You need to add to your list of titles:
Loser
Idiot
In desperate need of a life
life long member of the tiny dick club
Just plain stupid
Now that better describes you.
Rick Baker, owner
I’m usually there everyday so you should drop by and see me little man.
Rick Baker
Jun 30, 2014
Email to Ed Levine
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a message on Facebook from Nick G.—Joe]
For the remaining weapons such as guns or blades, women will hold exclusive right of use over them in order to defend ourselves from men, from the risk of them taking power over us again.
witchwind
October 7, 2014
UTOPIA: what would a women’s society look like?
[Via Sean Sorrentino via Michael Z. Williamson on Facebook.
Also in her utopia:
All of men’s (alive and euthanised) belongings, property, resources and land will be confiscated from men and handed back to female care and supervision – property rights over land will be abolished. You can’t own land!
And if that isn’t sufficient to confirm she been off of her anti-psychotic meds too long here is a clincher (pretty much every paragraph would do, but I particularly like this sentence):
Our lives have no more or no less value than those of a rabbit, fly, tree, plant, fish, seashell or stone.
Regardless, don’t ever let someone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
Frequently we will see anti-gun people claim the NRA looks after the “corporate interests” of the gun manufactures. This is despite the fact the manufactures aren’t members of the NRA and have their own lobbying organization that represents them. This is despite the fact that the NRA has about five million individual members. They don’t just don’t seem to understand that there are principles we hold dear and give time and money to the NRA to advocate for those principles.
This belief extends to the politicians that support the Second Amendment. The anti-gun people believe it must be money that motivates politicians. This Brady Campaign video makes that belief more clear than I could ever do with words:
While I don’t have a lot of respect for politicians in general I do believe many of the supporters of Second Amendment understand the principles involved and are comfortable taking a principled stand.
The Brady Campaign and their supporters? If you speak of principles to them they will get a confused look on their face and think you are speaking in some sort of code words. Code words that surely must mean “money.”
That desire to get two people fighting and then hide is a very deeply imbued urge. It is borne of an attempt to make something which stimulates the leftist’s amygdala stimulate their enemy’s amygdala, combined with sheer cowardice making direct confrontation not an option. As with every other leftist tactic, the goal is an outcome which would terrify the leftist, were positions reversed, namely manly men coming to kill them.
From simple social out-grouping, to calling cops to a store in such a way that they might shoot a conservative, to out-right swatting, to deploying various other government agencies to harass and intimidate conservatives, leftists have a burning, innate desire to get K-strategists fighting each other, especially as things get crazy. It is not a coincidence and it is not an accident – it is a long-evolved strategy, and we should all expect to see a lot more of it in the next two decades. The obvious solution is to not fall for it, and instead focus on the leftist themselves as the source of the problem. Very quickly leftists would abandon that strategy.
Anonymous Conservative
October 14, 2014
Amygdalae in the News
[If you want to understand the psychology of our political opponents and strategies for defeating them and just as important how they attempt to defeat us, you must read Anonymous Conservative’s work. He has a book, The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans, which is sometimes available free on Kindle.
One of the more important insights I have gotten from reading him is that, in general, the police are our natural friends. They enforce the rule of law and only enforce the whims of some ruler because the ruler had the authority to make law. Our state and federal constitutions, being higher law than those that would be our unconstrained rulers, gives them authority and license to oppose those rules. See, for example, the opposition to many of the gun laws such as in New York, Colorado, and in Washington State (I-594). At some level our political opponents recognize this and attempt to get us to fight each other, to the death.
Recognizing this we can adopt a much better strategy of encouraging and supporting the police to respect our guaranteed rights and deal with those that would infringe upon our rights in an appropriate manner.—Joe]
Barron was the guest on the 2AToday podcast that came out yesterday. The title is “What’s about to happen in Washington State?” – with Barron Barnett of The Minuteman blog. Barron’s blog post on the topic is here. Barron did well but the OCD engineer in me was annoyed when he said the 18 page I-594 was 17 pages. Then my teeth clenched when he later said it was 16 pages. But that isn’t really important.
What’s important is that a great number of innocent, everyday transfers of guns for educational, training, and recreational use will become crimes if I-594 passes. And the latest poll indicates it has a big lead. But polls can be wrong. As someone pointed out the latest poll was of registered voters, not likely voters.
When we fought against I-676 back in 1997 it had an even greater lead in the pre-election surveys and yet it went down in flames 71 to 29 (Barron also got the numbers wrong for that one too, he said 70 to 20, my OCD issues are probably the reason I don’t have many friends).
If you are one of the good guys in Washington State who votes for freedom please get your ballot in the mail on time. If we can win this even though Bloomberg, Gates, Ballmer, Allen, and a few millionaires are bankrolling the forces of evil it will strongly discourage them from trying again. After defeating I-676 back in ‘97 we have had almost nothing but improvement in our gun laws since then. Defeat this issue here and maybe we will have another 15 or 20 years of successes.
Gun control must take place here. [Tapping his chest to indicate the heart.]
Then real gun control come.
Dalai Lama
October 26, 2014
Gun control: What the Dalai Lama said may surprise you
[I saw hints that he had spoken about gun control a few days ago but wasn’t able to find an actual quote. Now I know why.
He is referring to changes in the hearts of people rather than restrictions on pieces of metal. This not all that different from the NRA and other gun rights groups saying we need to focus on the criminal rather than on the guns.
Here is the other reference to his speech I had seen earlier:
Dalai Lama: U.S. needs to address gun control
…
The Dalai Lama also talked about the importance of inner beauty and wasn’t afraid to touch on controversial topics like gun control.
I wonder why the one article completely changed the tone of what was actually said. And I wonder if he said even more that was suppressed.
He has mentioned self-defense using guns before so we have a decent idea of his thoughts on the topic. They just aren’t politically correct thoughts.—Joe]
The ATF doesn’t call them “ghost guns” like some prejudiced bigots in the California legislature but they did put out a news release on 80% receivers a few days ago. The worst they said was:
6. Can functioning firearms made from receiver blanks be traced?
ATF successfully traces crime guns to the first retail purchaser in most instances. ATF starts with the manufacturer and goes through the entire chain of distribution to find who first bought the firearm from a licensed dealer. Because receiver blanks do not have markings or serial numbers, when firearms made from such receiver blanks are found at a crime scene, it is usually not possible to trace the firearm or determine its history, which hinders crime gun investigations jeopardizing public safety.7. Have firearms made from unmarked receiver blanks been recovered after being used in a crime?
Yes, firearms that began as receiver blanks have been recovered after shooting incidents, from gang members and from prohibited people after they have been used to commit crimes.
They chose their words very carefully. I think it is very telling they don’t give any numbers on how often traces failed and that actually hindered the arrest and conviction of criminals who committed violent crimes. I would not be at all surprised if the number of people arrested for victimless crimes associated with making guns that didn’t quite meet ATF’s regulations drastically exceeds the number of criminals who evaded arrest because of 80% receivers.
Yesterday I posted about how our political opponents use insults because they know insults are effective on themselves even when the insults are totally baseless. The Obama administration calling Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu “chickenshit” is an example that is making world news. Anonymous Conservative does the analysis:
So why launch such an attack? If you are intimately familiar with the psychology, you’ll immediately see that this was an amygdala hijack directed at Netanyahu. Like many such attempts by narcissists, it was predicated on an understanding of human psychology that arose from the narcissist’s self examination of themselves, and thus it assumes the narcissist’s malady is ever-present in everyone.
…
It make me think about how things must be unraveling inside the White House now that Dear Leader and his entire entourage are being criticized by leftists afraid of seeing the Obama administration’s failures reflect back badly upon the movement. Groups of narcissists can become amygdala echo chambers. One get’s hijacked and tries to relieve the strain by hijacking two others himself. Like nuclear fission, it can create a very unpleasant environment.
Similar conclusions are probably valid when our anti-freedom opponents spew crude insults at us.
No methodologically sound study has found any important effect on homicide, suicide or violent crime rates from Canadian gun laws.
Gary Mauser
Professor emeritus at the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies Beedie School of Business at Simon Fraser University.
October 29, 2014
Did Parliament Shooting Change Canada’s Gun Control Debate?
[The same is true in the U.S.
So why do some people still advocate for more gun control? I can only think of the following possible reasons:
Or some combination of the above.—Joe]
Those anti-gun people sure like their blood.
These are “public service announcements” from CSGV.
What you see in the videos is not a dance but you can be sure they believe putting the blood of innocents victims in a video helps their bottom line. All the hundreds of thousands (at least, it could be in the millions) of people each year who defend themselves with a gun are completely ignored. And if the number of victims is greater with increased gun restrictions as was in Washington D.C. and Chicago, well, that just the price some people have to pay for getting rid of those icky guns.
I recently tweeted this:
@CamEdwards@robdelaney@NRA@YouLikeAaron In a debate you lead with the best you have. They have crude insults. We have SCOTUS rulings.
It was in response to this tweet from rob delaney (@robdelaney):
This is how
@NRA guys have sex. RT@YouLikeAaron:
The associated drawing is so crude I’m putting it “below the fold.”
This is entirely consistent with The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans. They are not data and logic driven. Anti-gun people are driven by emotions. They know that insulting and degrading people is what is effective on them. They therefore attempt to use this same tactic on us as their best weapon in a debate.
In a lot of ways you really can model them as not having matured beyond grade school.
I agree that assault guns and large ammunition holders are totally unnecessary and should be banned.
Alice Gutenkauf
January 20, 2013
Comment to Please Take Away My Right to a Gun
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
I am totally in favor of gun control, of removing guns not only from civilians but also from police.
…
I talked about the fact that my father had guns when I was growing up; our families needed to protect themselves from the Ku Klux Klan.
Angela Davis
May 6, 2014
Angela Y. Davis on what’s radical in the 21st century
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take away your guns.
After reading the article I breathed a heavy sigh. Barb asked what was wrong. I answered, “I just don’t know what to do with this. How do you respond to this?”
At some level Davis understands why gun ownership is important but she also wants to take guns from all private hands.
I guess it comes with the territory of being so crazy that you advocate for communism.—Joe]
You’d think this would be just common sense. Maybe we should make it legal for them to openly carry their penis. It would be safer, but they probably wouldn’t be as proud about it.
horrido
July 2, 2014
Comment to Big Win For Gun Control Groups: Target Bans Guns In Its Stores
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!–Joe]
We need more school shootings!!! Vote yes on Initiative 591.
Nick Hanauer
October 24, 2014
Too Soon? Nick Hanauer Posts Sarcastically, ‘We Need More School Shootings!!!
[Via WAC.
In addition to the moral bankruptcy, blood dancing, and exceedingly poor taste Nick Hanauer is a top funder raiser for I-594.
I-594 is the anti-gun initiative in Washington State which would outlaw many common and innocent acts related to gun ownership. One such example is my loaning a gun to Barb for the weekend so she could take a class. If I-594 were law we would have had to seek out a FFL, pay a fee, and fill out a bunch of paperwork for when I “transferred” the gun to her, and then again when she “transferred” it back.
I-591 is the pro-gun initiative which would limit Washington State to background checks to the same criteria as Federal background checks. And, assuming Hanauer is rational, then the only thing that could possibly be what he was referring to with I-591 being a issue in regards to school shootings is the following:
A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:
It is unlawful for any government agency to confiscate guns or other firearms from citizens without due process.
So, unless Hanauer thinks unlawful confiscation of guns is in the future, he has crap for brains in making the statement he did.
My conclusions is that with this post he just confirms the relationship between those opposed to our fundamental rights, crap for brains, and inherent evil.—Joe]
Take all guns from the commoners and dole out harsh prison terms, such as life without parole, for possession of any firearm, ammunition, or firearm component. Good governance requires it and President Obama supports it.
BenRothstein (Commander McBragg)
October 24, 2014
Comment to Suspect Among 2 Dead in Washington High School Shooting
[I suspect a troll, but sometimes it’s hard to tell.
In addition to the tragedy of the deaths and injuries this could push a very close election (in process right now) on the gun control initiative I-594 the wrong way. Sometimes it’s tempting to think of these events as Manchurian Candidate conspiracies.—Joe]
Via ammoland; University of Idaho “Executive Director for Public Safety and Security” (nod nod, wink wink), Matt Dorschel, has openly advocated abusing the 911 system to harass peaceable gun owners, potentially leading to another “SWATting” of an innocent person.
Intentional misuse of the 911 system is one crime, and this jackass (and anyone who takes his advice) is also committing a federal crime, violating 18 USC 241 “Conspiracy Against Rights”.
This warrants calls and letters to the Latah County Sheriff’s department, the U. of I. president, your ID State Representatives, and to the Governor’s office. The Moscow, ID Police Department contracts with the University of Idaho for campus security, to the tune of around a million dollars, or so I was told, which in this tiny town is a HUGE pile of cash. There’s a major conflict of interest there, and I wouldn’t bother with the city PD for that reason. We have a criminal in our midst, and we’re paying the son of a bitch.
Someone inside the U. of I. I.T. system needs to get hold of Dorschel’s e-mails and other communications before his “hard drive fails”. Pronto!
Hat Tip; Info Wars
From the gun email list at work:
From: Shawn
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 8:37 AM
Subject: Weapons on Campus survey….quick and confidentialMy son Kyle is a Senior Cadet (MS-4) in the US Army ROTC at the University of Arizona. He is enrolled in a political science course focused on polling, and has been tasked with creating a survey on a topic of his choice, collecting and analyzing the responses, and writing a report of his findings. His topic is weapons on campus. He has asked his mother and I to help him collect responses by asking as many people as we can to participate in his survey. The survey is very short and completely confidential. If you read through the survey and prefer not to answer the questions, you are not required to submit. You can simply close the tab or browser.
Thanks for your time.
Shawn
Link to survey: https://kyle14.typeform.com/to/CQpZsc
I dislike the wording of question 14. People are not given such a right. But I answered it as “strongly agree” anyway.
The GPU (secret police) exposed von Meck, and he was shot: His objective had been to wear out rails and roadbeds, freight cars and locomotives, so as to leave the Republic without railroads in case of foreign military intervention!
When, not long afterward, the new People’s Commissar of Railroads, Comrade Kaganovich, ordered that average loads should be increased, and even doubled and tripled them (and for this discovery received the Order of Lenin along with others of our leaders) the malicious engineers who protested became know as limiters.
They raised the outcry that this was too much, and would result in the breakdown of the rolling stock, and they were rightly shot for their lack of faith in the possibilities of socialist transport.
Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) page 45.
[I was talking about this with son James last night so I thought I would post it too. Basically the lesson is that progressives have a burning desire to eliminate those that point out reality to them. Some of the most visible battles in our country today are the battle over Obamacare and the right to keep and bear arms. They refuse to recognize the realities of economics and human nature and are willing to have us imprisoned and/or killed when we attempt to explain reality to them.
But it is much more widespread than those. Look at the war against Islamic terrorism. Progressives insisted that we are to blame for our conflict despite the very clear words from the terrorists themselves that they will only be peaceful after all people have submitted to Sharia Law. Or look at how they insisted that stand your ground laws were a factor in the George Zimmerman case. Progressives have beliefs which contradict reality and if they have the power they become very dangerous when reality is forced upon them.
The constant conflict between reality and their beliefs is why the book Nineteen Eighty Four resonates so strongly. It brings to light the inherent conflict of the struggle we are facing. It is a battle between reality and their ever changing beliefs.
They insist that if we would acquiesce to their demands of a complete gun ban or a completely “free” government run health care system the world would be a better place. And they call us obstructionist because we insist what they demand cannot succeed. Today they call us obstructionists instead of limiters. I sometimes wonder if that is deliberate because some of them know the Soviet baggage associated with the word “limiters”.
I don’t wonder what they would do to those that insist upon maintaining a close connection to reality. If only they had the political power to deal with us as they wished our fate would be clear. That path has made countless history books of the most unpleasant nature.—Joe]
Interesting news story yesterday. The Seattle police had sued over the new “use of force” rules, saying in part that it violated their 2nd Amendment rights.
The judge’s decision came down, and she (judge Marsha Pechman) dismissed the suit. According to the KOMO article :
The judge also dismissed the officers’ constitutional arguments, saying that while the Second Amendment ensures the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn’t protect the right to use the weapons.
Ummmm…. Excuse me? That’s like saying you have the right to free speech as long as you don’t say anything.