More women should have guns. And since it’s abundantly clear that they’ll commit less violence than men and be vulnerable to violence committed by men, let’s take all the guns away from men and give them to women. In fact, let’s only give guns to women.
Rae Witte
July 21, 2016
Here’s An Idea: Only Women Should Have Guns
[Here’s an idea: never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
You have to take that sort of moderate, “We just wanna have commmon sense legislation so our children are safe!”
You say shit like that, and then people will buy into it.
Mary Bayer @marybayer3
DNC delegate
July 25, 2016
[See also a shorter version at Say Uncle. I chose this one because it shows her stealing the sign of the people who made the video (the police recovered it from her and returned it to the owners). This demonstrates private property means nothing to her, the First Amendment means nothing to her, and, obviously, the Second Amendment is nothing more than a minor obstacle.
From PVertias Action who made the video:
After being included in a tweet about the video she then contacted the police saying that she is being harassed.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
As the video says at the end:
Now we know what Hillary Clinton and the Democrats mean when they say, “Common Sense Gun Legislation”…
We’ve known this for decades, but it’s nice to have them saying it on video.—Joe]
Micah Johnson waited for his lawyer to work out some kind of deal with the Army. Family friend Myrtle Booker noted that along with becoming withdrawn, Johnson had developed an increased interest in firearms, as might befit a onetime panty stealer who found himself lacking.
Michael Daly
July 9, 2016
Micah Johnson Was Kicked Out of the Army for Stealing Panties
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]
Gun control laws are dangerous because they don’t do a very good job of taking guns away from people who shouldn’t have them. They’re more effective at taking guns out of the hands of people who can and should use them, if they chose to, for lawful protection. And gun control laws are most dangerous because they provide such political distraction from much more important issues on reducing crime, particularly reducing the illegitimacy rate. And as long as the president is up there yakking about the Brady bill and assault weapons, that’s all the less time he’s going to be putting into welfare reform and other things to rebuild the family, and that’s the heart of any real solution to crime.
David Kopel
1995
Does Gun Control Work?
[Don’t ever let anyone tell you we haven’t been having a conversation on gun control or that we haven’t been saying for decades it doesn’t work and in fact it is counter productive. We have also been saying it is also a violation of specific enumerated and natural rights. It’s time for those people to grow up, accept the facts and stop wasting their, and our, money, time, and human resources.—Joe]
Hillary’s entire career has been dedicated to taking things away from you “on behalf of the common good,” to borrow from her rare moment of candor in 2004. It’s the intellectual milieu she’s been steeped in for her entire adult life.
Ed Driscoll
July 18, 2016
HILLARY EMBRACES LIBERAL EXTREMISM
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Attending the UW $11,859.00 in base tuition a year, going shooting with friends and tossing the empty wiped down ammo boxes in a string of random open waste baskets inside the Comparative History of Ideas Padelford Hall, priceless. There are somethings money can’t buy, but for everything else there’s trolling Marxists in academia.
Anonymous UW Student
July 18, 2016
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
It would be a good idea to stop using the term “unintended consequences”. I haven’t see a consequence in years that I could reasonably assume to be unintended. Thinking of them as unintended will only mislead you about the nature of the opposition.
Paul Koning
July 18, 2016
Comment to Govt proposed “Smart-gun” specs
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
A ban and complete eradication of assault rifles from the hands of everyday citizens is a reasonable reform.
Shaun King
July 18, 2016
KING: Dallas, Baton Rouge massacres show need for assault rifle ban, can make trained cops think they’re under attack from small army
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
Banning the most popular type of firearm (I assume he means “assault weapon” rather than “assault rifle”) in the U.S. is “reform”?
Wrong.
It’s called deprivation of rights under color of law and is a felony punishable by death.—Joe]
My gun and I had a great day at the range!
Barb L.
July 16, 2016
[Barb and I took some new shooters to the range and Barb did some shooting as well as provide support for me with the new shooters. She shot much better than the last couple of times we went to the range. I wish I would have taken a picture of her happy dance.—Joe]
white men have small dick so they compensate by buying big guns.
True Israelite@ 1liberal2a
Tweeted on January 8, 2016
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
Via a tweet from QuackHead/PotterHead @Duck_Hunter7.—Joe]
At least 84 people died Thursday night in Nice, France, when a terrorist plowed a truck into a crowd celebrating Bastille Day. Their deaths should free all of us, once and for all, from the toxic and seditious lie, spread by the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, that guns–not madmen or radical Islamics–are a threat to civilized people in America, or in France, or anywhere else.
Dr. Keith Ablow
July 15, 2016
Bastille Day bloodbath in Nice proves that gun control advocates are liars
[Read the whole thing. It’s short and sweet.—Joe]
Only recently, Richmond, Calif., had among America’s highest per capita rates of gun violence. In 2009, there were 47 homicides among 100,000 residents. Officials there theorized that a few bad actors caused most of the problem. As it turned out, 70 percent of their gun violence in 2008 was caused by fewer than 1 percent of the city’s residents. This isn’t unique: in Cincinnati, less than 1 percent of the city’s population was responsible for 74 percent of homicides in 2007.
Richmond developed an innovative, controversial program: They identified the 50 people most likely to shoot someone and engaged with them, even paying them to participate.
The city provided career help, training, resume writing and health care. It asked people what they feared and helped them create plans to mitigate those fears.
Critics called it “paying gang members not to shoot people.” It was more than that. And it worked.
From 2007 to 2012, the city experienced a 61 percent reduction in homicides.
Nick Selby
July 14, 2016
Forget new gun laws. Here’s what could really keep people from shooting each other.
[H/T Say Uncle.
At first thought I’m uncomfortable “paying people to not shoot each other”. It seems to create a perverse incentive. I.E. So, if I start shooting people on a regular basis will someone start paying me to stop shooting too?
But I’m willing to think about this more. If such concerns aren’t realized, the criminal homicides are dramatically decreased, and the costs associated with the programs are not extreme then I’m at a loss as to why one should be against it.—Joe]
Some sorta academic clown suggests he and some buddies might storm NRA headquarters.
It’d be like “The Keystone Cops Storm Okinawa.” Amusing, but rather messy for the cleanup crews. Of course an anti gunner sees nothing wrong with homicide, that’s not really the issue….
David Hardy
July 6, 2016
It is possible he and his friends might make it to the elevators
[Delusions are often functional.
In this case my hypothesis is the academic clown is able to imagine some sort of control over his hated enemy in his delusional universe and this gives him comfort that he is lacking in the real world.—Joe]
In my writings, when I first came out of Wall Street, I focused on debt, I focused on economics and I focused on financial markets. I did all of that stuff, but I stopped doing that for one simple reason. It was obvious to me . . . that this thing had only one way to go, which is a complete collapse of everything. We’re going to need to start over. There’s too much debt. There’s too much corruption. There’s too much BS. There’s too much war. There’s too much everything that is bad in this world, and debt is one aspect of it. Are we going to have to wipe out the debts one way or the other? Of course, we will. I guess the reason I have stopped talking about that and writing about that is because it is so obvious. So, what I have been doing over the last three years is getting people aware and engaged on everything, not just the economics, but the political corruption. Every single industry in this world is basically hitting peak corruption, peak shadiness, peak violence and peak everything. So, it’s not just the debt or the economies that are going to collapse, it’s everything, the political establishment and the social fabric. All of these things we have been living under our entire lives will be replaced by something else. . . . The only question is, are we going to get something better or are we going to get something worse?
Michael Krieger
July 3, 2016
Disintegration & Overthrow of Global Elite Regime-Michael Krieger
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
What liberated us? It might have been the printing press, or capitalism, or the sailing ship. But it might have been the gun. And if it was the gun that liberated us, then we should be very worried. Because when the Age of the Gun ends, the age of freedom and dignity and equality that much of humanity now enjoys may turn out to have been a bizarre, temporary aberration.
Noah Smith
March 11, 2014
Drones will cause an upheaval of society like we haven’t seen in 700 years
[We all know that the gun is civilization so that condition is met, but it’s not entirely clear to me that drones will eliminate the power of the gun. And drones are in the hands of private citizens as well as the government so it’s not a complete loss of power by the individual even if drones somehow make guns essentially obsolete.
But it is something to think about and I think a very real concern. Especially since the government is ahead of the curve some and is requiring registration of drones in this country. They missed the window of opportunity on registration of guns but they nailed it on drones.—Joe]
@AdamPiersen @JoeHuffman @TANSTAAFL23 @MarkAWebster1 @NeLoNe79 @FShagW yes which is y I never date gun nuts. No little puny cocks for me 🙂
SusanBerman @TripleMinority
Tweeted on January 8, 2016
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
Via a Tweet from Adam Pierson @AdamPiersen.—Joe]
I don’t know what the solution is, but historically speaking: resets that occur when that which cannot continue, doesn’t are messy. Very messy. Voting for either of the bifactional pro-State ruling parties is not going to help, because neither of them are dedicated to the ideals or ideas set out in our founding documents, or espoused by our founding fathers. They do not even seem to understand them.
Interesting times are afoot, and those that are easily offended are going to see what “going all the way to 11” really means before too many more years have passed.
Rolf Nelson
July 4, 2016
Happy 4th
[I could see this being a prophecy which comes true.—Joe]
They’ve got hate, and a holy mandate to build Utopia – on our corpses, if history is any guide. We’ve got a populace that knows something is wrong, but has been robbed of the education necessary to grasp exactly what and then reason themselves out of the problem by the same forces that are intent on building that Utopia. Instead, a significant portion voted for Donald Trump, mostly out of sheer frustration. Another example of pressing the “Fuck It” button.
This does not bode well for us.
Kevin Baker
July 4, 2016
Pressing the “Fuck It” Button
[Kevin and I have had private conversations on this, more than once, into the wee hours of the morning. I tend to think he is a bit too pessimistic and he thinks I am too optimistic.
I suspect we are getting scary close to finding out who is more nearly correct. Fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.—Joe]
As I watched that first debate, and I heard Hillary Clinton answer the question about her enemies, my mouth dropped to the floor. I couldn’t believe what I had just heard from someone who wants to lead this country. She just called 5 million law-abiding Americans her enemy, and she was proud of it! Of all the atrocities going on in the world, we are what she sees as an enemy?
In this day and age, when we are constantly being lectured on “acceptance” and “tolerance” of people who don’t look or act like us, how is it acceptable for a presidential candidate to call out gun owners as enemies? This seems like textbook bullying tactics—maybe worse. Her comments segregate, demonize, blame, and suggest that we don’t have common sense if we disagree with what she and her anti-Second Amendment cronies define as “common-sense gun control.”
Dianna Muller
22-year Tulsa Police Department veteran and professional 3-gun world champion.
July 6, 2016
Hillary’s Enemies List: Dianna Muller
[Of course the NRA and gun owners are at the top of her enemies list. We are in a 5th or 6th Generation War. We must recognize this and respond accordingly or we will be defeated and probably handled just as leftist have treated their defeated enemies in the past.—Joe]
The truth is quite simple. IslamoNazi ideology is spreading like a cancer across the globe. The only way to defeat this scourge is on the battlefield, and through effective counter propaganda.
America accomplished these twin goals in World War II — by reducing Germany and Japan to ashes. Half-measures are doomed to failure. The only language radical Islam understands is the language of brute power.
And apparently, the only language the Democrats understand is Orwellian Newspeak.
Robert J. Avrech
June 21, 2016
Democrats Believe Orlando Massacre is America’s Fault
[While I agree with most of this there is a difference between WW II and now. We are now in a 4th generation style war which is primarily composed of violent non-state actors instead of nation states. Our response to the asymmetric war we are in must be different than that of WW II. My hypothesis is that the best response will involve an increase in the non-state actors on our side as well as our traditional military forces. My vision of our non-state actors are private citizens able and willing to deliver firepower to the enemy in the first few seconds of an attack.
Defenseless innocent people are an invitation to attack. Politicians who disarm people via “gun-free zones” should be considered guilty of treason in the time of war and treated as such.—Joe]