“What can we do about gun control?” is an open question on answers.yahoo.com.
Someone with the alias of Sal Paradise says:
Shoot gun owners with their own guns?
I find it difficult to interpret this any other way than this guy is advocating theft and murder of people exercising a specific enumerated right. Typical.
He must be a democrat. They have a very long history of opposition to civil rights:
Cheating to “qualify” as a public school teacher.
You could select names randomly from a phone book, hire those people as teachers and administrators without any training and no benefits or retirement program, end up with a very high turnover accordingly, and probably end up with a better school than some of the ones we’re currently forced by law to fund. Chances are, they wouldn’t all be indoctrinated leftist/authoritarians such as we have now, but then it would depend on the city. Certainly, some of the teachers I had were far below average in intelligence and functionality. Plus they hated kids. The random, first generation immigrant farmer or mill worker from that area would have exceeded their educational abilities, at least for a while until they got bored from not being able to pursue their main interests. If all they did was nothing, we’d have done better in my high school, as we wouldn’t have had anyone impeding us in the classroom. We could have read some books, looked into things using the library, brought in people from the community to speak about their specialties, discussed things amongst ourselves, and actually ended up understanding something along the way without getting a bad taste for the “education” process or being treated like pieces of shit for being curious and having independent minds.
Paul C. Duffy has the strangest thoughts. And then he shares them with a letter to the editor:
I was disheartened beyond words to read about a program that offers would-be victims of school shootings alternatives to the traditional lock-down reaction to such crimes.
…
Canton police Detective Chip Yeaton, who sounds like a caring citizen and father, spoke in support of the proposed school program, called ALICE, which stands for alert, lockdown, inform, counter, evacuate. Yeaton said that “school shootings continue to happen, and young people are dying. We need to change the philosophy.”
Yeaton is right, but his focus is wrong. Our philosophy does indeed need to change: We need to find the real and moral courage to stand down the gun lobbies — the National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment zealots — whose reckless defense of gun rights has led to a society where almost anyone can acquire a Glock 9mm and the ammunition needed to ruin lives and communities in seconds.
What Duffy totally ignores or does not comprehend is that people can acquire a 9mm Glock and the ammunition to defend lives. I realized I’m biased as I have a handgun on my hip as I type this but handguns are designed for and used millions of times each year to defend innocent life. Duffy’s brain is stuck in “prey” mode.
Read Columbine by Dave Cullen. When violent predators attack students at a school cowering under the desk this behavior gives the predator feelings of even greater power and control. They feel justified in killing those who cower beneath them. One of the prime motivators of the Columbine predators was that they believed people were so stupid they didn’t deserve to live. We don’t know what their thoughts were the last couple of hours but it would seem to me their opinions of human intelligence could not have improved as they saw people “hiding” underneath desks and tables and they strolled from person to person and shot them.
I kept wondering if the Boston Globe got the letter writers name wrong. Maybe it was actually “Fluffy” instead of “Duffy”. And the ‘C’ stands for Cottontail.
Duffy advocates being a coward in the face of a single criminal predator but “courage” while advocating people “stand down the gun lobbies”. He should think this through. Suppose he does “stand down the gun lobbies”. Then what? Is he going to start confiscating firearms from people? I would like to point out that Fluffy Duffy should be happy he has the gun lobby. They are what separate him from the 80 million gun owners in this country. Rabbits are no match for hunters.
Update: Sebastian also comments with Oh Noes! Freedom!
Of all the classes of men, I dislike most those who make their livings by talking—actors, clergymen, politicians, pedagogues, and so on. All of them participate in the shallow false pretenses of the actor who is their archetype. It is almost impossible to imagine a talker who sticks to the facts. Carried away by the sound of his own voice and the applause of the groundlings, he makes inevitably the jump from logic to mere rhetoric.
Henry Louis Mencken
From Minority Report, H. L. Mencken’s Notebooks, Knopf, 1956.
[It would seem to me that the appreciation of the applause is an important item. If the talker causes the listener to think and contemplate it would seem to me that you have an entirely different species than if the talker stirs the emotions with the intent to generate applause.
Still, I understand his point. I get particularly annoyed at actors and politicians that know how to “work a crowd” but know next to nothing about the topic they are pontificating on.—Joe]
For people like myself who are not satisfied with the justifications for carrying dangerous weapons, it sometimes seems that your viewpoint isn’t important when it’s a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Keep in mind, the Constitution has been changed before and can change again as long as you’re willing to put your efforts in the right place in Washington to get laws changed.
Rachel Elmalawany
November 14, 2012
Columnist: Gun control doesn’t control enough
[Keep in mind, Ms. Elmalawany, the constitution can’t be changed “in Washington”. It takes quite a bit more than that.
Keep in mind, Ms. Elmalawany, the entire Bill of Rights was a qualifier for agreeing to the constitution to begin with. If one of those items are nulled out the agreement to form a union is nulled.
Keep in mind, Ms. Elmalawany, that if you were to successful in repealing the 13th Amendment you would encounter, and rightly so, “stiff resistance” in the implementation. There are probably just as many people that would resist the implementation of a 2nd Amendment repeal as there are that would resist a 13th Amendment repeal implementation.
Keep in mind, Ms. Elmalawany, there are about 220 million people in the U.S. that don’t own guns. There are about 80 million people who do and who consume about 10 billion rounds of ammo each year. That’s what we do for practice. Please don’t attempt to verify our level of resolve or the quality of our practice.—Joe]
Roberta, Sebastian, and Tam report on the nanny’s in Indiana getting their panties twist over Tannerite.
A few years ago almost exactly the same thing happened. A T.V. station (WSBTV) made a video whining about, as Roberta said, “Scary–Go-BOOM!” They got a politician to talk about how terrible it was and how he was “going to do something” about it.
I sent them an email and within 24 hours the video was taken down and we didn’t hear anything more about it. Not even from the politician.
This is a little different case in that they didn’t use any of my video for their whine piece but the same principles apply. Here is a starting point for your letter to the T.V. station. Modify it a bit and you have one for your legislator:
You recently produced a video about a legal product used by thousands of people every year and found people willing to say it scared them and you. For you to engage in a such a biased and even bigoted attack on a legal product used in a legal manner is exceedingly offensive to me and thousands of other people.
I can’t imagine what you were thinking. Would you show video of people using guns to legally hunt, shoot tin cans, or put holes in paper targets and then contact the opportunist politicians because you were worried someone might use their guns to commit a terrorist act? Or how about showing someone having a glass of wine with dinner or drinking a beer in their backyard? Would you demand the government do something about this because of your concerns about drunk driving?
When I was growing up my family was able to, and did, buy dynamite, blasting caps, at the local hardware store with no special license or transportation requirements. We paid for it, picked it up out back, put in it in the trunk of the car and drove home with it. That the average person can still acquire explosives easily, legally, and safely is a testament to what a great country we have. It shows that not only the government is subservient to its citizens but that its citizens are responsible and can be trusted.
If you had demonstrated these explosives were used in thousands of crimes each year I might think you had reason to be concerned. But you did not do this. You could have used that same product and those same video to show what a great country we have. You could have shown what unique freedoms we have and how those freedoms are not being abused. Seattle King 5 Evening Magazine did that with this video: http://www.boomershoot.org/2005/KING5.wmv. But you didn’t do that. You merely demonstrated you are a Puritan–afraid that someone, someplace, is having fun.
I found your email when you were sticking up for that republican bitch michelle malkin. If you know whats good you will keep your fucking mouth shut about Obama or you will come up missing on the news.
Joseph C.
jcXXXXX@yahoo.com
November 10, 2012 8:43 AM
Original email and header is here.
[I suspect he was referring to this web page. I haven’t checked my log files yet but I suspect he found it via this blog post.
Additional information about Joseph C.:
Additional information for Joseph C.:
Yet another example of violent liberals. We are better than this.
And, yes, I sent an email to Ms. Malkin about it.—Joe]
Update February 19, 2013: He called me.
Update February 26, 2013: He called again.
There are at least two ways to interpret Americans Aged 18-29 Have A More Favorable Response To Socialism Than To Capitalism. One is that the young are inclined toward socialism and as they age they will become more capitalist. The other is that capitalism is on it’s way out and as the current capitalist age out socialism is inevitable.
I’m inclined to believe the first hypothesis is more likely to be true than the latter. One of the reasons is that young socialists have been predicting the imminent collapse of capitalism for decades if not longer. Here is one example:
In the last week of May 1968, a rallying call to the working class to take political power into their hands would have tolled the death knell of capitalism on a world scale.
In rural Idaho at the time, and a bit too young, I was too far removed from ground zero of the socialist movements of the 1960s. But I know people who were near the center of those times and places. They too believed within a few decades capitalism would be dead and buried.
I won’t deny that capitalism is weaker and is more likely to be crushed now than at any other time in the last 50 years, but it is far stronger than its detractors of the 1960s thought it would be at this time. Many of those sympathetic to socialism at that time became more capitalist as they grew older.
Perhaps socialism will temporarily bury capitalism in the next few years or perhaps decades. But I believe the young will continue to mature and become more capitalist as they age. Socialism will succeed only because we grant them power based on their stated intention rather than based on the fruit they bring. And results versus stated intentions are becoming more and more clear with each victory the socialists make.
It is those stated intentions that are so seductive we can almost taste the sweetness of the candy. The candy that is laced, by it’s very socialist nature, with carcinogens. What the socialists don’t really understand, and why I say any burial of capitalism is temporary, is that as the cancer takes hold and destroys a society it destroys the great mass of the socialist advocates at a faster rate than it does the capitalists. The capitalists will move to protect their “capital” whether it is their tangible wealth or the intellectual and physical skills that made them more productive than the socialists to begin with. As the socialists rot from the cancer of their own making the capitalists will be the ones to recover and rise from the ashes of the civilization the socialists destroyed.
I don’t know the time scale. There are just too many variables. The elections next week, as important as they are, are probably a minor player in the big picture. The economic collapse of Western Europe and perhaps Japan and China will play a major role. Add in the price and availability of oil and the possibility of glass pockmarks replacing the cities of Iran and/or Israel and you have such huge variables that making such predictions is impossible.
But I believe that even if it has to be resurrected from the ashes capitalism, particularly the right to property and all that derives from that, will rise because it is a natural law recognized and defended by nearly all animals and even our very young. I’ve talked to avowed Marxists and others who looked me directly in the eyes and said, “What’s wrong with socialism?” Their logic is non-existent, their data is cherry-picked, and their arguments are both fragile and brittle.
They can only succeed through deception and force. And at some level they know that too. This is why they have such violent tendencies. This is why they are genocidal. They can only succeed if they can kill off their intellectual competition. But as they run out of places to loot there is a “little problem” waiting for them. Their final, intended, victims are armed.
It is only as we humans go through the process of maturing in the teenage years that our brains turn to mush and advocate for socialism. Most recover but some do not. It is my belief that socialism is now making it’s final push to kill capitalism and although those with mush for brains might actually succeed in the end mush for brains will always lose to superior firepower.
@linoge_wotc I can see from your stockpile of guns and photos of guns that you have a VERY SMALL PENIS!
GiGI (@gigimorgan10)
Tweeted October 18, 2012
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
H/T Linoge via Twitter.
Her statement presumes facts not in evidence. I think a citation is needed. Or, more likely, she has crap for brains.—Joe]
Gun are a plague and I don’t think education is going to keep guns out of the hands of gang members. The solution is to prevent all people who shouldn’t have guns from getting them.
Let’s get serious, these are people who have guns, and the only reason to carry a gun is to use it. To kill people.
Michael Bloomberg
Mayor New York City
October 17, 2012
Bloomberg Opens Fire On Obama And Romney’s Gun Control “Gibberish”
[“Guns are a plague”? The last time I check gun ownership is a specific enumerated right. One could just as well claim books, newspapers, and religious texts are “a plague”.
He cannot be serious in believing the only reason for carrying guns is to kill people. Is that why his body guards and the police in his city carry them? People legally carry guns to protect innocent life. If Bloomberg cannot comprehend that then he has some serious mental issues.
If Bloomberg views a specific enumerated right as a plague then it would appear to me there are only two legitimate paths to take from here. 1) Bloomberg voluntarily enters a mental institution for treatment of his mental disorder(s); or 2) Federal prosecutors charge him with violation of 18 USC 242. In no way is Bloomberg fit for public office.—Joe]
If the ATF couldn’t keep track of 2500 guns it required FFL holders to sell to the drug cartels then it would seem that they would have zero moral authority to penalize FFL holders for losing track of a few firearms in the course of their business.
And the same should apply to the anti-gun organizations. Either they should be supporting investigation into and prosecution of those responsible in the ATF selling guns to the cartels as well as FFLs that lose guns or they should not support legal action against either.
Of course I’m expecting far too much from both the ATF and anti-gun organizations. I’m expecting morality, rationality, and consistency. I doubt they even know what those things are.
The first time, probably about 1970, I read Atlas Shrugged I was fascinated by it. Awesome book. But it was just a piece of fiction to me. In my mind at that time it could not possibly represent anything past, present, and probably not the future as being close to reality.
As I grew less naive, and particularly with the easy access to differing viewpoints via the Internet I realized there really are people out there that hate the economic/political system that enabled the greatest advances in human prosperity, human rights, and living conditions in history. And they don’t just want to “tweak” it a little in some false hope of making it better. They want to kill those that participate in the system. And furthermore they use the fruits of that system to advocate their hate:
@NancyWonderful @Our4thEstate Hanging profiteers should restore confidence, not the other way. Ah, what do I know?
I can’t even make sense of this. Whose confidence could possibly be restored by hanging those that make a profit? The confidence of communists? Don’t they understand that if the rule of law breaks down and “hanging profiteers” has no legal repercussions the “hanging of communists” will almost for certain also be without legal repercussions?
We don’t want to go there. The end result will be very grim.
It isn’t often that you see 50 or so felonies committed on a single webpage.
David Hardy
October 17, 2012
Ah, those peaceniks
[I wonder how many of those felonies will even be investigated, let alone prosecuted. My guess is zero.
It only matters if the target is the political left. Violence is considered an appropriate tool of political change when it is used or threatened by the left on their opponents.—Joe]
I’m so tired of hearing about the second amendment and the Constitution. If you love guns just admit it like it’s a vice. It’s like alcohol or drugs or sex addiction or gambling. It’s just a vice. It’s something you like. It’s not good for you or anybody else. You just like it. But stop the bulls–t about the second amendment in the Constitution, because nobody needs a gun that fires 31 rounds.
Bill Maher
January 12, 2011
Bill Maher Heckled by ‘Tonight Show’ Crowd for Saying Conservatives Want to Kill People They Disagree With
[H/T Say Uncle.
Bill, It’s a Bill of Rights, not a Bill of Needs. And you don’t need to be bad mouthing the right to keep and bear arms. How about we just put you in prison for what you just said? Because if you can just dismiss and/or ignore it gives someone else free license to dismiss and/or ignore every other specific enumerated right. Life would be considerably less pleasant if the police could legally beat a confession out of you or you could be compelled into slavery as a eunuch and praying to Mecca five times a day. That endangers everyone. Maher, you are a threat to society and the human race.
But I don’t advocate putting Maher in prison or restricting his right to free speech no matter how stupid and dangerous it is in the long run. Because the danger to society is greater if we punish speech we don’t like as long as it doesn’t cause a clear and imminent danger to innocent people. And so it is with the right to keep and bear arms.
At least Maher admits he doesn’t have any respect for the Constitution. I wish he would have said, “It’s just a piece of paper.” Just to make it crystal clear what he is really saying. He’s saying he doesn’t want our form of government. He wants to live under a government that has no formal limits to it’s power. An all powerful government is just as valid as a government which respects our natural rights. He didn’t say it but you can read between the lines that he doesn’t want you to be able to advocate for the right to keep and bear arms. He is tired of hearing that such a right exists. Well, Mr. Maher, why don’t you move so some place where your natural rights to free speech and to defend yourself are not recognized. I’d like to suggest North Korea. I’m sure you will be much happier there.
And the right to keep and bear arms is a vice? Tell that to the people in the picture of this blog post. Oh, that’s right! They are all dead because they didn’t have any guns to defend themselves with. And a gun that fires 30 or more rounds would have come in really handy when trying to defend those people. Is the right to defend yourself or other innocent people a vice? I think letting your mouth run off without knowing what you are talking about is a vice. A protected vice.—Joe]
It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
As Phil said:
That 3 minutes has the highest concentration of stupid I’ve seen in a video in quite a long time. The female co-host has absolutely no idea of what she is saying. I have more knowledge of how perming solution works than she does about firearms and the laws governing firearms. The male cohost Markley’s himself within just a few sentences.
I love it that they keep doing this sort of thing. It demonstrates they are out of “ammunition” in the fight. They are way beyond bringing a knife to a gun fight like they used to. Now they are just spitting at us.
When my views were first published in book form in 2002, I was not surprised that almost all the reviewers were unfavourable. I had expected that my old-fashioned views would get a fairly hostile reception, but the bitterness did astonish me.
I had not realised how offensive the plain truth can be to the politically correct, how enraged they can be by its mere expression, and how deeply they detest the values and standards respected 50 years ago and which dinosaurs like me still believe in, God help us.
George MacDonald Fraser
January 5, 2008
The last testament of Flashman’s creator: How Britain has destroyed itself
H/T Tamara.
[Fraser discovered the same thing pro-rights people have. Liberals appear to be violent by nature.—Joe]
Sometimes I suspect the TV people of deliberately attempting to inculcate superstition in the viewing public; then I realize they’re quite serious about putting chicken bones through their noses, if less so about the Deep Meaning of it all. That, they leave for the passive, receptive blobs on the other side of the screen and there’s nothing we can do about them.
Roberta X
October 11, 2012
7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12;
Or
The Superstitions Of Primitives
[While I have some disagreement about there being “nothing we can do about them” she has a valid point about the superstition of people. The older I get the more evidence I see presented that there is little more than a thin veneer of rationality and civilization over a subset of the human population. The rest has no veneer. You don’t even have to watch the idiot box, as Roberta did, to gather the evidence. I haven’t had an actual powered on television set in my home in at least 10, if not 15, years now yet I have the following examples from other sources:
That doesn’t include any of the people I have seen having an animated conversation with a power pole (in the dark ages before cell phones) or an empty seat on the other side of the bus (no cell phone present and the police were eventually called to remove her from the bus).—Joe]
People like this think they are qualified to make laws regulating firearms? And the media doesn’t even point out they don’t even make sense?
Moylan said he has taken heat from the gun lobby for his stance opposing semiautomatic, .50-caliber military-style assault rifles.
Assault rifles are, by definition, capable of fully automatic fire and of a medium caliber and power. Therefore the sentence above is nonsensical from at least two different perspectives. I suspect a third because “the gun lobby” likely would not care if he was opposed to something that does not and cannot exist.
The way these drooling idiots lurch from one panic-driven mistake to another, over and over again and not suffer a complete nervous breakdown, one is forced to question whether they have an actual CNS, or just a vestigial malformed brain-stem?
NotClauswitz
October 4, 2012
Comment to Denial – The first stage of grief…
[It may not be so much a lack of brain matter. It may be they have such an ingrained culture of deception that they don’t have a problem with what we think must have been a mistake. It could be it was just another deliberate deception that was implemented poorly. Those things frequently happen when the truth is irrelevant to what you advocate.—Joe]
Via Kevin:
This really resonated with me. I know an avowed Marxist who is a professor of business. The last few times I spent time with him I wanted to leave the restaurant because of the way he bullied the staff. I was extremely uncomfortable with his demanding to be in control of things that were against the restaurant policy. And that same demanding “in charge” attitude extended other things as well. He asked that I not carry a gun when in his presence. He apparently didn’t know that at least two others and possibly three were also carrying as well. I told him, “No. I prefer to carry.” My soon to be ex-wife asked him to drop it and he did so I didn’t have to tell him what I really thought and blister the ears of others.
His superior attitude, even with confronted with the logical inconsistences and obvious falsities of his beliefs, was nearly intolerable. Even the simplest to confirm facts would be dismissed with, “I don’t believe your facts.” And finally, just, “We’ll just have to disagree because I feel this way.” in direct conflict with his own supplied facts. He even insisted that basing decisions on emotions, “is just as valid as facts and logic.”
He seemed proud of the corruption of his city politicians (Chicago). He told stories of all the graft and was proud of his vote for Democrats. He laughed at the fence around the graveyard, “To keep the dead from voting.”
I’ve had extended conversations with others who view themselves as “intellectuals” and they all view themselves as superior to others and I wouldn’t trust them to think themselves to a draw in a game of tic-tac-toe. It’s the “intellectuals” of the anti-rights crowd that are confused that everyone doesn’t see the superiority of their view and demand guns be banned regardless of the increases in violent crime when the victims are disarmed. Facts are irrelevant because they believe they are smart when in fact they have merely subscribed to a religion that rewards its followers with the belief they are superior to others.