Belief is the death of intelligence.
Robert Anton Wilson
[I’m reminded of Ann Landers who said, “No one has the right to destroy another person’s belief by demanding empirical evidence.”
I’d also like to remind people that those that respect everyone’s beliefs have no respect for the truth.—Joe]
The bearing of arms is the essential medium through which the individual asserts both his social power and his participation in politics as a responsible moral being.
J.G.A. Pocock
Historian, describing the beliefs of the founders of the U.S.
From The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition
[Another one via Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor.—Joe]
This is something I wrote for the gun email list at work. Most of the people on the list live in California so I slanted it a little bit in that direction but I think it has application for a much broader audience.
I realize the situation is much different in California than in the states I spend most of my time (Washington and Idaho) but we are winning. We have been winning a bunch of court battles. We have been winning some political victories (carry in National Parks and in checked bags on Amtrak, carry in 49 states, fines for cities and elected officials in Florida who violate state preemption, etc. etc.). The anti-gun organizations are in financial trouble. And probably most importantly we are winning public opinion (see the most recent Gallup poll on guns).
As much progress as we have made elsewhere California and a few other states are still are a cancer that can spread if not treated. Don’t think that those of us in the free(er) states are unaware of the importance of these trouble spots or that we are neglecting the situation. And we are making progress in California. As you folks are probably even better aware than I SAF and CalGuns are making progress in the courts. I’ve spent a lot of time with Alan Gottlieb and Alan Gura and I am convinced they are more than competent and have plans that have a reasonable chance of success.
The blogosphere is also doing what it can to change things in California. Through the cooperation of Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned I was interviewed by a reporter for the Los Angeles Times yesterday. I was a bit apprehensive as the LA Times has been far from friendly to gun owners in the past. This report was fair and did not take advantage of some things I said which could have sounded poorly out of context. Although she didn’t mention it in the article her mother has even been to Front Sight!
I suspect California gun owners can make a difference by “coming out of the closet” now. I understand the risks but the rewards can be significant if done correctly.
One thing I would like to suggest is that gun owners/clubs reach out to traditional media. Boomershoot has had some remarkably good coverage (the KING5 Evening Magazine video on Boomershoot was even nominated for an Emmy). Boomershoot has some draw and some PR talent (not me) that most gun organizations can’t take advantage of but they can help gain public acceptance of gun owners without too much effort.
Find local news outlets that have a local events sections and get your IPDA/USPSA/Cowboy-Action/Steel-Challenge/Bowling-Pin/Bulleye/High-Power/whatever match listed. After the match write up a story (my PR person says, somewhat cynically, “Reporters are lazy. If you want their support do their work for them.”) about the match results and send it to the local news organizations. If you have something a little different you might even get them to send a reporter. Cowboy Action frequently qualifies as “different” enough. Action Pistol (IPDA/USPSA) matches provide an opportunity for this as well. I created stages for a USPSA match that addressed a visit by Fred Phelps to the area and made it into the local newspaper and the AP. That led to an interview for an article in the Seattle Times. A YouTube video of a Gabby Giffords themed concealed carry side match to a USPSA match generated nearly 8000 views and the rage of anti-gun groups and even got the attention of a Brady Campaign Board member who said, “These folks could have just sat back and shut up.”
If a news article has errors about guns (.357 caliber Glocks and 40mm handguns are my favorites) contact the reporter. Ask if they would like to attend a “media day”. Invite a number of media organizations and if you get a decent response set up a ½ day class (Keep it short! They won’t want to invest a whole day) to teach them the basics of gun types, gun vocabulary, gun myths, and gun safety. Print and bind some nice copies of the NSSF writers guide to give them (NSSF may have some for sale or distribution, you might check with them before printing your own). Include some range time with a .22 with options for larger calibers for those that are interested.
Carefully select your media guides. Good looking professionals of both sexes and various ethnic backgrounds will help dispel the stereotypes they may have of gun owners. Train your people! Prepare them for loaded questions. When media is expected at Boomershoot we have designated media contacts and since our people are spread all over the country do training via email discussions. We have a media guide FAQ (with our own inside humor) to help prepare our people. And except for those in the media who we know are gun friendly (I.E. Michael Bane of Shooting Gallery) we have a media guide with them at all times. We successfully handled a Newsweek reporter who, as near as we could determine, exclusively reported on terrorism, both international and domestic.
If you decide to head down this path let me know if I can help. My Boomershoot PR person currently has some health issues that sometimes prevent timely responses but if anyone thinks they could benefit from some help I will be glad to share what I have learned and pass on the tougher problems to an expert.
If you are in or near New York City on March 9th this would be something interesting to attend:
The Fordham Urban Law Journal will host its Volume XXXIX Symposium, titled “Gun Control and the Second Amendment: Developments and Controversies in the Wake of District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago,” on Friday, March 9 at Fordham Law School in New York City.
The event will be divided into the following panels:
· The Effect of the Supreme Court’s Gun Control Restrictions on Crime Rates
· The Scope of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Post-Heller and McDonald
· Urban Exceptionalism and Modern Conceptions of the Militia
It includes some well-known names of people who are supportive of gun rights such as Don Kates, David Kopel, and Gary Kleck as well as some heavy hitters of the opposing team.
A bit off topic, but what is “Urban Exceptionalism”? I wasn’t able to find a quick answer to that.
John Harrigan at NewHampshire.com has his own version of Just One Question:
Whenever anyone tries to draw me into the gun-control controversy, I ask this: Given the nation’s estimated 200 million guns, how are we going to keep them out of the hands of scofflaw criminals who could then prey on a law-abiding, disarmed citizenry? This is only one question in a complex matter, but until someone with a grip on reality provides an answer, that’s it for me.
I find it interesting he has a similar rational to mine for creating and using the question.
There are not many news outlets more hostile to gun ownership than MSNBC.
Or at least that is the way it used to be. Here we have an article in MSNBC telling us how much fun you can have with machine guns in Las Vegas:
You may want to set your sights on Las Vegas’ newest attraction, Machine Guns Vegas (MGV), which opened its doors Monday. Part gun range, part ultra-lounge, MGV invites visitors to grab the automatic weapon of their choice — Uzis, AK-47s and more — and get in touch with their inner gangster or SEAL Team Six commando.
“You’d be amazed at the number of people who come to Vegas and want to shoot a machine gun,” said co-owner Genghis Cohen. “It’s an experience you can’t have in a lot of places in the world.”
Gun ranges, of course, are nothing new but MGV puts a decidedly Sin City spin on the concept, a reflection, in part, of Cohen’s background in the city’s nightlife industry. He originally came to Las Vegas from his native New Zealand to open Tabu, the über-hip lounge in the MGM Grand.
MGV takes a similarly stylish approach, albeit an alcohol-free one, complete with leather furniture, hardwood floors and a bevy of “Gun Girls” led by model and U.S. Air Force veteran Jeannie Duffy.
I’m a little concerned the “Gun Girls” have the potential to reduce acceptance by women. But while she is quite attractive at least the picture of Duffy doesn’t show an excessive amount of skin or promise jiggle with the machine gun recoil:
In conformance with the naming of fire, flood, and collision insurance the policy that pays out in the event of your death should be called “Death Insurance”.
“Life Insurance” is what you should call your carry handgun.
Update: I woke up at 3:30 the next morning realizing it probably should “Life Assurance”. Then I found the comment from Publius who suggested “life ensurance”. But I can’t find a definition for “ensurance”. [shrug]
Local elected officials are not above the law, and I think it’s arrogant and disrespectful of the citizens of this state when you have a local elected official who thinks they can pass any law they want willy-nilly.
Rep. Daryl Metcalfe
February 25, 2012
Gun bill could put Allentown on defensive–NRA wants owners of firearms to take cities with reporting laws to court.
[It’s no different than if a city were to pass a law prohibiting interracial or gay marriages. The state possess the sole power to regulate marriages and in this case as well as many others the state has the sole power to regulate firearms. City politicians that think they have the power regulate firearms have a lot in common with those that discriminate against other minorities and should be dealt with in the same manner and public scorn.—Joe]
Guns-n-Eyeballs by TankerGrunt.
This is another win win for the NRA and it’s buddies in the gun lobby.
The Banksters buddies crush any opposition to them, so they can continue to fund the gun manufacturers, which in turn soaks our communities with guns, blood, and death.
Bryan Miller
Using the alias “BantheNRA“.
November 15, 2011
Comment to N.Y. judge rules against Occupy Wall Street protesters, upholds decision to dismantle Zuccotti Park encampment
[For many years Miller was the director of CeaseFire New Jersey until it went belly up.
His alias demonstrates his contempt for the First Amendment as well as the Second.
But most importantly the comment above demonstrates Miller apparently hasn’t been taking his anti-psychotic medications. He, and most anti-gun extremists, live in an alternate reality all their own.—Joe]
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Chiefs of Police have not yet provided a single example in which tracing was of more than peripheral importance in solving a case.
The problem isn’t just with the long-gun registry. The data provided above cover all guns, including handguns. There is no evidence that, since the handgun registry was started in 1934, it has been important in solving a single homicide.
John R. Lott Jr. & Gary Mauser
February 20, 2012
Death of a Long-Gun Registry
[H/T David Hardy.
Don’t ever forget the story of the Belgium Corporal. The only thing a gun registry is good for is confiscation.
When someone suggests gun registration is a good thing you know they are ignorant, stupid, and/or evil. You should determine which and deal with them appropriately.—Joe]
Since is it illegal for the government to keep records of someone who exercises their First Amendment rights it should also be illegal for a government to keep records of someone who exercises their Second Amendment rights.
Can you imagine the outcry if the government demanded you fill out the equivalent of a 4473 and undergo a NICS check before purchasing a printer for your computer, start a blog, or write a letter to the editor?
The Second Amendment deserves as much or more respect than the First Amendment and we need to get that point across.
Why apply prior restraint to a Constitutionally-protected right, then? Barring stupidity, deliberate ignorance or outright insanity, … unreasoning prejudice is the only motive.
Roberta X
February 21, 2012
Running The Numbers
[For a simple one-word answer “prejudice” is close enough and probably should be used in those contexts where sound bytes are important. But the real answer is probably much more complex. There is more than a little ignorance, a fair amount of stupidity and a lot of near insanity as well. Read about Peterson Syndrome for a more complete story on that mix.
But what Roberta left out was hatred, maliciousness, and evil. There are those that would disarm us because they know that if we have arms we will forcefully resist their final ultimate solution to what they believe to be the problems of the world.—Joe]
Starbucks? This is your bold, patriotic idea of a dangerous venue in which to flaunt your precious Second Amendment pacifiers? Because laptop-wielding hipsters are soooo freaking terrifying? Because the baristers are armed with… scalding hot milk foam?
If your gun is a tool, it is something to be treated with the respect you’d show any potentially dangerous tool. Somehow I don’t see a spontaneous uprising of lumberjacks carrying chainsaws and construction workers flourishing jackhammers at the local Starbucks, because this is the real world, not a badly scripted porno movie. Semi-retired CPAs who listen to a lot of Rush Limbaugh, please copy.
Anyone who has to demonstrate his political allegiances by flashing a gun at a Starbucks has presumably decided that it’s too risky to “support the Second Amendment” at a Dunkin Donuts… where the professional security forces hang out. Or even at the local McDonald’s, where some safety-conscious mommy at the ball pit would be liable to give you a very hurtful talking-to.
Anne Laurie
March 3, 2010
Open Thread: Penis Substitutes At the Ready!
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
From the title to any hint of substance in the post itself Laurie demonstrates her total clueness of what the Starbucks conflict was about.—Joe]
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
Ronald Reagan
[The freedom to ingest whatever mind altering chemical you desired was lost in the last century. They had to have a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw alcohol, But for some reason they didn’t bother with giving themselves the power to ban Marijuana, heroin, or “magic mushrooms”. Politicians just assumed they had the power and almost magically they did have the power.
The same thing almost happened with firearms. From GCA68 to AWB ‘94 (slightly more than a generation) we came within a hair breadth of losing the freedom guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.. It’s possible we did loose a part of it (machine guns and destructive devices) to not be recovered in out lifetime–if ever.
There is a lesson to be learned here. It’s a slippery slope and minor, almost tolerable, infringements must not be tolerated.—Joe]
I’m a great example of why it is that the NRA simply mops the floor with its opponents when it comes to influencing DC. As Bloomberg rightly notes, they — gun fetishists or simply Second Amendment absolutists — care way, way more. In fact, it’s not uncommon for that to be the only thing an NRA member cares about. A lifetime of political activism funneled into simply one tiny and, I would argue, frivolous niche.
Elias Isquith
February 17, 2012
Mike Bloomberg And The Politics Of Gun Control
[Regardless of his distain for gun owners there is a certain amount of truth in his statement. Many of us are willing to vote for (or against) someone strictly on the basis of their stand on specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. Yes, many of us use the Second Amendment as a strong indicator of a politician’s support for freedom in general. But conversely the anti-freedom people could claim the same thing with a sign change, “If a politician supports gun ownership then you know he is not going to support the type of government that is going to send all the people we don’t like off to the reeducation camps.” But for some reason it doesn’t work for them that way.
It is my suspicion the anti-freedom people can only succeed when they are deceptive. They have to hide their true intentions. They have to express their goals in terms of free unicorns for everyone instead of jack-booted thugs crushing human skulls. Raw anti-freedom simply doesn’t generate that many votes. Gun owners understand that guns are a strong indicator, and a requirement, of free society. Hence we do care more about guns and are willing to vote on that single issue.—Joe]
Commenter FlyGuy at Robb’s points out that many articles of safety equipment such as seat belts, child safety caps, fire extinguishers, etc. are mandated by government. But yet many governments attempt to ban or heavily regulated another article of safety equipment—firearms.
As he says, “Very eeenteresting…”
In real life, you solve problems by breaking them down into smaller problems that are trivial by themselves. But if you respond to crazy circular logic by refuting each step as you go along, you lose track of the fact that you’re actually talking to a crazy person, and you lose the argument. Because by the time you’ve proven to a anti-gunner that he’s not Napoleon, he’s already telling you, with equally invincible conviction, that he’s Jesus. So you ask him if he was in fact born in a manger, and he tells you that Buckingham Palace is in fact a manger, you redneck, and before you’re done explaining what a manger is, he’s already tired of being Mary Queen of Scots, at which point you’re like “Wait, Buckingham Palace was built after she died!”, and you know what he says?
“Kiss me, Josephine, I’ve beaten Wellington again!”
Brandoch Daha
February 16, 2012
Comment to Fear driven society
[Awesome!
It reminds me of one of the responses to Just One Question, “What colour is orange: True or False?”
Many of these people are truly nuts and cannot be reasoned with. They simply don’t have the mental capacity. We should be alert for the signs then change our method of engagement or stop entirely when the crazy becomes apparent.—Joe]
The gunfight is over, and the cities lost. The question is: Do they realize it yet?
Patrick Kerkstra
February 14, 2012
Cities facing a tough fight on gun control
[If they were to think about it rationally they cannot help but realize it. But most are probably in denial. Those that are not in denial have only moved to the anger stage. They have quite a way to go before reaching acceptance.
Even though Kerkstra has arrived at the correct conclusion he doesn’t seem to consider that it is even plausible that guns are useful for protection. To him, “guns represent a plague, not protection”.
A suggestion to Kerkstra: answer Just One Question then get back to me.
I’d leave a comment for him but it appears they have implemented “Reasoned Discourse”.—Joe]
On February 3rd Linoge sent me an email telling me that CSGV was using daughter Kim’s picture from the Too Many Victims video on their blog in a manner that erroneously shows gun owners in a poor light. He suggested I might want to ask them to remove it.
On February 6th I did just that:
From: Joe Huffman
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 9:46 AM
To: Ladd Everitt
Cc: Kimberly Frederick
Subject: Please remove my daughters picture.Neither my daughter nor I gave you permission to use her image on the left sidebar of this web page: http://csgv4.blogspot.com/. Please remove it.
Use of the entire video is fine because it includes the proper context.
Thank you.
-joe-
https://blog.joehuffman.org/
http://www.boomershoot.org/
http://www.modernballistics.com/Sent via Windows Phone Seven.
On February 10th I received a reply:
From: Ladd Everitt
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 9:08 AM
To: Joe Huffman
Cc: Kimberly Frederick
Subject: RE: Please remove my daughters picture.Joe,
Thanks for your email. We’re running this by our attorneys and will get back with you soon.
Best regards,
Ladd Everitt
Director of Communications
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
1424 L Street NW, Suite 2-1
Washington, DC 20005
W: [deleted by Joe for privacy reasons]
Cell: [deleted by Joe for privacy reasons]
Email: [deleted by Joe for privacy reasons]
Website: www.csgv.org
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CSGV
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/CoalitionToStopGunViolence/
It is now five days later and I still have not heard back from them. Although I am capable and willing to get my own attorney involved are there some “magic words” involving copyrights I need to invoke that might “encourage” them to remove the picture without the involvement of my lawyers?
Thanks.