Category Archives: Quote of the Day

Quote of the day—Stanwyck

Posted on by

Freud was right – men with little guns…buy big guns. (meanwhile, our liberal men? They’re just fine with the guns they were born with)

Stanwyck
January 10, 2013
Comment to Tactical Response CEO Threatens To ‘Start Killing People’ Over Possible Obama Gun Measure (VIDEO)
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

My second thought, after “Markley’s law!”, was, “Citation needed.” I don’t ever recall Freud saying anything like that.

As a side note, it is widely believed that Freud did say (with the citation of General Introduction to Psychoanalysis), “A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.” I cannot find that phrase in the book and Wikiquote claims it is misattributed.

The following, from Dreams in Folklore (1958), p. 33, comes sort of close:

The representation of the penis as a weapon, cutting knife, dagger etc., is familiar to us from the anxiety dreams of abstinent women in particular and also lies at the root of numerous phobias in neurotic people.

—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ann Coulter

Posted on by

The “general welfare” is every tyrant’s excuse, going back to Robespierre and the guillotine. Free people are not in the habit of providing reasons why they “need” something simply because the government wants to ban it. That’s true of anything — but especially something the government is constitutionally prohibited from banning, like guns.

The question isn’t whether we “need” guns. It’s whether the government should have a monopoly on force.

In liberals’ ideal world, no one will even know you don’t have to wait 22 minutes for the police when someone breaks into your home, there are toilets that can get the job done on one flush, food tastes better with salt, and you can drive over 55 mph and get there faster.

Meanwhile, we’re all required to subsidize their hobbies — recycling, abortion, the “arts,” bicycling, illegal alien workers, etc.

Liberals ought to think about acquiring a new hobby: leaving people alone.

Ann Coulter
February 27, 2013
WHY DOES ANYONE NEED TO READ ABOUT CELEBRITIES?
[The one thing I would add is that the “question” as to whether the government should have a monopoly on force has been answered. The answer is not just “No”, but “HELL NO!” There are about 100 million reasons (bodies) that answered that question in the 20th Century alone.

But then Liberals know they can’t implement “justice” without a monopoly on force. Force is part of their nature.—Joe]

Quote of the day—TriggerFinger

Posted on by

It’s nothing more than the alpha bitch baring her teeth and growling at us. She doesn’t want to ban guns. She wants us to submit, to roll over and show our throat and our belly. She wants submission. She wants to be acknowledged as higher status than us.

But you know what makes them come after us again and again? What really pisses them off? What keeps this issue coming back over and over again when any other political issue would be debated, legislated, victory won or lost and then forgotten?

We fight back. We refuse to submit. We refuse to show our belly. We refuse to show submission. We will not surrender. We will not submit. Maybe we lose, and retreat to lick our wounds, but we come back later even stronger than before, and every time that alpha bitch looks away from her nice, comfy top of the pack status, we’re there to steal her food and challenge all over again.

It’s all a status display, and we will not submit.

That’s why they are gun bigots. Bigotry is the ultimate status display.

TriggerFinger
February 27, 2013
Comment to More on that Canton police freak-out.
[TriggerFinger is explaining why anti-gun politicians don’t care that their laws don’t make sense and are ineffective at doing anything more than making us mad.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb

Posted on by

They should take a day off and visit the monuments at Lexington and Concord, and reflect on what prompted those colonists to stand their ground. It was the first time in American history that the government moved to seize arms and ammunition from its citizens, and it went rather badly for the British.

Beneath the surface many Americans are convinced that we may be approaching a point when the true purpose of the Second Amendment is realized.

Alan Gottlieb
February 5, 2013
Firearms ban also attacks the First Amendment
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew Cuomo

Posted on by

When people understand what the law is really about, and it’s not about taking their gun or a government intrusion on the Second Amendment, they’ll feel better about it.

Andrew Cuomo
New York State Governor
February 27, 2013
N.Y. gun law mandates magazines that don’t exist
[Do rape victims “feel better about it” when they find out their attacker won’t be prosecuted?

Governor Cuomo, this can and will be used as evidence against you at your trial.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David W.

Posted on by

Wait so, he requires you to have the guns, so he can shove them up YOUR ass?

He’s not going to bring his own guns or else he would say “I’ll shove my gun up your ass”.

So basically he is threatening someone, with guns, and the threat is to shove said guns up the gun owners ass…

Me thinks he is infinity fries short of a happy meal…

David W.
February 26, 2013
Comment to Another threat
[Barb L. and I were discussing, laughing, and shaking our heads at this very thing at the same time David W. was leaving his comment.

I was talking to AlphaMike about this nutcase as well. He said, “Obviously he has never met you or he would not have made any threats.”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Nuclear Unicorn

Posted on by

But let us assume, for the moment, that gun control advocates are correct in their descriptions of gun rights advocates with monikers of “paranoid” and nuts”.

Why would the gun control advocates, who are presumably unarmed, willing to antagonize heavily-armed paranoid nuts who are on guard against gun seizures?

What do they do for an encore? Take ventriloquist lessons and hang out in rooms filled with schizophrenics holding sharp objects?

Nuclear Unicorn
February 2, 2011
A thread at the Democratic Underground.
[H/T to Cargosquid who sent me the link via email.

As Nuclear Unicorn further elaborates, “It’s either a really dumb plan of action or a wildly gross mischaracterization of the pro-rights side.”

But that’s only if you are thinking rationally. With most anti-gun people suffering from Peterson Syndrome rational thought is an empty phrase.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Sealabian

Posted on by

I suspect that for this fellow, his guns are compensation for a miniscule “endowment”.

Sealabian
January 10, 2013
Comment to Tactical Response CEO Threatens To ‘Start Killing People’ Over Possible Obama Gun Measure (VIDEO)
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

Quote of the day–snipe ツ

Posted on by

IMHO, best defense against sexism in tech is to be a badass woman. Prove every archaic stereotype irrefutably wrong and set great examples.

snipe ツ (@snipeyhead)
Tweeted on February 23, 2013
[Being a “badass” woman with a gun could be a great part of that.—Joe]

Quote of the day—milquetoast

Posted on by

I think it is probably much simpler. Some antis are at ease lying through their teeth about an “assault weapon” being full auto, they’ll lump suicides together with homicides to try to inflate statistics, they’ll lie about what the laws currently are, they’ll lie about the our motivations, they’ll lie about the effects gun control will have, etc…

That they include ad hominen attacks in their repertoire is no surprise. They do it for the same reason they lie : because it often works.

milquetoast
February 23, 2012
Comment to An explanation for Markley’s Law.
[While I can believe, nay I know, this is true for some of them I think more commonly the reason is they have found themselves cornered. In their desperation they think themselves clever to make a jab at their opponent’s expense. It changes the subject and can put their opponent on the defensive.

Still, the bottom line is the same. It often works.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Nelson Lund

Posted on by

Anyone who thinks the anti-tyranny function of the Second Amendment is completely irrelevant today should also spend some time considering the historical experience of black Americans. At least until quite recently, one of the chief purposes of many gun control laws was to help secure the political subordination of the black population. That goal was successfully achieved for a long time, but it might not have been so easy if blacks had enjoyed the same right of access to firearms that the white population reserved for itself.

Nelson Lund, J.D., Ph.D.
June 2002
A Primer on the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms
[Also highly recommended reading is The Racist Roots of Gun Control by Clayton Cramer and:

See also several QOTDs by the author of the book.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Yowan

Posted on by

Quote of the day—mikeb302000

Posted on by

Linoge, You and Joe are too strong for me. By that I mean a great compliment. Your knowledge of the subject is too great for me to compete with. I’ve said this to Kevin a while back. Yet, as prolix and fact-laden as you guys are, I don’t find the argument convincing. I honestly read what you write, but I cannot answer your first question about what it would take to convince me.

mikeb302000
Comment on February 15, 2010 to Direct confrontation with the Brady Campaign
[mikeb302000 is one of the few anti-gun bloggers in existence. He used to frequently comment on here on my blog. I was one of the few bloggers that didn’t ban him.

He also doesn’t know how to determine truth from falsity.

A response such as his is fairly common when I debate this face to face. Those that remain stuck to their fallacious beliefs cannot tell me what it would take to change their beliefs and furthermore cannot tell me how they determine truth from falsity. That should be very telling.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Rivrdog

Posted on by

Do NOT be deluded into thinking that this push for gun control is about CRIME control. It isn’t, it’s about removing the guns from ALL of the society so as to make way for an uncontested dictatorship.

The only thing we can’t know yet is how benevolent the dictatorship might or might not be. In other words, will our enslavement be easy or harsh.

Also, do not be deluded that we aren’t already in the fight. The line between us being considered as dissidents exercising our rights and the putative dictatorship considering us insurgents is but a line in the sand, and the blowing wind will soon cover that line.

Rivrdog
February 17, 2013
Comment to Quote of the day—Nicholas James Johnson
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tom Tatum

Posted on by

Is there a way to substitute a different compensation item instead of guns for insecure young and middle-aged men? #guncontrol #alexjones

Quote of the day—Nicholas James Johnson

Posted on by

Without a commitment to or capacity for eliminating the existing inventory of private guns, the supply-side ideal and regulations based on it cannot be taken seriously. It is best to acknowledge the blocking power of the remainder and adjust our gun control regulations and goals to that reality. Policymakers who continue to press legislation grounded on the supply-side ideal while disclaiming the goal of prohibition are deluded or pandering.

Nicholas James Johnson
Fordham University School of Law
December 1, 2008
Imagining Gun Control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem
[H/T to eriko in the comment to this post.

Just reading the abstract is scary eye-opening. Here are just a couple sentences:

the temptation is to view Heller as the central obstacle to effective gun control. This is a mistake born of our failure to confront the incoherence of pre-Heller supply-side controls. This article elaborates the supply-side ideal as the foundation of our most ambitious gun control proposals, explains the remainder problem and the defiance impulse as both cultural and physical phenomena that block supply-side rules, and evaluates a series of familiar gun-control proposals in the context of these structural barriers in order to identify which can work and which cannot.

Some of our opponents are far more intelligent than we give them credit for. Not all of them are the almost useful idiots like MikeB302000 and Japete.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Kurt Hofmann

Posted on by

If the Obama regime wants to “buy” our guns, it had better be prepared to pay in blood.

Kurt Hofmann
February 14, 2013
NIJ memo shows new gun laws can only ‘work’ with registration, confiscation
[H/T to David Hardy.

The memo referred to, and marked up by, presumably, the NRA is extremely revealing. It is mandatory reading for insight into the Obama administration. They know the laws they propose are and will be ineffective. They aren’t stupid. They aren’t ignorant. They are evil.

Update: This NRA video should have been part of the original post:

—Joe]

Quote of the day—Bernardine Dohrn

Posted on by

There’s no way to be committed to non-violence in one of the most violent societies that history has ever created. I’m not committed to non-violence in any way.

Bernardine Dohrn
In the 2002 documentary film The Weather Underground. Get the movie from Amazon here.
[From the Wikipedia entry:

Dohrn with ten other SDS members associated with the RYM issued, on June 18, 1969, a sixteen-thousand-word manifesto entitled, “You Don’t Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows” in New Left Notes.

…

The manifesto stated that “the goal [of revolution] is the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism.”

Leftists know their agenda can only be implemented with violence. Government is violence and the threat of violence. They wish to use government to create their utopia. To advocate non-violence and have a leftist philosophy is a contradiction. To allow people not of the government to have the means to resist government is to allow their idyllic future to be denied.

The murdering, anti-gun, pro-leftist, ex-cop, from Los Angeles who was killed this week is just one in a long line of his type.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Michael Williamson

Posted on by

Who do I have to hate to be considered tolerant?

Michael Williamson
February 13, 2013
Comment to The Closet of Self-Censorship
[Liberals consider themselves tolerant but many hate people on the right and gun owners in particular with a burning passion that includes a desire for our deaths.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brian Schuetz

Posted on by

Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

Brian Schuetz
President
Olympic Arms, Inc.
February 12, 2013
This was in response to oppressive and clearly unconstitutional legislation by the state of New York.
[This is the same as the boycotting of countries that fail to recognize basic human rights. The right to keep and bear arms is a basic human right and governments that infringe upon the right need to be sent a strong message. This is one part of that message.—Joe]