What’s it like to be such a robotic, soulless gun nut freak, making up for an incredibly small part of your anatomy by brandishing a gun?
William Cairns @guppy270
Tweeted on August 23, 2019
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
And to answer his question: “You are the best person to answer that question because such people only exist in your delusions.”—Joe]
The argument that gun is useless because in a particular circumstance you might not be able to use it in time, or it might not save you, is no less nonsensical than the argument that there is no point owning or using a seat belt, since if you collide head on with a tractor trailer, it will not save you, and in some cases it might be better if you were thrown clear.
Similarly, the fact that “it might be used against you” is true of any tool, since the use of a tool depends on the purpose of the person wielding it. A recent syndicated column by Mike Royko pointed out, for example, that a number of murders in Chicago had been committed by drowning the victims in toilets. Ms. Jones could with equal force assert, “Bring a toilet into the home, and he might use it against you.”
Jeff Snyder
2001
Nation of Cowards, Guns and Feminism page 42.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Ebbin and his fellow Democrats simply want to feel safe, and that means endangering the safety of everyone they happen to disagree with that will come for the protest in February. After all, it’s funny how only the side he disagrees with will be impacted, despite the complete lack of violence.
Then again, sticking it to your enemies is an age-old political tactic.
Tom Knighton
December 27, 2019
VA Democrats Want To Ban Carrying Gun In State Capitol Grounds
[Such activities must not go unanswered. Otherwise they will continue to encroach upon our rights.
The gun rights side of the political aisle need to have a good way of “sticking it to their enemies” and play a game of tit for tat. I’m inclined to suggest prosecution and imprisonment but we aren’t there yet.—Joe]
The same people who feel it’s necessary to give driver’s licenses to defiant law-breakers are the same ones trying to pass this nonsense. When did we become a state that put lawbreakers first, while attacking the rights of hard-working, law-abiding citizens?
Erik Simonsen
New Jersey Assemblymen-elect.
December 20, 2019
Proposed N.J. gun law would mandate $50k insurance policies for all gun owners
[Answering the rhetorical question, evidence would indicate it was shortly after getting a socialist/communist majority in the state.
If you read the article you also find this interesting bit:
Governor Murphy signed an executive order in September making it practically impossible for a legal gun owner to obtain a firearms insurance policy. Attacking gun insurance as a gun ownership “enabling” concept has become a popular trend in blue states as of late.
So, the governor, through executive action has essentially banned people from obtaining firearm liability insurance (the NRA Carry Guard insurance). And:
A-6003 sponsored by Patricia Egan Jones (D-5) mandates that each New Jersey gun owner obtain a minimum of $50,000 in liability insurance at the time of purchase.
New Jersey is the one state that I refuse to visit until their oppressive gun laws are repealed or I can get a varmint hunting license for the politicians who created and/or perpetuate this tyranny.
These people need to prosecuted. I look forward to their trials.—Joe]
Big-government politicians in both parties want more government so that political payoffs continue. These politicians have no use for limited government and free citizens.
Rob Morse
December 25, 2019
What We Learned from the Bloomberg Effect in Virginia
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Gun grabbers frequently talk about banning “assault weapons,” but that term doesn’t have an agreed-upon meaning. For instance, the since-expired 1994 Assault Weapons Ban defined the term as a semi-automatic rifle with two of the following features: a pistol grip, collapsible stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor or grenade launcher.
If you know anything about firearms, the assertion that these secondary characteristics make a firearm more deadly is laughable. Grenades are already illegal.
What the term has come to mean is “scary-looking rifles that mass shooters use.” But, as Sisolak now admits, “It’s not the look of a weapon that makes an assault rifle.” This puts gun grabbers in a double bind. They’re either banning secondary characteristics that won’t stop mass shootings — even if gun bans worked, which they don’t — or they’re banning every semi-automatic rifle in the America, which is politically unpalatable.
It’s much easier to say you want to ban assault rifles — and then trust the media won’t dig deep enough to find out if you know what you’re talking about.
Victor Joecks
December 21, 2019
VICTOR JOECKS: Sisolak promised to ban assault rifles, but he doesn’t know what that term means
[Sisolak is the Governor of Nevada.
As a friend in high school, Ken Franklin, once told me, “If you can’t define a word then you literally don’t know what you are talking about.” And here we have a politician becoming the governor of Nevada based, in part, on a promise of something he literally had no idea what he was talking about.
This is not to say he is stupid or even ignorant. It’s self evident that he didn’t need to know what he was talking about. He won the election, right? In this context “assault weapon” is political tool used to gain power. And not in the sense Mao Tse-tung used it.
I’m reminded of the quote attributed to Adolf Hitler:
If the Jews didn’t exist, we would have to invent them.
And our country’s political left, and Governor Sisolak in particular, has Josh Sugarmann to thank for recognizing the utility of the “assault weapon” boogie man. Sisolak successfully used it in his bid for the governorship. And, if this article is to be believed, he did that without even knowing that they didn’t exist.
Think about that. A concept of something which cannot be defined, and hence is largely imaginary, was instrumental in getting someone elected state governor. The concept is a real tool so powerful that even if you don’t know what it is you can use it to win elections.—Joe]
Politicians know that the groundswell of peaceful pro-gun activism is backed up by something harder. That’s why in the near term they’re most likely to try and erode support for “assault weapons” and legislate them out of existence, as opposed to confiscate everyone’s AR-15s… for now.
Samuel Culper
December 23, 2019
Eyes on Virginia 2020 – Here’s what to expect
[Via email from Tony.
Scott Adams almost categorically dismisses slippery slope arguments in the general case, not just in the case of gun control. I mostly disagree with him. Here, and in the post this quote was taken from, Culper alludes to my disagreement with Adams.
Adams, in his most recent book, Loserthink: How untrained brains Are Ruining America, elaborates more on this. He says, if I recall correctly, that it’s a slippery slope only until something changes.and then it isn’t. In the case of gun control case he claims travel down the slope will continue only until gun owners stop it. Things that are not terribly unpopular will be enacted, perhaps background checks for retail sales, but that doesn’t affect the probability of gun confiscation. They are two different, unrelated things. Gun owners, and even many non-gunowners, will put up much stronger resistance to gun confiscation and the slide down the slope is stopped.
I don’t see it that way.
As Culper points out, the political response is to make it costly to be a gun owner. Not just in dollars and thing like requiring insurance and difficult licensing procedures but in risk and day to day hassle. I went to the range with a friend in Canada a while back. Each gun had to be unloaded, a trigger lock installed, then locked in a case, and put in the trunk of the car in order to transport it from his home to the range and back. If he were to have lost a trigger lock while at the range he could not have legally transported the gun back home without the risk of going to prison. The “gun-free zone” within 1000 feet of a school is another example of a cost imposed on gun ownership through increased risk of committing a victimless crime.
As these costs increase it decreases the number of people who are willing to pay the “price”. Each of these relatively small price increases is not sufficient to take a bunch of time off work or to donate a lot of money to help defeat it like you would if it were something like confiscation of America’s most popular rifle. Yet, because the increasing cost of gun ownership it means fewer gun owners which means there is less resistance to the next slide down the slope. Whereas in Adams view you get increased resistance as you slide down the slope.
We both see the slope as non-linear but he sees the slope as upturning and stopping further progress and I see it as downturning and increasing progress.
I claim we can see support for my view on two different slopes.
Look at the slippery slope the anti-gun people are on. For decades they fought the passage of concealed carry licensing laws as they slowly swept the nation. Now Constitutional Carry is slowly spreading. I remember people saying licensing our rights was actually a step in the wrong direction for us. It should be “Vermont Carry”, as what we now call Constitutional Carry was called 20 years ago, or nothing because once the right to carry was licensed we couldn’t get back to a principled claim of right to carry without a license. The anti-gun people have been sliding down this slope for something like 30 years now with no end in sight.
On the other side we can see the march of restrictions on “assault weapons” up and down the west and east costal states. Each year they come up with another type of restriction or cost to add to the burden of owning and using them. Had the anti-gun people gone for an outright ban and demand for confiscation, again about 30 years ago, few politicians would have given the ideas support. This year people hoping to become president seem to be competing on who can confiscate them in the shortest period of time. We have slid down a slippery slope. Those early restrictions enabled further restrictions as soon as the legislature reconvened the next year.
On the other hand Adam could say the 2nd Amendment Sanctuary movement proves his point.
Am I missing something? Adams is a smart guy and I may too close to this issue to see the issue clearly. Is there some special case situation that Adams would concede in my examples while being substantially correct in the more general case?—Joe]
Nothing so vividly illustrates the delusional state of the gun prohibitionist’s mindset than the stubborn defense of the so called “gun-free school zone.”
Alan Gottlieb & Dave Workman
2019
Good Guys With Guns, page 105
[You would think they would give it up after being shown that 95+% of all mass shootings occur in “gun-free” areas. Or just pointing out that if “gun-free” areas worked making banks “gun-free zones” would eliminate bank robberies. Or making schools “drug-free zones” would cause recreational drug to cease.
But it is irrational to expect people to be rational. And those rational enough to know the truth but evil enough to further their agenda with the deaths of innocent children use this lack of rationality in the masses to their advantage.—Joe]
Rule by executive fiat was rejected by the Thirteen American Colonies, including Pennsylvania, when they declared independence from England, and we reject such lawlessness today. The Attorney General’s revisionist legal opinion adds an entire class of inanimate objects to the definition of ‘firearm’ under Pennsylvania law that the General Assembly never considered, nor intended. As such, we are requesting the Commonwealth Court to enjoin Commissioner Evanchick and his Pennsylvania State Police from implementing and enforcing any policy or practice that would follow the Attorney General’s misguided definitional structure.
Adam Kraut
Director of Legal Policy
The Firearm Policy Coalition
December 20, 2019
BREAKING: Emergency Injunction Sought Against Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner Evanchick Following ‘Lawless’ Gun Ban Mandate, “Legal Opinion” by Attorney General Josh Shapiro
[See also: GUN-RIGHTS GROUP SUES PENNSYLVANIA OVER NEW ‘GHOST GUNS’ RULE
I donate money every month (matched by my employer) to the FPC.
It’s amazing what these politicians want to get away with. It’s almost as if they believe they are rulers instead of public servants.
The courts need to slap them down hard and soon!—Joe]
Via email from Matthew Faulks.
The NRA Foundation has a national Yes Education Summit (YES) program. The state of Idaho recognizes this:
Idaho sophomores and juniors are invited to apply to participate in the Idaho State Youth Education Summit (Y.E.S.), part of a larger national program through the NRA Foundation – a non-profit, non-political charitable affiliate of the National Rifle Association. This innovative civics program brings participating students to the Idaho Capitol from March 12 to 15 to gain first-hand knowledge about our branches of government and to meet state elected officials. Students also engage in public speaking, problem-solving, participate in firearms training at a local gun range administered by certified firearms instructors and visit government agencies and historical venues. Meals, lodging, and materials are provided to participating students at no cost.
The selection of students for the program is competitive. One student participants will be chosen at the end of the Idaho program to attend the national Y.E.S. program in Washington D.C. on July 13-19, 2020. Up to $50,000 total in scholarships will be awarded among successful participants at this national Y.E.S. program.
For more information about applying contact Matthew Faulks via email or visit https://yes.nra.org/state-summits/.
You can learn more and share via the Idaho YES flyer Faulks sent me. The deadline for application is coming up fast (January 8th, 2020). So, get those High School sophomores and juniors to download the application and get it submitted soon.
Today, as of 9:00 AM PST, Boomershoot 2020 registration is open to everyone. For the last several days Boomershoot 2019 participants and staff have selected their positions. The long range event on Sunday still has 42 of the 76 positions available. The Friday and Saturday Precision Rifle Clinic still has lots of openings with only three and four of the 16 positions taken on each day. The Field Fire, practice on your own with the steel targets with a range safety officer, is an alternative to the Precision Rifle Clinic and doesn’t have a practical limit to the number of people who participate.
The High Intensity events on Friday and Saturday evenings have five and 10 of the 25 available positions still available.
“What are the High Intensity events?”, you might ask. A few years ago Oleg made a great video which captures it:
The Sunday long range event is a little harder to capture. The thumps to your chest don’t come through the filtering of the video camera:
Anette gives you an overview of the entire experience:
And once experienced you will never forget the opening fireball on Sunday morning:
Boomershoot 2019 Fireball from Joe Huffman on Vimeo.
Register for Boomershoot 2020 now for an experience you will treasure for the rest of your life.
We genuinely have no idea how many firearms there are in America, and that is fine. We do know how many have been produced a year for the past ~35 years, the only correlation between the change in firearms in America and the change in firearm-related fatalities is negative-to-non-existent, for both raw numbers and per-American rates. Thus, “more guns = more deaths” cannot be true.
Jonathan
December 4, 2019
fixed points in data
[I found the blog post quite interesting because Jonathan points out something that I knew from my multiple classes in statistics but had not thought applied to the topic at hand. That is, a time correlation does not care about absolute values of the variables being considered, just the change in the values over time.
For example the correlation between the number of firearms in circulation and the murder rate by gun fire is the same in each of these cases with the following assumptions 1) The murder rate over time is the same in all cases; and 2) The number of guns added or removed from circulation over time is the same.
And of course, the result of this exercise does not have any effect on the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. It does, however, have utility in demonstrating anti-gun people do not understand math when they claim “more guns = more deaths”.—Joe]
Bolt action in .300 Win Mag for targets out to 1200 yards. It will compensate for target velocities up to 20 MPH and tracks with a precision of 0.047 MOA.
When one is available in semi-auto, 20 round magazines and will lock on targets out to 1000 yards I want one of those too.
Via email from Chet we have Progressives Gone Wild:
… a growing trend in Seattle: municipal employees increasingly seeing their work as part of a broader agenda of radical social change. Over the past five years, the City of Seattle has rapidly added personnel under the auspices of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Christopher Peguero, for example, manager of the equity program at Seattle City Light, views his role as much more than providing reliable electricity to utility customers. As Peguero explained in a recent interview on the City of Seattle blog, public utilities can be instrumental in the fight against white supremacy. “Race is most central to addressing institutional oppression since it is central to historical inequity in the United States,” he says. “I feel that an inclusive model is the only way that we will ever reach collective liberation from institutional oppression.”
There are several more examples but I particularly like this one:
The Seattle Public Schools’ Ethnic Studies Task Force has launched a new math curriculum based on the idea that the “Western” model of instruction has “[disenfranchised] people and communities of color” and legitimized “systems that contribute to poverty and slave labor.” To fight this injustice, the task force argues, schools must transition “from individualistic to collectivist thinking” and implement a new math curriculum that will “liberate people and communities of color.”
This is like something out of Atlas Shrugged or “The Crazy Years” as described in some of Robert Heinlein’s books. Stuff that was just too crazy to actually ever be real. But as I’ve heard people say before, “Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.”
I could never have even imagined this on my own for a fictional story. I think this is a sign I should move back to Idaho. I would rather they build their utopia without me and my tax contributions.
Keep calm. Spread the word. Agitate against such outrages. Buy more guns. Buy them legally. Buy them privately if you can. Buy more, more, and yet more. There’s always the risk we’ll reach the point where America tips over. But that’s a chance we’ll have to take.
Because if it’s impossible for the government to seize 300 million weapons (the lowball estimate), it’s way more than four times as impossible for them to seize 1.2 billion.
Michael Z. Williamson
December 15, 2019
The Virginia Debacle, Summarized (And Why You Should Buy More Guns)
[There is more than a little truth to this. But a gun properly buried in the woods and practically impossible to confiscate might as well be in government hands or destroyed. Just one gun, and enough ammunition, in the hands of someone skilled, able, and willing to use it will be of far more use that a thousand guns hidden and unused.
Attend Boomershoot 2020 (sign up here). Learn what your gun can do at a distance, increase your skill, have the confidence to use it if you really need to, and have a whole lot of fun doing it.—Joe]
“Resist!” is screamed by media personalities and celebrities and politicians who in a sane world would never win a race for city lieutenant sanitation commissioner. They betray ignorance of what real dictatorship is, as they dare ascribe the gravitas of 1989’s righteous rebellions upon their own crusade.
When I consider Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, and Jerry Nadler maneuvering for impeachment of President Donald Trump, it is with some dark bewilderment. They have no idea what disaster they are courting for themselves and their allies. It will not end well for them.
…
Out of desperation Ceausescu promised higher salaries and student aid. But Ceausescu had woefully mis-gauged the frustrations of the people amassed before him in Bucharest. The moment his decades of control evaporated was chronicled on worldwide television. Nicolai and Elena Ceausescu promptly fled the palace by helicopter and were soon captured.
December 25, 1989 was not a Merry Christmas for the Ceausescus. Found guilty by a drumhead trial of crimes against the Romanian people, Nicolai and Elena were immediately thrown against the wall – literally – and shot dead. Images of their shattered bodies were broadcast around the globe.
So far as analogies go, the comforts and careers of the petty tyrants in Washington may soon be just as crumbled. Our own would-be overlords would do well to be mindful of that.
Christopher Knight
December 10, 2019
The Fall of the Deep State and 1989’s Fall of Communism
[It’s easy to draw parallels to present day. And after Knight is done it’s simpler than painting by numbers.—Joe]
I was a victim of 3 violent robberies in my life
The last one 3 yrs ago was an exceptionally violent house robbery by 4 armed men who assaulted everyone, including my 8yr old grand daughter
I remember thinking then, as I do now, thank God I did NOT have a gun in the house
Gertrude O. Douglas @Gertrude_O_D
Tweeted on December 12, 2019
[And would she thank God she did not have a fire extinguisher in the house when an arsonist tried to burn her house down?
And would she thank God she did not have a telephone in the house when the armed men assaulted her and her family?
And would she thank God she did not have a first-aid kit in the house after she and her family were assaulted?
The mindset of some people is incomprehensible to me. There are times when I just want to let Darwin sort them out.—Joe]
Unfortunately, we probably already know the outcome. World leaders are still trying to run away from their responsibilities but we have to make sure they cannot do that.
We will make sure that we put them against the wall and they will have to do their job to protect our futures.
Greta Thunberg
December 13, 2019
Greta Thunberg tells cheering crowd ‘we will make sure we put world leaders against the wall’ if they do not tackle global warming as she attends climate protest in Turin
[This is consistent with much of the political left throughout the 20th Century. But usually they do not publicly announce this until they have consolidated more political power than what this 16 year old has. I attribute the poor judgement to her youth.
It would appear that after saying this she received some coaching from someone wiser than her:
Yesterday I said we must hold our leaders accountable and unfortunately said “put them against the wall”. That’s Swenglish: “att ställa någon mot väggen” (to put someone against the wall) means to hold someone accountable. That’s what happens when you improvise speeches in a second language. But of course I apologise if anyone misunderstood this. I can not enough express the fact that I – as well as the entire school strike movement- are against any possible form of violence. It goes without saying but I say it anyway.
Any native Swedish speaker out there that can verify or refute this claim?—Joe]
The radical liberal mind is trapped in his bitter cynicism because he suffered certain kinds of neglect, deprivation and abuse at an early age and has had as a consequence to deny, as if they don’t exist, whole realms of human experience, because awareness of those realms is emotionally painful beyond his tolerance. He has not had as an infant and toddler the deeply formative benefits of engagement, love, tenderness, protection and empathy that would allow him to understand and participate happily in the human benevolence that is everywhere available to him as an adult.
To the radical liberal who is blind to an entire realm of interpersonal experience, and who distorts the realities of spontaneous cooperation in every community where freedom prevails, America and Trump are devils that must be stopped from destroying the world. The radical liberal and the Trump-deranged individual see only the projections onto others of their own inner badness, greed, predation, exclusion, prejudice, bigotry, envy, jealousy and exploitative impulses. They don’t see, beyond Trump’s personality faults, his goodwill for America, his generosity toward veterans and other Americans, his grandiose but effective identification with the greatness of America. The dysfunctional families which radical liberals and Trump-deranged sufferers come from are the source of their projections of badness onto our country. What they see in present-day America are transference versions of their own early traumas.
Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.
September 30, 2019
Psychiatrist: Trump Derangement Syndrome is real – and serious
[As stated in SJWs Always Lie, They lie, they double down, and they project. This psychiatrist claims he know why they do this:
Perhaps. But I would like to see the raw data he used to arrive at his conclusions.—Joe]
This is what being unhinged looks like—being so sure of your correctness that you demand affirmation. The use of violence to revolt against lawful elections is only done by people who don’t care about free and fair elections. Britain is not a rogue state where sham elections are held. It’s a cornerstone democratic nation.
Libby Emmons and Barrett Wilson
December 13, 2019
Democracy Is Alive And Well Despite The Media’s Best Efforts
[The political left only consider the democratic process as valid as long as it is making progress in their direction. When “progress” slows or reverses they bring out the violence.
Respond appropriately.—Joe]
