Quote of the day—Excelsior

This is never going to end until we make it illegal to own firearms. Until then, thousands of innocent people will die every year. So this country has a choice – either give up the deadly weapons or admit the selfish desire to pack heat is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for all those deaths. There is no other way around it – you own a gun, you’re part of the problem. Period.

Excelsior
November 24, 2011
Comment to Dear Amy, Should I Let My Holiday Guests Pack Heat?
[[sarcasm] And the abuse of recreational drugs and alcohol is never going to end until we make it illegal to own them either. [/sarcasm]

I’m always surprised that people who make claims like this were smart enough to assemble a sentence that was intelligible. They could not possibly have given their views more than a second or two of thought. Of course the last two sentences demonstrate they think proof by vigorous assertion is valid too.

It’s pure crap for brains.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Crotalus

The U.S. is done. It’s all over but the killing and eating. I just hope we have the ‘nads to never let another government take root in this country. Governments are always corrupt. Always.

Crotalus
November 9, 2011
Comment to Theory.
[Ubu52’s comments here reminded me of this quote.

While I could find a lot to agree with this I fear that for the foreseeable future government will always be a necessary evil. Hence the best we can do is minimize the evil. We probably will not be able to eliminate it without going to a small tribal society which looks to be an even worse option.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Anonymous

NJ is in the dark ages trying to eliminate violent crime with bloodletting, that is the blood of crime victims, disarmed by their state’s archaic gun control laws and forced to face violent criminals on the streets that do not obey those laws with nothing more than a cell phone in one hand and a prayer in the other.

Anonymous
November 28, 2011
Comment to Amick: Gun laws in the Garden State
[It’s an imperfect analogy because there are some diseases that are treated by bloodletting. There appear to be no benefits to restrictions on restricting access to handheld weapons. Hence NJ restrictions on the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms is more harmful than bloodletting.

However Anonymous is completely correct about NJ being in the dark ages where when dealing with guns, the citizen acts at his own peril. This is analogous to the 13th Amendment guaranteeing there is no slavery but saying black skinned people venture there at their own peril. It’s time, as before, to send in the U.S. Marshals and National Guard to set these bigots straight.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle

This is the power of victimhood in the “social justice” (Marxist) movement, and it’s why I’ve said many times that victimhood– real, genuine, beautiful, wonderful, rich and delicious victimhood, is so deeply cherished, sought after and uplifted with such passion by the left. It’s their gold and diamond currency and they mine it, mint it, wear it and show it off with a greedy, lusty fervor.

Lyle
November 30, 2011
Comment to Peterson Syndrome example.
[You don’t have to think about this very long to realize Lyle has nailed it.

The NRA says, “Refuse to be a victim” and trains people to enforce this refusal with knowledge, confidence, and, if necessary, force. The anti-gun people seek out victims, hire them, and not only enable more victims but work to force others into being victims.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Weer’d Beard

George Washington didn’t cross the Delaware River to get to his duck blind.

Weer’d Beard
November 30, 2011
The Other Way, Actually
[I like the way he said that.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Noam Chomsky

Government turns to clandestine terrorist operations when it is afraid of it’s own population.

Noam Chomsky
[I was reminded of this quote by various links to this article and related stuff.

But from actually reading the bill I don’t see what the big fuss is about:

Subtitle D—Detainee Matters

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

This appears to be consistent with my understanding of the Geneva and Hague Conventions in regards to acceptable conduct during war. When someone aids the enemy, on or off the battlefield, they are subject to detention, interrogation, trial, and if not a privileged combatant, even execution.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Texas Aggie

For the people who insist on carrying weapons, driving oversized pickups and HumVees to the 7/11, and similar manifestations of psychological problems, it isn’t that they’re paranoid, although that may also be a problem. Their major problem is a real or imagined dysfunction in their capacity to procreate. They may have tried the various “enlarge your penis” advertisements on the internet and none of them gave results, so now they go with an artificial sexual apparatus enhancer.

Texas Aggie
November 24, 2011
Comment to Dear Amy, Should I Let My Holiday Guests Pack Heat?
[Ahhhh yes. It’s the kindergarten kids talking about penises and giggling.

When in the context of gun owners it’s known as Markley’s Law.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Josh Sugarmann

Give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns.

Real gun control will take courage. In the long run, half-measures and compromises only sacrifice lives.

Josh Sugarmann
1999
Seattle and Honolulu shootings more reasons to regulate guns
[This is from the dark days of gun owner rights activism.

Sugarmann goes through regulatory proposals such as licensing, registration, expanding background checks at gun shows and stopping the import of high-capacity magazines. He then concludes a complete ban is the only rational conclusion.

I grudgingly admire Sugarmann for his genius in regards to “assault weapons” and his honesty in saying the endgame must be, always has been, and always will be a complete ban.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Exurban Kevin

It amuses me to no end that people who faint dead away at the thought of judging someone by their outside appearance have no problem judging the function and intent of an inanimate object by its outside appearance.

Exurban Kevin
November 22, 2011
Comment to SAF/Calguns Suit Against California Assault Weapons Ban
[For some reason it doesn’t amuse me. I’m inclined to call them intolerant, ignorant, bigots.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mark Schaffer

Your facts will not penetrate the rabid gun owners heads. Sad we can’t live in a civilized country with much lower rates of violence all in the name of ‘rights’.

Mark Schaffer
November 24, 2011
Comment to Argument for gun control is flimsy.
[“Rabid gun owners”? The only irrational, nearly foaming at the mouth with lies, people in the gun debate I know of have been on the anti-gun side.

But it’s nice to know what you think of gun owners. After all, we all know what is done with rabid animals.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dennis Henigan

We haven’t given up hope but our impatience is growing with each passing day.

Dennis Henigan
Acting president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence,
November 24, 2011
Tough politics for Obama on guns as 2012 election approaches
[Impatience? I would have thought it was desperation. And it’s the shrinking bank balance and public support that has to have him worried.

I long, and work toward, the day when he is worried about being prosecuted under 18 USC 241.—Joe]

Quote of the day—fr8dog

Many years ago, a young woman lived in Washington DC. Economic circumstances forced her to live in a high crime area & commute to work via metro, as as she couldn’t afford a car. As she walked home one evening she was followed by 2 dirt-bags who attacked her as she unlocked her front door. Over the next few hours she was repeatedly raped, her home ransacked & was beaten so badly her skull was fractured. She spent weeks in the hospital & Many months in rehab. Years later she’s not fully recovered. & never will be. But she’s fit enough to handle a gun which I gave her & now carries it when ever she leaves home. But isn’t this “illegal” in DC you ask? Ask her if she gives a $H1T.

Besides training her to use a gun, I’ve taught her the following:

  1. The 2nd Amd is the only CCW “permit” required. “Permission” NOT required to exercise a RIGHT.
  2. When SECONDS count, police are only MINUTES away.
  3. Better tried by 12 than carried by 6.
  4. My sister will NEVER AGAIN be a victim.

fr8dog
November 21, 2011
Comment to More women are using guns for fun and protection
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Josh Horwitz

The NRA’s greatest lie is its talking point that gun violence prevention laws in America are a “slippery slope” that will eventually lead to total confiscation of privately held firearms. What an absurdity that is today — 43 years after the signing of the 1968 Gun Control Act — as demented individuals like Jared Loughner and Nidal Malik Hasan continue to legally buy guns and carry them in our communities.

The reality is that the slippery slope has been running in the opposite direction the entire time — toward a future where even the most violent and deranged individuals can legally buy guns, legally carry them on the street, and legally bring them into churches, schools, daycare centers, public transportation, government buildings and the rest of our most sensitive public spaces.

Josh Horwitz
Executive Director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
The Real Slippery Slope of Gun Laws
November 16, 2011
[The government has NO business trying to prevent “gun violence”. If there isn’t a victim or imminent danger of permanent injury or death to an innocent person or serious property damage then the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms must be given precedence. This point is probably the most important one we should be making. It strikes at the very core of the “The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence” and the nearly all of the arguments of people like Horwitz want to make.

If Horwitz believes that since 1968 “the slippery slope has been running in the opposite direction the entire time” then he has crap for brains, he is lying, or he is so ignorant that he missed out on the following major gun bans (does not include hundreds of increased restrictions, registrations, and lawsuits):

  • 1976: Washington D.C. bans handguns and all other firearms must be rendered inoperable.
  • 1981: Morton Grove Illinois bans the sale, transportation, and ownership of handguns.
  • 1982: Chicago bans new registration of handguns.
  • 1982: Evanston, Illinois bans handguns.
  • 1984: Oak Park Illinois bans handguns.
  • 1986: Sales of new machine guns banned nationwide.
  • 1989: Highland Park Illinois bans handguns.
  • 1989: California bans “assault weapons”.
  • 1991: New Jersey bans “assault weapons”.
  • 1991: New York City bans “assault weapons” and gun registration lists were used by police to go door-to-door to confiscate them.
  • 1992: Chicago bans “assault weapons”.
  • 1993: Connecticut bans “assault weapons”.
  • 1994: Sales of new “Assault weapons” and magazines holding more than 10 rounds are banned nationwide.
  • 2000: New York state bans “assault weapons”.
  • 2004: Massachusetts (Mitt Romney, as governor, signed the bill into law) bans “assault weapons”.
  • 2005: New Orleans sends the police and the National Guard door to door to confiscate all firearms in the wake of hurricane Katrina.

And that doesn’t even include the U.S. politicians who said they were trying to ban firearms in the mid 1990s.

So which is it Josh? Are you ignorant, lying, and/or have crap for brains?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb

It’s an insult to be arrested once for violating a law that is so vague and ambiguous that law enforcement officers cannot tell the difference between what is and what is not a legal firearm under this statute but to be arrested and jailed twice for the same offense is an outrage. Brendan Richards’ dilemma is a textbook example of why the California statute should be nullified.

This nonsense has to stop and the only way to insure that is to show California’s assault weapon statutes and regulations are unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous. Brendan Richards is not the only citizen faced with this kind of harassment under color of law.

Alan M. Gottlieb
SAF Executive Vice President
November 21, 2011
SAF FILES CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF CALIFORNIA ‘ASSAULT WEAPONS’ LAW
[Go SAF  and CalGuns!

On my return trip from Reno for the Gun Blogger Rendezvous this year I was strongly advised by a lawyer and others from California to not traverse even a small corner of California even if I did not stop and fully complied with FOPA. I was forcefully told that many California police, prosecutors and judges do not recognize FOPA.

My response was, essentially, does this mean that Alabama and Mississippi don’t have to recognize the 13th Amendment or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? I was told that the Feds enforced those laws with the National Guard and the states backed off. In the case of FOPA the Feds would look the other way. In other words if I got caught with my everyday carry firearm and magazines, unloaded and locked inaccessible to driver and passengers I could spend weeks in jail and months in and out of the courts because the state of California believes it does not have to comply with Federal law.

It’s time the state of California got it’s nanny state tit wound up tight in a wringer.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Glen Utzman

People that make tax law must be drunk.

Glen Utzman
Fall Semester 2011
[Via daughter Kimberly who is taking a class from Professor Utzman.

Some of them certainly are drunk in the usual sense but a lot of them are “drunk” on power which is far worse than if it were just alcohol. But I suppose the symptoms in the tax law would be similar in both cases.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tam

Of course it will sell like gangbusters. This is, after all, a round marketed to people whose knowledge of terminal ballistics is so shaky that they’ve already bought a Taurus Judge for personal protection.

Tam
November 19, 2011
While, yes, it is technically a shotgun…
[I lifted my moratorium (no one else would have a chance if I didn’t put her in a special class) on Tam being my QOTD for this one.

When I first started getting into guns I would spend a lot of time reading magazine articles on terminal ballistics, the latest modern/high-performance/next-generation/whatever ammo. I fired various bullet styles in various weights into milk jugs filled with water. I bought and read various books. The various authors called each other names and said they were sloppy researchers, ignorant, and then got nasty with each other.

My conclusion from all of this was that the bullet MUST penetrate. Expansion is good but not required. The time spent reading and researching was better spent learning and practicing to put another bullet beside the first one in the minimum time possible.

Tam, in her post, nails it. This round only needs to be given a couple of seconds of consideration before totally rejecting it in favor of almost any other round unless you are defending yourself from anemic rabbits three feet away nibbling on your strawberries.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Solomon Friedman

Responsible citizens do not cease to act responsibly merely due to the presence of tools.

Solomon Friedman
November 15, 2011
Testimony at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (Canada).

[You would think this statement is blindly obvious but beliefs to the contrary have been around for centuries and persist to this today in the form of “gun control”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John/az

When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it’s yellow

John/az
From his signature line on a The Firing Line post May 4, 2000.
[Via a link from Tamara.—Joe]

Quote of the day—BitterB

I find it interesting that not a *single* member of the opposition to HR822 named the @bradybuzz position as a reason to oppose the bill.

Bloomberg was mentioned by many, but @bradybuzz seems to have become politically irrelevant.

BitterB
November 16, 2011 in two Tweets: here and here.
In regards to the debate over HR822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.
[And The Brady Campaign should be politically irrelevant. The KKK and similar anti-civil rights organizations are no longer relevant are they?

Their “membership” is non-existent, their donations are in the tank, and now important people don’t listen to them. They should just give it up, change their names, and rejoin civilized society.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aesop

Any excuse will serve a tyrant.

Aesop
[It is also true that any excuse will serve those that enable tyrants. Here are some of the many I have come across:

  • It’s for the children.
  • No one needs one of those.
  • It’s an ASSAULT weapon!
  • It’s a collective, not an individual, right.
  • The Brady Act works. It has blocked XX million gun sales. (Never mind that no measurable increase in safety has occurred. The mere fact that sales have been blocked is proof of success.)
  • Road rage will become gun fights.
  • Assault clips can hold 30, 50, or even 100 rounds!
  • 32 rounds in just 16 seconds!
  • States and cities should be allowed to make their own laws.
  • The Federal government must do it because many states have lax laws.

It’s interesting how there are truths which appear to be universal yet people never learn.—Joe]