Happy Friday you kings and queens, it’s always a good day to remind everyone that under that under The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Communists are not people.
The Redheaded libertarian @TRHLofficial
Tweeted on April 29, 2022
[Good to know. I’ll keep that in mind.—Joe]
The right to carry a bowie-knife for lawful defense is secured, and must be admitted. It is an exceeding destructive weapon. It is difficult to defend against it, by any degree of bravery, or any amount of skill. The gun or pistol may miss its aim, and when discharged, its dangerous character is lost, or diminished at least. The sword may be parried. With these weapons men fight for the sake of the combat, to satisfy the laws of honor, not necessarily with the intention to kill, or with a certainty of killing, when the intention exists. The bowie-knife differs from these in its device and design; it is the instrument of almost certain death. He who carries such a weapon, for lawful defense, as he may, makes himself more dangerous to the rights of others, considering the frailties of human nature, than if he carried a less dangerous weapon. Now, is the legislature powerless to protect the rights of others thus the more endangered, by superinducing caution against yielding to such frailties? May the state not say, through its law, to the citizen, “this right which you exercise, is very liable to be dangerous to the rights of others, you must school your mind to forbear the abuse of your right, by yielding to sudden passion; to secure this necessary schooling of your mind, an increased penalty must be affixed to the abuse of this right, so dangerous to others.”
John Gregg
Texas Appeals Court Judge
1859
John Cockrum v. The State Page 402
[Via The legal history of bans on firearms and Bowie knives before 1900 by David Kopel.
I found this take on the use of large knives versus guns very interesting. There are several facets to this, but the following is the most intriguing. Those who would restrict access to guns would increase the use of weapons the courts have found to be more deadly.—Joe]
Perez-Gallan had a restraining order issued against him, in which case federal law prohibits the possession of a firearm.
Counts ruled that the federal government’s disarming of Perez-Gallan did not sufficiently consider the historical context of domestic abuse law when revoking his Second Amendment rights. In September, the same judge ruled that it’s unconstitutional to disarm somebody who has been indicted but hasn’t been convicted yet.
William Melhado
November 14, 2022
Federal judge in Texas rules that disarming those under protective orders violates their Second Amendment rights
[Nice!
It is long past time which the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms was recognized as a first class right instead of an embarrassing dog turd on the bottom of someone’s shoe.
I would think there are some due process issues involved as well.—Joe]
Wow can you even see your own penis?
Johnny Memphis @johnnymemphis
Tweeted on June 6, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!
When they have no facts, no principles, and no legal argument they let you have it with the best they can delivery… childish insults.
Via a tweet from In Chains @InChainsInJail.—Joe]
Ladies and gentlemen of the 97 Percent panel, thank you for letting me participate in the conference today as a representative of the gun community. I appreciate and endorse your stated mission of reducing gun deaths in America by conducting original research to identify common ground, to change the conversation around gun safety to include gun owners, and to leverage technology to make our communities safer. All of these goals are goals that the gun community shares with you.
But I must tell you something very important.
I have never heard a more delusional, more dishonest stream of bad faith bullshit as I have just heard. You all should be ashamed of yourselves.
Handwaving Freakoutery
November 18, 2022
Ninety Seven Percent: Epistemic status: gun policy fiction based on that embarrassingly awful 97% zoom call yesterday
[Good fiction humor based on a lot of facts.—Joe]
Oregon faces a crisis in its criminal justice system because the leftists elements in Salem have refused to hold criminal[s] accountable for their behavior. Banning large capacity magazines will only turn law-abiding citizens into criminals. Assuming that restricting magazines to 10 rounds will make you safe is one of the most ignorant statements ever made.
Jason Pollock
Jefferson County Sheriff
November 15, 2022
Oregon sheriffs won’t enforce new gun law: ‘Infringes on Second Amendment’
[Politicians need to be prosecuted over this crap. They implement “catch and release” policies for criminal. They defund the police. Then they pass blatantly unconstitutional laws to make it difficult or impossible to purchase effective self-defense tools. It cannot get much clearer. These people are evil and/or insane.
By telling them, “I hope you enjoy your trial.” I am advocating on their behalf. This is because if they aren’t prosecuted, they risk angry mobs with tar, feathers, pitchforks, and short ropes on tall trees.—Joe]
Proponents argue that a digital U.S. dollar will allow the Federal Reserve a much greater level of precision in enacting its own monetary policy. For instance, if the Fed wants to juice up consumer spending, it can start penalizing the digital U.S. dollars stored in each citizen’s wallet, thereby creating a perverse incentive to spend those dollars. Similarly, the Fed can also provide targeted relief to those most in need by depositing a set balance of the digital U.S. dollar directly within designated wallets.
Rohail Saleem
November 15, 2022
Here Comes the Digital U.S. Dollar: The NY Fed Has Now Launched a 12-Week Pilot Program for Digital Dollar Tokens
[This is what the proponents are saying? Wow! That’s like a used car salesman telling you, “This car is a ticking time bomb and by morning it will take out your house and family in a huge fireball. Just give us your money and in a few minutes it is yours to drive off the lot.”
This is a really bad idea. I prefer cash and perhaps precious metals for money. Change my mind.—Joe]
What happened to the gigantic red wave that was supposed to crush the Democrats in the midterm elections? Every Republican in the country is blaming everyone else for this disaster, but almost no one is looking in the right place—and that’s exactly how the Big Tech companies like it.
Based on my team’s research, Google, and to a lesser extent, Facebook and other tech monopolies, not only took steps to shift millions of votes to Democrats in the midterms, but they are using their influence to spread rumors and conspiracy theories to make sure people look everywhere for explanations—except at them.
Robert Epstein
November 15, 2022
How Google Stopped the Red Wave
[What he says happened is technically fairly easy and plausible. Assuming they actually did this, I find it very irritating. It is little different than suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story. But, I can’t see they did anything illegal or that a law to punish such activity would pass constitutional muster.
It is a different case than restaurants, motels, and other public accommodations being required to serve people of all races, religions, etc. They aren’t, in this case, denying anyone service. Should the Republican party be required to send “Vote today!” email to everyone instead of just people they believe are likely to vote for their candidates?
If Google should register as a lobbyist to engage in this sort of activity, then should bloggers also be required to register? How about people with Facebook pages or a Twitter account?
Beyond boycotting them and their advertisers what might be the solution?—Joe]
How many of you know my lawyer called the FBI to testify during my trial?
How many of you know their testimony was stopped after an assistant US Attorney objected from the gallery over a tail number?
One day the entire story will be told and it will shock every American.
Kyle Rittenhouse @ThisIsKyleR
Tweeted on November 13, 2022
[What a tease!
I’ve thought about asking Rittenhouse to be the dinner speaker at Boomershoot. It isn’t the most perfect match but it could be interesting.—Joe]
Historically, piecemeal public-service ads have trod cautiously so as not to alienate a core constituency—gun owners themselves, some 30 percent of Americans. They’ve employed inconsistent strategies, sometimes urging gun owners to “lock it up,” other times decrying feeble government regulation. Mixed messages threaten to undercut the impact of these PSAs, and soft targets can make for mealymouthed calls to action. Thoughtful, measured arguments aren’t always the right fit for this medium, which usually requires a villain, like a Big Tobacco. “For us, that starts and stops with the NRA,” Sam Shepherd, the global executive creative director of Leo Burnett, told me.
Mac Schwerin
November 11, 2022
The Ad Industry’s Plan to Fix America’s Gun Crisis
[Interesting stuff in this article. It’s a look into the smartest minds of the enemy.
This at least partially explains the long time blame on the gun manufactures who “care more about profits than children’s lives.” The slogan writers know they need a villain and they have been trying out the NRA and the manufactures.
For some reason criminals as villains are not acceptable. Is it because criminal are their natural ally in the fight against private gun ownership? If the criminals did not exist there would not be a publicly defendable need to restrict gun ownership.—Joe]
Guys who carry guns are overcompensating for a lot of things. Without them, they feel inadequate in a lot of ways.
JHN @JHNTruthTeller
Tweeted on July 17, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!
We have SCOTUS decisions, the moral high ground, and real world data to back us up.
They have childish insults.
Via a tweet from In Chains@InChainsInJail.—Joe]
For the first time since the poll began in 1972, more Americans chose “None at all” to describe their trust in mass media. While 34 percent of respondents chose “Great deal/Fair amount,” which is unchanged since last year and a two-point improvement from the record low of 2016, 38 percent chose “None at all” – a 4 point bump since last year.
Alex Griffing
October 19, 2022
Gallup Records Highest Ever Level of Americans With No Trust At All in Mass Media As GOP Numbers Crater
[That 62% have some level of trust in the mass media is evidence their lies are successful. This will be used as support to continue lying.—Joe]
I think those assault-style weapons that are grandfathered should not be grandfathered. They should not be allowed in the state of Connecticut. I think they’re killers.
Ned Lamont
Governor of Connecticut
Lamont suggests making over ‘grandfathered’ assault weapons illegal. Over 80,000 exist in CT
[From the same article:
… weapons that were legally kept in Connecticut between 1994 and 2013 — when the ban was expanded to include at least 100 additional models — and allowed owners to register those guns with the state, but not to sell or transfer them to anyone except for a licensed gun dealer or family member.
Registration is only good for one thing and that is confiscation.
I hope he enjoys his trial.—Joe]
Apparently there is no limit to what kind of ridiculousness the public will believe.
Once the Fake News industry convinced the country a president asking about using light therapy as a lung disinfectant was “recommending drinking bleach,” it was clear there was no limit.
Scott Adams @ScottAdamsSays
Tweeted on November 8, 2022
[It is truly amazing.
I’m reminded of something from an Heinlein book:
Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser
than one man. How’s that again? I missed something.Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a
million men. Let’s play that over again, too. Who decides?
I don’t have any solutions to the problem. I’m inclined to just sit back with a large bowl of popcorn and make snarky comments. But the issues can be, literally, genocidally serious.
Prepare and response appropriately.—Joe]
I love admissions like this.
The good “doctor” was trying to argue that the Democrat Party isn’t coming for peaceful United States citizens’ firearms… by pointing out that the Democrat Party is, in fact, coming for those firearms.
In Chains @InChainsInJail
Tweeted on November 9, 2022
[This was in response to this tweet:
Lol. We are coming after your AKs and ARs. But not the others. I’ll be forever keeping my shotgun, my rifle, and my handguns.
The mind of those on the political left is so “interesting”. This is just like yesterday when we had the brainiac tell us, “Other than murder, violent crime is not up.”
Think about it! It’s all consistent..They spout contradictive nonsense which demonstrates they cannot detect simple logical errors. This explains why they (excluding the willfully evil) cannot understand, despite mountains of evidence, their leftist policies are economic suicide and catastrophic for individual rights.
They simply don’t have the mental processing capability to detect logic errors. It is like a variation of Peterson Syndrome. They are missing a thought process than the rest of us take for granted that nearly everyone has.
Fascinating!—Joe]
Other than murder, violent crime is not up. Did you know that? Violent crime is a key midterm voting issue, but what does the data say?
Mona Charen
Tweeted on November 5, 2022
[Visit this link for more context and appropriate attribution for these comments:
My contribution:
No wonder she doesn’t see a problem with restricting access to guns. She doesn’t see a need for self-defense. After all, it is only murder.
And her double down response to the criticism was almost as good as the original:
All crime is bad. I’m against it. But it is also a fact that perceptions of crime and actual crime are often out of sync. That may be true now. I found the Pew data surprising. That’s why I posted.
My response to this is to go slack jawed and walk away. Someone that dense is in danger of becoming a neutron star.
If this had been a fictional movie or book the editors would have insisted it be rewritten. She would not be a believable character in a work of fiction.—Joe]
Just like we warned politicians after the Bruen decision, fall in line, or we will force you to. We are excited to see Kathy Hochul finally served a plate of humble pie, and we are fully prepared to continue the fight should she again attempt to disarm the citizens of her state at a time when her party’s policies are only escalating the danger that everyday citizens face.
Erich Pratt
Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America
November 7, 2022
GOA DEFEATS NY “CONCEALED CARRY IMPROVEMENT ACT” IN FEDERAL COURT
[See also:
This is happening a little faster than I expected.
I’m anxiously awaiting some decisions on the “assault weapon” and “high capacity” magazine bans. The bans on 18 to 20 year-old gun ownership sales should show up about the same time. After that it is on to suppressors, short barreled rifles and shotguns, and, eventually, full autos. What a glorious time to be a gun rights activist!—Joe
It’s a micro penis thing, the bigger the gun the smaller the…
You know
@AmyRangel
Tweeted on July 17, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!
You have to wonder about these people. Did she do her own research and come up with different results? Or is she just another bigoted science denier?
Via a tweet from In Chains@InChainsInJail.—Joe]
I don’t think you’ll find any precedent in U.S. history in which a citizen has to go through so many hoops to exercise Constitutional rights. This is the first of its kind and, if it passes, it will wind up in court.
Leonard Williamson
Oregon trial attorney who specializes in firearms law
October 31, 2022
Opponents Setting Out Unintended Consequences of Oregon’s Gun Control Measure
[Via email from Rolf.
I almost welcome this sort of crap. The more outrageous the restrictions on our specific enumerated rights the easier it is to establish precedence and create a slippery slope in the correct direction.
Also, when the time comes, it will make it easier to get convictions.—Joe]
Saul Cornell, who is a professor of history when he is not writing for Slate, is engaged in intellectual dishonesty. He claims, as I note below, that a 1964 study of firearms lethality says something that it does not say (and, indeed, that it could not say, given its date of publication) in the course of trying to make modern sporting rifles sound scary for cheap propaganda purposes. Saul Cornell knows that this is false, and I know that he knows this is false, because I have told him, and he has acknowledged the fact in emails to me. But the claim remains unretracted. Retracting the claim would mean admitting that the source he cites not only does not say what he says it says about AR-style rifles, but that it in fact does not say anything about those rifles at all.
Honest mistakes happen all the time in journalism. This is not one of those. This is a fabrication.
Kevin D. Williamson
May 25, 2022
A Little More Saul Cornell
[Gun control supporters lie. It is part of their culture. It has always been this way. It will always be that way. Without lies they have no hope of winning a public debate.
If you have the time to read it there is far more information and justification for the case of deliberate lies by Cornell.
Respond appropriately.—Joe]