The fact is, the President’s gun control agenda will only make it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to self-defense.

Jennifer Baker
NRA spokeswoman
January 1, 2016
Gun Control Is Obama’s New Year’s Resolution
[Baker is correct.

Because gun control advocates don’t recognize the existence of or the legitimacy of self-defense they can convince themselves that any restriction on gun ownership is a good thing because it will make it harder for the bad guys to get guns. Any negative consequences of making it harder for good people to obtain or use guns is ignored and/or dismissed.

What is lost to many people is that restrictions on firearms ownership always affect the normally law abiding people far more than those who habitually disobey the law. Think of the illegal use of recreational drugs. How hard is it for someone to obtain and use them if they are willing to break the law? It’s trivially easy. But it is very difficult for someone to stay within the law and use those same drugs (they have to obtain and use them in a location outside the law such as in a different country or out at sea).

Making it difficult for the normally law-abiding to defend themselves is an extremely immoral act, a violation of our rights, and is, rightly so, a crime. These criminals should be arrested and prosecuted.—Joe]

The best evidence to date suggests that right-to-carry laws increase gun violence, so efforts to eliminate or tighten those laws and to oppose their adoption in the states that do have them would be prudent at this time. A recent study noted that since May 2007, 29 concealed carry permit holders have gone on shooting sprees that killed at least three individuals. In general, legislative tightening of those allowed to possess guns to the fullest extent that the Constitution allows is clearly worth exploring.

John Donohue
Stanford Law Professor
December 31, 2015
Improved gun buyer background checks would impede some mass shootings, Stanford expert says
[“Gun violence” is a totally false metric and is immediate disqualification for taking this “expert” seriously. “Gun violence” includes self-defense shootings, and ignores any increase in non-gun violence as a result of people being unable to defend themselves. This “expert” clearly has an prejudiced and bigoted agenda against the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. And he  does not even acknowledge the existence of such a right.

In eight years 29 of the millions of concealed carry permit holders have killed three people? How many people in that same time period with medical degrees, drivers licenses, and police badges kill? If Donohue’s claim is true then he just claimed we are extraordinarily safe people yet he presents it as if we are dangerous.

This is no different than someone discussing “black violence” and insisting government should enslave all people with black skin based on the number of crimes committed by such people and completely ignoring the 13th Amendment. Someone with Donohue’s attitude on fundamental human rights isn’t fit to clean the toilets at Stanford let alone represent them in public.—Joe]

Back in North Texas a young coed was visibly upset when interviewed on TV. The guy sitting next to her in class might whip out his concealed carry gun and start shooting, she feared. A libertarian would ask why she also didn’t fear that he might suddenly start bashing her with his MacBook or stabbing her with his BIC pen? Or maybe whipping out his concealed carry phallus and raping her? This is, after all, the same guy who has been sitting next to her all semester. Why the sudden irrational fear over a gun?

Why isn’t she reassured that another student sitting nearby with a gun will jump in and defend her? Why, in fact, doesn’t she just grow up, act like a responsible adult, get handgun certified and defend herself?

Maybe people just need to stop coddling and being coddled.

Garry Reed
December 29, 2015
Gun culture, anti-gun culture and Texas campus carry
[The anti-gun culture has nothing but childish insults so it seems entirely appropriate to speak to them as if they were children. Something like, “Go someplace else now, the adults are talking.” Or perhaps better yet tell them, “Grow up and act like adults instead of spoiled children.”—Joe]

So President Obama is welcome to sign all of the illegal executive orders he wants, where the rubber meets the road is who comes for our guns. And “assault weapons” are the least of their problems, because as a former professional military guy with 20+ years of service I have to tell you that as a commander sitting in the TC hatch of a tank or a Stryker or a Bradley the thing I would worry about most is a local deer/elk hunter with a dialed-in, high-powered, scoped, bolt-action rifle and the skill to hit me with one round in the head at 300 meters. “Molon Labe!”

Don Kaag
December 23, 2015
Facebook comment to Quote of the day—Kurt Schlichter
[Attend Boomershoot to learn and practice for 700 yards.—Joe]

So, how do liberals get their wish for a disarmed, subservient population? Because all this talk of gun banning – and now they are finally admitting that they want to take our guns – raises some practical questions. Not least among them is how you get a hundred million-plus armed citizens to cheerfully turn over their firearms at the behest of a bunch of liberals who have nothing but contempt for normal Americans.

…

Don’t count on our guys in uniform killing or dying to please a bunch of coastal liberals determined to turn American citizens into defenseless subjects. And the special snowflake spawn of the coastal elites certainly aren’t going to emerge from their safe spaces and gender studies seminars to suit up in Kevlar and kick in doors in Middle America.

Kurt Schlichter
December 17, 2015
Here’s What A Liberal ‘Gun-Grab’ Would Look Like And Why It Would Ultimately Fail
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Women have always had the right to bear arms, we have had the right to bear arms before we had the right to vote.  I just get mad when I hear people say I can’t carry here, or shouldn’t carry at all or that I need a magazine capacity restriction. Those people make me angry because they put me in danger and my children in danger. If they can hire personal security they can’t tell me how I can protect my children. They are trying to put me and other women at risk.

Dana Loesch
April 18, 2015
Dana Loesch – Truly A Well Armed Woman
[Of course they are trying to put women at risk. Then they can claim to be protecting them by passing still more laws. The more self reliant individuals are the less need there is for powerful politicians.—Joe]