Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb

A state cannot legislate political correctness at the expense of a fundamental, constitutionally-delineated civil right.

Alan Gottlieb
Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President
September 11, 2018
FED. COURT ENJOINS PART OF CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE IN SAF-SUPPORTED CASE
[Additional context:

A federal district court has ruled that a section of the California Penal Code is unconstitutional and has issued an injunction against enforcement of a prohibition on the display of handguns or handgun placards that may be seen from the outside of a store in a case supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and two California gun rights groups.

The state of California is expected to appeal the decision. They don’t want us to be able to exercise our First Amendment rights either. The state of California mindset appears to be the same as that of Stalin.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Bob Menendez

If Brett Kavanaugh joins the Supreme Court, the gun industry will have new ammunition in their war to overturn common sense gun safety laws aimed at protecting our children, keeping our streets safe, and stopping deadly firearms from falling into the wrong hands.

Bob Menendez
U.S. Senator from New Jersey
September 3, 2018
Senator Bob Menendez Speaks in Paterson Against Appointment of Supreme Court Nominee Based on ‘Dangerous Views on the Second Amendment’
[All freedoms are “dangerous”. And that is why some of the most important ones are specific enumerated rights.

And you notice, as frequently is the case, this anti-gun person speaks in terms of “the gun industry” being the driving force rather than there being a market for common sense defensive tools. They pretend to believe that only evil capitalists and criminals could possible want or need to own guns. The truth is that only political tyrants and criminals could possibly want or need to restrict gun ownership.

I would like to suggest Senator Menendez and his ilk get on the winning side soon or risk prosecution in the future.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Gregg Popovich

The obvious elephant in the room is the guns, weapons of war, the magazines.

The real discussion should be about the Second Amendment.

Is it useful?

Gregg Popovich
San Antonio Spurs head coach
March 27, 2018
San Antonio Spurs head coach Gregg Popovich sounds off on Second Amendment after loss
[Via a tweet from Firearms Policy Conference:

CoachGreggPopovich

Yes.

Next question?—Joe]

NO on I-1639 Grassroots Organizer

Contribute to the fight against I-1639:

Please use the form and map below to report and locate firearms retailers, ranges, clubs, or other shops that have SOS | NO on I-1639 handouts, and also the NRA NO on I-1639 handouts and or campaign materials.

Also, please indicate if the store is out or refuses to post or make materials available.

A downloadable and printable copy of the SOS | NO on I-1639 information handout is available at this link.

You don’t know what I-1639 is about? Here is the text.

Of particular interest is this definition:

25) “Semiautomatic assault rifle” means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

Hence, all semiautomatic rifles are “semiautomatic assault rifles”. Ruger Mini-30s, Ruger 10-22s, and even Remington Model 750 with four round magazines:

Remington750

Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one is after your hunting rifles.

And the cute rifle you might get as your daughter’s first gun will be included:

If I-1639 passes your daughter won’t be allowed to possess it until she turns 21, and then she will have to take “a recognized firearm safety training program”. The gun must be register to her. And:

The chief of police or sheriff, or the designee of either, shall check with the national crime information center, including the national instant criminal background check system, provided for by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. Sec. 921 et seq.), the Washington state patrol electronic database, the health care authority electronic database, and with other agencies or resources as appropriate, to determine whether the applicant is ineligible under RCW 9.41.040 to possess a firearm.

Yes, law enforcement gets to look at your daughter’s medical records to see if she is unfit to possess an “semiautomatic assault rifle”, also known as a Ruger 10-22 or Remington Model 597.

Just say NO!

Quote of the day—Chip Bergh

As a company, we have never been afraid to take an unpopular stand to support a greater good.

I’m convinced that while some will disagree with our stand to end gun violence, history will prove this position right too.

Our country has faced seemingly intractable issues like this before, but together we’ve overcome them. We can do it again. Together we can put an end to the gun violence epidemic in America.

Chip Bergh
September 4, 2018
Levi Strauss CEO: Why Business Leaders Need to Take a Stand on Gun Violence
[Not anywhere in the article does he even hint there is such a thing as justified violence. He says he is not suggesting we repeal Second Amendment but he doesn’t acknowledge that it protects the rights of individuals to own firearms.

He speaks of ending “gun violence” and “the greater good”. He apparently doesn’t realize that in almost all cases the greater good is achieved by respecting the rights of individuals. Because of this disrespect of our rights tens of millions of individuals will fail to respect his decision and spend their money elsewhere.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Eric Raymond

The people who had the most extreme, negative, lying-bastards model of what “gun-control” activists had been doing turned out to be correct.

One of the people radicalized by this realization was me.

Eric Raymond
June 20, 2018
Comment to The critical fraction
[I didn’t really have any models presented to me. I had to make my own model from the available evidence. And, as you well know, the only model that fits is the “most extreme, negative, lying-bastards model”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—L.B. Zumpshon

Until we can get comprehensive education and deal with toxic masculinity head-on, and/or the U.S. gets some sensible gun control laws in place, I believe the only solution is for a law to be passed that only lets women buy and own guns.

L.B. Zumpshon
September 4, 2018
We Need Man Control as Much as Gun Control to Stop Mass Shootings
[What she conveniently ignores:

  • The percentage of mass shooters who are leftists is close to that of those who are men. Using the same logic one could concluded that all leftists or leftist men should be banned from gun ownership.
  • Rights belong to individuals. Just because everyone else in a group abuses a right does not justify the infringement of that right for individuals who have not abused it.

But, as has been known for many decades, in every socialist/communist utopia there are always some animals which are more equal than others.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Hannah Shearer

Kavanaugh’s illogical claim was that public safety should play no role in determining the constitutionality of public safety laws.

Hannah Shearer
September 4, 2018
Brett Kavanaugh’s extreme beliefs on gun control ignore the concerns of most Americans
[Wow.

“Illogical”? I don’t think that word means what Shearer thinks it means. But then it’s clear, that to Shearer, words mean whatever she wants them to mean. Apparently she expects people to forget that if there needs to be some exception carved out of the Bill of Rights there is an amendment process for that. The constitution doesn’t give Federal judges the power to rewrite the constitution.

But, again, she doesn’t want to acknowledge the judges don’t have the power. She appears to thinks the constitution means whatever she wants it to mean.

Ms. Shearer, please get yourself a copy of the constitution, the Bill of Rights, and a dictionary. Words mean something and you, and especially judges, don’t get to redefine them to suit your whims.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Abbie Vetger

Only one in five gun owners belong to the NRA, so we think there is something else going on than just the NRA when it comes to mobilisation.

Abbie Vetger
September 2, 2018
Gun owners are more politically active, study finds
[The naiveté and lack of rigor here is astounding. Were they paid money to do this “study”?

Vetger and her colleagues need to check their work. A very simple check would have revealed the following:

Most estimates of gun ownership are between 20 and 40 percent of people in the U.S.. And this assumes all gun owners admit they own guns when they are asked by a pollster. It may be much higher than this.

The population of the U.S. is currently about 330,000,000. This means there are between 66 and 132 million gun owners in the U.S.

The NRA claims a membership of about 6 million people. Hence only about one in 11 to one in 22 gun owners belong to the NRA. Unless, you hypothesize the NRA is telling the world they have far fewer members than they actually have. For them to have such a motive escapes me.

Simple arithmetic shows any influence gun owners have must be far beyond the members the NRA influences.Assuming all the NRA’s 6 million members vote and vote as a block for the NRA agenda in an eligible voting population of about 241 million people is only about 2.5%. Sure, some political races are as close or closer than that but that isn’t enough to make a big difference and the assumption they all vote as a block is almost for certain false.

So… if the hypothesis that the NRA is the source of power is of questionable validity how about the hypothesis that gun owners a group independent of NRA members being a source of election strength? 60 to 126 million out of 241 million is about 25% to 50%. Now you are talking about some real power!

Therefore the timid conclusions reached by Vetger can be arrived at, and stated with far more assuredness, with a few minutes of searching on the Internet without going through the grant process and publishing a peer reviewed paper.

I wonder if Vetger and company were among those making projections that Hillary Clinton had a 95% chance of winning the 2016 election. If not then I expect she at least rode the same short bus to school with them.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mr. T‏ @MrT_runner

Do you sell plan for a plastic dick too? Because all you gun nutters are compensating for something. We all know.

Mr. T‏ @MrT_runner
Tweeted on August 28, 2018
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

Via a tweet from Jonathan @CorrelA_B.

It’s very clear what these anti-gun people use as criteria for knowledge is not related to that which the normal population uses. For other examples see here and here.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ramishah Maruf

It’s time to stop using video games as a deflection from conversations about responsible gun control. Video games shouldn’t even be in the conversation because it distracts us from the hard truth: easy access to guns is the main reason for mass shootings.

It takes a special train of thought to come to the conclusion that an animated video game is more to blame for shootings than the actual weapon used. Is America really that blinded by their love for the Second Amendment?

Ramishah Maruf
August 30, 2018
Video games have no relevance to mass shootings
[It’s interesting how she substitutes one class of objects, video games, which probably didn’t have much of an effect on the mental illness of the perpetrator, for another object, firearms, which certainly didn’t cause the mental illness.

That takes a very special kind of train of thought. At first you might think her train was functioning properly then you find it was going backward.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Winnipeg Free Press editorial board

Of particular interest to gun-control advocates are handguns and military-style assault rifles, neither of which have any real practical application for civilians, hunters or rural residents who keep firearms at hand to protect their livestock from predation.

Winnipeg Free Press editorial board
August 30, 2018
Entrenched positions won’t resolve gun debate
[The board appears to believe they are essentially a neutral party in the debate. But their claim that handguns and “military-style assault rifles” don’t “have any real practical application for civilians” betrays their bias and lack of information on the topic.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Adam Lankford

I am not interested in giving any serious thought to John Lott or his claims.

Adam Lankford
Professor at the University of Alabama
August 2018
Shock study: U.S. had far fewer mass shootings than previously reported
[Of course not. Liars have no desire for the truth.

Lankford claimed the U.S. has more mass shooters per capita, by far, than any country. And has, what appears to be, a socialist explanation:

Mr. Lankford, who claimed to be the first to attempt a global survey, said his results suggested there was something to the American psyche that left people disaffected when they failed to achieve the American dream. He said they turn to violent outbursts with firearms.

“It may thus be the lofty aspirations and broken dreams of a tiny percentage of America’s students and workers — combined with their mental health problems, distorted perceptions of victimization, delusions of grandeur, and access to firearms — that makes them more likely to commit public mass shootings than people from other cultures,” he postulated in his 2015 paper.

He refuses to share his data and his exact methodology and John Lott, and others, easily find many more mass shootings in the rest of the world that what Lankford claims. This results in:

Mr. Lankford studied the period from 1966 to 2012 using data from the New York City Police Department’s active shooter report, a 2014 FBI active shooter report and some foreign accounts.

He identified 292 incidents worldwide in which at least four people were killed — the FBI’s definition of a mass murder. Of those, 90 were in the U.S. — 31 percent of the total among –Jooe171 countries.

Mr. Lott, meanwhile, turned to data from the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database and followed up with Nexis and web searches to try to catch cases that the database missed.

He said good data exist only for recent years, so he looked from 1998 to 2012 and found 1,491 mass public shootings worldwide. Of those, only 43 — or 2.88 percent — were in the U.S. Divide that by per capita rates, and the U.S. comes in 58th, behind Finland, Peru, Russia, Norway and Thailand — though still worse than France, Mexico, Germany and the United Kingdom.

Looked at from the number of victims in those shootings, the U.S. again ranks low, with just 2.1 percent of mass shooting deaths, Mr. Lott said.

Lott released his data and even sent it to Lankford. Who, of course, has an agenda to support and is “not interested in giving any serious thought” to it.

They have to lie to even attempt to win, and they know it.—Joe]

Quote of the day—map.therealbitcoin.club

If you need a gun to protect your property you simply have too much property and lost your life already aquiring [sic] that property.

map.therealbitcoin.club
August 27, 2018
Comment to EXCLUSIVE: 3D Gun Proponent Defiant Offers Firearm Blueprints For Sale.*
[Ahhh… yes. The true nature of an anti-gun person comes to light. They are opposed to private property as well as being anti-gun. Apparently they want us all to be part of the collective.—Joe]


* Bonus: There is a humorous typo in the URL to the post:

… exclusive-3d-fun-proponent-defiant-offers-firearm-blueprints-for-sale

Quote of the day—FedUp

I don’t really have a need to download them.

I’m just downloading them because some black robed cocksucker in Seattle doesn’t think I have the right to do it.

FedUp
August 1, 2018
Comment to Gun Controllers, Politicians and Judges Think They Can Stop the Free Flow of Information. They’re Wrong.
[Further developments here and here.

You can also get everything you want here.—Joe]

Preliminary injunction on 3-D printed guns granted

The Seattle judge found the arguments of the tyrants more convincing than those of who yearn to be free:

The private defendants raise the more substantive argument that a preliminary injunction will impair their First Amendment rights, a loss which, “for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373-74 (1976). The First Amendment argument raises a number of challenging issues. Is computer code speech? If yes, is it protected under the First Amendment? To answer those questions, one would have to determine what the nature of the files at issue here is: are they written and designed to interact solely with a computer in the absence of the intercession of the mind or will of the recipient or is it an expressive means for the exchange of information regarding computer programming and/or weapons manufacturing? Are the export controls of the ITAR a prior restraint giving rise to a presumption that they are unconstitutional? Is the AECA a general regulatory statute not intended to control the content of speech but only incidentally limiting its unfettered exercise? Or is the government attempting to regulate distribution of the CAD files because of the message they convey? Depending on which level of scrutiny applies, does the regulation advance important governmental interests unrelated to the suppression of free speech and avoid burdening more speech than necessary or is the regulation narrowly tailored to promote a compelling Government interest?

The Court declines to wade through these issues based on the limited record before it and instead presumes that the private defendants have a First Amendment right to disseminate the CAD files. That right is currently abridged, but it has not been abrogated. Regulation under the AECA means that the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, or otherwise published within the United States. The Court finds that the irreparable burdens on the private defendants’ First Amendment rights are dwarfed by the irreparable harms the States are likely to suffer if the existing restrictions are withdrawn and that, overall, the public interest strongly supports maintaining the status quo through the pendency of this litigation.

For all of the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED. The federal defendants and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees are hereby enjoined from implementing or enforcing the “Temporary Modification of Category I of the United States Munitions List” and the letter to Cody R. Wilson, Defense Distributed, and the Second Amendment Foundation issued by the U.S. Department of State on July 27, 2018, and shall preserve the status quo ex ante as if the modification had not occurred and the letter had not been issued until further order of the Court.

I’m on the side of Code Is Free Speech and suggest you get your 3-D printed gun CAD files there.

Quote of the day—Stephen Jordan

Because a gun symbolizes a part of the male anatomy (the bigger the better!) and firing a gun emulates an ejaculation. That’s why.

Stephen Jordan
August 21, 2018
Comment to I Would Still Like To Know Why Gun Owners Love Their Guns.
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

One has to wonder if that answer is because of peer reviewed research or direct personal knowledge. It has to be direct personal knowledge because all the survey results I have seen, which ask why people own guns, come up with “personal protection”, “recreation”, and “hunting” in the top places.

Via email from Weer’d Beard.—Joe]

Quote of the day—NRA-ILA

The idea that the guns caused the violence doesn’t hold up. That’s like claiming The Trace is a real media outlet because they have keyboards.

NRA-ILA
August 24, 2018
What Really Drove the Early ‘90s Crime Wave?
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Gilad Erdan

Many civilians saved lives during terror attacks and in an era of ‘lone terrorism.’ The more skilled civilians carrying weapons, the greater the chance of thwarting attacks without causalities and reducing the number of casualties.

Gilad Erdan
Israel Public Security Minister
Eradan eases gun-control rules
[Anytime, anyplace, gun regulation is reduced as well as improving the lives of the innocent directly affected it makes it more difficult for our opponents in this country to make their case.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Boch

Lott’s report serves as nothing but bad news for Democrats who have fully embraced gun control as a campaign plank going into the midterms this fall.

John Boch
August 20, 2018
Lott: 7.14% of Americans Have Carry Licenses, Up 273% Since 2007
[Generally I think this is true. But it might help solidify their support in areas guns are already heavily regulated and support for Democrats may be weakened because of the good economic news. In heavily regulated areas people can’t imagine knowing “someone like that” who would carry a gun in public and are scared of people who exercise their right to keep and bear arms. The support of Democrats for more gun control to “protect them” from “people like that” could be a net positive in some geographical areas. On a national basis? It’s going to be a net loss.—Joe]