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.
The AR-15 is an assault rifle and in my mind there is no reason why a civilian needs to own an assault rifle.
Candace Fay
Democratic candidate for Connecticut state representative.
October 16, 2014
Carter, Fay spar over gun control at league debate
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
This is also an excellent example of how people intent on doing evil do not fit the Hollywood vision of an evil doer.—Joe]
Wanting sensible gun laws isn’t anti-liberty to anyone but the small wee wee’d gunsterbators who are terrified to go outside. #GunSense
Dennis (@StillersFanInFL)
July 29, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via Mark (@tazcat2011) and Linoge.—Joe]
What the gun signs in effect did was disarm a law abiding citizen, and I didn’t feel comfortable being a part of that. I think this makes us safer. In my opinion removing the signs is the same thing as removing a bullseye.
Rollen “Buddy” Bradshaw
County Mayor
October 14, 2014
Signs banning guns taken down at Loudon County government office building
[It’s a Mayor Against Illegal Laws!—Joe]
We have one infrastructure. We can’t choose a world where the US gets to spy and the Chinese don’t. We get to choose a world where everyone can spy, or a world where no one can spy. We can be secure from everyone, or vulnerable to anyone. And I’m tired of us choosing surveillance over security.
Bruce Schneier
September 19, 2014
Fake Cell Phone Towers Across the US
[A similar statement can be made about gun ownership.
We don’t get to choose between the everyone has guns and only the good guys have guns. The bad guys will always have guns or at least lethal weapons of some sort. And since they get to choose the time, location, and victim they will frequently succeed in their attacks when the innocent are stripped or discouraged from owning guns.
It’s only when the potential victims have the capability of causing near immediate serious consequences that perpetrators give serious consideration to their life choices. If there are not serious consequences then the case can be made they would be stupid to not to take advantage of those who are vulnerable. If the consequences are significantly delayed, as in a possible jail term a year or two in the future, the perpetrators may not be able to integrate those consequences into the decisions being made in the present.
I’m tired of politicians giving us the false choice of tolerating infringements on our right to keep and bear arms in exchange for imagined security.—Joe]
Via email from Mike we have ELIZABETH E. MORRIS; and ALAN C. BAKER, Plaintiffs, v. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, et al., Case No. 3:13-CV-00336-BLW:
While the Corps retains the right to regulate the possession and carrying of handguns on Corps property, this regulation imposes an outright ban, and is therefore unconstitutional under any level of scrutiny, as set forth in Heller and Peruta.
…
For all of the reasons cited above, the Court will grant plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment…
Summary judgment! Can school and Post Office carry be far behind?
Yes, I recognize this decision is dependent upon the Ninth Circuit and other circuits have contrary ruling but when SCOTUS ultimately takes the case we will have that much more data demonstrating the risk, if any, to respecting the right to keep and bear arms is low. Claims of government being “special” will warrant little more than a raised eyebrow.
As Say Uncle said, Ban on guns violates second amendment? Who knew?
It would be surprising, as Amis says, that such a warped psychology as Hitler’s could ever be “a considerate and energetic lover”. Yet, once I began to write about the Nazi wives, I realised that the ability of mass murderers to compartmentalise their lives is one of their most disturbing aspects.
A new documentary about Himmler’s home life, called The Decent One, by the acclaimed filmmaker Vanessa Lapa, focuses on the tender personal letters between Himmler and his wife Marga, largely about their daughter Puppi, even as he perpetrated daily atrocities. It raises the same questions as Thomas Harding’s book Hanns and Rudolf, about the private life of Rudolf Höss, the Auschwitz commandant, whose children played just yards away from the camp, oblivious of the horrors occurring there.
Jane Thynne
October 15, 2014
What Hitler’s sex life was really like
[What I don’t think most people really understand is how easy it was, and is, for people to murder people on a mass scale. Hitler and the Nazi’s are viewed as terrible monsters the likes of which have only been seen once in history. Wrong.
People, across differing societies, accept orders to do terrible things to other people up to and including murder them. Read Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. Or The Gulag Archipelago. Or The Rape Of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust Of World War II. Those are just some of the better known instances.
You can’t imagine our government rounding up people and putting them in camps? “That just can’t happen in this country”? Wrong. It did happen. Read Looking Like the Enemy: My Story of Imprisonment in Japanese American Internment Camps.
The people that inflict these terrible things did not have warning beacons flashing on their foreheads. Many, if not most, were kind to their family and pets and widely admired in society at the time. In both Hitler’s Willing Executioners and The Rape of Nanking, it is documented that the perpetrators sent photos and postcards of their atrocities to their families and the public at large. They were happily doing their jobs for the good of their country and the betterment of mankind.
I think one of the key flags to identify people who do these things are that they believe that the good of society outweighs the rights of the individual. There may be exceedingly narrow circumstances where this is true, Ebola comes to mind but when I hear someone advocate people “make sacrifices for the greater good” I go on full alert. Those are fighting words to me and such a person is, at a minimum, an enabler of, if not an advocate for, the next genocidal tyrant. And as such they deserve all the contempt given Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler.—Joe]
Gun control laws would not affect any citizen who follows the law. No one wants to take away the right every American has to own a gun. But responsible Gun control is needed to keep all of us safe.
Karagan Knowles
October 13, 2014
Opposing Opinions: Gun Control
[Uhhh… wrong. Every. Single. Sentence.
Laws that require me to seek out and pay a FFL to loan my gun to my girlfriend for the week affect me. Laws that ban nearly every gun I own affect me. Laws that require me to pay a $200 tax and wait many months to purchase a hearing protection device not much larger than my thumb affect me.
There are lots of people who want to take away our guns.
Gun control has never been shown to make anyone safer.
Please try again Ms. Knowles. And this time do a little research rather than just making up stuff as you go.—Joe]
The main aspect of slavery down through history was that people victimized by slavery were unarmed, disarmed and then kept that way. Anyone who wants to disarm you while they remain armed are for slavery!
Ron W
October 13, 2014
Comment to White slaves
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
After several well publicized instances of the tiny penis brigade marching through Target stores with their artificial manhood in hand, Target announces that they want you to leave your insecurities and guns at home. Since the total number of people who really want to bring a gun to Target stores is about 11, and all of them are unemployed man-children in Texas, I suspect they won’t miss the business. Hell given the number of weekly gun-fails in the US of A they might save more customers lives in a single year than they lose to the Neanderthal crowd.
Shane Smith
July 3, 2014
Stores behaving well!
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via email from Bob S.
Plus we get bonus insults to our maturity and genealogy. Citation needed on the number of people that carry guns into Target stores (I’ve done it dozens of times) and potential for saved lives considering the increased risk from the suggestion that Target stores become victim disarmament zones.
I wonder if he noticed irony of the maturity comment while making references to “the tiny penis brigade”. I suspect not.—Joe]
There’s a difference between gun culture and hunting culture. They’re talking about hunting in Montana. They’re not talking about walking into a Wal-Mart with a 9-millimeter strapped to their back.
Charles Gallagher
October 10, 2014
Does race shape Americans’ passion for guns?
[Gallagher claims expertise in the field of sociology, race, and guns. I don’t know about his sociology and race credentials but when he talks about “a 9-millimeter strapped to their back” you know he has lots of work to do on the gun side of things.
Other than quoting crap for brains Gallagher in a few places it’s decent article. For CNN to publish this, it’s conclusive proof we are winning.—Joe]
There are always people who are convinced there is a rational, polite, gentle and civilized way to stop a violent sociopath from raping their eye sockets.
We call these sensitive souls “Morons.”
Michael Z. Williamson
October 9, 2014
Wishful Thinking Knows No Bounds
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Times have changed, society has changed. Time to disarm.
X9887L
November 4, 2013
Comment to Dianne Feinstein: ‘Gun People’ Hold A ‘Hammerlock’ On Gun Control Reform
[Never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
No one needs a gun, especially a handgun. The idea that a handgun is essential for self protection is a myth. If someone is pointing a gun at you then it’s too late for you to pull yours out on them. A handgun is worthless for hunting.
…
The government is not going to invade your home and take away your guns. Gun-rights advocates say that they need their guns in order to keep the government from confiscating them. It’s illogical, paranoid reasoning, especially given the fact that there are already almost enough firearms in private hands to arm every man, woman and child in the country. The government would not need a list in order to come after your guns. All they would have to do is go door-to-door, and they would likely find one.
Marshall Dunlap
October 7, 2014
Gun control: Background-check inconvenience worth it to keep guns from criminals
[Gun owners are illogical and paranoid? This is a few sentences after he says we handguns being used for defense is a myth (tell the police that), they are worthless for hunting and, “No one needs a gun…” And it’s a few sentences before he suggests it would be easy for the police to go door-to-door and confiscate them.
I think Mr. Dunlap is doing some projection and that he is further evidence of why we shouldn’t have registration lists of guns or gun owners.—Joe]