Not only do I know people like this I am getting a new job because I cannot work with someone like this.
Via email from Barron.
Category Archives: Crap For Brains
Quote of the day—Susan Glick
The bottom line is that Florida’s concealed-carry law puts guns into the hands of criminals.
It is ironic that the gun lobby’s ‘model’ concealed carry law is designed to actually reward criminals who plea bargain, a practice that the gun lobby’s rhetoric routinely and vehemently condemns. Under the Florida law, Patrick Purdy, perpetrator of the 1989 Stockton, California schoolyard massacre, and the gun lobby’s poster-boy for the evils of plea bargaining, would not have been prevented from eventually obtaining a concealed carry license despite his previous arrests and convictions for drug possession, illegal possession of dangerous weapons, firing a pistol in a national forest, and resisting arrest.
Florida’s law has made it substantially easier for individuals with criminal records or criminal intent to go about armed. The findings in Concealed Carry: The Criminal’s Companion demonstrate that Florida’s concealed carry law is definitely a model one not to be followed.
Susan Glick
November 1, 1995
VPC Health Policy Analyst
New Study Shows Florida’s “Model” Concealed Carry Law Puts Guns Into the Hands of Criminals
[Note the date, 1995 before you get too wound up over this. History has shown the were demonstrable wrong on the “model one not to be followed” and their efforts to stop the shall issue concealed carry laws from steamrolling the nation were futile.
Even if we ignore the hints they prefer a system where accusations and not convictions are all that are required to deny a person their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms they still have serious problems with their mindset. It may take few extra seconds to grasp but their basic premise is incredibly stupid. Almost any normal person would realize this within a minute after putting it down on paper. That they don’t recognize this shows how broken their mental processes are.
How can they possibly claim, “Florida’s law has made it substantially easier for individuals with criminal records or criminal intent to go about armed.”? Or “The bottom line is that Florida’s concealed-carry law puts guns into the hands of criminals.”? Do recreational drug users have any problem finding a supplier? Does anyone think that the criminal who wants a firearm will have trouble finding a supplier or tucking a gun into their waistband if they can’t get a concealed carry permit?
The anti-gun people have long demonstrated they have crap for brains and this is just one more example.—Joe]
Logical Contradiction
NRCC Chairman, Pete Sessions, just sent out a letter. First sentence;
While House Republicans are working hard to return our country to economic prosperity and strengthen and secure Medicare…
Let me see if can put this into perspective. While House Republicans are working hard to run our economy for us (because we’re too stupid and/or evil to do it ourselves) and to try, once again, to make socialism viable. ETS; Or are they working hard to free the economy so it can work, AND trying to make socialism viable? They don’t say. That’s about how I read it.
Quote of the day—Bob Walker
FreedomChannel.com will be a valuable tool to reach Americans from all political persuasions. The fight against gun violence should not be a partisan issue and we look forward to getting our message out to the public through FreedomChannel.com.
Bob Walker
President of Handgun Control, Inc.
November 4, 1999
HANDGUN CONTROL PARTICIPATES IN LAUNCH OF NEW POLITICAL INTERNET SITE, FREEDOMCHANNEL.COM
[One would think it has to be satire when an organization with a name like “Handgun Control” gives praise to an organization with “freedom” in its name. But FreedomChannel.com was an Orwellian construct. Apparently they really believed that if their slogans are repeated enough people will believe them. It was a slogan taken directly out of the book, WAR IS PEACE, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, and, obviously, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.
Apparently they thought people would fail to recognize Nineteen Eighty-Four was dystopian novel rather than play book to achieve their goals.—Joe]
Critical Pedagogy Hits Home
There’s been some talk about it lately and it’s been in the news, but it’s also been in your home town school for some time. Here is a history paper, handed out in my son’s history class, complete with syntax errors, inexplicable asterisks, bad grammar, omitted words, and miss-numbering. The kids were told to memorize it. Keep in mind the title of the piece – “U.S. History” This is all American. Everything below is what made/makes us tick;
U.S. History
Philosophies — Foreign and Domestic
“What Made/Makes Us Tick”
1. Capitalism – Pure*** vs. Regulated
An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.
OK, right there; no mention of property rights, the acknowledgement and protection of which result in capitalism. “Corporately owned” IS privately owned, but they must make a distinction.
Pure capitalism over time results in poverty, worker abuse, environmental destruction, a two class social structure, and governmental control by the wealthy. All economic, political and social norms were control directly ad indirectly by the wealthy. Even the presentation of religious views were seen through the eyes of the capitalistic values.(2-
Karl Marx would be giddy with pride seeing what our public schools are teaching my kids today. There’s so much wrong with that one paragraph I don’t know where to begin. For one thing, “governmental control by the wealthy” defines a corrupt government. The acknowledgement and protection of property rights, which defines capitalism, does not lead to governmental control by the wealthy. That’s a contradiction in terms, but you’re not supposed to notice. Corrupt politicians lead to governmental control by the wealthy, and for that they should be arrested.
Regulated Capitalism – has produced our nation. Government regulates what industry can do within limits. Environmental impact (air quality), worker safety, fair pay, fair trade, and business dealings are regulated by law.
The Fascisti would certainly approve of that statement, and they were committed Marxists. Notice throughout this whole piece that there is no mention of human rights, or of America’s founding principles. That would blow the whole thing though, wouldn’t it?
2. Expansionism
The belief that the nation must grow to acquire natural resources, new areas of trade, and living space. (Safety Value Theory – Turner Thesis)
3. Manifest Destiny (New Manifest Destiny)***
— Similar to Expansionism. This was the belief that God had pre-determined (destined) the United States to expand. It was an outgrowth of the Puritan ethic [God rewards those who work hard and live an exemplary life.] The term eventually meant that the U.S. would eventually control the land from coast to coast. This belief system motivated the “Western Movement.” The acquisition of land and the displacement of Native Americans became justified in part by this belief system. The Mexican War, the Southwest land, Northwest Territory, and Alaska are also acquired with belief system as the driving force for America to expand.
Nearly every country that ever existed has practiced some version of Manifest Destiny or Expansionism. The American government did some terrible things to the Indians. The innuendo I get from this is that there are wrongs remaining to be righted, which is actually being said elsewhere, complete with the “R” word (revolution) in the above linked video, as part of a school curriculum.
4. Whiteman’s Burden – Anglo Saxonism*** The term is taken from a poem by Rudyard Kipling in which he states is was “the white man’s burden” to colonize the other nations for their benefit. In practice it was the belief that:
God had chosen the Anglo-Saxon race to colonize the “less fortunate” peoples of the world. In so doing they were to bring them education, the Christian faith, a Puritan work ethic, capitalism, health care, and the other “benefits” of our culture.
Ah, so America really IS racist! Crap!
5. Imperialism***
–,The control of one nation over another nation or territory for the purposes of acquiring natural resources, trade, and/or military advantage. This is the core of U.S. expansion. The acquisition of Hawaii, Cuba, and the Philippines are examples of imperialism.
Notice how they slipped trade in there, like trading with people in another nation amounts to Imperialism. We bastards! Those poor victims!
6. Rugged Individualism
— The belief that individuals are to provide for their own needs without the help of others. “I can do it myself.” This was the pioneer spirit and the belief of the nation in the 1800s. It worked against the average person during the latter part of the Industrial Revolution as corporations controlled the variables of life. Working harder did not mean greater rewards for the worker. It meant greater profits for the corporation.
The ideal of self sufficiency worked against the average person, eh? So you’d be better off relying on others. Notice too the repeated use of the word “worker”. “Workers of the World Unite” then, I guess. There are those evil corporations again, and the use of “profits” as an epithet.
7. Social Darwinism
— Applying the theory of Darwinism, survival of the fittest, to political and social life. The strong must survive to benefit the entire nation. No sympathy for the weak, (poor, workers). Laws and social customs were for the benefit of the fittest (rich, industrialist, upper crust of society). When you combine the philosophies of Social Darwinism with imperialism, and Manifest Destiny., the world created was a tough one for the average person.
The Nazis were Social Darwinists, or I would say “Socialist Darwinists”. Let’s be clear.
8. Humanitarianism
— the belief that mankind should help others just because they can. “Social Gospel” of the latter 1800s.
“Just because they can”, mind you. Not because it’s the right thing to do. Not because there are rich people who are, you know, actually human.
9. Liberty/Freedom/Self-determination*
These fundamental beliefs began to take on a new meaning for many of society as the end of the century approached. The empathy to “occupied countries” overseas and to the oppressed at home gains attention of a wider spectrum of society in the late 1800s.
Again no mention of rights, rights protection, or founding principles. Instead it’s all up for grabs, depending on prevailing theories.
9. AMERICAN IMPERIALISM
It is easier to define American Imperialism by contrasting it with Imperialism.
Imperialism is centered on Social Darwinism, Manifest Destiny, and White Man’s Burden.
There were never, ever, anywhere, any non-white Imperialists then. You racist, you.
American Imperialism tempers those beliefs with humanitarianism and the beliefs of self-determination, freedom and liberty. Our present foreign and domestic policies are motivated by this belief.
There you have it. We’re an Imperialist nation. Damn us all to hell.
This history lesson is a self-contradictory and confused jumble of omissions, lies, half truths and truths. Would Karl Marx strongly disagree with any of it?
Quote of the day—Josh Moon
There are too many guns floating around here these days.
…
They’re doing all they can on the back end to get guns off the street, but they’re fighting a losing battle.
It sure would be nice if we did something to help on the front end, when we’re handing these guns out like candy to anyone with a pulse.
I’ve made no secret of my position on guns: The ease with which we distribute them drives me crazy.
I’m sorry, but it shouldn’t be easier to get a gun than it is to get a driver’s license. And it certainly shouldn’t be easier to get unlimited amounts of ammunition than it is to vote.
Josh Moon
May 14, 2011
Just Saying: Proactive measures needed to help curb gun violence
[I could spend a paragraph or three fisking each of those sentences but I think it boils down to a single problem with this guys mindset. There is no “we”. If he could ever understand that then the rest of his errors would fall away like hot ejected brass shell casing.—Joe]
Mother and child of Satan
Last year there was this guy that blew himself up and was in the hospital for some time but ultimately recovered. The speculation at the time was that he used Tannerite and he was extremely stupid in the application.
Even if the stupid part was correct it turns out that it wasn’t Tannerite. Darwin was unable to cure his stupidity and now the Federal Government is attempting to address the symptoms. He was arrested Monday and the affidavit for his arrest was unsealed yesterday with interesting details. His explosives included Triacetone Triperoxide (TATP) which is sometimes known as Mother of Satan because of its high susceptibility to accidental detonation.
Other interesting stuff in the affidavit indicates the world would have been much better off if Darwin had been successful. This guy appears to be someone many would characterize as a child of Satan.
Update: I found the following interesting as well. This is from the list of items to be searched for and seized in the affidavit. Notice that nearly every home has the precursor chemicals to make explosives. This is one of the reasons I say the TSA explosives tests cannot be effective and are a waste of time. Explosives can be easily made from common household materials. If the TSA were to screen for these they would generate so many false positives that the “pat downs” and extensive searches would raise the cost of TSA to even higher levels and create even more public outrage. Since they don’t test for these chemicals explosive devices can be easily made and detonated on board commercial flights at will.
Rational thought isn’t their strong point
As Dave Hardy points out the Brady Campaign cannot be truthful and yet simultaneously claim they do not wish to make firearm ownership difficult just for the sake of making it difficult and claim it is good news there are reports that firearms ownership is declining. Their pleasure at the claims of lower firearms ownership must be interpreted as reduced ownership rates as a desirable goal. If they desire that goal then all their actions must be viewed as something they consider might further that goal.
I find their views on reports of reduced gun ownership rates like someone cheering a reduction in the number of people who vote, write letters to the editor, or people voluntarily becoming slaves.
Quote of the day—Paul Helmke
In yet another sign of how out of touch it is with how people interact in a civilized society, the National Rifle Association is apparently so wrapped up in its paranoid view of the world that it planted an undercover cameraman at our news conference at the National Press Club on Wednesday when the Brady Campaign released its annual Scorecard of State gun laws that can help reduce gun violence.
Paul Helmke
May 6, 2011
NRA Didn’t Have To Spy: Their Deadly Agenda Is Out
[I wasn’t aware that news conferences were intended to be secret and that if someone showed up without being specifically invited they were considered a “spy”.
I guess that shows how out of touch I am with how people interact in a civilized society as well. Or maybe is shows it is the Brady Campaign which is paranoid instead of the NRA.—Joe]
Quote of the day—meus_ovatio
I don’t think Mr. Huffman is capable, much less trustworthy, of “protecting innocent life”.
meus_ovatio
April 26, 2011
Comment to Democracy vs Totalitarianism: Hiding Godwin in the closet.
[It’s odd how people who have never met me or my family think they are qualified to make such sweeping statements with such certainty. But it shouldn’t be surprising. There are large numbers of people that find facts and reason obstacles to their belief systems. This is just one more example.—Joe]
Quote of the day—sandwichwarrior
Mr. Huffman is what many liberals would charitably call a Right-wing-militia nut. He is sufficiently infamous that a certain member of this community has linked to news articles about him and others as proof of a nascent right-wing terrorist movement.
sandwichwarrior
April 26, 2011
Democracy vs Totalitarianism: Hiding Godwin in the closet.
[There are more howlers in the comments. I’ll post another tomorrow.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Carolyn McCarthy
No. that’s absolutely not true. I’ve been working on gun issues for the last 14 years, since I’ve been in Congress. This is something I’m passionate about, as much as they are passionate about say their Second Amendment rights.
We’re not dealing about guns here. We’re dealing about a piece of equipment that goes to the gun. I think when you think about just common sense here, large capacity clips that can basically, in my opinion, be weapons of mass destruction, should not be available to the average citizen. They will be available to our military. They will be available to our police officers.
Carolyn McCarthy
January 11, 2011
McCarthy To Propose Ban On High-Capacity Ammo
In response to the question, “What would you say to gun rights supporters who may be listening to you and feeling that you’re politicizing this rather extreme tragedy to push the bill that you’re describing?”
[Notice that she doesn’t answer the question other than, “No. That’s absolutely not true.” No evidence, no logic, just vigorous assertion.
Further notice that she apparently thinks “weapons of mass destruction” should be available to police officers. Or she is lying when she says, “large capacity clips that can basically, in my opinion, be weapons of mass destruction”. And/or she has crap for brains.
And of course the headline writer thinks there is such a thing as “High-Capacity Ammo”.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Mike Barkley
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States repealing the right to keep and bear arms.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid for all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States at any time after the date of its submission for ratification:
‘Article–
1. Any right to keep and bear arms, whether under the Second Amendment to this Constitution, or under some pre-existing doctrine of natural law or common law or otherwise, or under Constitution or laws of any State, is repealed.
2. The privilege to keep and bear arms throughout the United States shall be under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.’
Mike Barkley
Candidate for Congress
April 17, 2011
Repeal the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
[As if natural law can be “repealed”.
He also ignores the fact that the 2nd Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and said Bill of Rights was a requirement for the agreement to enter into the Union. Hence if the 2nd Amendment were to be “repealed” would that mean that the states are no longer bound by the agreement to be a part of the union?
Of course he ignores the little problem of the majority of the people in this country support the existence of the 2nd Amendment. And finally he seems clueless that there are many states that would consider such an act sufficient grounds to have another civil war.
This is just a reminder that there are people out there that explicitly say they do want to destroy the 2nd Amendment.—Joe]
That does not compute
Yesterday I received an email from Josh Horwitz at Coalition to Stop Gun Violence:
Recognize VA Tech Anniversary by Saying “NO GUNS ON CAMPUS!”
As many of you know, April 16 will mark the fourth anniversary of the mass shooting at Virginia Tech. This weekend will be a time for survivors to remember their lost loved ones and pay tribute to their lives, and for America to reflect on the causes and meaning behind this horrific tragedy.
While the Virginia Tech families have emerged as some of the strongest proponents of tougher gun control laws, the gun lobby has exploited the massacre to push extreme legislation that would force colleges and universities to allowing the carrying of loaded firearms on their campuses. Such NRA-drafted bills are now being considered in 18 different states.
Today, Friday, April 15, the Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus is recognizing the fourth anniversary of the Virginia Tech shootings by conducting a National Call-In Day.
Please call your governor today and ask him/her to oppose guns on campus legislation in your state. If you are in a state with no pending guns on campus legislation, please call and ask your governor to oppose any future attempts to force colleges and universities to allows guns on campus. To find the phone number for your governor, just click here.
Thank you in advance for participating in this important action. If we are to build a safer future for our children, keeping guns out of the classroom is a must.
What Horwitz doesn’t say is that Virginia Tech had rules against guns on campus and it didn’t stop the shooter. There were also laws against murder which didn’t stop the shooter either. The only thing that would have stopped the shooter was another person with a gun. This was, in fact, the response of the police dispatch when they got the call about an active shooter on campus. They sent people with guns to confront the shooter. But they took a few minutes to arrive and of course they were much too late to stop the carnage.
Yet Horwitz want to “build a safer future” by ensuring that all campuses have the same policy in place that enable the shooter at Virginia Tech to be “successful”. Had Virginia Tech not had such a policy and the shooting took place it would almost make sense (there would still have been the law against murder in force) for his call to action. But that wasn’t the case. He is advocating for the proliferation of a policy proven to fail and uses an instance of failure as a reason for a call to action. Huh?
I shouldn’t be surprised. Again (and again just today!) the anti-gun people demonstrate they have nothing but crap for brains.
You’re doing it wrong and you’re lying
The Brady Campaign has a new video and web site about “assault clips” (yes, I put the “nofollow” tag on that link). In addition to the obvious ignorant use of the words “assault” and “clip” the shooter has a very poor grip on the gun. His left thumb is in danger of needing a bandage and/or stitches. And his left index finger is doing nothing.
Furthermore the narrator and text of the website talk of 32 shots in 16 seconds. But I only count 16 (or maybe 17) shots in 4 seconds. And of course the claim is that “A magazine that allows a gun to fire 32 rounds in 16 seconds is only good for one thing. Killing a lot of people–fast.” Is totally bogus.
In the following video I shot 17 rounds in 7.5 seconds including a magazine reload and a malfunction clearance. I then go on to shoot a total of 36 rounds in 16.02 seconds—still with 10 rounds in my magazines.
If one were to accept the Brady Campaign claim that “a magazine that allows a gun to fire 32 rounds in 16 seconds is only good for one thing” then 10 round magazines must be only good for killing a lot of people fast too. Hence, I must inevitably must conclude one of three things about the magazines in my guns which hold more 10 or more rounds:
- I have killed many thousands of people with the 60,000 or so rounds I have fired through these guns and no one has noticed—including myself.
- The magazines have continuously malfunctioned to the point of being useless for their intended purpose.
- The Brady Campaign is lying.
The use of Occam’s Razor should reveal the correct answer.
Random thought of the day
If it weren’t so deadly serious I would find it quite amusing that anti-gun activists get all bent out of shape and claim they feel threatened when millions of people peaceably carry concealed firearms in public every day. Yet they advocate passing laws that would mandate those same peaceable people give up their defensive tools at the point of a policeman’s gun and claim we are the ones threatening violence.
No clue
Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the lack of a rational thought process. This particular instance is brought to you by Elizabeth Guernsey, 26, a graduate of Trinity College who is pursuing a master’s degree in “urban studies”. “Urban studies” probably explains everything:
In fact, the federal government has passed only three major pieces of gun legislation over the past century. Two of these bills followed the assassination and attempted assassination of public officials. The National Firearms Act of 1934 made it illegal to carry hand grenades and machine guns. The Firearms Act of 1968, passed after the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, regulates the firearm industry and prevents interstate firearm transfers. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, named for James Brady, who was shot during the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan, requires background checks for those purchasing firearms.
These pieces of federal law are critical to keeping illegal guns out of our communities. Perhaps we should applaud politicians for using the moment after a president or congresswoman is shot to push for improved gun regulations. But why have public officials been unable to pass laws in light of the 9,484 ordinary people killed each year by gun violence?
First off, these three laws are far from all the Federal laws on the books. Alan Korwin has an entire book on just Federal Gun Laws—all 271 of them.
Next, the laws she describes as “critical to keeping illegal guns out of our communities” actually created “illegal guns”. Machine guns, short barreled shotguns, and suppressors weren’t “illegal” until it was required that an exorbitant tax (at the time) was placed on them with NFA 1934. Without registering the gun and paying the tax the guns were illegal to be privately owned. Again, GCA 1968 prohibiting the private transfers of firearms across state lines created “illegal guns”. And finally the background check mandated by the Brady Act in 1993 has nothing to do with guns. It only has to do with people. Her statement about the criticality of the laws in “keeping illegal guns out of our community” is a total disconnect from reality.
Finally, as pointed out by the CDC and others there is no evidence that any of the gun laws on the books has made communities safer. I find it very telling that neither the issue of effectiveness of laws infringing upon a specific enumerated right, or the issue that such a right even exists was mentioned by Ms. Guernsey. But what do you expect from someone who has crap for brains and the best they can do to establish self-esteem is attempt to acquire a degree in “urban studies”?
Quote of the day—BL
LOL the wingnuts havent one soon they will kill eachother with all there guns adn then all the peaceful people of the world can live a peaceful life without the neanderthals.
BL
March 19, 2011
Comment to Quote of the day—Paul Helmke.
[The first few times I read this I had no clue what was being said. I suspected comment spam but there was no link to cheap prescription meds. I finally asked Barb, who was in bed with me at the time, “What is this supposed to mean?” She pointed out that “one” should be “won”. Oh! Now I get it.
I have a difficult time interpreting thing other than literally and I wasn’t able to make that translation on my own. Had it been “their” instead of “there” or “no” instead of “know” I would have been able to do it. I believe this was my first encounter with this particular homonym and since I didn’t attempt to read it out loud I was baffled.
Since BL is so much smarter than I am that I needed assistance in reading just a single sentence of this enlightened commenter I guess this proves them correct.—Joe]
He must be using a multiple firing word processor
Sometimes I would almost agree there should be common sense limits, including background checks and licensing, on the First Amendment. This is one the reasons:
For an American, that means the person working beside you or sitting beside you on the bus or at the bar or the stadium or the movies or in class, or in the same traffic jam ready to explode with road rage, could well be carrying one of those formidable multiple-firing Glocks, the kind Mr. Loughner wielded.
But this guy is from Canada where censorship is already part of the political landscape. Maybe they should implement mandatory training and testing on a topic by topic basis for all journalists. The number of distortions and amount of ignorance and bigotry this guy spews is truly impressive.
Layers of editorial oversight
It could be this was ignorance of the investigators or a communications error somewhere along the way but a fact checker or someone should have caught this before it went public:
When investigators arrived they found shell casings from a .380 magnum and an AK-47 at the scene in the 3900 block of North Lansing Place.
A “.380 magnum”? That would be something like a 9mm Lugar, right?