Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day—Christopher Merken

Posted on by

Guns are designed with one purpose only: to kill. Ending a life is the purpose of a gun. The argument that it’s preventative, that it’s the “well it’s either me or the guy coming through my door” mentality, or that guns create a safer society is just plain wrong. Guns are designed to kill. A specially designed piece of metal, slotted into another piece of metal and projected at incredible speeds at another person is designed to kill. There is no way to deny, refute, or get around this simple fact. So why are guns allowed? Why do we as a society accept these dangerous weapons into our community?

Christopher Merken
December 8, 2011
Another Virginia Tech Shooting, and What Should Be Done About It: It’s time to take a stand against gun violence
[Heavy sigh. Here we go again.

I’ve fired about 100,000 rounds through my guns without killing anything but two deer and a rattlesnake. By his logic my guns must have malfunctioned with nearly every shot.

He offers no studies to support his assertions. The best he can do is proof by vigorous assertion.

He asks, “Why are guns allowed?” as if that which government does not allow is forbidden. He apparently missed out on the high school government class where it was taught that government is only allowed certain enumerated powers and the people retain all other rights and powers. He has it exactly backward.

He’s got crap for brains.—Joe]

Australia gun control is going ‘backward’

Posted on by

Although from my viewpoint I don’t see a lot of progress being made in Australia the gun control people are screaming bloody murder:

David Shoebridge says NSW has gone backwards on gun control.

As near as I can tell the problem for these people is that people are following the law and buying guns:

Figures obtained by The Sunday Telegraph show there are 188,885 people on the NSW Police Firearms Register, just short of the estimated 200,000 licence holders pre- the Port Arthur massacre, which triggered changes to gun laws.

NSW Greens described the increase as “alarming” and gun control groups warned that more and more firearms would end up on the black market.

“The trend is all one-way in NSW; that is, more guns and more gun owners and that is a dangerous trend,” NSW Greens MP David Shoebridge said.

“There’s a real concern where we are developing a gun culture here in NSW. A good part of the problem comes from the influence of the Shooters Party and the Gun Council here in NSW. We need this government to stand up to the gun lobby to restrict access, particularly to handguns, and ensure the current restrictions remain in place.”

It’s interesting and revealing that this politician wants to reduce the number of gun owners rather than just restrict the type of guns and that owners be licensed and their guns registered. It was the hope that the restrictions would decrease the number of gun owners. The ultimate goal of the anti-gun people must be, always has been, and always will be a complete ban.

The wolves must die

Posted on by

Idaho is very serious about thinning the wolf packs to give the deer and elk populations a chance to recover:

An Idaho Department of Fish and Game official said Thursday the state will use aerial gunning and professional and government trappers to kill wolves in the Lolo Zone, even as public hunting and trapping seasons continue.

Dave Cadwallader, supervisor of the department’s Clearwater Region, said he wants a multipronged approach to wolf control in the difficult-to-access area where elk herds are hurting.

One of the comments particularly struck me:

Why are these so called environmental groups so anti-elk? Around this world there are more wolves just like the ones we have here than we have elk. Not only the elk but our moose population here is all but gone. These groups need to be held accountable for what they have caused and should have to pay for the costs it’s taking to correct this destruction.

Quote of the day–David B. Kopel

Posted on by

It was feared that the Massachusetts gun confiscation was the prototype for confiscation throughout America.

David B. Kopel
December 2, 2011
How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution
[Kopel is referring to incidents in 1775 but the words could have just as easily applied to the late 20th Century.

The people of Massachusetts went to war against their government because of gun control in 1775 yet Massachusetts politicians lead the way for gun controllers of present day. I keep thinking they should be charged with treason but I doubt I could get much traction with that meme.—Joe]

How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution

Posted on by

I just finished reading David Kopel’s paper How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution. I found it fascinating. It was like an exciting short story but with lots of footnotes.

There is a lot of great material in it and my QOTD for tomorrow will come from it.

What follow are some of the highlights.

In 1777 when British victory seemed likely Colonial Undersecretary William Knox drafted a plan entitled “What Is Fit to Be Done with America?” It included the following:

The Militia Laws should be repealed and none suffered to be re-enacted, & the Arms of all the People should be taken away, . . . nor should any Foundery or manufactuary of Arms, Gunpowder, or Warlike Stores, be ever suffered in America, nor should any Gunpowder, Lead, Arms or Ordnance be imported into it without Licence . . . .

Imagine how different things would be today had the British won. Kopel convincingly presents the case (Patrick Henry’s speech of March 23, 1775 is just a hint) that the American citizens knew this was coming and was a significant, if not major, motivation for rebellion.

I especially like this (page 32):

The federal Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits the import of any firearm which is not deemed “sporting” by federal regulators. That import ban seems difficult to justify based on the historical record of 1774-76, or on District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, both of which hold that, while sporting uses such as hunting are part of the Second Amendment, the “core” and “central component” of the Second Amendment is self-defense.

And this (page 32):

Laws which aim to disarm the public at large are precisely what turned a political argument into the American Revolution. Sometimes, legislative history will frankly reveal that the purpose of an anti-gun law was to discourage gun ownership in general, or that the law was based on hostility to gun ownership. This is the case for New York City’s pistol licensing fees. Everywhere in New York State, the fee for the issuance or renewal of a handgun permit is $10 (plus a separate $95 fee for a fingerprint check for first-time applications). But in New York City, the fee is over $340, payable every three years. The explicitly stated purpose of allowing the New York City government to charge extra fees was to discourage handgun ownership in the City.

In Alameda County, California, the five-person County Board of Supervisors banned gun shows on county property at the behest of a Supervisor who complained that her previous efforts to ban gun shows had “gotten the run around from spineless people hiding behind the constitution.” She explained that the County should not “provide a place for people to display guns for worship as deities for the collectors who treat them as icons of patriotism.” Nevertheless, the Ninth Circuit upheld the ban because the other supervisors who voted for the ordinance might have had legitimate motives.

He concludes with:

Gun ownership simpliciter ought never to be a pretext for government violence. The Americans in 1775 fought a war because the king did not agree. Americans of the 21st century should not squander the heritage of constitutional liberty bequeathed by the Patriots.

Quote of the day—Robert Breedlove

Posted on by

The majority of (real)Amer­icans agree with everything the OWS stands for and you ignore their message at your own peril. You will “get it” from their peaceful protest or you will get it through more forceful means, but you will get it.

Robert Breedlove
December 2, 2011
Comment to Gun Ad Likens Obama To Hitler, Other Dictators.
[Why are liberals so violent?

Oh yeah! Now I remember.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joe Walsh

Posted on by

I challenge you to debate the Second Amendment in my district in front of real Americans in the heartland, not Washington D.C. insiders. Unless, of course, you have no interest in hearing what real Americans have to say.

Joe Walsh
U.S. Representative from Illinois
December 2, 2011
Letter to Dennis Henigan, Acting President, The Brady Campaign.
[Henigan wants to have the debate in D.C.. Walsh says it should be in his Congressional district.

Henigan didn’t care what the U.S. Constitution said about guns so of course he has no interest in what real Americans have to say about guns. People are even less relevant than the Constitution to his type. Plus being outnumbered 100:1 by a bunch of gun owners would probably require too many layers of Depends.

Sebastian has more thoughts on the debate about the (no) debate.—Joe]

Quote of the day–edgeninja

Posted on by

I was just reading a NYT op-ed about the insane, irrational paranoia of gun nuts during Obama’s presidency­. These people are just itching for any reason to go on a mass shooting spree. Most of them probably have really small penises too.

edgeninja
December 2, 2011
Comment to Gun Ad Likens Obama To Hitler, Other Dictators.
[It’s Markley’s Law Monday!

I was going through the comments on this Huffington Post article and finding the commenters were generating QOTD material faster than I could harvest it. There are going to be Markley’s Law QOTDs every Monday for several weeks along with “Crap for Brains” and “Why are Liberals so Violent” QOTD material for quite some time.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Crotalus

Posted on by

The U.S. is done. It’s all over but the killing and eating. I just hope we have the ‘nads to never let another government take root in this country. Governments are always corrupt. Always.

Crotalus
November 9, 2011
Comment to Theory.
[Ubu52’s comments here reminded me of this quote.

While I could find a lot to agree with this I fear that for the foreseeable future government will always be a necessary evil. Hence the best we can do is minimize the evil. We probably will not be able to eliminate it without going to a small tribal society which looks to be an even worse option.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle

Posted on by

This is the power of victimhood in the “social justice” (Marxist) movement, and it’s why I’ve said many times that victimhood– real, genuine, beautiful, wonderful, rich and delicious victimhood, is so deeply cherished, sought after and uplifted with such passion by the left. It’s their gold and diamond currency and they mine it, mint it, wear it and show it off with a greedy, lusty fervor.

Lyle
November 30, 2011
Comment to Peterson Syndrome example.
[You don’t have to think about this very long to realize Lyle has nailed it.

The NRA says, “Refuse to be a victim” and trains people to enforce this refusal with knowledge, confidence, and, if necessary, force. The anti-gun people seek out victims, hire them, and not only enable more victims but work to force others into being victims.—Joe]

Read the column the UK’s Daily Mail pulled for being too dangerous

Posted on by

Of course I knew it was possible. But I didn’t dare say it for fear of being wrong and embarrassed when some other explanation came to light. So I just stated the facts when a pro-gun story disappeared from the UK’s Daily Mail.

I did manage to contact the author who responded with a single URL. It is a link to the same story on a different website with the subtitle, “Read the column the UK’s Daily Mail pulled for being too dangerous”.

Not only was it possible; it was what happened. Some people in the UK are such wimps they can’t tolerate people even speaking about the exercise of their natural right to keep and bear arms.

Should they end up needing that which they don’t have it will be hard to give them much sympathy beyond nominating them for a collective (as they surely would have wanted it) Darwin Award.

Quote of the day—Noam Chomsky

Posted on by

Government turns to clandestine terrorist operations when it is afraid of it’s own population.

Noam Chomsky
[I was reminded of this quote by various links to this article and related stuff.

But from actually reading the bill I don’t see what the big fuss is about:

Subtitle D—Detainee Matters

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

This appears to be consistent with my understanding of the Geneva and Hague Conventions in regards to acceptable conduct during war. When someone aids the enemy, on or off the battlefield, they are subject to detention, interrogation, trial, and if not a privileged combatant, even execution.—Joe]

Atlas may shrug

Posted on by

Son James, his wife Kelsey, and I had an interesting conversation about the possible coming collapse of the Euro this evening. I read part of this story to them:

British embassies in the eurozone have been told to draw up plans to help British expats through the collapse of the single currency, amid new fears for Italy and Spain.

As the Italian government struggled to borrow and Spain considered seeking an international bail-out, British ministers privately warned that the break-up of the euro, once almost unthinkable, is now increasingly plausible.

Diplomats are preparing to help Britons abroad through a banking collapse and even riots arising from the debt crisis.

The Treasury confirmed earlier this month that contingency planning for a collapse is now under way.

A senior minister has now revealed the extent of the Government’s concern, saying that Britain is now planning on the basis that a euro collapse is now just a matter of time.

That’s the background. What’s more interesting to me is this article:

About a year ago, I spoke at a conference in Europe that attracted a lot of very rich people from all over the continent, as well as a lot of people who manage money for high-net-worth individuals.

What made this conference remarkable was not the presentations, though they were generally quite interesting. The stunning part of the conference was learning – as part of casual conversation during breaks, meals, and other socializing time – how many rich people are planning for the eventual collapse of European society.

Not stagnation. Not gradual decline. Collapse.

As in riots, social disarray, plundering, and chaos. A non-trivial number of these people think the rioting in places such as Greece and England is just the tip of the iceberg, and they have plans – if bad things begin to happen – to escape to jurisdictions ranging from Australia to Costa Rica (several of them remarked that they no longer see the U.S. as a good long-run refuge).

Of course. Once it is pointed out it is obvious.

Those with money will escape the collapse if it occurs. They will take a big hit and won’t be able to get all of their wealth out but they are generally smart and will generally succeed. The looters (by this I mean to include the socialist governments) will attempt to prevent the wealth from leaving but even if they were successful eventually the looters will run out of loot.

Much of the wealth and nearly all the brain power that generated that wealth will “take a holiday”. There is also a good chance, as in the book, that the escape of these people to another place will hasten the downfall. Rand may have missed a lot of the details but the basic concepts may be close enough that the end result is essentially the same.

Atlas may be shrugging.

Quote of the day—Josh Sugarmann

Posted on by

Give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns.

Real gun control will take courage. In the long run, half-measures and compromises only sacrifice lives.

Josh Sugarmann
1999
Seattle and Honolulu shootings more reasons to regulate guns
[This is from the dark days of gun owner rights activism.

Sugarmann goes through regulatory proposals such as licensing, registration, expanding background checks at gun shows and stopping the import of high-capacity magazines. He then concludes a complete ban is the only rational conclusion.

I grudgingly admire Sugarmann for his genius in regards to “assault weapons” and his honesty in saying the endgame must be, always has been, and always will be a complete ban.—Joe]

Congress Debates Status of Tomato Sauce

Posted on by

Seen here.  I heard about it on one of the morning talk shows.  Sorry I don’t remember which.  Beck, Limbaugh or Medved – take your pick.

I said it when I heard Congress was legislating the rules of baseball years ago– this is final proof that we’ve gone far off the deep end of pathological insanity.  If the founders of this nation had heard Congress was involved in determining whether the tomato was a vegetable and no one had stepped in to haul them off and lock them in an asylum, they’d have shot somebody.  Maybe themselves, for they’d have realized that all their learning, inspiration, vision, struggle, suffering, perseverance, profound loss and eventual victory had been in vain.

Every last bit of it pissed out a window by vacuous, nasty little fools who to this day still think we look up to them and celebrate them.  It always comes as a shock to the tyrant when he finally gets his due at the hands of the people, as did Mussolini and his wife.  “Why, they don’t love me?  Surely this is some mistake.  I am the Father of The People.  I don’t understand.  No wait…”

ETA; Congress getting involved in the likes of baseball and vegetables is the very definition of totalitarianism— the doctrine that says nothing is outside the realm of politics, that everything is government’s business.  I used to pose the question to leftists; “What, if anything, do you believe is absolutely, positively, none of government’s business whatsoever?”  It’s a rhetorical question of course.  We know the answer, as evidenced above.  Now that it is settled– that we live in an ideologically totalitarian state, I pose another question.  What is the way out of this?

Quote of the day—Glen Utzman

Posted on by

People that make tax law must be drunk.

Glen Utzman
Fall Semester 2011
[Via daughter Kimberly who is taking a class from Professor Utzman.

Some of them certainly are drunk in the usual sense but a lot of them are “drunk” on power which is far worse than if it were just alcohol. But I suppose the symptoms in the tax law would be similar in both cases.—Joe]

Quote of the day—BitterB

Posted on by

I find it interesting that not a *single* member of the opposition to HR822 named the @bradybuzz position as a reason to oppose the bill.

Bloomberg was mentioned by many, but @bradybuzz seems to have become politically irrelevant.

BitterB
November 16, 2011 in two Tweets: here and here.
In regards to the debate over HR822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.
[And The Brady Campaign should be politically irrelevant. The KKK and similar anti-civil rights organizations are no longer relevant are they?

Their “membership” is non-existent, their donations are in the tank, and now important people don’t listen to them. They should just give it up, change their names, and rejoin civilized society.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aesop

Posted on by

Any excuse will serve a tyrant.

Aesop
[It is also true that any excuse will serve those that enable tyrants. Here are some of the many I have come across:

  • It’s for the children.
  • No one needs one of those.
  • It’s an ASSAULT weapon!
  • It’s a collective, not an individual, right.
  • The Brady Act works. It has blocked XX million gun sales. (Never mind that no measurable increase in safety has occurred. The mere fact that sales have been blocked is proof of success.)
  • Road rage will become gun fights.
  • Assault clips can hold 30, 50, or even 100 rounds!
  • 32 rounds in just 16 seconds!
  • States and cities should be allowed to make their own laws.
  • The Federal government must do it because many states have lax laws.

It’s interesting how there are truths which appear to be universal yet people never learn.—Joe]

Y’all Better Read This

Posted on by

I promise you; you will want to read this excerpt from The Life of Colonel David Crockett if you haven’t already.

There’s a powerful lot of meaning in few words.  I intend to print it off and hand it to my daughter, to be brought into her high school history class for discussion.

Special Thanks to LukeM, who brought it to my attention in comments here.  I don’t know how I missed it for so long.

Quote of the day—Dr. Tim Ball

Posted on by

There are several misconceptions about CO2, most created because proponents tried to prove the hypothesis rather than the normal scientific practice of disproof.

Dr. Tim Ball
November 9, 2011
Whether It Is Warming or Climate Change, It Cannot be the CO2.
[There is lots of other interesting data in this post. As Ry summarized when telling me about this, “North America and Europe are net absorbers of CO2. South America and Africa are net producers. And it’s all due to natural causes. Human CO2 production is in the noise of measurement error of the natural sources.”

Beyond the point the CO2/global-warming/climate-change fraud I wanted to point out that the “normal scientific practice of disproof” is what has been tripping up the anti-gun people. Their hypothesis that gun control will decrease crime is so easy to disprove that they expose themselves as a religious faith. Their deeply held beliefs persist in the absence of and in despite of evidence. I have no problem with them exercising their First Amendment rights to exercise the the religion of their choice but they do not have the right, nor should they have the power, to force others to worship the same god(s) they do.

If you only need a couple of talking point so to put them in their place point out that since the gun ban in Washington D.C. was thrown out the number of murders (the murder rate would be lower still) has dropped to the lowest in 46 years. Since the gun ban in Chicago was overthrown the number of murders is the lowest in at least 20 years. The gun bans reduce crime hypothesis cannot survive exposure to the normal scientific practice of disproof. This has been well known since at least the mid-1980s when Rossi and Wright published their book.

The Brady Campaign, The Violence Policy Center, and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence are nothing more than fading religious cults whose beliefs have killed tens of thousands of people and put millions of lives at risk. They are no more credible and should be given no more political voice than a cult advocating castration to reach an alien spacecraft.—Joe]