serious constitutional questions.’ ‘It is an unprecedented attempt to thwart judicial review,’”

As Tom Gresham (@Guntalk) said:

This was absolutely critical. A “Must Win.”

Quote of the day—Noah @noah_anyname

Posted on by

There’s no law saying you’re entitled to your own beliefs.

Noah @noah_anyname
Tweeted on December 18, 2022
[Via a tweet by In Chains @InChainsInJail.

From reading his blog he doesn’t appear be that stupid, but this guy is mind bogglingly ignorant on philosophy and law. I wonder what color the sky is in his universe.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Collins @Logically_JC

Posted on by

Democrats have guns, too.

We just don’t jerk off with them in public.

John Collins @Logically_JC
Tweeted on November 11, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

Via In Chains @InChainsInJail.

Citation needed.

You have to wonder what color the sky is in his universe. I have never heard of such a thing happening.

Or, more likely, this just a childish insult because that is the best he can come up with to protect his fragile feelings when confronted with the reality that people exercise rights he does not approve of.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Stephen Halbrook

Posted on by

There is only one Second Amendment. It means what it meant in 1791. Although analysis of attitudes in 1868 is relevant to determining whether the Second Amendment is incorporated, that does not change the fact that what was incorporated was the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms. Post-1868 evidence cannot be used to contradict that original understanding.

Stephen Halbrook
December 14, 2022
Did the Fourteenth Amendment Alter the Meaning of the Second Amendment?
[Shouldn’t that be “Post-1791 evidence…”?—Joe]

Quote of the day—LKB

Posted on by

While the wheels of justice do grind slowly, in this case I foresee them crushing the state of California’s gun control ambitions.

LKB
December 15, 2022
Judge Benitez’s Latest Order in Miller v. Bonta Sets the Stage for Taking Down California’s Assault Weapons Ban
[I expect things will be slow for months or perhaps a year or two then speed up. But the chances of gun control being crushed is quite high.

It’s the trials, and/or the threat of prosecution, which will really speed things up… if they actually start happening.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ryan Busse

Posted on by

We still depend on hundreds of laws that keep guns out of crowded public places, stop teenagers from buying handguns, and prohibit criminals from arming themselves with assault rifles. Now, because of a recent Supreme Court ruling, many of these remaining regulations are in danger of being dismantled.

Ryan Busse
December 14, 2022
One Nation Under Guns
[Who does he think he is fooling? Do bans on recreation drugs (including alcohol and tobacco) stop teenagers from buying them? Have background checks increased public safety? No.

If he is actually alarmed by the “dismantling” of these laws it because his intent of the laws is something other than public safety.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joe Biden

Posted on by

I am determined to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines like those used at Sandy Hook and countless mass shootings in America. Enough is enough. Our obligation is clear. We must eliminate these weapons, which serve no purpose other than to kill people in large numbers,

Joe Biden
U.S. President
December 14, 2022
Biden speaks of «societal guilt» for «taking too long» to address the problem of gun regulation in the U.S.
[Ignoring the blatant lie about their sole purpose is the mass killing of people*, I find it very telling that he (and his handlers) express no concern for the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is as if those restraints on government do not exist in their minds. This is the mind of a dictator.

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

I hope they enjoy their trials.—Joe]

* I’ve firing over 100,000 rounds with “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines” without killing anyone. Are they going to claim my guns are malfunctioning or admit they lied about only having one purpose?

Quote of the day—Thomas DiLorenzo

Posted on by

The Left considers the fight over free speech to be a political death struggle, and they are right about that.  If anything deserves to be strangled in its crib it is the Left’s current assault on the First Amendment.

Thomas DiLorenzo
December 9, 2022
Why the Left Must Destroy Free Speech – or Be Destroyed
[That is what I would call, “A good start.”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Journal of Surgical Research

Posted on by

Nationally, all crime rates except the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–designated firearm homicides decreased as firearm sales increased over the study period. Using a naive national model, increases in firearm sales were associated with significant decreases in multiple crime categories. However, a more robust analysis using generalized estimating equation estimates on state-level data demonstrated increases in firearms sales were not associated with changes in any crime variables examined.

Journal of Surgical Research
Mark E.Hamill MD
Matthew C.Hernandez MD
Kent R.Bailey PhD
Caleb L.Cutherell MD
Martin D.Zielinski MD
Donald H.Jenkins MD
Douglas F.Naylor MD
Miguel A.Matos DO
Bryan R.Collier DO
Henry J.Schiller MD
Legal Firearm Sales at State Level and Rates of Violent Crime, Property Crime, and Homicides
Journal of Surgical Research
Volume 281, January 2023, Pages 143-154
[This may be useful for exposing the lies of the anti-gun people who claim more guns cause more crime. It may also demonstrate benefits in reducing stress in the general population caused by the courts declaring existing gun laws unconstitutional.—Joe]

Quote of the day—fukt (@mrluciferian)

Posted on by

What a pathetic life you must live when your only purpose is to “trigger people” aka you have a small pecker and can’t get women so you need a long gun to compensate.

fukt (@mrluciferian)
Tweeted on October 20, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

What a pathetic and delusional life they must live to think childish insults are an appropriate or viable response to SCOTUS decisions.

Via a tweet from In Chains @InChainsInJail.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Maj Toure (@MAJTOURE)

Posted on by

I ALWAYS bring a knife to a gun fight.

I also bring a gun.

Maj Toure (@MAJTOURE)
Tweeted on December 10, 2022
[I bring two knives. Knives are for when thing end up being at contact distance. A knife on both the left and the right side makes it more likely access to at least one of them is unobstructed.

Learn how to use your defensive knife.—Joe]

Total sense

Posted on by

Via Randy VanSickle:

image

While other hypothesizes may also have merit this one will be difficult to disprove.

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

Posted on by

CNN’s constant coverage of what it calls “mass shootings” disguises the fact that these are mass murders. The villains they always call shooters are actually murderers. America’s 100 million gun owners, they’re shooters—decent righteous people practicing, learning, teaching and when needed, defending themselves and others facing violent criminals. Self-defense with guns is absent from CNN but not in real life—a total misinformation and misdirection campaign.

The Associated Press once told me they don’t cover incidents of self defense because they don’t want to inspire copycats. So why do they give massive saturation coverage to mass murderers? I got no answer.

Alan Korwin
November 1, 2022
Most Gun Reporting is a Misinformation Campaign
[I suspect Korwin does have an answer but doesn’t want to say it out loud. The answer will have greater impact if you come to the realization on your own and many people would probably label it as a crazy conspiracy theory.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan M. Dershowitz

Posted on by

In the bad old days, race was often used to discriminate against black applicants. Today race is often used to discriminate in favor of black applicants. I guess that is some sort of progress. But real progress will be achieved only if and when race is no longer a factor that trumps meritocracy.

Only then will Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of how his children and ours should be judged become a reality.

Alan M. Dershowitz
December 1, 2022
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: San Francisco Is The Canary In The Coal Mine For Where Wokeism Is Headed
[Just interact with people as individuals rather than some racial/religious/ethic/sexual-preference group. Does this person do good work and get along with people? If so, then except for a very few jobs, the other stuff does not matter.

By not hiring people based on merit society is made to pay more for goods and services. It is an waste of economic resources. Or, if you want to tweak the lefties, non-meritocracy hiring damages the planet.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Douglass Dowty

Posted on by

The judge struck down much of New York’s new gun law as unconstitutional. Suddaby painstakingly put to work Thomas’ historical test to decide the fitness of New York’s gun bans in dozens of locations.

For example, a state can ban guns from a school and a playground, but not a park. What about a zoo?

Guns may be banned on a local bus, but what about a Greyhound bus? Suddaby found the answer in the age before the invention of the car.

What about conference centers or movie theaters? The judge looked to 18th century meat markets and ballrooms.

Can New York require an applicant for a gun permit to provide his social media accounts? Suddaby invoked Alexander Hamilton’s death in a famed duel with Aaron Burr in 1804 to reason that you don’t have to provide your Facebook account.

…

What about airports? Or movie theaters? Again, he ruled, no historical tradition from the horse-and-buggy days provided constitutional grounds to ban guns there.

Douglass Dowty
December 1, 2022
Can you bring a gun to the zoo? On a bus? Syracuse judge eagerly rewrites NY firearms law
[I hope the issue of airports doesn’t drift into carrying on airplane too quickly. I think it runs the risk of backlash. Wait, maybe, five years then finish the job with right to carry on airplanes and in K-12 schools.

I think the anti-gun people are in some sort of shock and cannot believe what is happening. In support of this hypothesis, from the same article:

“The test that Bruen set up is unworkable in practice,” Charles said. “It doesn’t give clear guidelines to state officials or state legislatures. What do you need to do to pass constitutional laws? How do judges do this?”

He just doesn’t seem to get it. It is exceedingly clear. It is exactly as we have been saying for decades, “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!” Why is this so hard? Or is he just pretending to not understand?—Joe]