Weapons of mass destruction

I can see why his name is “Nutter”:

Bad people will do bad things, but we can and must take steps to deny these criminals the weapons of mass destruction that have ripped apart families across the country.

…

President Obama has called for “common sense” regulation. Regulating magazine size is surely common sense. Large-capacity magazines can turn a semiautomatic pistol into a weapon of mass destruction, with some spitting out six shots per second.

Actually, as I demonstrated last week, even on an off day a middle-aged computer geek can do close to six rounds a second with only ten rounds in the magazine. The size of the magazine has nothing to do with rate of fire and no matter how many rounds are in the magazine it doesn’t turn the gun into a WMD.

Or is Nutter saying we really did find WMDs in Iraq?

Quote of the day—Jack Klenk

In the state of Arizona any felon or mental case can purchase an assault weapon without any restrictions.

Jack Klenk
February 14, 2011
NRA and ‘gutless’ politicians
[Like stupidity, ignorance has no limits.—Joe]

Popularity contest

It’s not the way I think it should be done but in essence politics is a popularity contest. A politician wins by being popular. They become popular in a number of ways. They can “buy” votes via advertising, and/or having friends in the media. They can belong to a rich and/or famous family like the Kennedy’s. Or they can align their political plans (as near as I can tell no politician has a significant chance of election with a consistent political philosophy) that resonates with a significantly large segment of the voters. This last method frequently consists of buying votes with taxpayer money but that is a different story.

I find it very interesting that in this Internet age a single individual can measure the popularity of public figures and ideas without paying for a survey. It may not be as accurate as an actual survey but it can give some clues.

The anti-gun blogs are either so out of touch or so low on the totem pole they don’t even show up on the tools I use for measuring relevance but there are other measures of the opposition.

My most recent measure of the popularity of our opposition is to look at the views of the Brady Campaign videos on YouTube.

There are four videos of the Brady Campaign President on YouTube since the Tucson shooting. The titles, dates, and number of views as of the evening of February 13, 2011 are:

  • Brady President Paul Helmke’s thoughts on the Tucson Shooting, January 10, 2011: 124 views
  • Paul Helmke Video Blog on HB308, to Ban High Capacity Magazines, January 20, 2011: 114 views
  • Paul Helmke at the Intro of H.B. 308 to Ban High Capacity Mags, January 20, 2011: 685 views
  • Paul Helmke on the Resurgence of Support for Gun Regulation, January 28, 2011: 310 views

That is a total of 1233 views.

In the same timeframe and on essentially the same topic I have posted two YouTube videos:

That is a total of 2968 views. And the second of those videos has only been up for less than 70 hours and is still getting a fairly high rate of hits.

I expect that by the middle of this week I should have about three times (it is currently 2.4 X) the number of views for my message as Paul Helmke has for his. And my videos were crudely done with video glasses and edited on my laptop while I was in bed instead of professionally scripted, produced, and edited.

If Helmke were to get paid by his popularity he should be getting about 1/3 of what I am receiving for my videos. This makes Helmke worth about one third of zero. I know the anti-gun people have a problem with arithmetic but it still should be pretty obvious Brady Campaign donors are not getting their money’s worth.

Brady Campaign is hiring

I’m surprised the Brady Campaign has any money to hire someone but it appears they do:

Associate Director, Communications

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and its sister organization, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, are the nation’s largest, non-partisan, grassroots organizations leading the fight to prevent gun violence. For additional information and a full job description, please visit www.bradycenter.org. We are searching for a talented Associate Director, Communications!

The Communications Department develops and implements the public education and message strategy for all organizations (Campaign/MMM,Center, VEF) through print, video, audio and television outlets. The Department plans press conferences, writes press releases, op-eds, articles and editorial reports and supervises content and design of the organization’s website ensuring that legislative, outreach, fundraising and message delivery are as effective as possible.

Reporting to the Director of Communications, the Associate Director is responsible for developing strategy and materials for use with the press and the public to advance goals of the organization.  The Associate Director will represent the organization in national and local media and public forums.  The Associate Director assists in message and media training for staff and activists, identifies and recruits new constituencies to the organization as experts and/or local spokespeople. The incumbent keeps abreast of all new developments, trends in the gun control movement, and develops countermeasures.  The Associate Director assists in managing content and design of the organization’s Web site.

The Associate Director should maintain daily contacts with national and local editors, reporters, columnists, producers, correspondents and communications directors of health and education organizations. This position works closely with staff, board members, and membership. The Associate Director handles last minute/after hours press deadlines and is available to the press after hours and on weekends/holidays when the Director is not available. The Associate Director must be able to fill in for the Director of Communications at any time.

Qualifications for this role include:

·         Bachelors degree or equivalent in communications or public relations background desired. 5-7 years of progressively responsible experience in a similar position performing communications responsibilities. Non profit experience strongly preferred.

·         Excellent communication (both verbal and written) skills.

·         Must have experience in planning and implementing media campaigns.    

·         Must have news-style professional photography, broadcasting, and videography skills, which include taking and editing photographs, taping, editing, and storytelling with video and audio, and writing scripts. Must have experience in the use of video and audio for the Internet, and social media marketing and promotion. Strong graphic design skills required.

·         Ability to juggle competing projects and shift priorities quickly.

·         Demonstrated ability to facilitate and maintain relationships with influential media outlets and players.

Please submit your resume and letter of interest to Expand HR Consulting, the organization’s Human Resources Consulting Firm, at jobs@expandhr.com. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is proud to be an equal opportunity employer.

NOTES:
Local Residents Preferred (No Relo)

Requirements

·         Bachelors degree or equivalent in communications or public relations background desired. 5-7 years of progressively responsible experience in a similar position performing communications responsibilities. Non profit experience strongly preferred.

·         Excellent communication (both verbal and written) skills.

·         Must have experience in planning and implementing media campaigns.    

·         Must have news-style professional photography, broadcasting, and videography skills, which include taking and editing photographs, taping, editing, and storytelling with video and audio, and writing scripts. Must have experience in the use of video and audio for the Internet, and social media marketing and promotion. Strong graphic design skills required.

·         Ability to juggle competing projects and shift priorities quickly.

·         Demonstrated ability to facilitate and maintain relationships with influential media outlets and players

Once their new person comes on board and begins to “facilitate and maintain relationships with influential media outlets and players” I think one of the first set of people they need to meet is the gun blogger community. I plan to invited him or her to Boomershoot 2011 (there should be at least 10 bloggers there this year) and I’m pretty sure I could get them an invitation the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in Reno too.

As Winston Churchill said, “When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite.” I have no intention of causing anyone physical injury but I don’t see any harm in being polite as we declare “war”. And after meeting us they might just surrender on the spot and join the winning team.

Update: After an email discussion with Sebastian I went looking for the previous person in this position—Doug Pennington. I found him at the Constitutional Accountability Center. I find it interesting that the CAC filed a brief in the McDonald case supporting incorporation of the Second Amendment under the Privileges or Immunities clause. It’s almost as if Pennington came over to our side of the issue. I would like to think that I helped convince him of the righteous of our cause but that is probably just wistful thinking.

Get involved in Florida

Robb is requesting your help. Getting involved is how we make a political difference.

The fallacy of magazine capacity limitations

This is my response to the Brady Campaign saying, “In Tucson, the shooter fired 32 bullets in only 16 seconds.” I shoot 35 rounds in less than 16 seconds and clear a malfunction with 10 rounds magazines:

What they propose is at best a minor hindrance to criminals. But it is potentially lethal to people attempting to use a gun for legitimate self-defense.

Quote of the day—Plato

False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.

Plato
[The Brady Campaign and other anti-gun ownership advocates would do well to keep this in mind. What they think of lies of necessity destroy their integrity, believability, and ultimately harm innocent life.—Joe]

Inception

I watched the movie the other night.  It’s silly in a lot of ways, but it is interesting, not least because I once woke up from a dream after I realized I was dreaming, but it then turned out I was still dreaming.  I “awoke” right where I should be– right there on the couch where I’d fallen asleep, looked around, and got up.  “Wow, that was a weird dream” I thought.  What tipped me off was that I started floating up from the floor after I got up to go to the bathroom.  That’s a dead giveaway right there, see.  I could identify with the story in a way.  But this post isn’t about that.


An inception the way it was used in the movie, is the seed of an idea that, once it’s planted, cannot be stopped.  It sprouts, takes root, grows and eventually bears fruit.


I remember quite clearly an inception experience I had during my dark days of believing in leftist garbage.  I had what I’ve since referred to as the “Default Mentality”.  It was natural.  Everyone had it.  It was just the way things were.  School teachers, professors, friends, the talking heads on NPR and PBS– everyone thought that way but for a few idiots dredged up and brought in just to make the discussion more interesting and prove to us that we were the smart ones.  I was listening to a crazy, extremist right wing talk show (to see just how stupid it was, and gloat over it) and one of the callers gave his definition of a “liberal”; “The kind of person who will give you the shirt off of someone else’s back.”  I could not refute that.  Hmm.  That set the snowball in motion, though it had already been building on top of the hill by that time.


There was another one that happened long before.  A girl (yes, girl– we were in our tweens) I was dating just set it out there all by itself; “About the only things the federal government should be doing are commanding the military and maintaining the interstates.”  I guffawed, naturally, and she let it be, but that inception of an idea never left me.  Now I question why they should be involved in the interstates (if we need some way to get around, we’ll come up with the solution without being forced by someone else).  Obviously she was a Progressive.


The left has used seed planting for generations.  It’s why they’ve always used “rights” to describe coercive redistribution, “regulation” to describe coercive restrictions, “democracy” as though it is synonymous with freedom, “hope and change” to describe communist revolution, and so on, redefining all the important words and concepts.  Just the misuse of one little word– one single word over here, another little word slipped in over there while you weren’t paying attention, to reverse the meaning of life itself.  Eventually the students are rioting in the streets and taking over the campus, and the Jonestown inhabitants are all dead– men, women and children.  The untimate in “shared sacrifice”.  Why, don’t the good Christians believe in sharing?  Don’t they believe in sacrifice?  Of course they do.  Shared sacrifice can be wonderful.  But see how it was turned around into something ghastly.


We have it much better though, because we have reality on our side.  My challenge to you who advocate the American Principles of Liberty is to plant seeds of your own.  It’s very easy.  Seeds are very small, light, and very compact.  Here’s one that I think just qualifies;


Gun restrictions are not only an affront to the ideal of liberty; they are counterproductive in practice.


Simpler yet; substitute “gun restrictions” with “prohibitions”.  Same thing, you see, but it’s a bit lighter.


Redistribution and restriction do not equal freedom.


Freedom means one thing– the protection of rights.


It isn’t a right if it demands something of someone else.


You know? People, when left alone, are capable of some really cool things…


Try to take it from there if you like.  This is somewhat new to me, and I’m sure others can do better at it.  There are perhaps thousands of them you could come up with– Simple, very small, resilient ideas that can sit around until the conditions are right.  Find some soil and plant them.  Scatter them to the wind and they’ll sprout if they find the right conditions.  Too often we’re tempted to try to convert someone with a protracted back and forth argument until we’re out of breath.  If the conditions for that little seed aren’t right, don’t flood it with more and more water and wash it away.  Just plant it and let it sit there.  You don’t pound seeds into the ground.  You just sort of drop them there, and wait.  When things warm up after the snow melts, when the next rain comes in springtime, they will germinate.

Quote of the day—Dave Workman

Yesterday’s announcement that Seattle-based Starbucks’ fourth-quarter 2010 earnings were up again – as reported in this morning’s Seattle Times – is evidently driving gun prohibitionists nuts.

Why else would Chicago-based anti-gunner Elliot N. Fineman make the absolutely crazy public demand that Starbucks donate $10 million annually to the gun prohibition lobby and change its policy of catering to legally-armed private citizens? Fineman, like the Brady Campaign and Washington CeaseFire before him, is promoting a boycott of Starbucks until the coffee giant hands over the money.

This sounds an awful lot like blackmail. Some might suggest it borders on racketeering.

…the bottom line to this argument is Starbucks’ bottom line. That has looked much better in a down economy ever since the anti-gun-rights lobby tried to intimidate the company with its campaign of political thuggery.

Dave Workman
January 27, 2011
Time for a hard January lesson in economics, public sentiment, common sense
[I guess that “buycott” by gun owners is working out okay for Starbucks.—Joe]

No surprise

The new (anti-) gun blogger (Baldr Odinson at New Trajectory) on the block is running a poll to “gauge the philosophy of visitors to New Trajectory”.


When I last looked at the poll results the voting was 70 to 3 (95% to 5%) “very much against stricter gun legislation” versus “very much for stricter gun legislation”.


This is consistent with the impressions of nearly everyone I have talked to and read on the blogs. About the only people listening to the anti-gun message are gun rights activists. If it weren’t for the traffic we give them they wouldn’t have any traffic worth talking about. Any one of the top 10 or 20 gun bloggers has more traffic than all the anti-gun bloggers combined.


Online life for them must feel a lot like showing up alone at a NAACP convention dressed in their whitest sheets and pillow cases—as it well should.

Quote of the day—Brady Campaign

In Tucson, the shooter fired 32 bullets in only 16 seconds.

Brady Campaign
Web site as of February 9, 2011. Screen capture of the image is here.
[I find it interesting that the Brady Campaign thinks this is a source of concern that needs legislative action. What are they going to do when I demonstrate I can fire that many rounds or more in that same time while switching magazines after every 10 rounds?

I think tomorrow after work will be a good time to visit the range with my video glasses again.

Are they going to legislate against my trigger finger? Yeah, that’s it, I have an “assault finger” they need to ban the possession of.

If they want a finger I’ll give them a finger. They won’t even have to get the legislation passed before I give it to them.—Joe]

Lying to win

Deception and twisting the facts are all they have left so they continue to use what they have:

The legal argument being used to try to force EPA to ban lead ammunition and fishing tackle is based on a nonsensical interpretation of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which includes a specific exclusion for ammunition.  TSCA, section 3(2)(B)(v)) precludes the EPA from regulating ammunition.  But, CBD wants a court to hold that the TSCA ammunition exclusion does not apply to bullets and shot, because neither bullets nor shot are actually “ammunition” (i.e., a shell, primer, and projectile, etc., in one cartridge or unit). CBD’s argument is founded on an inapplicable interpretation of a tax ruling issued by the IRS in 1954 that distinguished the sale of “separate parts of ammunition” and complete ammunition for taxation purposes only.

It was this sort of behavior from Handgun Control, now the Brady Campaign, that first convinced me the gun grabbers needed to be opposed and I started down the path to being a gun owner rights activist. Ruby Ridge, Waco, and, as I have explained before, Diane Feinstein helped bring the world Boomershoot.

It odd how the unintended consequences of a few relatively small lies can change the world isn’t it? Some people become activists because of a malicious act by someone with mental problems (the Brady’s for example) and others become activists against them because they lied. Others report similar stories.

I’ve heard people say, “Karma is a bitch” and this could be an example of that. Each year about 125 people acquire equipment and skills then attend Boomershoot to exercise those skills to hit pie-plate sized targets at 700 yards. This is more people than the Brady Campaign can get to attend their annual meeting.

Sebastian also has thoughts on what activates activists.

Head in the vault?

I realize I’m far better informed on the state of gun laws than the average gun owner but it appears this guy has had his head locked in the bank vault for the last couple of years:

“Ownership should be earned. It’s a privilege,” said Dickson, vice president and branch manager at Stamford First Bank. “Anybody can easily buy an automatic assault weapon. There should be required training and extensive background checks before people are allowed to own a gun.”

The specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms is a privilege? How could any gun owner of not heard of the Heller decision? Anybody can easily buy an automatic assault weapon? That’s not been true since 1934 and since 1986 it has become significantly more difficult.

Someone needs to find the keys to safe deposit box where Dickson keeps his brain.

Quote of the day—Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Why is Mayor Bloomberg concerned about law enforcement in my county? Maybe I should send undercover deputies to New York.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio
January 31, 2011
[I think I might like that. Go Joe!—Joe]

JPFO on GCA68

Another one from my archives. The following reprint of an article from the May 1993 issue of Gun & Ammo came in a packet from JPFO with a postmark date of April 22, 1996. I don’t know when I purchased the book, ”Gun Control” Gateway to Tyranny, but it was probably about the same time. A scan of the cover of my copy follows the article reprint.

I was quite thrilled with JPFO. They could say things as a Jewish organization that I couldn’t. I was disappointed that the JPFO work which documented the derivation of the U.S. Gun Control Act of 1968 from the German Weapons Control Act of 1938 never gained significant traction. Had a law been derived from Nazi law and aimed at U.S. Jews and/or blacks instead of U.S. gun owners I think it would have. But even though we are singled out for special protection in the Bill of Rights for some reason to most people that just doesn’t matter. It’s okay to discriminate against and restrict the rights of gun owners. That the Nazis did it too and it enabled the Holocaust just didn’t seem to matter.

This gains additional importance now because the “sporting purpose” clause of GCA68 came directly Nazi Germany and is the basis for some of our current pain. It’s time we did away with all “sporting purpose” requirements. See also an interview with John Frazer, Director of NRA-ILA’s Research and Information Division for more history on the “sporting purpose” clause.

It was sometime in early 1999 that I talked to JPFO founder Aaron Zelman for several minutes about the gun politics in Washington state. I had some concerns about a startup gun rights organization that appeared to have some anti-Semitic leaning and his organization had some roundabout connections to it and I suggested he investigate before getting more closely involved. He listened and asked a lot of question about other organizations and I think we both learned a lot. I was quite saddened to learn he died last December.

Click on the pictures below to enlarge them to more readable size.

JPFOGCA68_1

JPFOGCA68_2

JPFOGCA68_3

JPFOGCA68_4

GunControlGatewayToTyranny

Quote of the day—Ann Coulter

When there are no armed citizens to stop mass murderers, the killers are able to shoot unabated, even pausing to reload their weapons, until they get bored and stop. Some stop only when their trigger fingers develop carpal tunnel syndrome.

Ann Coulter
February 2, 2011
What Liberals Don’t Know About Guns, Chapter 217
[Via Linoge.

Another way to think about it is to ask the anti-gun person, “In an active shooter situation would you require the police go in without a gun? If not then why do you require the potential victims to be disarmed?”—Joe]

No one needs a magazine of bullets

Deb McMahon is exploring new depths of ignorance in regards to firearms:



The truth is that no citizen needs to have a magazine of bullets that can kill, maim and critically injure others.


The type of massacre that occurred in Arizona should never be repeated. I find it unconscionable that intelligent people would defend this kind of ammunition. There is a difference between responsible gun ownership and just giving carte blanche to anyone and everyone.


The NRA talks about hunters’ gun rights on its website. Hunters do not need a magazine of bullets to enjoy their sport.


I find it interesting that even though taken as a whole her writing is disjointed and nearly nonsensical each sentence taken by itself and out of context of the Tucson shooting comes pretty close to being intelligible. It’s as if her mind cannot span more than a dozen words and one concept at a time.


And I wonder why she thinks people have trouble distinguishing between responsible gun ownership and giving beer to anyone and everyone.

Where are the knife control groups?

We had an attempted assassination of a U.S. political leader with a gun and one month later a Google News search for his name yields almost 8000 hits and a Bing News search gets you 21700 hits.

We had an attempted assassination of a U.S. political leader by a radical leftist with a knife and five months later a Google News search for his name yields two hits and a Bing News search gets you six hits. And most of those hits are people asking why the MSM didn’t give it the attention given the attempted assassination using a gun.

We didn’t even have knife control groups demanding new laws. You would think that at least the Violence Policy Center would be interested in “knife violence” since there name is more generic and not specific to firearms. Yet, a search of their website yields zero hits.

Why was it that the MSM and the “violence prevention” groups were so silent in the attempted assassination of a state Governor with a knife? Is it because no one died? Or maybe it was because there was only one victim. Could it be because the attacker was someone with clearly leftist views instead of someone (wrongly) suspected of being associated with the right? Or was it because it was a knife instead of a gun?

Quote of the day—John Lott

With multiple mistakes per article, the New York Times would never want to compare its error rate to the rate of mistakes by permit holders. But then these biases are so obvious and over the top that accuracy really doesn’t seem to be their goal.

John Lott
February 4, 2011
Another Mistake in The New York Times
[Excellent point.—Joe]

Gun owners as rabid dogs

What if someone were to express their concerns about allowing blacks their freedom after some crime committed by a gang of young black men in this fashion?

In the debate over gun control, a key issue is being ignored. Instead of emphasizing personal liberties, we should be talking about protecting public health and safety.

In many other arenas we limit individual freedom to protect the lives of others. When someone has a highly communicable disease, she or he is quarantined. Even dogs with rabies are isolated to prevent transmission. You wouldn’t want a person infected with Ebola virus walking the streets and kissing your children. We also limit the use, and particularly the sale, of dangerous and addicting drugs.

…

It is the potential victims whose lives we should focus on protecting. Putting modest limits on types of weapons and who can own them is a small price to pay for enhanced safety and security.

Comparing gun owners to rabid dogs should not be any more acceptable than comparing Jews, blacks, or homosexuals to them. Yet somehow it is acceptable in this country.

Those who have not experienced life in the absence of personal liberties should not advocate the rejection of those liberties without first consulting those who have.

I’m reminded of what William Pitt the younger said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”