Category Archives: Quote of the Day

Quote of the day—Italian Rose

Posted on by

The 10-round limit is a reasonable common sense restriction that should be adopted nationwide. I think, myself, that the 10 round limit is way too liberal. First, you could only hunt in most jurisdictions with 5 rounds in a magazine, so a more reasonable restriction would be a 5-round magazine not a 10. Additionally, since all repeating firearms and handguns are considered terrorist grade weapons, the American Civilian should be regimented to single shot drop breach long guns and break in half single shot shotguns

Italian Rose
May 30, 2014
Comment to The history of magazines holding 11 or more rounds: Amicus brief in 9th Circuit
[We’ve seen the words of this fruitcake before (and here and here). Even though a case could be made for it I can’t believe this is sarcasm. Apparently they have no respect for the Bill of Rights or basic moral principles.

And just what do they think should be done with all the existing guns in private hands that don’t conform to their tyrannical view? Don’t let anyone tell you that no one want to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Paul M. Barrett

Posted on by

A despairing parent gets wide latitude. But the NRA didn’t kill young Chris. Elliott Rodger did.

Paul M. Barrett
May 27, 2014
Santa Barbara Massacre Defies Gun Control, Mental Health Proposals: 4 Blunt Points
[That’s pretty much how I feel about the father of one of the victims as well. I’m not comfortable being critical of his inflammatory and erroneous statements when he is half-crazy with grief. If he keeps it up for a month or two then correcting him in a more firm manner becomes appropriate.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Cavebot

Posted on by

Holster your weapons, try not to think about your shitty job, try not to think about the meaninglessness within the cult of individualism, and try not to think about your tiny cock.

Cavebot
May 26, 2014
Stop Making Sense
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via email from Bob S.

I find it revealing that he makes reference to “the cult of individualism”. One might infer that he has a preference for the cult of collectivism. I would have thought that the hundreds of millions of dead in the last century because of that cult would be enough to dissuade most from that particular line of thinking.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Hans vlasveld

Posted on by

No private individual must not be in possession of ANY gun ever, only those who are to protect us and are trained, with very few exceptions like rifles only (always locked up and registered for hunting & large farms that can prove they are needed to protect their cattle or.? So, absolutely no guns will mean a drastically reduced deaths. Any one who thinks contrary does not respect life. Period! Is mentally disturbed & a murderer!!!

Hans vlasveld
May 29, 2014
Comment to 7 Lies We Need to Stop Telling About Gun Control in America
[Got that? If anyone doesn’t think as he does about the right to keep and bear arms they are mentally disturbed and a murderer.

So what do you suppose he thinks should be done with us? It’s got to be one of the psych ward, prison, or execution, right? So, is he going to be taking point on the visit to my house?—Joe]

Quote of the day—NRA-ILA

Posted on by

As anyone who has gone through the process to legally obtain a firearm in Massachusetts knows, there is no dearth of existing laws that regulate the sale, purchase and transfer of firearms. The question should be what gun control laws should be repealed, NOT enacted.

NRA-ILA
May 30, 2014
Massachusetts: House Speaker Introduces Sweeping Gun Control Legislation
[Emphasis in the original.

“The question that should be” asked is applicable to all the states as well as the Federal Government.

Of the simple answers the most correct one is, “All of them.”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Scott Martelle

Posted on by

As for handguns, assault-style weapons, etc., let’s have a flat-out ban. Beyond the histrionics of the gun lobby, there is no defensible reason for such weapons to be a part of our culture. They exist for one purpose: to kill.

Scott Martelle
May 28, 2014
You say gun control doesn’t work? Fine. Let’s ban guns altogether.
[H/T to Sebastian.

Don’t ever let anyone tell you no one wants to take your guns. This is from the Los Angles Times’ Opinion Staff.

He dismisses the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms with:

One can hope that the court will someday go further than its recognition that the 2nd Amendment is not an absolute right and determine that rampant gun ownership is a public safety threat. And that Congress will push legislation that recognizes that the heavy societal costs of gun ownership outweigh any 2nd Amendment pretense to the right to own guns.

He dismisses self-defense with:

Impossible to measure because of a lack of trustworthy data.

This is even though his cited source, Paul Barrett, says the lower limit on estimated defensive gun use in the U.S. is about 100,000/year which exceeds the murders by a factor of ten.

It is apparently beyond his ability to accept the realities of the Supreme Court ruling that firearm in common use, and handguns in particular are protected. This is in the ruling he linked to! Then after realizing numbers and simple arithmetic are apparently beyond his grasp we could suggest he look to the “success” of banning things which have far less benefit and probably more harm, such as recreational drugs. How did the prohibition of alcohol work out? And the continuing ban of hardcore recreational drugs? Maybe he would like to extend the bans of those things harmful to other things such as tobacco? How does he think that would turn out? We already have a large black market in cigarettes because of the high taxes on them.

But we shouldn’t bother speculating. He obviously has crap for brains and is incapable of extrapolating past the end of his nose.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Janey Rountree

Posted on by

There is no question it will be the smartest, toughest regulation on gun stores in the country. It’s designed to prevent gun trafficking and illegal sales in these stores.

Janey Rountree
Chicago mayor’s deputy chief of staff for public safety
May 28, 2014
Chicago mayor pushes plan requiring all gun sales to be videotaped
[I don’t care what it is “designed to prevent”. I care about results. The city of Chicago could pass a law requiring chastity belts for all women which was “designed to prevent” prostitution and unwanted pregnancy but that doesn’t mean it would achieve the desired goal or be constitutional.

For decades the city banned handguns and yet the cops confiscated about 7,000 guns a year. So how is the plan for videotaping the sales, limiting sales to about 0.5% of the city’s geographic area, and limiting sales to one per month per buyer going to be measurably better than the way gun stores are regulated in the more free states?

If they think it will be so successful then why don’t they place the same restrictions on alcohol and tobacco sales to prevent them from getting in the hands of minors. Or the sales of illegal recreational drugs? Oh, yeah. Those are even more tightly regulated yet any high school dropout can get anything they want within a few minutes, 24/7, from all the “unlicensed” drug dealers.

This law is not “smart”. It’s crap for brains stupid. It’s unconstitutional. And those that voted for it should be prosecuted.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle

Posted on by

Anyone who uses the word “profit” as a dirty word should be watched very, very carefully. If they hate the idea of gain through free trade it can only mean that they’re looking to get it through robbery.

Lyle
May 27, 2014
Comment to Quote of the day—reality
[I’ve often had similar thoughts but hadn’t put them into words as well as Lyle did.—Joe]

Quote of the day—reality

Posted on by

The NRA is primarily in it for money and profit, and have demonstrated that they don’t give a SH about you and your family. They are not protecting your gun rights to have a gun (because no one is trying to ban all guns) – they are protecting THEIR PROFITS. Keep being ignorant and voting with them, and see how far it gets you . . .

reality
May 26, 2014
Comment to Shooter’s rage at women too familiar in America
[“reality” appears to be living in an alternate reality because in my universe the NRA is a nonprofit organization, does a lot to protect our right to keep and bear arms, and there are a lot of people who want to ban all guns.

I wonder what color the sky is in their world.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brandon Watson

Posted on by

It seems the hot shots of Come and Take It Austin took umbrage to a SXSW panel about social media and gun control. With toddlers in tow, they marched down Sixth Street last Saturday waving flags and revolvers.

…

Still, those of you who were actually invited to our city’s annual party should know that this isn’t exactly everyday behavior. It is true that Texans do enjoy firepower. It is de rigueur for GOP politicians to be photographed at firing ranges, and even our bright liberal beacon Sen. Wendy Davis supports open-carry laws. But in Austin, most of us are content to keep our phallic symbols in our pants.

Without wading into the larger gun-control debate, these kinds of protests are not about the concept of “liberty” that Infowars slings around like a short-order cook. They are about display and braggadocio.

Brandon Watson
March 12, 2014
No, Armed Protests Are Not Normal in Austin
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

H/T to TriggerFinger for the email.—Joe]

Quote of the day—The_One_Pc

Posted on by

The type of gun control we have now doesn’t work. We need to outright repeal the 2nd Amendment.

The_One_Pc
May 24, 2014
Comment to Sheriff: Gunman killed 3 people at home before going on rampage
[If laws aren’t working then those laws need to be repealed. You don’t double down on something you admit isn’t working.

The drug control laws aren’t working either. What does he advise to remedy that problem?

Or how about the laws against people under 21 drinking alcohol? What does he recommend for that?

Even though the guy has crap for brains, don’t let anyone tell you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mark O’Mara

Posted on by

Our Constitution is a resilient force, and our Bill of Rights has survived countless modifications and restrictions without the erosion of fundamental freedoms. Our Second Amendment right is no different: It can survive modification and restriction without the fear that it will vanish altogether.

Mark O’Mara
May 2, 2014
I’m a gun owner and I want gun control
[“…without fear that it will vanish altogether”! That’s his criteria for the preservation of a specific enumerated right? So as long as you get permission from the government to checkout your single shot .22 rifle once a month at the gun range and use it under close supervision before checking it back your right to keep and bear arms hasn’t been infringed, right?

Let’s test this concept with some other rights:

  • Your right to freedom of speech hasn’t vanished altogether as long as you are given a “free speech zone” a mile from the nearest person that might be offended.
  • Your right freedom of religion hasn’t vanished altogether as long as you tithe 10% to the one government approved church regardless of which of the other two approved religions you more closely align with.
  • Your right to not have government agents quartered in your home hasn’t vanished altogether as long as you get one day a month without them.
  • Your right to be free from involuntary servitude hasn’t vanished altogether as long as you get one day a week to yourself.

I would like to suggest that O’Mara review the concept of “strict scrutiny” in regards to constitutionally protected rights. But I fear his ability to think rationally has vanished altogether.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Bryan Miller

Posted on by

No law abiding citizen needs 15-round magazines.

In mass shootings, the shooter is overwhelmed at the point he has to re-load. That provides the rest of us opportunities to stop the carnage.

Bryan Miller
Executive director of the anti-violence group Heeding God’s Call.
May 23, 2014
New Jersey gun control bill passes Assembly, heads to governor’s desk
[First off, it’s a Bill of Rights. Not a Bill of Needs.

Second, magazines of 15, 20, and 30 rounds are “in common use” and hence protected under the Heller decisions.

Third,  in mass shootings the shooter should be overwhelmed by incoming lead by about the second or third shot, not the 10th.

Fourth, think about trying to overwhelm this old fart during magazine changes or even during the malfunction clearance:

It’s not going to go well for anyone that tries. The only thing that is stopping someone with even a moderate amount of training is a good guy with a gun or the exhaustion of his ammo supply.

This law is only useful for handicapping those who obey it. Those will overwhelmingly be people protecting innocent lives.

I look forward to the eventual prosecution of Miller and all those who voted for this law which will do nothing but protect criminals.—Joe]

Quote of the day—TriggerFinger

Posted on by

You have to be really, really good to get to the targets at the top of the hill if you start at the bottom. You see, the really good folks tend to start at the top…

TriggerFinger
May 18, 2014
Boomershoot math
[I have nothing to add but my laughter.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Zack Beauchamp

Posted on by

There is no longer any defensible argument for a constitutional right to own a firearm, if there ever was.

Zack Beauchamp
February 20, 2014
Ban the Second Amendment: Imagine the Second Amendment didn’t exist, and try arguing for a constitutional right to gun ownership. You will fail.
[H/T to Kurt Hofmann.

Self defense, one of the easiest ways to argue it to most people is dismissed with:

The second argument in favor of untrammeled gun ownership, a right to self-defense, is equally incoherent. For starters, there’s no reason that, in a civil society, the right to defend yourself implies the right to defend yourself however you’d like. A basic part of government’s job is to limit our ability to hurt others; assuming the absolute right to self-defense constitutes, in Alan Jacobs’ evocative phrasing, “the absolute abandonment of civil society.”

Here you can see some of his incredibly scary mindset. “A basic part of government’s job is to limit our ability to hurt others”. Wow!

It’s that same old prevention instead of punishment argument. In my mind one of the characteristics of a free society is that you are free to make mistake, or be evil, it’s just that you will suffer the consequences of your actions if you do. Except in extreme outlier cases, such as true weapons of mass destruction, the government should not ever be granted the power to prevent ordinary people from doing whatever it is they want to do. In terms of citizen/citizen interaction government power is only granted to punish those that infringe upon the rights of others.

Beauchamp’s mindset is that of one who yearns for an all powerful, all seeing, all protective government. A government with widespread informants which interrogates and tortures people in response to anonymous or torture induced testimony. That is the only way you can even hope to approach a preventive model for citizens hurting others.

Beauchamp should study history rather than yearn for an utopia who’s quest has resulted in the murder of 10’s of millions by their own government in the 20th Century.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

Posted on by

To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good, or else that it’s a well-considered act in conformity with natural law. Fortunately, it is in the nature of the human being to seek a justification for his actions.

Macbeth’s self-justifications were feeble—and his conscience devoured him. Yes, even Iago was a little lamb too. The imagination and the spiritual strength of Shakespeare’s evildoers stopped short at a dozen corpses. Because they had no ideology.

Ideology—that is what gives evildoing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination. That is the social theory which helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and others’ eyes, so that he won’t hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise and honors. That was how the agents of the Inquisition fortified their wills: by invoking Christianity; the conquerors of foreign lands, by extolling the grandeur of their Motherland; the colonizers, by civilizations; the Nazis, by race; and the Jacobins (early and late), by equality, brotherhood, and the happiness of future generations.

Thanks to ideology, the twentieth century was fated to experience evildoing on a scale calculated in the millions.

Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) pages 173 and 174.
[Those that believe in the power of the state to do good have and will use the state to enforce their ideology upon the unbelievers. They believe “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” The twentieth century saw 60 to 100 million people murdered by their governments to make the world a better place. Governments which believed the welfare of the nation took precedence over that of individuals. That is what their ideology enabled. The ideology of the U.S. Constitution is that government has a very limited role, must be given only a small set of enumerated powers, and must respect the rights of the individual. That is why the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The oppressed individuals in the great massacres of the 20th Century always vastly outnumbered their active oppressors. This is why the ideologies of those who believe in the power of the state always include the disarming of the individual. The armed individual is too dangerous to their ideology.

Let’s not let the 21st Century ideologies that succeed be those that enable the murder of 10s or 100s of millions.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Oliver Willis

Posted on by

@JayCaruso no, out of touch with the avg maryland voter, who isnt some gun nut compensating for something missing. @JeffQuinton

Oliver Willis
Tweeted on March 23, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

H/T to Jay Caruso in his post The Liberal Mindset As It Relates To Guns And The Second Amendment—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ludwig von Mises

Posted on by

The welfare of the nation takes precedence over the selfishness of the individuals … was the fundamental principle of Nazi economic management. But as people are too dull and too vicious to comply with this rule, it is the task of government to enforce it.

Ludwig von Mises
1949
Human Action: A Treatise on Economics (4 Volume Set)
[For more context see here.

“Dull and vicious.” That is what they think of you if you do not place the welfare of the nation above that of your own. When people tell you this today inform them there have been a lot of people in agreement with them. It was the fundamental principle of Nazi economic management.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jay Leno

Posted on by

We wanted a president that listens to all Americans – now we have one. Yeah.

Actually, President Obama clarified the situation today. He said no one is listening to your phone calls. The president said it’s not what the program is all about. You know, like the IRS isn’t about targeting certain political groups. That’s not what it’s about!

I mean what’s going on? The White House has looked into our phone records, checking our computers, monitoring our e-mails. When did the government suddenly become our psycho ex-girlfriend? When did that happen?

Jay Leno
June 7, 2013
From here.

[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ayn Rand

Posted on by

There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism – by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.

Ay Rand
“Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main Weapon,”
The Los Angeles times, Sept. 9, 1962, G2
From here.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]