One man with a gun can control 100 without one. … Make mass searches and hold executions for found arms.
Vladimir Lenin
Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Soviet Union
[To remove guns from the hands of private citizens is to make them easier to control. Gun control is not about guns. It is about control.—Joe]
Make semi-automatic weapons illegal. The Second Amendment crowd can keep the muskets that our forefathers were carrying when they came up with right to bear arms.
Put a ban on high-capacity magazines. It won’t prevent drive-by shootings but it will create a pause if you have to reload after six shots.
Bryn Mickle
October 1, 2015
More billboards won’t fix Flint’s violence problem — gun control will
[Mickle should read the Heller decision before he proclaims what “The Second Amendment crowd” can and cannot do.
Don’t every let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
Update: As more information becomes available it’s clear the campus was “gun-free” by policy even though not by law. Students and campus employees were defenseless by college decree. Those who made and enforced such a despicable policy should be accountable for the deaths they enabled.
End Update.
Don’t spout off about the mass murder happening in another “gun-free” zone too soon. The details are not entirely clear yet. It wasn’t in a government mandated “gun-free” zone but it could have been campus policy that discouraged carry by students and staff.
…
According to Students for Concealed Carry there are 206 colleges that allow this. Here is a partial list.
…
26. UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
But there is speculation that state law allows it but the college will discipline employees and students who exercise their rights. So perhaps only visitors can safely carry on campus without risk of being fired or expelled.
If the far right is willing to shut down the government because they don’t get a tax cut for the rich, then our people should have the same resolve and threaten to shut down the government if they don’t get a real gun control law to stop killing of their innocents.
Andrew Cuomo
New York State Governor
September 26, 2015
Gov. Andrew Cuomo Tells Democrats to Shut Down Government Until They Get Gun Control
[He wants people to shut down the Federal Government in an attempt to get what he wants?
Don’t make any promises you aren’t willing to keep!
A less active Federal government is what we want! Shutting it down means no Federal gun law enforcement during the down time. If the NICS system is shutdown then just about anyone can get a gun without a background check (with a three day wait).
These people have never been known for the rationality and this is just another example.—Joe]
Lobbying and money in politics only gets you so far. It nudges government in a one direction or the other but changes in the mindset of the people is what makes the real differences. On the gun issue we are taking new shooters to the range and creating more gun owners. We can legally carry guns in public in all 50 states (theoretically, in some jurisdictions it is still impractical or even impossible in practice). Crime rates are dropping as gun ownership increases. And most importantly the mindset of the general population is changing:
According to Quinnipiac, when asked, “Do you support or oppose stricter gun control laws in the United States?” 48 percent of all voters responded by opposing gun control while 45 percent responded by favoring more.
When broken down by parties, only 16 percent of Democrats opposed more gun control. A full 76 percent of Democrats–roughly 3 out of 4–want more of it. Republicans were just the opposite, with only 23 percent supporting more gun control while 73 percent–roughly 3 out of 4–oppose adding more laws.
Independents oppose more gun control by a margin of 49 to 45.
I haven’t done the math so it’s a little difficult to know what this means for the electoral vote count for President. It could be that the Anti-Gun Presidential Candidate is only looking at the short term to the nomination and will attempt to switch directions after the nomination. But we need to keep doing what we are doing and create more and more gun owners. Give or sell cheap your old guns to people without guns. Give them some skin in the game when a politician tells them how they are “a minority of people that hold a viewpoint that terrorizes a majority of people”. That’s right. Some politicians believe that just holding a viewpoint terrorizes people. Such politicians are not fit to be on a government payroll and the more gun owners there are the less likely they be successful in gaining power and if they are successful the less likely they will be to impose their anti-freedom agenda upon the good people of this country.
Our entire Constitution and Bill of Rights are essential measures of gun control—this time, gun control directed against the government. For example, the First Amendment prohibits the government from using its guns to abridge the freedoms of speech or press. The Second Amendment prohibits the government from using its guns to abridge the freedom of the citizen to keep and bear arms. Indirectly, the Second Amendment also operates to limit the government’s use of its guns to abridge freedom in general. This is because, in our system of checks and balances, an armed citizenry constitutes a check on the possibility of the government becoming tyrannical and attempting to use its power to threaten the citizens’ lives and property. It should be understood as protecting a balance between the power remaining in the hands of the people and the power they have delegated to their government. Indeed, the language of the Second Amendment—“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”—should be understood in this way.
George Reisman
September 25, 2015
Gun Control: Controlling the Government’s Guns Part 1
[I have nothing to add other than to say, “Read the whole thing.”—Joe]
We hope that we are spearheading a movement to expose these egregious and unconstitutional laws for what they really are. They are an attack on our civil liberties. With these laws in place ordinary citizens are effectively barred by the exorbitant cost from bringing any civil action against sellers of firearms and ammunition.
Lonnie and Sandy Phillips
September 25, 2015
We Lost Our Daughter to a Mass Shooter and Now Owe $203,000 to His Ammo Dealer
[They believe the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is an attack on their civil liberties and is unconstitutional?
I only have a small inkling of they pain and suffering they are going through with the loss of their daughter. They have a tremendous amount of sympathy from me in regards to having their daughter murdered. But I’m not going to remain quiet when they go all crap for brains on us and confuse, in essence, up from down, black from white, and right from wrong.
They should be seeking the services of a grief counselor and not attempting to infringe upon the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]
@PC_Banned_Humor Ok, you need it as phallus replacement @ZeitgeistGhost
Berlincopa @Berlincopa
Tweeted on February 23, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from LowRider @PC_Banned_Humor.—Joe]
Canada should really ease the laws about guns so that more people can have them and eventually kill each other with them.
LWYRUP
April 14, 2015
Comment to Supreme Court strikes down mandatory minimum sentences for gun possession
[Why are anti-gun people so violent?
Oh yeah! Now I remember. It’s because it’s in their nature.—Joe]
Now, society has the right and obligation to insist that each of us does not interfere with the rights of others. But rights are different from preferences. You have the right not to be injured personally or financially by anyone. BUT you do not have the right not to have your feelings hurt since you and you alone can determine what hurts your feelings.
You do not have the right to live in a risk free society where everyone else adjusts their rights to suit you.
You do not have the right to live in a society where everyone agrees with you and nothing you see or hear offends your tender sensibilities.
Your rights end where mine began.
Averett Jones
September 24, 2015
Gun Control vs. People Control
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
I find the idea that we should extend the same protections we give to game species to prevent them from becoming extinct to criminals and tyrants oddly curious.
dittybopper
September 23, 2015
Comment to Quote of the day—Shannyn Moore
[This was in reference to Moore denigrating the use of standard capacity magazines for use in hunting.
I understand that dittybopper was being witty but that aside I don’t find it odd or curious in the slightest.
Criminals are the constituents and allies of tyrants and those who aspire to be tyrants. It naturally follows that those who desire the rule of a tyrant will, of logical necessity, desire the same or greater protections for the preservation of criminal and tyrant species as is normal for the conservation of game species.—Joe]
Just as it is no answer to ban protected firearms because they might sometimes be misused by criminals, Highland Park cannot ban them because they are too good at what they are supposed to do. Broken down to its most basic function, a firearm is a tool that is designed to leverage force. And millions of Americans prefer the prohibited firearms because they more effectively leverage force due to their increased accuracy, reliability, versatility, and safety. Pet. Writ Cert. at 9-11, 19-20, 29; infra pp. 17-27. The fact that the prohibited firearms perform better cannot be a justification for their confiscation.
BRIEF OF NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
August 28, 2015
[I have nothing to add.—Joe
If you need a 30-round clip you’re a pretty poor hunter. If you are hoarding automatic (yes, they are legal) or semi-automatic weapons, you need Viagra.
Shannyn Moore
December 27, 2012
My Guns Are Less Regulated Than My Uterus
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via an email from Weerd Beard.—Joe]
Still more persuasive evidence on the effect of gun control comes from Australia, which — following a highly publicized mass killing in the 1990s — banned many types of weapons, introduced a more restrictive permit system, and then launched a buy-back program in which states paid gun owners for turning in weapons that the new laws made illegal. Homicide and suicide rates dropped substantially. And while the murder rates was also dropping before the laws took effect, researchers found that the decline was sharpest for the weapons declared illegal and in those states reporting the highest buyback rates.
Johnathan Cohn and Nick Wing
August 27, 2015
Gun Control Might Not Have Stopped The WDBJ Shooter. That’s Not The Point.
[No consideration whatsoever of the constitutionality of what they lust for. No consideration for the deception they promulgate. No consideration for the parallels to burning books they so vividly display. And no consideration that their facts are wrong.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
I have no idea what the solution is to gun violence, but America continues to lead the industrial West when it comes to shooting it out. I think one step in the right direction would be an extension of the castle doctrine to allow shooting anyone open carrying an assault rifle.
…
If you see a couple of people carrying assault rifles openly, you could argue convincingly that they needed killing.
Bill S.
2015
From an email sent to Alan Korwin.
[Just so you know what some people think of you if you carry one of the most popular rifles in the U.S. That is, you need to be killed.—Joe]
Time for that asshole to eat a Pb sandwich then see how he feels.
Smarter than Your Average Bear
August 31, 2015
Comment to NRA spokesman tells parents of slain Virginia journalists not to be ‘so emotional’
[He is referring to Colin Noir in this video:
This is also relevant and contains more of Colin’s video:
The bottom line is that people think you should be killed for expressing a perfectly reasonable appeal to reason and facts and to not let your emotions rule your actions.
Don’t let people like this gain political power.—Joe]
…any law enforcement or x-miltary will tell you, that there exists as likely of a chance of someone innocent getting shot unintentionally……I think they should give all you idiots a gun so you an mistakenly shoot each other when these things happen…………
Peter Dean
September 14, 2015
Comment to Professor killed at Mississippi university, fellow instructor sought
[Before his comment was deleted his first sentence was corrected by law enforcement and x-military people. But what I really wanted to point out is that he wants gun owners dead.
Keep that mind for future reference. Your life may depend upon these type of people being prevented from obtaining political power.—Joe]
@shannonrwatts You simpering halfwit. Would you make murder more illegal? Criminals with ill intent walk past your silly signs.
Bob Owens
Tweeted on September 14, 2015
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
@INCTBON @Minutemaniac @FreedomSR9 So you’re carrying deadly weapons around because you want to make up for the size of your penis then?
Richy Wilson @RichyWilson
Tweeted on July 31, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
Via a tweet from BFD @BigFatDave—Joe]
Sen. Kaine is joining a mob of gun prohibitionists who are trying every scheme imaginable to discourage people from lawfully buying and selling firearms. He apparently wants to prosecute people for being unable to see into the future, or look into the mind of a customer, and he wants us to believe this will help prevent future crimes. If we go by the standard of his bill, he should face prosecution when his measure doesn’t prevent a crime somewhere over the horizon.
Alan Gottlieb
September 9, 2015
CCRKBA BLASTS SEN. KAINE’S NEW GUN CONTROL MEASURE
[I wish we had a SCOTUS ruling saying all “rights and privileges” cannot be subject to a law which causes a “chilling effect” on the exercise of those rights and/or privileges. Then that was followed up aggressive enforcement of 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242.
But as my grandmother used to say, “If wishes were horses all beggars would ride.” We need to vote people into office who respect the constitution. And to do that we need to change the attitudes of the voters. That is no small task but it is a task that everyone can contribute to in their own way.—Joe]