No point in wasting your time on this bonehead with shit for brains. He just likes to go out and kill things. You know, so he can feel like a real man.
A Vermont Resister @SonnyVermont
Tweeted on April 29, 2019
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
H/T to Paddlefish Slayer @spoonbillslyr91.—Joe]
While some try to hide their intentions by saying that they are just wanting “common sense” gun regulation, the reality is that ALL gun laws are gun bans. ALL gun laws are threats of deadly violence against peaceful people. Inherently, men, women, and children will be executed for gun ownership as has been demonstrated time again throughout history, including instances within the U.S. like with the ATF and Ruby Ridge. If you support gun control by the state, you’re for gun violence; you’re for gun violence so long as the people perpetrating that violence wear fancy costumes and a badge. Stop the mass violence. Stop the violence of the state.
The Pholosopher
Posted December 2018
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
If recent policies have any indication on Democrats’ intentions, the candidates have stopped their consideration for the rights of gun owners. Here are six ways — big and small — that 2020 Democrats plan to strip gun owners of their access to firearms.
Madison Dibble
April 30, 2019
2020 Democrats Find Unity in Targeting the Second Amendment: 6 Ways They Plan to Limit Gun-Owner Rights
[Yeah, I think those are pretty good indicators. Politicians frequently lie but depend on them expanding the power of government.—Joe]
I can think of no reason for a resident of this country to own a handgun or an assault rifle, as these firearms are only used to shoot at other humans. Therefore, the tougher the laws for these types of weapons, the safer we all are.
David Southern
April 30, 2019
LETTER: Tough gun control laws create a safer society
[Even if we were to accept Southern’s faulty claim that the named firearm types are only used to shoot at humans he has remarkably deficient thinking abilities. He apparently cannot envision that some humans need to be shot and need to be shot in a hurry. This is convincing proof he has crap for brains.—Joe]
Gun rights court victories are like seeds. They grow into big legal precedents.
Alan M. Gottlieb
April 30, 2019
‘THREE FOR THREE GUN RIGHTS COURT WINS IS GOOD NEWS FOR 2A,’ SAYS SAF
[We are building the foundation for bigger and bigger victories.—Joe]
Their ultimate desire to take and confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens is where they have always wanted to go, but they know the public is not there, the country is not there, so they try to go in backdoor ways.
Steve Scalise
House Minority Whip
April 28, 2019
Steve Scalise: Far-Left Democrats Want Gun Confiscation
[It’s not the most coherent expression of someone’s thoughts but the essence of what he says is correct.
The question is, can he and other gun rights supporters in the house do something about the criminals attempting to infringe upon the rights of the people?—Joe]
California has every gun law the Democrats are pushing on the federal level but none of it prevented 19-year-old John Earnest from allegedly opening fire in Congregation Chabad in Poway.
California has universal background checks, firearm registration requirements, and firearm confiscation orders, via Red Flag Laws. The state requires would-be gun owners to first obtain gun safety certification from the state and then requires a 10-day waiting period for all gun purchases. They also have a one-handgun-a-month purchase limit and a minimum age of 21 for all gun purchases, whether long guns or handguns. Campus carry is banned, K-12 teachers are barred from being armed in school for self-defense, and concealed carry permit issuance is constrained by a “good cause” requirement.
Moreover, California has an “assault weapons” ban. Yet CNN reports that the Chabad in Poway attacker used an “AR-type assault weapon.”
On December 9, 2018, Breitbart News reported that California firearm homicides were up 18 percent 2014-2016, despite the passage of gun control after gun control law.
Awr Hawkins
April 28, 2019
Stringent California Gun Controls Failed to Stop Synagogue Attack
[Gun control is not about making the general population safer. The accomplishment of gun control is exactly the opposite. It puts the general population at greater risk of criminal violence. I believe all politicians with an above average IQ, at some level, know this. They either view the increased criminal violence as an acceptable price to pay or, in many cases, the desired result.
This increased risk may or may not show up in the general crime statistics as it did for California. Where it really shows up is in those catastrophic events which happen once every few decades in a disarmed population under control of a criminal government. People forget or never really learn the lessons of history. Remember the lessons from the 20th Century originally taught by schoolmasters Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, and many others.—Joe]
They will not trust their fellow, gun-owning Americans to act responsibly with firearms, because they do not perceive their fellow American to be harnessed or dedicated to the common good. No republic is established or long stands on such a foundation.
Jeff Snyder
2001
Nation of Cowards, Who’s Under Assault in the Assault Weapon Ban? page 65.
[And here we are, 18 years later, talking about Civil War II.—Joe]
Law is . . . not simply a set of spoken, written or formalized rules that people blindly follow. Rather, law represents the formalization of behavioral rules, about which a high percentage of people agree, that reflect behavioral propensities and that offer potential benefits to those who follow them.
Margaret Gruter
1991
Law and the Mind: Biological Origins of Human Behavior
[I found this quote in the book The Mystery Of Capital Why Capitalism Succeeds In The West And Fails Everywhere Else in chapter 6. It is an interesting book in more than the domain it was intended.
There is a lot of discussion regarding the formulation of law in developing countries, former communist countries and how certain laws came to be the U.S. and some other western countries. In many cases the rulers set down some law and the common folk ignored it and created their own alternate law which served the people better. In the examples given the rulers frequently gave up even after, in some cases, the military was brought in, burned peoples houses down and drove them off. When the people, as a whole, disagree with a law the rulers frequently adopt, at least in part, the law of the people and give up on their own decrees.
I could not help but make the connection to the gun sanctuary movement in this country.—Joe]
It’s irrational to expect people to be rational but still it’s something to think about:
Guns have an almost supernatural potency to change the people who possess them into unethical agents.
Trace (@teamtrace)
Tweeted on April 22, 2019
[I suppose it’s technical possible. People who possess guns are inclined to be more self-reliant. In the mind of the authoritarian this would be considered an “unethical agent”. It all depends upon your ethical framework.
However, I’m of the opinion that if @teamtrace believes this then they should invoke their own supernatural potency to protect themselves.
I would like to suggest the first thing they protect themselves from is extraordinary stupid ideas.—Joe]
Of course we will get strict nationwide gun regulations. We will subjugate Insurrectionist Gunloving maniacs like you.
David Hluchy @davehluchy
Tweeted on April 20, 2019
[It’s good to have such people finally come out and admit what we always knew. It will be useful at their trial.
Enjoy your trial David Hluchy.—Joe]
White people genuinely think that police make kids safer when in reality at most schools the police ARE the threat.
David Hogg @davidhogg111
Tweeted on April 19, 2019
[None of the dupes in the anti-gun movement are particularly bright but the stupid is exceptionally strong in this one.—Joe]
This is amazing stuff:
More than 200 counties across nine states have vowed not to enforce new state measures that restrict gun access, and 132 have voted to become gun sanctuaries.
…
Except for 52 counties in New York and three in Maryland, which acted in 2013 after their states passed new legislation following the Sandy Hook mass shooting, all of the counties have made their declarations since the Parkland shooting just over a year ago.
In New Mexico, the Democratic-controlled state government enacted a new law in March requiring background checks for firearm purchases.
But the month before, as state leaders considered the measure, 29 of 33 county sheriffs signed a letter declaring they would oppose any new state laws that “restrict the rights” of New Mexicans to own firearms.…
nation and around the world, The Polk County resolution includes a clause to the pro-resolution stance.
It says, “The criminal misuse of firearms is due to the fact that criminals do not obey laws, and this is not a reason to abrogate or abridge the unalienable, constitutionally guaranteed rights of law-abiding citizens.”
This doesn’t get much mention by anti-gun activists and politicians. I wonder if they are aware they are reaching the end of their rope (pun intended).
Numerous parallels can be drawn between the slave states and free states of 160 years ago. I’m wondering when it will happen that present day “free state” will refuse to extradite a firearm “criminal” to a “slave state”. Also, when will a “free state” arrest and prosecute a “slave hunter”.
We live in interesting times.
Here is how the 4th Amendment is treated:
That bit of chalk left on your car’s tire by a parking officer is unconstitutional, a federal court ruled Monday.
A three-judge panel took up the case of Alison Taylor, a Michigan woman who received 15 parking tickets during a three-year feud with a single parking officer, Tabitha Hoskins of the City of Saginaw.
Taylor’s lawyer argued that the city’s physical marking with chalk, done to note how long a vehicle is parked, amounted to searching without a warrant — a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel unanimously agreed.
The city “commences its search on vehicles that are parked legally, without probable cause or even so much as ‘individualized suspicion of wrongdoing’ — the touchstone of the reasonableness standard,” the court’s opinion states.
The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” And the city’s chalking of cars “to raise revenue” does not qualify as a public safety concern that could allow a search without a warrant, the court said.
The court’s decision affects Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.
“Trespassing upon a privately-owned vehicle parked on a public street to place a chalk mark to begin gathering information to ultimately impose a government sanction is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment,” Taylor’s lawyer, Philip Ellison, said in a court filing reported by NPR.
Ellison said that covertly marking a tire with chalk is not unlike police secretly putting a GPS on a car without a warrant, according to the Associated Press.
So what would it look like if the 2nd Amendment were treated like the 4th?
Certainly all the laws against owning a gun, knife, or pepper spray would go away. No licenses or registration could be required for any type of arm. For your 4th of July party you could rent an old M40 and purchase its ammo on Amazon. And Glock 17s would be in blister packs of six at Costco.
The best way to deal with guns nuts is give them unlimited guns and ammo, natural selection will take care of these lower branch Republican mutations.
James Cavell @james_cavell
Tweeted on April 11, 2019
[I’m looking forward to Cavell giving me unlimited guns and ammo. I willing to bet my view of reality is more accurate than Cavell’s and at the end of the bet I’ll be alive and happy and Cavell will be poor and sad.
But that isn’t the real lesson to learn from Cavell. The real lesson to learn is that this is what they think of you. They believe the best way to “deal with gun nuts” is to see you dead.—Joe]
Scared men need big guns there is NEVER going to be a time in America that 20 people are going to storm your house. That’s ridiculous! You don’t hunt a Roosevelt with a 30 round mag. It’s just an extension of your manhood or lack there of. Buy a bigger truck for God’s sake!
Brad Henderson @BradHenderson31
Tweeted on April 17, 2019
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
Shortly after I told him that Judge Roger T. Benitez disagreed with him he blocked me:
When thousands of people are rioting, as happened in Los Angeles in 1992, or more recently with Antifa members in Berkeley in 2017, a 10-round limit for self-defense is a severe burden. When a group of armed burglars break into a citizen’s home at night, and the homeowner in pajamas must choose between using their left hand to grab either a telephone, a flashlight, or an extra 10-round magazine, the burden is severe. When one is far from help in a sparsely populated part of the state, and law enforcement may not be able to respond in a timely manner, the burden of a 10-round limit is severe. When a major earthquake causes power outages, gas and water line ruptures, collapsed bridges and buildings, and chaos, the burden of a 10-round magazine limit is severe. When food distribution channels are disrupted and sustenance becomes scarce while criminals run rampant, the burden of a 10-round magazine limit is severe. Surely, the rights protected by the Second Amendment are not to be trimmed away as unnecessary because today’s litigation happens during the best of times. It may be the best of times in Sunnyvale; it may be the worst of times in Bombay Beach or Potrero. California’s ban covers the entire state at all times.
As if we needed justification to exercise a specific enumerated right.—Joe]
The entire U.S. military could not disarm 17,000 illiterate fanatics in Afghanistan, which has the square miles of one state, but Eric Swalwell is going to disarm tens of millions of wealthy, educated people who can now make guns with a click of a mouse. Good luck, Skippy.
Kirk Freeman @KirkFreemanLaw
Tweeted on April 10, 2019
[See also Boots on the ground.—Joe]
Why Carry a Gun?
My old Grandpa said to me, ‘Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps and usually it’s when he becomes too old to take a whoopin’.’
I don’t carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.
I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry; I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone; I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man; I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate; I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don’t carry a gun because I love it; I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Police protection is an oxymoron: Free citizens must protect themselves because police do not protect you from crime; they just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take a whoopin’!
#NSFW Henry Pongratz @henry_in_Texas
Posted on Gab January 2019
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Anyone who owns a gun is stupid and/or a weirdo.
tom @itscaptainwow
Tweeted on April 16, 2019
[This is what they think of you.
We have SCOTUS decisions. They have childish insults.—Joe]