Quote of the day—Julie Was Here

I don’t think there should be a waiting period for abortion care. Waiting periods for guns allow time for back-ground checks, and allow for a “cool-off”period, as no one should purchase weapons designed specifically to kill just on an angry whim.

But the purpose of waiting periods for abortion care is to make abortion harder to get, abortion being something very time-sensitive in a way that gun purchases aren’t.

Julie Was Here
April 30, 2012
Comment to Gun Control. Let’s Be Reasonable Adults
[Wow! Only if I were trying to mock someone would I say such a thing and pretend not to see the parallels that are so blindingly obvious.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Cynicism

I despise guns; they have a single aim, to inflict massive damage upon its target. By its very nature, guns in the public are completely antithetical to peace, and should be cast out by all sane people. It should only be used by the enforcers of the law.

Cynicism
May 3, 2012
Guns And Gun Control
[I find the mind of anti-gun people “interesting”. Statements of facts apparently do not need to be based on reality. See the first sentence as an example. And adjoining sentences need not be in agreement with each other. See the last two sentences as an example—unless they are of the opinion that “the law” is also antithetical to peace.

If rational thought is present at all in the majority of humans it is but a thin, easy ruptured, veneer over a core of incoherent impulses. And as pointed out over a decade ago by son James some high school teachers actively promote the removal of this veneer.

I, and you should as well, fear for our future. These people not only vote they run our government institutions and command great power.—Joe]

Dennis Prager Demands Violence, Torture

Last night on his radio program, Dennis Prager said we need to “hold [Republicans’] feet to the fire”.

No doubt he’ll be hearing from the Secret Service any second.

Anti Gun Americans Will Flip

In an e-mail from Oleg Volk;

“Fetishizing the gun…

“American antis will flip at this animation series…”

Yup.

Combating the Mindset

A radio news report this morning said there have been three accidental shootings in Latah County recently.  One of them happened when a guy was “cleaning a loaded pistol”.  Yeah, right.

We know about these accidents, why?  Because when the injured went to the hospital for their minor wounds, the people at the hospital call the cops.

I once shot myself right through the weak hand thumb.  I went to the hospital to get the projectile extracted from my thumb.  It was sticking out both ends of the wound.  The thought of calling the cops, I am certain, never entered anyone’s mind at the hospital that day.

OK, class.  This is a test.  WHY did no one at the hospital think of calling the cops in my case, but they automatically called the cops in those other cases?  Hint; why aren’t the cops typically called in on a lawnmower accident, a ladder accident, any time you cut your finger while chopping vegetables, cut your head running into a door, etc?

Answer;  Because those accidents do not involve guns.  We’ve all been conditioned.  If it involves a firearm, call the cops.  No thinking required.  If it doesn’t involve a firearm, well take care of the patient, stupid.  This is a hospital.  If that’s not bigotry, it sure does look like it.

(I shot myself with an arrow, you see.  Flawed wooden arrows can fracture upon launch, and since your hand is right there on the bow, the fractured arrow can be thrust right through your hand)

“Oh, but those gunshots could have been part of a crime” you say.  And that’s my point– even you are programmed.  If a gun is involved, well, crime.  Sure, and someone could have shot me with an arrow while I was threatening them, or that cut you got chopping food could have been done on purpose by your raging spouse, and that contusion on your kid’s head from the bicycle crash might have been caused by you hitting him with a blunt object on purpose, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.   Get the irrational programming (the mindset; gun = crime) ironed out.

Armed Robbery Thwarted in Moscow

The local newspaper story is here.  You only see part of it unless you subscribe.  Basically, the robber was distracted with pulling money out of the cash drawer, which was placed on the counter and the clerk took the initiative, snatching the robber’s gun.  The gun was dropped.  The robber then fled, leaving the cash and the gun behind.  Oops.  He later came back and turned himself in– probably not a bad idea, given the circumstances.

One of the radio reports has the cops telling us, after this incident, not to fight back– to do whatever the criminals tell us to do.  Uh, hey Skippy: isn’t that exactly the sort of advice that enabled the 9/11 attacks?

You can’t really plan ahead for what you’ll do, and you certainly cannot second guess the actions of the clerk.  What happened this time, and what happens time and time again, is that someone recognizes an opportunity to stop a crime, and then takes that opportunity while the taking is good.  That’s all.

I wouldn’t call it an act of will so much as a reflexive reaction based on a split second certainty, founded in basic principles.  My son once recounted an incident at school wherein he had a habitual bully pinned to the floor, crying, before Son even really knew what had happened.  No; you don’t plan this stuff, but you don’t want to be hamstrung by stupid advice from cops and other wannabe authorities either.

Good for that clerk for having the presence of mind plus the wherewithal to act.  He used his bare hands against an armed robber, no one was hurt, and the robber is in custody.

Right Too Late

Hat tip; Billy Beck  This can’t get enough exposure;

Some of the people close to me are in effect communists.  No; they don’t attend Party rallies and most of them don’t send money to The Party (though some do through their union dues and they may not even know it) but their underlying assumptions are the same.  That’s all it takes.  You don’t need to be a Firm Believer in the teachings of Brother Marx, carrying around the little red book, or even understand where your beliefs came from.  You only need those underlying assumptions you acquired by default sometime in childhood, and just a little bit of envy, or resentment, or frustration, or anger, and plenty of reinforcement from those with whom you’ve chosen to surround yourself.  The Party and it’s allies will then be free to do the rest, because you won’t notice until it’s too late.  It all sounds fairly reasonable, even good, along the way, because “we all know that something has to be done”.  Right?  And that something is, as always, more government (less freedom).

Suckers.  I can forgive the kids (most haven’t received a proper education) but what about you adults?  Seriously.

It’s interesting.  I was listening this weekend to a man who barely escaped with his life from Cuba.  He said his parents supported Castro.  All Castro wanted was justice after all (there was clearly a lack of justice in Cuba, pre revolution) and to serve the collective good of The People.  His parents supported Castro wholeheartedly.  That is, until the newly empowered communists came and took everything they had– everything his parents had worked for all their lives.  I heard the same basic story directly from a famous musician who had escaped from Cuba by skipping out on his handlers while on tour in the U.S.  You risk your life doing that.  If the catch you, they kill you, or take you back to make an example out of you.  The man I was listening to this weekend was in tears, trying to warn us that the same thing is happening here in the U.S., in this land of his Last Great Hope.  They’re using same promises and the same rationale, using the same underlying assumptions, with the same goals right here and right now.  If it succeeds it will have the same outcome.  It always does.  Only this time it’s global.

It has been said that being right is ok (sometimes) but being right too soon makes you a radical extremist.

What about being right too late?  What does that make you?  I ask you Progressives.  You’ve grown up with the warning signs all around you, and now the warning signs have reached ear-splitting decibel levels.  What does it make you if you’re right too late?  Or does your anger or fear, or hatred, or disgust with the human race, prevent you from caring about the consequences?  I know there are those who believe there are too many people on the planet already.  Some people know what we’re headed for and they secretly long for it.  For other Progressives– those who just want to live a good life and want what’s “best” for everyone; What does it make you when you’re right too late?

Quote of the day—Amanda Wilcox

It wasn’t a failure of laws. I just don’t see how our gun laws could have stopped something like that.

Amanda Wilcox,
Lobbyist for the California chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
April 6, 2012
California’s tough gun laws could not prevent Oakland tragedy
[It’s nice to see the Brady Campaign admitting gun laws cannot stop mass shootings but she still has some pretty significant symptoms of Peterson Syndrome.

Did you noticed she said “It wasn’t a failure of laws” but then in the next sentence she says she doesn’t see how gun laws could have stopped the shooting. One or the other of those statements has to be false.

The corrected statement should be:

Our gun laws have failed. Our gun laws cannot stop something like that. The best known way to stop an active criminal shooter is for another person to shoot back. As long as our gun laws make it difficult or impossible for potential victims to defend themselves these tragedies will continue to happen.

But the Brady Campaign has a vested interest in the blood of innocent people running in the streets. If they were more rare their funding would dry up and they would cease to exist. Hence they give out sound bites that at first glance support their warped view but upon closer examination cannot even maintain coherence from sentence to sentence.

See also Say Uncle and the comments to his post.—Joe]

Sometimes it’s no fun being right

In comments here, regarding Hollywood’s lack of ideas and their focus on remakes, I predicted a new series of the Three Stooges.  Turns out I was right on time.  They have the movie coming out this month.  I’ll guess that the new series is already in the works.  The Marx Brothers and then Silent flicks to follow, I suppose.

These are the people who accuse us of being “backward” or “simple-minded”.

Ignorant yahoo

Paul Krugman writes:

Florida’s now-infamous Stand Your Ground law, which lets you shoot someone you consider threatening without facing arrest, let alone prosecution, sounds crazy – and it is. And it’s tempting to dismiss this law as the work of ignorant yahoos.

The Stand Your Ground law does not enable someone to avoid arrest for shooting someone “you consider threatening”. It merely codifies what has been common law since at least Biblical times. If you are reasonably in fear of seriously body harm or death then you are protected from prosecution and civil action if you use deadly force to protect innocent life rather than having an obligation to attempt escape.

As people have known for quite sometime you shouldn’t live in a glass house if you are going to throw stones. If Krugman is looking for someone to call an ignorant yahoo he only need look as far as the nearest mirror.

More on Heavy Boots

Or is it Moron Heavy Boots?  Ry brought up the “Heavy Boots” phenomenon a while back, but I hadn’t heard of it until he explained it to me and I Googled it.  I was disappointed, but the story didn’t surprise me.  I’ve talked to a lot of people about a lot of things, having been in the service business and in consumer credit, for over 30 years.  Richard P. Feynman wrote about similar experiences he’d had in his teaching career.  It’s sad to realize how many people lack that little bit of curiosity that would lead them quickly to understand some of the basics of their world.

At the music store, I put up a poster-sized photo of the full Earth taken from space.  You’ve all seen it, and some of you will already know when it was taken, based on the history of the mission.  I looked at it a lot, just as a beautiful image that says something about the ingenuity of Man, before I realized that it told us a few other things.  So now I have some questions.  This is my Heavy Boots experiment but it’s on a bit higher level.  These questions are for those who have no idea when the picture was was taken without analyzing the image itself.  Forget the history and the mission, and so on.  It’s a simple question for those who know the basics of our solar system and of Earth’s place in it;
About what time of year was this photo taken?  How can you tell?  Also; About what time of day was it taken?  How do you know?

Here’s another one.  Looking at this image of the moon, assuming you’re facing East.  What time is it?  Why?

One of my older brothers liked to mess with people when we were younger.  When one of his young sisters-in-law asked him what those bumps between the lanes on the freeway were for, he told them they were part of a project for the blind– so blind drivers could tell when they were crossing lanes.  “Really?” came the reply.  He pulled off a lot of that sort of thing, trying to see just how fantastic a story he could tell and still get someone to believe him.  I suppose his behavior could be referred to as a search for Progressive voters.  If you’re ignorant enough, you’ll believe anything if it’s presented just right.  Our coercively-funded schools have that part covered.  They actively discourage learning.

Leno had a bit on his show last night wherein he placed a magician behind the counter at a convenience store.  There were some plastic Easter eggs in a counter display, labeled “Insta-Chick” or some such.  The egg contained a little foam “chick” that would expand in water.  The magician, introducing the new and rare product to the customers “placed one in a cup”, then “poured water over it” and a live chick came out instantly.  People believed it, even after he said they were “engineered in China” such that you could let them dry out again and reanimate them later, and you didn’t need to feed them.  More “Heavy Boots”.  “Vote for me— I’ll give you free health care” or etc. is along the same lines.

I try not to be discouraged.  There are a lot of people who don’t fall for this stuff.  They can tell from looking at a photo of our planet what time it was taken, know that mass exhibits gravity, know that we can’t all get free lunch forever and there’s no such thing as a perpetual motion machine.

Crazy thought of the day

With all the crazy stuff Joan Peterson says I wonder how large her team of psychologists is. And the authorities locked up Sarah Conner for months, who appears to be far more sane, and took her guns away.

Quote of the day—Marianne DeAlessi

Losing innocent children to gun fatalities can be eliminated with gun control.

Marianne DeAlessi
March 15, 2012
Argument for gun control
[What kind of fantasy world is she living in? Even ignoring the hundreds of thousands of children murdered by their own government using firearms many who might have been saved had there not been gun control the only “gun control” that could possibly achieve such a result would be the complete destruction of all firearms. And of course as the availability of firearms tends toward zero other types of violence tend to go up such that there is no net gain in safety.

It may be that she is suffering from Peterson Syndrome but if not then she should attempt to answer Just One Question before advocating for more gun control.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Richardson

Calling Ladd Everitt an expert on gun laws is such an oxymoron that it borders on incomprehensible.

John Richardson
Consult An Expert!
March 9, 2012
[Everitt is with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

This is almost a trend. Yesterday I quoted a former police officer saying Brian Malte at the Brady Campaign didn’t know what he was talking about.—Joe]

Quote of the day—kraigwy

Mr. Malte needs to ask for a refund from his History Teacher. The Constitution says nothing about Permission in regards to the 2nd amend.

As an FTO for my department I stressed that the officer safety dictates to the officer that everyone he/she meets is carrying.

My hat goes off to every state that passes “constitutional carry’ laws, joining my state (WY) and the state I policed (AK) prior to retiring.

kraigwy
March 8, 2012
In response to “They want a gun in every nook and cranny in society with no permission needed and no background check,” Malte said, adding, “This is just a recipe for disaster.” in the article 12 States on Path to Guns Without Permits.
[“Malte” refers to Brian Malte, the director of state legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

So here we have a former police Firearms Training Officer telling the Brady Campaign they don’t know what they are talking about.

That’s par for the course.—Joe]

‘Civilians’

It seems to have become universal.  Cops refer to us as civilians, meaning, I guess, that cops don’t see themselves as civilians, meaning that they think they are military police.

If you want our respect, you might at least try using the language correctly, otherwise I’ll assume you went to cop school because you were rejected as a junior high school janitor.

I rarely watch television anymore, but last night I caught some of a show about cops in Alaska.  I’ve been to several parts of the state, so I was interested in a general sort of way.  Absolutely, drop-dead gorgeous photography, but it otherwise made my skin crawl.  In what I can only assume is an effort to dehumanize the people they ostensibly serve, cops refer to men and women as “males” and “females”.  No one is a man, or a woman, or a husband, father, son, brother, wife, mother, sister or daughter, but is a “male” or a “female” as though cops are of a different species.  By their own language then, they’re non human MPs.  Or is it superhuman MPs?  Either way it’s sick.

They say there is a high rate of suicide in Alaska, and they showed a couple of responses to the same.  I find it extremely unfortunate that they send a man with a uniform and a gun (drawn) to respond to something like that.  It’s probably the worst possible choice.  Yes; I know the reasoning, so don’t bother.  It’s just extremely unfortunate.  They hauled one guy off to a “doctor”.  Gawd.  The last thing that “civilian male” probably needed was cop (who refers to him as a “civilian male”) and “doctor”.  The whole thing reminded me of that spoof Star Wars Cops video, only it wasn’t a spoof.

Quote of the day—Irene Peter

Ignorance is no excuse, it’s the real thing.

Irene Peter
[Especially when it is deliberate. Which means the great majority of anti-gun people are “the real thing”.—Joe]

Don’t be stupid

If you are going to be making explosives PLEASE don’t do it some place stupid—like your office at work:

A 50-year-old Lorain County man was jailed for arson on Saturday for an explosion that injured him in his Elyria office on Friday.

Police said Robert Shaw of LaGrange was mixing chemicals to build exploding targets for firearm target practice when one blew up around 9 a.m. in the office at Diamond Products on Prospect Avenue.

Go to some open space where an accident doesn’t injure others or their property. If you don’t you can spoil the fun for the rest of us who don’t have an interest in acquiring Darwin Awards.

Via email from Bubblehead Les.

Posit

There essentially are no restrictions on guns or ammunition.  There are several organizations, local, national and worldwide, providing guns and ammunition to minors and to the poor, either for free or at subsidized prices, often without parental consent, even to the point of covering up for criminal use of guns in some cases so as to maximize the number of kids with access to guns.  It is a human right after all.  A right is a right, and that’s that.  If you so much as question it, you are against children and against human rights in general, you backward-minded Neanderthal, redneck ignorant Nazi bastard.  There are gun training programs in most public schools, with free ammunition available if a kid goes to a school counselor to ask for it, saying that his parents are denying him his right to ammunition.

There’s the background.  It is firmly entrenched in our culture, hardly anyone is questioning it, those who do are never taken seriously, and for sure it is not threatened either by this Congress or any foreseeable one.

Then; proposed new federal legislation adds to all of the above by forcing tax payers to pay for free guns and ammunition, for the asking, nationwide.  Anyone objecting to this new bill is accused of wanting to “ban guns”, denying the poorest people and the children their second amendment rights.  If you can’t get it for free, immediately, any time, anywhere, your right to it has thereby been denied, QED, so without this new bill, even with everything in the first paragraph untouched and safe for the future, the second amendment is effectively banned.  Poor, sobbing victim after poor, sobbing victim is paraded in front of the in-depth news show cameras to tell their stories of woe and despair arising from a lack of access to ”affordable” guns and ammunition, and the pundits have nothing but sympathy for them, and the serious understanding that can only come from having had similar experiences of their own.

Now; it is by that same resoning, in that same sort of environment, that Rick Santorum and others are accused of wanting to ban birth control.

Focus, People.  Santorum may be the spawn of Satan for all I know, but neither he nor anyone else of any prominence wants to ban birth control.  This entire issue was manufactured by Democrats to divert attention from the Obama economy and other Obama atrocities because they believe that “social issues” are the Republicans’ weakness and they want to keep the discussion focused there.  Some among us have actually fallen for it even though it’s been used a thousand times before in broad daylight.  Please get a grip.

Now I will point out that when we of the pro liberty mindset want a human right respected (one that‘s actually in the constitution, for example) we don’t demand that certain goodies be given to us as part of a government program at taxpayer’s expense and we don’t demand it be given to kids against their parents wishes.  The proof of whether a “right” is really a right is that a true right never demands anything from anyone else other than non interference.

One of Many Things I’ll Never Quite Understand

Those who consider themselves iconic conservatives, or Republican leaders, often praise  President Lincoln.  Just reading the Emancipation Proclamation, I see it as a cheap political ploy of Clintonian style (or W. J. Clinton was of the Lincolnian tradition).  It didn’t free a single slave.  Furthermore, the North had slaves all through The War Between the States, and General Grant kept slaves for years after.  Depending on who you listen to, Lincoln was either a brutal tyrant or a brilliant champion of liberty.  I definitely do not see the latter.  This whole issue is clouded in B.S. so thick I can’t see through it.  Where do I turn for the truth?