Quote of the day—Anonymous Reader

I hope that CNN and Fox News and ABC and all of the news outlets broadcast live feeds from the destruction of the guns once they are criminalized. We’ll have trash compactors reducing the guns to pieces of unrecognizable metal. The death-worshipping guns nuts will be watching TV, tears streaming down their cheeks, shrieking “OUR GUNS! OUR GUNS!” Their children will ask them what time supper is, and they will backhand them across the face and shout “DON’T TALK BACK TO ME! THEY’RE DESTROYING OUR GUNS!”

Anonymous Reader
July 26, 2001
Comment to The Terrible Truth About Gun Owners
[This is what they think about people who exercise the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Merry Christmas.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Clayton Cramer

Watching Aborn’s attempt to define fear of gun bans as paranoid while arguing in favor of gun bans makes me disinclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the leaders.

Clayton Cramer
December 17, 2013
Not Trying to Ban Guns – Except When We Are
[H/T to Say Uncle.

The problem is they have mental problems. They literally cannot see they contributed to the situation.

I have a lot of experience dealing with this sort of “thinking”. Stacy, my counselor for dealing with this sort of thing, explained this was one of the symptoms of personality disorders. The essence of the explanation applicable in this context is as follows:

If you tell a normal person their actions contributed to a particular situation or result and suggest changing their behavior might result in a better outcome they will respond with something like, “I think I understand, I will try your suggestion next time.” The person with a personality disorder cannot see they contributed to the situation in any way. They never did anything wrong and will refuse to change their behavior.

There is no point in trying to have a logical discussion with these type of people. Your only productive recourse is to “set boundaries”, tell them you will not tolerate their irrational behavior, and then enforce those boundaries. As difficult as this is in interpersonal relationships it’s even more difficult when these people have political power, the power of government force, over you. This is why we have the 2nd Amendment. It is the last ditch resort to enforcing boundaries.

Further complicating the issue is that when you enforce those boundaries “the crazy” may get far, far worse. They can and will do extremely destructive things. In interpersonal relationships this is one the paths by which people get murdered by their abusive spouse.

Gun owners have a lot in common with abused spouses and should be aware things can very rapidly get much much worse.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Italian Rose

Like ever other civilized first world nation civilian ownership of guns needs to be banned in this country so we can enjoy the freedom from gun violence as they do.

Italian Rose
December 11, 2013
Comment to How gun control is losing, badly (in charts)
[You don’t have to squint very hard to imagine this is sarcasm. But given the context (the Washington Post) I don’t think it is.

And I would imagine our Rose also advocates banning recreational drugs, including alcohol, so we an be free from drug abuse. That worked out so well the last few times it was last tried.*—Joe]


*That last line is sarcasm.

Wrong hands, right hands… uh, say again?

 

Assault-weapons_2

I shamelessly copied this from Ace, who copied it from Bookworm, who found it on FB. Seems to be on-topic.

This is what they think of you

Via email from Col. Milquetoast who says, “Phillip Adams is an old Australian lefty with a newspaper column and a radio show. And apparently a bit of a totalitarian streak”.

Adams’ Twitter profile says, “Broadcaster, columnist, presenter of Late Night Live on ABC RN.”

Adams wrote this column on September 10, 2011:

It was widely accepted that her attempted assassination was triggered, no pun intended, by the verbal violence of US politics – such as the “lock ’n’ load” rhetoric of gun-totin’ Sarah Palin, whose campaign literature literally targeted political opponents, depicting them in the crosshairs of telescopic sights.

While sticks and stones break bones, words can never hurt? Manifestly untrue.

The massacre in Arizona that almost killed Giffords killed six others – and the appalled reaction almost killed off Palin’s campaign. Let this and Norway remind us to turn down our political volume and venom. It’s not enough for Abbott to tell us he “doesn’t entirely agree” with vile placards being waved at right-wing rallies. He must denounce them. And when an Alan Jones suggests that Gillard should be drowned in a hessian sack? With memories of his role in the Cronulla riots, he should he sacked.

Today, words. Tomorrow, sticks and stones. And the day after that?

It might have been “widely accepted” by those who do not require evidence to form their beliefs but it wasn’t accepted by most people. But that is mostly beside the point.

The main point is that he then demonstrated his total lack of an irony co-processor, or perhaps an overactive hypocritical gland, by tweeting the following:

Tweeted December 14, 2013 3:53 PM:

Biggest US death toll?Not Iraq or A’stan but the war waged within the US by the Invincible NRMA.Seems to gain strength with every massacre

Tweeted December 14, 2013, 3:58 PM:

The target of the US war on terror should be those NRMA nutters-who outgun and outmaneuver every challenger from POTUS down.And always have

Tweeted December 14, 2013, 3:59 PM:

The charnel house of Charlton Heston

Tweeted December 14, 2013, 4:05 PM:

Oops. NRA. Brain dulled by medication

Tweeted December 14, 2013, 4:07 PM:

National Ratbags. National Racists

This is a broadcaster with ABC who thinks “The target of the US war on terror should be those NRA nutters”. You, as a NRA member and gun owner, are to be give special treatment. This is not the special treatment afforded to others exercising a specific enumerated right but the special treatment of military assaults, detention without trial, and drone strikes.

How would ABC handle it if he were to say something similar about blacks, Jews, feminists, or gays?

Quote of the day–Sen. Ed Markey

We need a ban on assault weapons. We need to stop the flow of high magazine clips, like the ones used in Aurora and Newtown.

Sen. Ed Markey
December 16, 2013
Markey calls for assault weapons ban
[H/T to NRA News for the Tweet.

If it weren’t so common I would say it is ironic that someone so ignorant of firearms that they say something like “stop the flow of high magazine clips” thinks he knows enough about them to make firearm law. But I suspect ignorance of the subject matter and the desire to use force to impose your will on those that are not ignorant are highly correlated. Think of school bullies versus the nerds, the KKK versus people of color, and Anti-Semitists versus Jews.

Philosophically, Senator Markey has a lot of close and dangerous company throughout all known history. And this is why we need to protect our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. It is a last ditch safeguard to protect innocent people from ignorant bigots with power like Senator Markey.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dennis Levinson

Our politicians are unwilling to stand up to the terrorist organization using the name the National Rifle Association (NRA).

It is now time to overturn the Second Amendment, which no longer has any more validity than slavery or suppression of women’s rights, all supported by our founding fathers in our original Constitution.

We now live in the 21st century and need to become a “civilized” society. No one should be allowed to own a gun of any kind.

The time has come for all of the intelligent, sane citizens to demand an end to all guns in our society. It can be done when we have finally had enough of going to the funerals of innocent little children.

Dennis Levinson
December 26, 2012
Time to ban all guns
[I wonder what he thinks should be done with those non-intelligent, insane, supporters of the “terrorist organization using the name the National Rifle Association”. Jail perhaps? Or maybe psych wards? Progressives in the Soviet Union utilized psychiatric medical institutions to suppress political dissent. With his attitude toward gun owners it’s not hard to imagine he would think it appropriate.

I always find it baffling that people conflate some repugnant anti-rights government support for something, like slavery, with government recognition of a right like the right to keep and bear arms or freedom of speech. Do they think other people can’t tell the difference? Or are they so lacking in the understanding of principles that they cannot distinguish the difference?

I suspect in this case it’s a matter of lack of understanding. If he thinks all it would take is having “enough of going to the funerals of innocent little children” then that demonstrates he has no clue as to the issues involved. Gun in the hands of private citizens save lives. That includes the lives of innocent children. Gun Control Kills Kids! It doesn’t save them.

We have the right to defend innocent life with the best tools available and no government has the authority to disallow that.—Joe]

No one wants to confiscate your guns…

Except when they do. Even things like a tube-magazine bolt-action 22, because it can hold more than 5 rounds. NYC at it’s stupidest. The 113 year old 1911 .45 ACP has a standard seven round magazine, so you need to get rid of your old magazines and buy… er, I don’t know of any makers of 5-round 1911 magazines. Maybe they exist, but I’ve never seen one.

Quote of the day—Edgar Chavez

Guns are a big problem in our country. They have made us more violent. Basically, guns have taken control of us.

This country would be a lot safer if we could, in some way, get rid of all the guns. One way this could happen is by making the government intervene and take them away from every person. I think that would be the best.

Edgar Chavez
December 2, 2013
Taking guns out of society
[We sometimes say that the anti-gun people must believe guns control people. Here is someone who explicitly says that.

Further evidence of his delusions is that he imagines the government could take all the guns from every person and that would make people safer.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Anonymous Reader

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is the flagship organization of the gun crazies. It claims to be an organization of law-abiding Americans who are doing more than defending their Second Amendment right to keep and bear firearms. However, the truth about the NRA is far from benign; the truth is frightening. They are a group of sociopaths with a clear agenda: unlimited gun proliferation at all costs, human and otherwise. They have not one iota of human compassion or feeling; their devotion to their implements of death knows no bounds.

Anonymous Reader
July 26, 2001
The Terrible Truth About Gun Owners
[Imagine what they think “the government should do” about “a group of sociopaths” with “not one iota of human compassion or feeling”.

These are very dangerous people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Anonymous

A gun has no other purpose than to kill. It appear to me that the right to bear arms transcends the right of school children’s right to live. As long as the public are allowed to own weapons of local destruction children’s lives will be in danger. Make ALL ownership of guns a capital offence.

Anonymous
Comment to Would a ban on guns reduce crime in the U.S.?
[Simple solutions from simple minds.—Joe]

Quote of the day—The Responsive Communitarian Platform

There is, however, one measure sure to gain monumental benefits in the short run. It is politically nearly impossible to take, otherwise low-cost and very effective.

What is needed is domestic disarmament. This is the policy of practically all other Western democracies, from Canada to Britain to Germany, from France to Scandinavia. Domestic disarmament entails the removal of arms from private hands and, ultimately, from much of the police force.

The Responsive Communitarian Platform
November 18, 1991
THE CASE FOR DOMESTIC DISARMAMENT
[From the dark ages of gun ownership.

Low cost? The cost would be incalculable.

Effective? At what? The only thing I can see it being effective at is mobilizing people to “recall” (one way or another) all the politicians foolish enough to support it.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Rabbi Michael Lerner

Banning all guns is necessary but NOT sufficient in light of the increasing violence in our society.

Rabbi Michael Lerner
December 15, 2012
Banning Guns Is Necessary But Not Sufficient
[The Rabbi should check his numbers on the “increasing violence”. Then he should talk to the good folks at JPFO.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ed Koch

When Washington, D.C., passed a law that nobody could have a gun except law enforcement and it was struck down by the United States Supreme Court, that we should overrule the Supreme Court with a Constitutional amendment. I don’t believe that in our society that we should have guns.

Ed Koch
Former New York City Mayor
January 13, 2013
Ex-NYC mayor: Ban all guns
[ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Richard C Suquer

As you can see, any reasonable person would support the banning of all guns. It is time we put these gun-toting extremists in jail where they belong!

Richard C Suquer
November 7, 2001
Ban All Guns Now!
[I could almost believe this post was satire but not quite. Here are some more choice quotes from the same post:

It all goes back to an obscure centuries-old document called the “Constitution of the United States of America.”

Many right-wing members of today’s United States have interpreted this amendment to mean that every citizen has the right to “keep and bear arms.” Absurd? Perhaps. But uneducated people in our society (such as members of Congress) can still be fooled into believing this absurdity.

Suppose a person breaks into your house at night and attacks you with a knife. Now, according to the right-wing point of view, you would be justified in shooting him with the gun you keep hidden under your pillow.

However, it is impossible to truly understand the circumstances leading up to this person’s breaking into your house. Perhaps he is a minority. Maybe he was made fun of in school for being a homosexual. He is probably poor. Knowing these facts, how can you, an upper middle class exploiter, be justified in ending this man’s life? The answer is: you can’t.

In fact this man is homeless and was merely looking for some food to feed his starving family. By killing him in so-called self-defense you are no better than a common murderer.

Imagine the typical day of the white male hunter:

The hunter gets up early, before daybreak. While shaving, he cuts his face. He tastes the blood and it is good. His desire for the prey has become sexual.

Later that morning, the hunter enters the forest with his phallic firearm, and stalks the great horned beast. He sees one innocently drinking water from a stream, and raises his phallus-gun to his shoulder. Pulling the trigger he releases his sperm-bullet into the innocent mammal. But rather than life, his sperm-bullet spreads death.

I have to conclude people like this have a mental illness.–Joe]

This is what they think of you

Via a Tweet from Linoge:

BZ7FaIaIYAApckf

After you grasp the fact that this person regards gun owners as “murderers who hate children” think about what the next step is. What is the normal disposition of “murderers who hate children”?

My conclusion is that this person wants people who exercise the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arm in prison or executed. And just what does someone like this think of people who defend Second Amendment? My speculation is they are hostile to the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments as well as the Second.

These are very, very dangerous people.

Update: Linoge emailed me more tweets from this person. Imagine if they were saying these things about blacks, Jews, or gays. It reinforces my conclusion that these are very dangerous people.

lougagliardicompromise1

lougagliardicompromise3

lougagliardicompromise4

lougagliardijustifiedhomicide1

lougagliardijustifiedhomicide2

lougagliardilibertarian

lougagliardireligion

lougagliardireligion2

lougagliardiwantpeopletodie

lougagliardiyoukilledthosechildren

Quote of the day—Myrddin

Gun control advocates have offered capitulation couched as ‘reasonable demands’ for far too long. If the pro-gun lobby is going to resist any significant restriction on guns, then we should put on the table the very thing they fear most.

We need to start far more drastic measures if we are going to save our children and ourselves.

It is far past time to call for a total ban on guns.

Myrddin
December 14, 2012
Forget the assault weapons ban, it’s time to ban guns completely
[Myrddin has no sense of political, physical, or criminological reality.

With our enemies that out of touch it’s no wonder we are winning.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jack Lessenberry

Nobody needs to have a handgun in America.

Nobody needs to have guns in their home, period.

That should be the starting point for any discussion about gun control in our insanely murderous society.

Jack Lessenberry
December 19, 2012
Ban all guns, now. Nobody needs to have a handgun in America — period
[“Insanely murderous society?” Citation needed.

No Jack, there are couple of other starting points in the discussion. 1) The Bill of Rights guarantees the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And probably most importantly; 2) When the collections start are you going to be taking point? There will be lots of openings for that position. There will not be a lot of opportunities for retirement but you can count on getting your 15 minutes of fame early, as well as late, in your career.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jim Rosapepe

I’m glad the people of the 21st District support my efforts to get assault weapons off Maryland streets once and for all.

Jim Rosapepe
November 11, 2006
Maryland State Senator
Advocates for Assault Weapons Ban Sweep Close Contests in Maryland
[Don’t ever let someone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—New York Times

One way to discourage the gun culture is to remove the guns from the hands and shoulders of people who are not in the law enforcement business.

New York Times
September 24, 1975
The Gun Culture
[“Discourage” the gun culture?

I don’t think “discouragement” would be the response. The New York Times was, and still is, quite out of touch with reality.—Joe]