Let’s ban handguns in Ontario. Let’s ban handguns across the country. Let’s declare war against handguns.
Dalton McGuinty
Ontario Liberal Leader
September 12, 2007
Gun ban needed, not school metal detectors: McGuinty
Responding to concerns after a student had been stabbed to death at a Toronto High School.
[Via Phil. Many of the comments to the article are just as nonsensical. These people have mental problems.–Joe]
The anti-freedom bigots have pushed things so far that people don’t have a clue of where “the middle” is. Example:
What the two sides don’t acknowledge is that reasonable people can oppose civilian ownership of machine guns or .50-caliber rifles so powerful they must be shot using a tripod while still supporting hunting and owning guns for self-defense. Americans can support background checks on guns sold everywhere – not just by licensed dealers – without putting gun companies out of business. The United States can require registration of guns and proficiency tests for gun owners, just as we do with cars, without making it impossible, or even difficult, for law-abiding citizens to buy guns.
The name-calling and breath-holding have made us all forget that a middle ground is possible.
I have long had a hot-button about people that want to be in “the middle” and those who create the perception of “the middle”. People, in general, don’t want to be considered extremists or even a short distance from what they perceive as “the center”. Most people are comfortable only when they are with the majority and when the perception of “the center” moves they tend to move with it. “Wimps” doesn’t begin to express my disgust for people like this who decline and/or refuse to think for themselves.
That aside as a inalterable trait of human nature we now must deal with it and perhaps use it to our advantage.
Perception of “the center” is created in at least three ways:
The anti-freedom bigots label the NRA as “an extremist” organization and claim they are advocates for “reasonable measures”. Check and check on points one and two. The NRA has, in essence, abandoned class three devices and agreed with the NICS background check. Check on point three. This makes it difficult for us to make progress in repealing oppressive gun laws due to the majority of people who believe “the middle” is somewhere close to the current state of our laws.
This “middle ground” mentality and the desire to stake out a more “extreme position” was an additional motivating factor for me to create Boomershoot. By being an advocate for long range precision rifles and recreational explosives I enable others to feel more comfortable with less “extreme” positions. I push as an “extreme” advocate for freedom to make it more comfortable for others to move in my direction.
But what is really missing in the debate is an identification of where the real extremes are.
Obviously one extreme is a complete ban on firearm ownership with a death penalty for even the slightest infraction for possession of a firearm or any component of a firearm or, plans, documents, or materials with the intent to make a firearm or component of a firearm.
So what is the other extreme?
The anti-freedom bigots would have us believe it’s allowing people to carry concealed firearms or teaching children or young adults how to shoot. But with only a small amount of thought most people will realize this isn’t all that extreme. It’s just that that position has been labeled as extreme.
How about the GOA who claim they are a “no-compromise gun lobby” and who want our gun rights back? Surely they are staking out the extremist position, right?
Wrong. Very, very wrong.
Part of the other extremist position would be where firearms ownership, training, practice, and continuous (24 by 7 with no exceptions) possession of a loaded firearm is mandatory for everyone. The other part of this extremist position would be when government funds are used to accomplish those goals and it’s a death penalty offense for anyone who attempted to avoid or change these requirements.
With those definitions of extremism the “the middle ground” should be pretty clear–“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Not infringed in the slightest. No law that places any restriction or ownership requirement on anyone. That is the true “middle ground”.
There are so many ways to game this technology, that’s the difficulty. This is not ready for prime time.
Rick Keene
September 11, 2007
Assemblyman, R-Chico.
Handgun stamping bill sent to governor–Spent shell casings would be imprinted
[Yup. Advocates of this are either exceedingly simple minded and/or just want to increase the difficultly of gun ownership.–Joe]
My “triangle of death” post was one of the most linked to posts I have ever made. Now, via Uncle, we find out you can buy your own Triangle of Death clothing, cups, and stickers.
It was amazing seeing something that was used for so much violence, hurt and destruction, to watch its power being taken away. This really hits so close to home.
Melanie C. Brandon
Fashion statement for gun control Designer Melanie C. Brandon has made jewelry from a machine gun and pistols seized in Phila. and melted down.
[Her tag-line: “With each piece made, another gun is taken off the street.” It must be like some sort of primitive religion that believes spirits inhabit inanimate objects. The “power” is in the gun. Maybe an exorcism ritual would just as well. Or if it’s not evil spirits inhabiting the gun then maybe it’s the shape of the piece of metal. Do wearing crosses or some other shape of metal ward off evil spirits? Maybe putting smiley faces on the guns would make them acceptable. Whatever it is, it’s not about the facts of gun ownership.–Joe]
There has been quite a bit of talk about Ms. Ringler, the anti-rights activist, recently:
Mostly because of the Enough is Enough post by Ringler. If it is really true as she reports, “I’ve been told I should be dead and how my death should take place.” then I have some sympathy for her on that one point. If not directly, then almost for certain indirectly, I contributed to her feelings being hurt after being called a bigot.
I debated with myself how to write this post which is part of why I am so behind the curve on the topic. I considered doing an Alex St. John type “apology” (read the book) which resulted in his immediate termination of employment at Microsoft (he knew it would and IIRC cleaned out his desk before pushing the “Send” button on the apology email). I finally decided that there was a better approach.
First a taste of the Alex St. John approach–Ms. Ringler, I’m sorry. I forgot to mention you are a felon as well as a bigot.
In one sense I really don’t like hurting other people’s feelings–especially children and women. I feel empathy for them and I’m certain others that we might like to have on our side will feel empathy toward them as well. But how much sympathy should one have for those that don’t want “colored people” eating in the same restaurant as “white folk” or drinking from the same drinking fountain, or are not allowed access to the public swimming pool because “they would have to drain and clean the pool after the blacks had used it”?
How much sympathy do you feel for a KKK or Aryan Nation type person that gets ostracized in their community for their bigotry and leaves town? Or the bully at school that finally gets caught in the act and is disciplined? Ms. Ringler, of course, does not think of herself as a bigot. I’m certain she thinks of herself as just looking out for what is best for everyone. But the KKK think the same things about themselves. Ringler hasn’t said she wants us dead or living our lives as slaves. And I’m certain she hasn’t put a pillow case over her head and burned crosses in the yards of anyone’s home. She is much more refined than that. She just wants the government to put us in jail for exercising a right constitutionally guaranteed to not be infringed (refer to numerous state constitutions if she whines that the Federal Constitution doesn’t really say that–many state constitutions are not in the least bit ambiguous). She wouldn’t want to get her own hands dirty dealing with scum like us.
This last point may be why she is turning off the comments. As one person commented maybe she doesn’t want to be associated with people like me in any way.
What we have here, in the case of Ringler, is her experiencing what I call the proper state of mind for defending the RKBA. We are just “gun niggers” in her mind and she has just realized we are going to stand up to her and Ringler is feeling the same pain as the old man in the book Negros with Guns who said (page 10):
God damn, God damn, what is this God damn country coming to that the niggers have got guns, the niggers are armed and the police can’t even arrest them!
To Ms. Ringler I say, again, I’m sorry if you received death threats or people said you should be dead. That was entirely inappropriate. The law provides for the death penalty for your type of crime only if it results in the death, kidnapping, or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill. I don’t believe you made it that far in your conspiracy against the rights of others and hence I believe the worst punishment that should be dealt to you is a fine and perhaps a few years in prison. But you don’t have any of my sympathy for having your feelings hurt. As Xavier said, “……….Oh good grief. Grow up.“
Looking up Alan’s web page for my previous post I took a look at his blog for the first time in quite a while. Not because it rarely deserves my attention but because his stuff is frequently long and I postpone reading it “until I have more time” and then that just never happens. But this post thrills me. A sample:
Gun Owners Without Borders is a proposal for a new international human rights organization.
Gun Owners Without Borders recognizes a bond between individual human beings whose right to live is challenged by their governments or other forces.
Gun Owners Without Borders supports an inalienable right of people to resist any attempts to exterminate them, regardless of the source or justification for the attempted extermination.
Current United Nations policies do not prevent genocide and democide, because a nation’s sovereignty logically comes first. Internal policies are a nation’s own business. This holds true whether the rulers are elected, appointed, inherited or in charge through force of arms.
Gun Owners Without Borders recognizes that this is perfectly understandable and a normal state of affairs under the nation-state system.
Communist China, for example, could shoot its citizens who are drug addicts, or for political reasons, or to harvest organs or to turn babies over for adoption (and they do). The U.N. and others might object, or not, but it’s not within their realm to stop such abuse. Nor could they, as a practical matter, if they were of a mind to.
Gun Owners Without Borders therefore understands it falls only to individual persons to defend their own right to their own lives if they can, even if such defense would be viewed as illegal or criminal acts by the ruling parties. Under the doctrine of state sovereignty, anyone who shoots back at an agent of the government is by definition typically an “outlaw.”
If you ever think we have the gun-rights situation in the U.S. under control and you are looking for a more challenging political environment I’m sure there will be enough work available on this planet for a generation or ten of gun-rights activists.
Uncle reports they can’t help it. It’s just a condition. Jed read the report and took away that people “become deaf to arguments of reason”.
I think it’s a fascinating insight into the human mind. And my take is different from both Uncle and Jed. My take is that we need to carefully word things to avoid reinforcing the very lies the anti-gun bigots are trying to convince people of. This is very closely related to something Alan Korwin shared via email over seven years ago. Here is just a sample of Alan’s brilliant, ahead of his time, insight:
Certain words hurt you when you’re talking about your rights. People who would deny your rights have done a good job of manipulating the language so far. Without even realizing it, you’re probably using terms that actually help the people who want to disarm you.
To preserve, protect and defend your rights in this critical debate, you need effective word choices.
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
PRO GUN
It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
PRO RIGHTS
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
GUN CONTROLIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
CRIME CONTROL
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
ANTI-GUN MOVEMENTIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
ANTI-SELF-DEFENSE MOVEMENT
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
SEMIAUTOMATIC HANDGUNIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
SIDEARM
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
CONCEALED CARRYIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
CARRY or RIGHT TO CARRY
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
ASSAULT OR LETHAL WEAPONIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
HOUSEHOLD FIREARMS
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
SATURDAY NIGHT SPECIALSIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
RACIST GUN LAWS
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
JUNK GUNSIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINESIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
FULL CAPACITY MAGAZINES
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
SECOND AMENDMENTIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
BILL OF RIGHTS
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
ANTI GUNIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
ANTI-GUN BIGOT or ANTI-GUN PREJUDICE
They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
ANTI GUNIt’s better to say (and they lose if you say):
ANTI RIGHTS
I finally stopped procrastinating and made our travel and hotel reservations for the Rendezvous. I’ll get our registration in to Mr. Completely later today.
We are flying in so that means even if the range would allow “Joe’s special recipe” for reactive targets I’d be blocked by the TSA from bringing my chemistry set.
Barb and I will arrive in Reno on Thursday morning and leave Sunday evening. I’m hoping to see the same participants as last year as well a bunch of new ones. Will you be there?
But the deeper reason behind the hysteria over the decision is that for decades the left has been able to make the Constitution into whatever it wanted. The actual words did not matter. When words — even just 27 words — mean exactly what they say, then the power to dictate law from a “living” Constitution disappears and liberals are reduced to trying to persuade people that they are right — a daunting task. When a court can decide that the 2nd Amendment must be respected, the left is on a slippery slope indeed. Who knows what amendment might be rediscovered next? Personally, I vote for the 10th. Regardless, if the trend is allowed to continue, it will be a disaster for the dictatorial left. Thus, I predict the decision will be appealed.
Mac Johnson
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other ‘Rights’ May Soon be Found
March 15, 2007
[And, as was recently reported and commented on in various places, Johnson was correct in his prediction–it was appealed.–Joe]
The Brady Bunch has a link to this video about “microstamping” on their website. They ignore obvious and important points of their critics such as:
One must assume they believe in some sort of supernatural capabilities for this technology that defies the laws of physics and human nature as we know it. But regardless of all the reasons why this scheme could never work the big thing that I noticed while watching this video was the background music–the theme from The X-Files.
If your organization was concerned with reducing violence you would assume you claim victory when violence was reduced after expending your energy to accomplish some task. But that’s not the way it works with the Violence Policy Center. They claim victory when the number of gun dealers is reduced:
The sharp drop in gun dealers is one of the most important—and little noticed—victories in the effort to reduce firearms violence in America. Fewer gun dealers reduces the potential number of sources for high-volume illegal gun trafficking.
I’m pleased to note they report Idaho still has more gun dealers than gas stations however:
America Once Had More Gun Dealers Than Gas Stations, Now Only Five States Do: Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Wyoming.
As a reminder, it was their buddy former President Bill Clinton and fellow criminals in the legislative bodies obtained an dramatic increase in the price of a Type 1 Federal Firearms License (FFL). This drove hundreds of thousands of dealers out of business and gave the VPC their “victory”.
If the VPC is going to claim victory when the number of gun dealers is reduced instead of when the rate of violence crime is reduced they really should be called the “Victimization Proliferation Conspiracy”.
On Hillary and Guns:
If a majority of the Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the District’s handgun ban, the NRA and the entire gun community will explode.
Oh, not literally–at least not necessarily.
Hillary needs to cross her fingers and hope that Breyer and Ginsburg can somehow read the 2nd amendment to the constitution as it is actually written and not how the liberals would like it to be written.
Interesting conundrum. According to this analysis if the court comes down on our side regarding the meaning of the 2nd amendment Hillary could be our next president. If we don’t end up with Hillary it will because the court ruled against us.
Sadly enough, overthrowing the government is exactly what this country needs.
[…]
As George Orwell put it in 1984 – “If there was hope, it must lie in the proles…”
dragonwolf
September 1, 2007
The New Revolution
[This is at least part of why we are winning the war against gun control. The left hates Bush to such an extreme they are thinking of an armed rebellion. They then realized bans on guns are an impediment.–Joe]
When people believe a tale that conflicts with self-checkable evidence it tells me that people undervalue the role of evidence in forming an internal belief system. Why this is so is not clear but it enables many people to hold fast to ideas and notions based purely on supposition.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries
[This is a good book. It’s especially entertaining when he lets lose with a rant. But, back on point, I believe the reason is very clear. People believe what they want to believe. It’s rare that people will believe the evidence when it is contrary to a position they have invested in. That investment can be of any type including political and emotional, as well as financial. Belief in god(s), gun control, communism, and (redundancy alert) the Democrat party are prime examples. Chris Phillips encapsulated the appropriate conclusion and cure with much wider application than he originally suggested. Although he never discussed it with me I believe that conclusion was based on the basic truth of investing in your beliefs tends to close your thinking. See also When Prophecy Fails and Cognitive dissonance.–Joe]
Guns and puberty are a dangerous mix. Targeting juniors increases the likelihood of gun addiction.
John Crook
Gun Control Australia’s president (see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia) 
Shooters turn recruiters to keep young guns firing
[Does he also have a problem with juniors getting “addicted” to books, stamp collecting, chess, tennis, golf, baseball, football, or basketball? Or is maybe he just has a problem with freedom. One could make a wise ass remark about the guy’s last name, but I won’t.–Joe]
Being a “double stack guy” I don’t have a use for them. But they are pretty and, I’m certain, of very high quality.
ETM_Press_Release_83007.doc (313 KB)
It’s amazing what people will say about you and how messed up they get the facts. And it’s amazing what you can discover if you just look through your log files.
A case in point:
A commenter to one of my posts said something that piqued my interest so I went looking for their IP address in my log files. What I found shocked me. The log files lead me to the comments here. The article itself is very factually based as near I could tell. It was the comments that went off the deep end and got libelous:
Any word on if they are going to close down the training facilities Jason Hamilton received instruction at or the sporting store he bought his firearms at. I hope they don’t close down that long ranger sniper explosive shooting course that takes place near Orofino. Jason Hamilton is said to have attended that regularly with his friends.
I don’t keep a list of previous attendees but I think I would recognize a name of someone that attended more than once or twice. I don’t recall Jason Hamilton ever attending Boomershoot. I also just looked and don’t see any email addresses with an obvious connection to his name on the Boomershoot announcement list.
Ralph I think that shooting event you are referring to is called boomershoot. Its run by a guy I think is fairly well know around sandpoint, Idaho and might also have connections to Aryan nations. I heard he runs in Anti circles to throw the ATF off. He has a CD on how to make explosives, encrypt and hide messages and hit targets at long range. I believe it can be downloaded from a couple of P2P sites, but I can’t remember which. He likes to post about hitting the second amendment reset button a lot and shooting Jack Booted thugs. That whole group is being watched pretty close by several watchdogs groups like the southern poverty law center.
Just because Joe Huffman went to a few of their meetings doesn’t make him a member.
You say Joe Huffman puts on that event and he brags about training people to shoot jack booted thugs! WOW. Sounds like this Jason Hamilton took that advocacy to heart. Given what happened in Moscow I’m surprised there hasn’t been more media attention on that.
See for yourself:
“If it ever becomes necessary to start shooting tyrants and “jack booted thugs“ in our country I want as many people on my side as possible. And I want them to have the equipment and the skills to be able to hit head and chest sized objects many hundreds of yards away.”
One small step at a time then a half step backward–Iowa Permits Same-Sex Marriage, for 4 Hours, Anyway.
I’m happy about this for three reasons:
I do agree it really should be handled in the legislative arena rather than the judicial arena but court action such as this forces the legislature to address it.
Just so you know what they think of you.
According to the Brady bunch if you are part of the NRA you are part of the “Triangle of Death”:
They ignore the fact that firearms are used to save far more innocent lives than to take them, and that thousands of NRA instructors across the country teach self-defense and the protection of innocent life. They ignore the fact that the NRA is not a lobbying group for dealers or manufactures but is primarily an educational, range development, and sporting organization. Even if you focus entirely on NRA-ILA, the actual lobbying arm of the NRA, it’s primarily funded by individual donations not dealer and/or manufacture donations. But the truth isn’t nearly as useful to the Brady Bunch.
And of course even if you were to take their claims about the NRA as true it still doesn’t make sense. If the guns are already “illegal” and/or the dealers are “corrupt” then it’s an enforcement, not legislative, problem. But then, people with mental problems frequently don’t make sense.