Quote of the day—Sir Malta

holy shit kill yourself.

You realize the only people who want these are those who can’t legally get guns, right?

I can say this honestly: I hope you or someone you love is shot.

Sir Malta
January 6, 2015
Comment to 3D-Printed Guns Are Only Getting Better, and Scarier
[There are many legitimate reasons why one would want a gun without it being registered with the government. Sir Malta with his desire to see you and/or your family dead or injured is one of those reasons.

Via email from Jack M.—Joe]

We need more of this

Via a post of Alan Andrews on Facebook we have Davenport employer offers cash bonus to conceal carry:

DAVENPORT, Iowa (KWQC) – Getting paid extra, to carry a firearm.

A local attorney said he is giving his employees a $50 bonus each month if they choose to conceal carry.

Not only does this help normalize the carry of firearms it probably is going to induce aneurisms in the anti-gun crowd.

We need more of this.

Quote of the day—Matthew

If you track the scoring, and the graded topics, over time it becomes clear they are publishing their own obituary in slow motion.

Matthew
March 17, 2014
Comment to Gun Control ‘Humor’ in regards to the Brady Campaign’s gun control “scorecard”.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

80% of the public is in support

We frequently hear the some large percentage of the public is in support of universal background checks for firearms sales. But it is easy to demonstrate that a large percentage of the public is either ignorant of the effectiveness of background checks or has evil intent.

Basically the problem boils down to a large percentage of the public has opinions on things they really don’t know much about. Brother Doug pointed out a great example recently:

A … survey in January conducted by the Oklahoma State University Department of Agricultural Economics found that 82 percent of respondents supported mandatory labels on GMOs. However, 80 percent of respondents also said they supported mandatory labels on “foods containing DNA.”

This is the reason we have a representative democracy with enumerated powers for the government rather than a direct democracy. Our representatives are supposed to carefully study and debate any potential laws and only enact laws that are beneficial to the majority of people and do not infringe upon the rights of anyone.

Popular opinion can easily be shown, see above, to be a very poor way of determining, well, almost anything.

Quote of the day—Sandra Gonzales

That is beyond disturbing! He should be locked up for child neglect!

Sandra Gonzales
March 9, 2015
Facebook comment on the CSGV page in response to this photo found on Shyanne Roberts Facebook page:

ShyanneRobertsAmmo

Shyanne, a ten year old competitive shooter, posted the picture with the following comment:

Teee Heee the first shipment of ammo from my sponsor Steel Ridge Ammunition showed up today !! So I decided to forget about snow angels and make an ammo angel instead !

VERY, VERY happy and cant wait to hit the range, thanks so much to the entire team at Steel Ridge Ammunition!

[Would they also want someone laying on a stack of Bibles locked up for child neglect? Or is it just the exercise of Second Amendment rights they find disturbing?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

We face destructive hyperbole from an agenda-driven fear-mongering group in the nation’s murder capital, where obtaining even a government permission slip to keep and bear arms is virtually impossible. They get extensive “news” coverage, instead of ridicule and a demand for an apology. If such preposterous outrage were to appear over race, gender or any other civil right the media would howl with alarm. Instead, we find the lunatics are truly running the asylum. Guns save lives, stop crime and help keep you safe. The media should start covering that missing angle.

Alan Korwin
March 15, 2015
BRADY CAMPAIGN INSULTS ARIZONA BADLY
[This was in response to the Brady Campaign video I posted here.

I have nothing more to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Bacon @Baconmints

Uh oh, the #tinycockclub aka nra lapdogs, are losing their shit because I called them on their insecurity. Score. #gunsense #fuckthenra

Bacon @Baconmints
Tweeted on December 23, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

Via a Tweet from BFD‏ @BigFatDave.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

NraAccomplice

This is what the cartoonist thinks of supporters of the right to keep and bear arms. They believe we are insane criminals who should go to prison for the crimes of others.

Quote of the day—Kathy Jackson

I dream that one day, every woman who goes to the gun range in time of need will meet a person there who has both the willingness and the skills to teach her what she immediately need to know, with the expectation that she will in time be prepared to turn around and help spread that knowledge to others.

Kathy Jackson
March 13, 2015
I have a dream
[The only thing I would change about this dream is to remove the specific gender. Both men and women have times of need.—Joe]

Only one explanation

This is a Brady Campaign video (the comments are disabled—of course):

They claim that a criminal can buy a gun without a background check in Arizona and Nevada then sell it in California because AZ and NV don’t have universal background checks. This makes AZ and NV criminal paradises of some sort. But CA is a bad place for criminals because they do have universal background checks.

But if CA is such a bad place for criminals then why would criminals be motivated to sell guns there? And why wouldn’t these lifesaving background checks in CA prevent the criminals from selling guns to criminals in CA?

And if background checks make a difference in violent crime why is the 2013 violent crime rate in AZ (416.5/100K) and to a certain extent NV (603.0/100K) not all that different from CA (402.1/100K)? And why did they choose AZ and NV to talk about lack of universal background checks? Why not all states without universal background checks or maybe Idaho or Washington which in 2013 had violent crime rates of 217.0/100K and 289.1/100K? It is clear that background checks do not and cannot have a significant influence upon violent crime rates. But they do draw resources away from law enforcement that could have been used to put and keep violent criminal in prison. But facts like this are not something they want well known even though they know it themselves.

There can only be one explanation. They are attempting to deliberately deceive the public with sloppy thinking and cherry picking of data to gain support for the infringing the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. They have a demonstrated history of a culture of deception and it doesn’t appear to be changing even though they have had many changes in leadership during the last decade. I believe they know that they have to lie to have any hope of winning.

Gun cartoon of the day

JustShootMe

The cartoonist has to be incredibly ignorant or deliberately deceptive to claim the 2nd Amendment is about hunting. They have to have completely ignored or want you to ignore, the first part of it. One of the main purposes of the 2nd Amendment is the security of a free state. It is not the right to hunt animals. It is the right to hunt tyrants and their minions. If this was not true then why would the U.S. Supreme Court rule that unless the arms have:

…some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

It is specifically military weapons that are protected by the 2nd Amendment.

Also, as Weer’d Beard has often said, George Washington didn’t cross the Delaware River to get to his duck blind.

One might think it is odd that anti-gun people will claim we ignore the first half of the 2nd Amendment (“well regulated”) but then they do that themselves when they claim it is about hunting. But what you have to understand is that these people have serious mental issues.

Quote of the day—Scott Peterson

Who in their right mind thinks of owning guns as a human right?!

Scott Peterson
March 11, 2015
Comment to The NRA Wins Again on Armor-piercing Bullets, But Common Sense Was Already Lost
[One might conclude that Peterson is of the opinion that the entire U.S. Supreme Court and the majority of the U.S. population should be sent to the psych ward.

If this is true then I would like to suggest Peterson take point on that endeavor and see just who it is that ends up occupying the psych ward.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

SlamTheDoor

I’ve been in a restaurant that offers a discount to “gun-toters” multiple times and have never seen anything like this happen. I also been in restaurants hundreds of times while I and/or others were carrying and not once have I seen anything like this happen.

The cartoonist has an extremely wild and error prone imagination and/or is prejudiced against gun owners. What would be the response if some cartoonist hypothesized some equally outrageous consequences for a restaurant that welcomed people of color or alternate sexual orientation?

Bigotry and prejudice is never pretty regardless of the target. People should explain this to the cartoonist and the media that propagate this sort of thing.

Quote of the day—Mayor Danny Jones

These people look at guns like sex objects. They oil them up and rub them.

Danny Jones
Mayor of Charleston West Virginia
March 7, 2015

[H/T to Sebastian.

This is what anti-gun politicians think of you and the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Melissa Challenger

Who are the sick women who are having children with these gun nazis? It makes me physically ill. There is something mentally disturbed about people who own more than one gun.

Melissa Challenger
March 9, 2015
Facebook comment on the CSGV page in response to this photo found on Shyanne Roberts Facebook page:

ShyanneRobertsAmmo

Shyanne, a ten year old competitive shooter, posted the picture with the following comment:

Teee Heee the first shipment of ammo from my sponsor Steel Ridge Ammunition showed up today !! So I decided to forget about snow angels and make an ammo angel instead !

VERY, VERY happy and cant wait to hit the range, thanks so much to the entire team at Steel Ridge Ammunition!

[Apparently Challenger is oblivious to the irony of calling someone a Nazi and advocates for forcing them to give up enjoying their sport and the exercise of their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Challenger not only wants to take away your guns. She thinks people who own guns are mentally disturbed and doesn’t think gun owners should have have a spouse or children.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Robb

The corporation, and particularly tech companies, are particularly bad organizations for warfare.  One reason is that they are too centralized.  In particular, the institution of the CEO is a grave weakness (a systempunkt in global guerrilla lingo).  The CEO’s centrality to the corporate network makes him/her a single point of failure for the entire organization.  Another is that executives in most of the western world are very soft targets.  Easy to find (Google and Google maps), easy to isolate, and easy to kill…

John Robb
March 2, 2015
It’s Open Season on the Tech Elite
[ISIS threatened the life of Jack Dorsey, a co-founder and Chairman of Twitter. I wonder if the gun free zones of corporations will protect CEO’s as well as they do schools. Will corporate security protect the upper management, their families, and corporate facilities and continue to insist the little people must be unarmed?

Interesting times…—Joe]

Quote of the day—Donnie Brasco ‏@D0NNIE_BRASC0

We’re the ones who don’t need guns to make up for impudent inadequate dicks.

Donnie Brasco ‏@D0NNIE_BRASC0
Tweeted on December 19, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from BFD ‏@BigFatDave.—Joe]

Quote of the day—interrogator-chaplain

Were it up to me, I’d ban everything except bolt-action rifles and 5 chamber revolvers.

interrogator-chaplain
January 6, 2015
Comment to 3D-Printed Guns Are Only Getting Better, and Scarier
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

GOPNoGunLaws

The misrepresentation, lies, and false implications of this cartoon are almost overwhelming.

I’ll just address a couple of points. There are many more than could be made in this piece of garbage.

The elephant obviously represents the Republican party. Anyone who claims any major political party in this country is so cold hearted as to deliberately disregard the deaths of the innocent victims of the Sandy Hook tragedy has some serious mental health issues. The participants in the gun law debates can disagree on the appropriate response to the event and still see the other side as caring human beings. This cartoonist sees those opposed to oppressive gun laws as something considerably less than human.

This is consistent with many other anti-gun people. They want you dead and portraying gun owners as less than human is one of the steps on the path to achieving that.

Polls v. facts

My Facebook page consists of links to all my blog posts automatically published by WordPress. A couple of friends from many decades back (it’s been 40 years since I’ve seen Ken) questioned my unsubstantiated claim that the cartoonist in this blog post was delusional to believe gun ownership rates were going up instead of down.

It is true that various polls give us the idea there is a slight downward trend. The following data is from Gallup:

GallupGunOwnershipRatesGallupGunOwnershipRatesTable

GallupPersonalGunOwnershipRates

The cartoon in question was published in 2013. It could have been in response to Gallup’s annual poll.

As with all statistics there are errors. In many cases increasing the sample size will reduce the errors. In other cases changing your sample methods will decrease the errors. Many initial studies are done by grad students on fellow classmates in their college or university. The sample bias is obvious and many poll questions would be pointless in such an environment. There is also a danger of the respondent giving erroneous data and in some cases would also make many poll questions pointless.

For some polls there is little or no danger of getting erroneous data from the respondents. Asking someone their favorite color would be quite safe from this type of error. Asking if there is a wanted fugitive justice living in their home would be at extremely high risk from this type of error with a resultant bias toward “No” approaching 100%. Asking them if they are in an active homosexual relationship would probably have a mild bias in the “No” direction today but would have had much higher bias in the “No” direction 75 or 100 years ago.

It is the hypothesis of many people, myself included, that gun ownership polls suffers from a minor to moderate bias in the “No” direction today.

If you look carefully at the data above you will find something I think is very telling. Look at the rate of people that have “No opinion” in the tables above. I suspect this predominately represents those people that do own guns or have guns in their homes and do not wish to lie to the pollster. Notice how this was consistently 1% in the time frame 2000 to 2008 but came up after Obama was elected? A similar pattern shows up after his reelection in 2012. It is my hypothesis that most or perhaps all of this change is due to concerns that polls about guns could be used to build databases of gun owners for nefarious purposes by an administration hostile to gun ownership. This hypothesis is further supported by the data in the first table going back to the Clinton administration. It is also supported by public approval ratings of the NRA being in the 50+% range while government approval ratings are in the 10-% range.

I’ve made a case the “No opinion” data above reflects gun owners who own guns but aren’t willing to lie to the pollster. Now lets look at indications gun owners are lying and pushing the sample bias even further in the “No” direction.

It is well known that FBI NICS checks show dramatic increases in gun sales in recent years and only deviated from the upward trend slightly in 2014 (original here). The claim by anti-gun people is that the polling data demonstrates existing gun owners are purchasing more guns and that there are few new gun owners. Those of us close to the gun community strongly suspect this is false because of what we experience at gun stores, the ranges, and in our personal lives. The impression is there are a lot of new gun owners. But how can we quantify that and avoid our own confirmation, and other, biases?

One way to quantify it is through data from states that require registration of gun owners. Illinois is one such state. A Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) card is required for gun ownership. Here is what the State of Illinois says on their website about FOID cards:

The Illinois State Police (ISP), Firearms Services Bureau, (FSB) has received a record number of FOID card applications since May 2012. For example, in January 2013, the ISP FSB, received 61,172 FOID applications. As a comparison, in January 2012, the ISP FSB, received 31,655, which had been the highest number of FOID applications received during the month of January in years prior to 2012.

Those are applications. It is unclear but it appears these applications do not include renewals. If true then January 2013 had nearly double the number of new gun owners apply that it had in January 2012. This cannot be attributed to growth in the state population:

Illinois is one of the slowest growing states in the US. Between 2000 and 2010, the population of Illinois grew by a mere 3.3%, compared to a national average US population growth of 9.7%.

Estimates for 2010 through 2014 indicate even lower growth rates.

There are also sources with more detailed information about FOID numbers. Even if FOID stats includes renewals it is conclusive evidence that the rate of legal gun ownership in Illinois is increasing, not decreasing.

Massachusetts has a similar Firearm Identification (FID) card but I was unable to find the numbers (Weer’d Beard gives us these which are consistent even if not complete). Ditto for California, New Jersey and New York (I stand corrected). If someone has those numbers please let me know and I’ll update this post with the additional data.

Another proxy for gun ownership rates is the concealed weapon permits. DiveMedic gives us some numbers that also strongly suggest an increase in gun ownership rates:

… the number of concealed weapons permits in the state of Florida has more than doubled since 2009, when there were 591,830, which was double the number of permits from 2002, when there were 295,658 permit holders.

My conclusion is the polls on firearm ownership rates have a significant negative bias that distorts the true rates and that the true rate is much higher than it was 10 years ago. This is supported by the polls themselves, hard data from registration of gun owners, and proxy data. I have not been able to find any data with contradicts this conclusion.