VPC stops by to visit

Nice of them to stop by.

Domain Name   e-nt.net ? (Network)
IP Address   66.7.41.# (Violence Policy Center)
ISP   eLink Communications
Location  
Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9068, -77.0427 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinXP
Browser   Internet Explorer 7.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  

Resolution  :  1024 x 768
Color Depth  :  32 bits

Time of Visit   Sep 24 2007 2:34:51 pm
Last Page View   Sep 24 2007 2:41:17 pm
Visit Length   6 minutes 26 seconds
Page Views   3
Referring URL http://blogsearch.go… Center%22&scoring=d
Search Engine blogsearch.google.com
Search Words “violence policy center”
Visit Entry Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2007/09/20/quote-of-the-day-cam-edwards/
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/10/
Out Click   What A Tangled Web They Weave
http://www.camedwards.com/2007/09/19/what-a-tangled-web-they-weave/
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Sep 24 2007 5:34:51 pm
Visit Number   194,160

Since I now that I know their IP address I also went looking through old log files for them. They visited in March after doing a blog search for “Josh Sugarman”. Then they were here a couple times in August looking for stuff about Larry Craig. For more details see: VPCVisits.xls (28 KB)

Steel match pictures


Joe (a different Joe) ROs Don as he blasts through a stage. Yes, Joe’s shirt says “INFIDEL” on the back (and the front).


That’s Adam with the “air gun” practicing for the next stage.

 
As I mentioned in the QOD yesterday Xenia’s boyfriend John went with me to the match.

 
Michelle and Adam as he ROs while she shoots a few rounds.

We also had an anthropology grad student, Michelle, from Washington State University show up. I asked if she knew “Joan”, an anthropologist from WSU who has studied the gun culture. She claims to not know Joan Burbick (and here and here). Michelle has only been in town for a few weeks having just arrived from Iowa. She also said she is a Evolutionary Anthropologist while Joan is probably a Cultural Anthropologist which means they wouldn’t be as likely to meet each other. Since I was wrong about Joan being an anthropologist it’s quite believable.

We managed to talk her into shooting a little bit. She also claims to have only fired one gun on one occasion. Had it not been for her poor posture while shooting I, and probably everyone else, would not have believed her. In her first six shots I think she only had one miss. She did amazingly well for a completely new shooter. She emptied two magazines out of two different guns and didn’t develop a flinch which is quite common with new shooters with a fairly large caliber handgun.

I spent several minutes talking to her and answering questions. The questions had some anti-gun bias and I finally asked what her sort of opinion she had on guns. She said as anthropological observer she was not allowed to have an opinion.

Quote of the day–Joan Burbick

People in a society find ways to avoid conflict, and instead they find substitutes for it. I think the gun has become one of those substitutes.

Instead of addressing the root causes of the inequalities in our society, such as the limits of access to education, jobs, housing, the legal system etc., we invent or come up with crime scenarios. The gun becomes the substitute way to solve conflict in the United States, and the biggest conflict of all is crime.

So that’s how I view it as a political fetish — that it’s a substitution. This is a moment in the United States when access to political power is, I think, limited to a class of professional politicians and lobbyists. And the act of buying a gun can mimic political action. It makes people feel as if they are engaging in politics of political protest.

I’ll give an example of how I think guns have political meaning. One of my old friends who is an ex-Vietnam vet, a Navy pilot, said to me one night, “Whenever I get mad at the government, I go out and buy a gun.” And to me, that’s a form of mimicking political action. One is left only with a gun in one’s closet. One has not changed or affected the government at all. In that way, I see it as a fetish, a substitute.

Joan Burbick
October 16, 2006
Joan Burbick’s ‘Gun Show Nation’ Explains How the “Gun Rights” Movement is a White Male Political Power Play
[Just so you know what they think of you.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Greg Hamilton

If fact the whole culture of certain units is competition. They shoot “matches” quals, standards, stages, etc all the time. In that world everything is graded and the results posted for all to see.

These guys could be very good competition shooters, instead they are very good at killing our enemies.

Greg Hamilton
September 18, 2007 8:34 PM
[Greg teaches military, law enforcement, and private citizens how to shoot. He is very, very good. Not just at shooting but at teaching, thinking, understanding what he is doing, and explaining it.

On a related note–Xenia’s boyfriend just came back from “playing in the sandbox”. He went to a steel match with me today. His shooting has improved considerably since the last time we went to the range together. I still did better than he did, but he did make me proud. I should have some pictures up soon.–Joe]

Machine gun interest

I never was one who was interested in fast or flashy cars. Vehicles, to me, are a means to transport people and things from point A to point B. I once had a long series of conversations with this guy named Walter about cars and women. He figured that a nice car was essential to finding a nice woman. He drove a Mercedes when I first met him. Then it was some sort of flashy looking muscle car. I forget the make and model. I just don’t pay attention to that sort of thing. Then after he hit it big he bought a brand new, bright red, Ferrari. Within a day or so after buying it he came over to my place to show it off. “That’s nice Walter.” I just wasn’t interested. And when we went for a ride I couldn’t sit up straight. It was extremely uncomfortable for me. I just can’t see the point. The only way I could see getting something that “over the top” is if it were REALLY over the top. If it could spread wings and fly at 300 MPH then I could see the appeal. But to be merely 50% faster than an ordinary car just seems pointless to me.

I feel the same way about machine guns. I just don’t get the appeal. I’ve shot them a few times. And sure, they put a lot of lead down range in a short period of time but so what? I can put more pieces of lead on target with a semi-auto in any realistic situation that I can imagine myself being in. There isn’t even someone like Walter who could plausibly argue that machine guns will attract the babes–so what is the appeal? I really don’t get it.

That said, I just saw the analog in the machine gun world of the car that can spread wings and fly at 300 MPH.

I told Barb this is what I want for Christmas:

Video: VIP Protection Tool

P.S. After a decade of faster and faster, flasher and flasher cars Walter eventually did find a woman that would marry him. Barb and I always figured it would be a gold-digger that took him for a ride since that seemed to be what he was advertising for. But the reports I got back (he is on my “every time I see his face I involuntarily start to draw my gun” list now) is that she appeared to be an alcoholic instead.

Quote of the day–John Gilmore

We have to realize that people who run the government can and do change.  Our society and laws must assume that bad people – criminals even – will run the government, at least part of the time.

John Gilmore
A transcript of remarks given at the First Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, March 28,1991
[Gilmore’s primary concern is privacy. He is a big name in the opposition to a national ID card, unreasonable search and seizure, etc. But the justification for that concern, as stated above, is also applicable to being opposed to restrictions on firearms.–Joe]

Bigoted Moscow Idaho Mayor is told by AG to back off

Just today I received a copy of the letter the Idaho Attorney General sent to the Moscow City Attorney.

If you recall our Mayor wanted to ban guns in public places. The AG told her in legalize via the Moscow City Attorney to not even try going there.

I wish he had warned she was dangerously close to committing a felony but that is expecting too much even for Idaho in today’s political climate. We need to work on that for a few more years first.

Robyn Ringler stopped by again

Domain Name   verizon.net ? (Network)
IP Address   68.236.146.# (Verizon)
ISP   Verizon Internet Services
Location  
Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  New York
City  :  Rexford
Lat/Long  :  42.843, -73.8583 (Map)
Distance  :  2,105 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinME
Browser   Internet Explorer 5.5
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98; Win 9x 4.90)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  

Resolution  :  800 x 600
Color Depth  :  16 bits

Time of Visit   Sep 20 2007 5:57:21 pm
Last Page View   Sep 20 2007 5:57:21 pm
Visit Length   0 seconds
Page Views   1
Referring URL http://blogs.timesun…/underfire/wp-admin/
Visit Entry Page   http://blog.joehuffm…ppedByAFewTimes.aspx
Visit Exit Page   http://blog.joehuffm…ppedByAFewTimes.aspx
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Sep 20 2007 8:57:21 pm
Visit Number   193,023

 Previous visits were documented here.

Just So We’re All On The Same Page…

…regarding the police chiefs out there (who, we are told, have come out against the Second Amendment): Every law enforcement officer is required to take an Oath, affirming said officer’s commitment to the Constitution of the United States.  Here is one example taken at random.  I’m sure you can find many others:

“I swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland and support the Constitution and laws thereof; and that I will, to the best of my skill and judgment diligently and faithfully, without partiality or prejudice, execute the office of police officer according to the Constitution and laws of this State.”

Notice the first clause– support for the U.S. Constitution.  Taking an Oath not only suggests or recommends, but it requires individual judgment and individual commitment to the U.S. Constitution when deciding to follow a particular order or enforce a particular law.  It requires, in this case, that the sworn individual understand the Constitutionality of an action before taking that action.  Why else take the damned Oath?

The Nuremburg defense doesn’t cut it here.

On the matter of law enforcement officers who have taken the Oath, and who then actively lobby against our Constitutionally protected civil liberties:  Words fail me at the moment, but I’m envisioning a physician who takes the Hippocratic Oath and sets out thereafter to murder his patients.

To you chiefs of police out there who are on the fence:  Be reminded that some of us actually take our civil liberties seriously.  Just sayin’.

Update 09/21/07:  Another reminder for our friends in law enforcement (and to law makers as well).  I use this example only because it is so well known, though there are plenty of other examples: In early 1942 there were a whole lot of German officers and government agents who were as cock-sure of themselves as anyone could be.  Their degree of swagger was quite an impressive sight to behold.  Only a few years later however, many of them were fugitives from justice, while others were swinging from ropes (things can change in short order, and being on the right side of Liberty is good insurance).  As Joe points out in comments, there is this little thingy we call 18 USC 242.  Not that it would be needed as the Constitution already spells out the law in plain English, but here we have teeth, out in front of the brain, as it were.

Quote of the day–Cam Edwards

This is an anti-gun report bought and paid for by an anti-gun foundation, assembled by anti-gunners from the Joyce Foundation, Harvard, and the Violence Policy Center. I’ve seen more serious studies written by Carrot Top and Larry the Cable Guy.

[…]

They’re officially parodies of themselves.

Cam Edwards
September 19, 2007
What A Tangled Web They Weave
[Yup. See also what Uncle has to say about it.–Joe]

Gun porn

Son James and I watch DVDs of some Science Fiction TV series together nearly every Monday evening. Until we got all caught up with the releases we were watching four episodes of Stargate SG-1 each get together.

About three weeks ago Sean and I checked out a gun store that he had never been to and I had only been to once about 18 months ago. The wall looked like this:

James has been saying he needs to buy a gun. And right there, in plain sight, was a suppressed PS-90 TR (Triple Rail, semi-auto version of the P-90 used by SG-1 as they battle evil aliens from all over the galaxy). I tried to get James to buy it with his bonus money but he was too smart for that. It’s space-a-roma (I think that was the word Sean used) appeal is very high but neither James nor I have a use for one.

Quote of the day–Mac Johnson

The Founding Fathers systematically democratized the powers of society through the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They democratized the power of law through the right to vote. They democratized the power of wealth through the right to private property (since repealed by environmentalists and courts). They democratized the power of ideas through the right to free speech (since repealed by McCain/Feingold). And they democratized the power of violence (or the capability to commit it) through the right to bear arms (since repealed by “gun control”).

The four great powers of man: law, money, thought and violence were thus divided among the people and not reserved exclusively to the connected, the rich, the approved, and the enlisted. That’s the basis of our Republic. That’s America. And that is, apparently, a total surprise to liberals. 

Mac Johnson
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other ‘Rights’ May Soon be Found
March 15, 2007
[Liberals just got pwn’d in this very case. The D.C. lawyers messed up and the lawyers for the good guys just nailed their scrotums to the wall.–Joe]

A nice pointer from the Gun Guys

For once I can actually thank the Gun Guys for doing something useful. They pointed me at this video. Nice. Thanks Gun Guys.

Of course they call it ridiculous. But hey, what do you expect from him?

I still have the sneaking suspicion this guy is working for our side and collecting money from the bad guys. Nice gig if you can get it and aren’t encumbered by little things like morals and principles.

Bumper stickers for gunnies

Reader Rob pointed these out to me.

Setting aside the ones that appeal to my sick sense of humor and the one that would piss off my vegetarian daughter I think the pro-choice one is my favorite.

Quote of the day–Ginny Burdick

It’s just ludicrous to allow guns in schools under any circumstances. There are regular common-sense gun owners who overwhelmingly want the local school board to at least be able to make their own decision on this at the local level. Most of the parents I talked to had no idea, and they were horrified when they found out it was possible to bring a gun to school. . . . Johnny’s parents don’t want his first-grade teachers packing heat.

Ginny Burdick
Oregon State Senator
D-Portland
September 11, 2007
Teacher demands to carry gun in school
[Oh really? ANY circumstances? How about when some nut case or (redundancy alert) religious fanatic is shooting up the school? Should the cops leave their guns at the station when they come out to put a stop to it? If no, then why shouldn’t the teachers put a stop to it even sooner? And how about this teacher who has a nut case ex-husband? If she is a teacher then she doesn’t deserve to be able to defend herself? And it’s particularly noteworthy that she appeals to “common-sense”–because there is no factual data to support her conclusions. If she lived in the deep south 40 years ago she would be appealing to the “common-sense” laws prohibiting blacks to use the same water fountain with whites. It’s typical that she claims she is an advocate for “gun safety legislation”. I’ll bet she has never taught or even attended a gun safety class yet wants to legislate on the issue. In conclusion, not everyone is a bigot or has mental problems like Ms. Burdick. Some people want teachers to be able to protect themselves and their students. That is the real “common-sense” which should be adhered to.–Joe]

Robyn Ringler stopped by a few times

I knew Ms. Ringler was stopping by for a visit every once in a while. I had some time tonight to explore in greater detail her visits. I put the results in an Excel spreadsheet to easier share it with you: RobynRinglerVisits.xls (36 KB)

When I wrote my Sympathy for Robyn Ringler post I actually knew a little more than I let on. I knew that she had seen my post where I called her and her ilk bigots. I also knew she was visiting Kevin’s blog at least occasionally too (it’s all in the spreadsheet).

After my “sympathy” post she came by to read it less than 36 hours later (as well as visiting Uncle after he poked her with a stick). Ride Fast had his hope realized in less than 19 hours.

Bigots really don’t like to be made fun of. Frequently part of the reason they are bigots is because they are unsure of themselves and feel threatened. They need to bring someone else down in order to make themselves feel powerful. This may particularly apply to anti-gun bigots because we already scare them just because we own guns. As explained by my formerly liberal friend Mike:

Back in the days when I was very anti-gun, I tended to think of “gun nuts” as drooling, knuckle-dragging morons. Cavemen. Uneducated. Beer-drinking slobs who could barely read and who probably beat up their wives a lot. Maybe they were even all closet Nazis, eh? Etc., etc., etc. It was an image that came instantly to mind. I would talk about “gun nuts” that same way with friends of like mind. It all made such perfect sense to us.

But if ever I came across a “gun nut” in person I would be silent — especially if it was someone dressed in, say, hunting cammos. Or I might see “gun nuts” on TV and make a snide comment about them, but seeing them made me feel a bit afraid (something I didn’t reveal to other people). It wasn’t rational, but it wasn’t surprising considering how I’d been raised. It wasn’t until a long time later that I realized what I’d been doing: trying to make the “gun nuts” almost into sub-humans in my mind, and paint them as ridiculous and stupid so that they shrank in stature and were less scary to me. (But as I said, this doesn’t work. No amount of sneering made me feel less afraid.)

Pointing out their total lack of factual knowledge on the subject has got to be very painful for them. For them to think of us as knuckle-draggers and then have their intellectual lunch handed to them probably will do nothing to change their minds. But what it does do in this new democracy is make them back off the topic. I believe that having them avoid the topic is the best we can hope for. When they have such a poor self-esteem and they have taken a very public stance on the issue it is simply beyond their ability to admit they are wrong. You wouldn’t expect a Klansman to admit they were wrong would you?

The best you can hope for is for them to back down. So let’s take our victory over this bigot and continue on to the next one. Conversions are too difficult, just intellectually shame them into silence and mock them as we roll on past.

Ms. Ringler, if you stop by again to read this there is something I want you to know and understand. From Clayton Cramer:

Still, her announcement that she was going to stop allowing comments doesn’t particularly upset or surprise me–this is a common response of gun control advocates, who soon discover that we knuckle-dragging Neanderthals don’t just outnumber them, but we’re smarter than they are–way smarter.

That and if you ever change your mind about guns and gun ownership I’ll give you free NRA Certified training, a free position at Boomershoot, and I’ll never bring up your ugly past again.

Quote of the day–John Crook

Shooter groups, like the Sporting Shooters Association, who want to break our gun laws; take away gun registration; take away limits on hand guns; are in my opinion the most anti-social and dangerous type of groups that Australia has recently seen outside of course of certain criminal drug-related gangs.

John Crook
Gun Control Australia’s president
http://ssaasa.org.au/alerts2.htm
[Just so you know what they really think of you.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Anonymous

Handguns should be banned because they can kill quickly and from a long distance giving victims little chance to escape. If they use knives or any other weapon then the victims can escape.

We should be tightening our borders to ensure no one can bring any guns across the border and maybe lobby the Americans for a gun ban (too bad Americans to believe in this) or else energy exports are reduced.

rewrite the safe schools act to determine which disipline method is needed on a case-by-case basis (i.e instead of expulsion, we should try mental health programs)

Some police presence near schools can be helpful but can’t be everywhere at once.

I DONT WANT TO SEE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS REMARK.

September 9, 2007
Comment in response to Gun ban needed, not school metal detectors: McGuinty 
[signed] “Vote NDP in the next federal/provincial election from Toronto, Canada”
[Heavy sigh. See also yesterday’s QOTD. Keep in mind this article was, in part, about a high school student who was fatally stabbed. Apparently victims can’t always escape. Or else it is a nuance available only to the liberal mind which, of course, escapes a red-necked, knuckle dragging, Neanderthal like me. I suppose it could be that someone is mocking McGuinty but I can’t quite convince myself that is the case.–Joe]

Public servants

Does it ever strike you as odd that some of our servants demand that they have a monopoly on certain types of weapons?

I keep thinking that they must have either forgotten they are servants or intend to change the relationship.

Make a difference on gun ownership views in the U.K.

I have been in contact with Alice (Catherine has taken over) at Firecracker Films in the context of Boomershoot. My family is not that good of a match because Alice Catherine wants children aged 12 and under. Does the following apply to you? This is your chance to make a difference in the British view of firearms.