Quote of the day—Paul Leonardo @RealPleonardo

Posted on by

NO ONE and I mean NO ONE needs access to semi-automatic weapons, with the exception of trained law enforcement. They are weapons of death meant only to kill and maim. They should be banned and outlawed.

Paul Leonardo @RealPleonardo
Tweeted on Tue, Jan 29, 2019
[What is the legal difference between “banned” and “outlawed”? Anything?

I could go on with picking this apart but it doesn’t matter. For a long time I’ve been saying, “Never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.” That was important for a while. There were anti-freedom people actively trying to sell that story. They claimed they just wanted “reasonable gun safety laws”. Almost no one is telling that lie anymore. In the last few years the progressives have stopped trying to hide their delusions about guns and gun owners. Washington state put oppressive restrictions on all semi-automatic rifles. Other states and politicians are proposing greater restrictions and even bans on semi-autos. We are seeing a widespread mass delusion about guns and gun ownership.

As I have said many times before, quoting Robert Heinlein in a different context, “Delusions are often functional.”

Although I don’t have the data to prove this, nor the time and resources to gather the data, it is my hypothesis that a certain segment of the human population needs to hate other people. Racism, religious persecution, and homophobia and related aversions to sexual preferences are other manifestations of this. The 1960’s were a turning point for racism in this country with bans on interracial marriage disappearing in 1967. The later decades saw the fading of aversions of to people of different sexual preferences and finally the nationwide legalization of same sex marriage in 2015.

It is my further hypothesis that as those other hatreds diminished gun owners become the new target. This is demonstrated by the ramping up of gun restrictions in the 1960s. The democrats could no longer continue the open oppression of blacks with the Jim Crow laws and other open discrimination so they began targeting others such as gun owners and white men. This continued as the hatred of “sexual perverts” diminished (and the corresponding hatred of the fewer and fewer people opposed to gay rights). With the legalization, and general acceptance, of same sex marriage in 2015 the political left needed another target to hate. We now see a frenzy of hate from the political left. It undisguised, beyond reason, and unsupported by any rationalization. You see the face of this in the event at the Lincoln Center regarding the Covington students last week:

“We now know the kids of Covington Catholic were the real victims of the altercation in front of the Lincoln Memorial,” the statement added. “This is bigotry and its own brand of hatred. It is an ongoing display of anti-Trump, anti-life, anti-Catholic and anti-Christian bias. These are blatant bullying tactics designed to make conservatives and people of faith think twice before standing up for their beliefs or even having the audacity to wear a ‘MAGA’ hat in public, let alone smile while doing it.”

In order to accumulate power they need a hated enemy. Gun owners fit the bill and are a significant component of their targets of hate. We are doubly hated because gun ownership is a means to resist their exercise of oppressive power.

We are in for a rough ride and it appears our best hope for survival is with the courts giving us enough time to change the culture. But if my hypothesis is correct many people will need a new target of hate. Can we make that the enemies of freedom?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dick Polman

Posted on by

A little more than three years ago, the conservative activist Grover Norquist confidently declared, “When [Democrats] start to say … that people with guns are somehow connected to mass murders, that’s what turns voters off.” Democratic candidates will happily test that proposition in 2020. It’s a safe bet that none will wear duck-hunting clothes.

Dick Polman
January 27, 2019
Democrats Are Newly Emboldened on Gun Control—Exit polls in November showed that 59 percent of voters in House races favored “stricter gun-control measures.”
[This is what they think of you, “People with guns are connected to mass murders.”

This is actually sort of true. Prior to every genocide there has always been gun control. Private citizens with guns are the immunization against mass murder. But this isn’t what the author above means.

Do what you can to make sure democrats who vote for gun control wish they had made a big deal about their purchases of hunting licenses and concealed carry permits and keep a promise to protect your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Robb

Posted on by

In the past, winning meant having the largest army. That isn’t true anymore. Now, with new forms of warfare, any small group can successfully wage war. With simpler and more appealing goals almost any cause can raise an army. And they will.

John Robb
2007
Brave New War—The next stage of terrorism and the end of globalization, page 63
[What he says is possible hasn’t always become reality (see for example this description of how we might have fallen into civil war after the November 2016 election). But I have spent enough time in the security field and that I listen closely when he has something to say and I don’t think I have ever considered his ideas crazy or implausible.

In this book he tells how a society dependent upon vulnerable infrastructure can be brought to it knees with relatively few people and resources. The leverage exerted can be enormous. How much does the Molotov Cocktail cost versus the government vehicle it destroys? What is the cost to deliver it versus the cost to defend against it? What is the cost of a power outage versus the cost of a cutting torch to bring down a few transmission line towers? What does it cost to topple the towers versus the cost to defend them?

Go through the list of critical items in our world. Food, water, power, sanitation, communication, roads, bridges, etc. The list of leverage points is almost endless in a high tech society.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Michael Z. Williamson

Posted on by

You know why these people fear the myth of a Trump Death Camp™? Because they know they belong in one. They also know that’s their ultimate goal to do to others.

Michael Z. Williamson
January 24, 2019
We’re Ever Closer To The Gloves Coming Off
[I’m pretty sure most liberals (the definition used in his context for the above quote) don’t “know they belong in one”. And unless they were actively involved in the illegal deaths of one or more people they almost for certain don’t belong in one.

So, it’s a little overstated but a plausible explanation that I’m willing to accept for conversational purposes. Sprinkle similar caveats here and there as you read the rest of his post for some potentially useful gems.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mayor Bill Peduto

Posted on by

Arrest me. I welcome him trying to put up a lawsuit that would arrest me if I sign this legislation.

Mayor Bill Peduto
January 22, 2019
Mayor Peduto calls out DA for gun control comments, says ‘arrest me’
[The Pittsburgh mayor was told by the, anti-gun, district attorney that proposed anti-gun laws are illegal because of a state preemption law.

This is the first time I have heard of a politician mentioning the possibility of being arrested for pursuing gun laws which are illegal. It’s way past time for it. They should be in constant fear of it. Let this be a good start on making that a reality.

While I’m not so sure the local DA could have him arrested it would seem plausible a Federal Prosecutor could using violation of 18 USC 242 as the justification for prosecution.

This politician, and countless others, thinks he is above the law. It’s way past time to arrest and successfully prosecute a bunch of them. They need to start having some respect for the law and it’s clear they are not going to unless there is vigorous enforcement.—Joe]

Missing or stolen firearms

Posted on by

In states with “safe storage” laws private citizens would be facing heavy fines and probable jail time for this:

According to the audit conducted by MCSO along with the ATF, 50 guns were found to be missing from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.

The 50 missing or stolen weapons include:

  • 29 fully automatic weapons
  • 20 short barrel shotguns
  • 1 short barrel rifle

Note that these are all NFA class firearms. My guess is that why they know they are missing. The ATF had a record of them and asked to verify their existence. I wonder how many non-NFA firearms are missing or have been stolen and there are insufficient records to answer such questions.

Quote of the day—Mariel Alper, Ph.D., and Lauren Glaze

Posted on by

An estimated 287,400 prisoners had possessed a firearm during their offense. Among these, more than half (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at the scene of the crime (7%), or obtained it of the street or from the underground market (43%). Most of the remainder (25%) had obtained it from a family member or friend, or as a gift. Seven percent had purchased it under their own name from a licensed firearm dealer.

SourceOfFirearms2016Table5

Mariel Alper, Ph.D., and Lauren Glaze
BJS Statisticians
January 2019
Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016
NCJ 251776
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
[Using the percentages from Table 5, they add up to more than 100% (about 102%). I could find where this was explicitly stated but it seems this is because some prisoners (about 2.5%) obtained guns from multiple sources. Also note that it is possible, likely even, that those who obtained them from a gun store, gun show, or pawn shop were not prohibited persons when they purchased them.

So… the question is, “If anti-freedom people believe they can create a law to prevent gun possession by convicted felons what law would accomplish that?”

What would “Universal background checks” accomplish? At most, this would affect 25% (obtained from an individual) of the transfers. But how many of those transfers occurred before the person became a prohibited person? And if they are a prohibited person obtaining them from a friend or family is already against the law! Making it doubly illegal is nothing more than nonsensical.

And even if those transfers were completely stopped how many of those same criminals would then obtain their gun from different source such as the underground market or theft?

If the intent of “universal background checks” is to reduce access to guns by prohibited person it is clear it cannot make much, if any, difference. This is backed up by recent research as to the actual effects of background checks on violent crime. Hence, there are three possibilities:

  1. That is not the intent and these advocates are evil.
  2. The advocates are ignorant.
  3. The advocates are stupid.

Apply logical “and” and “or”s for the combinations of the possibilities however you deem appropriate.—Joe]

Interesting response

Posted on by

Via email from Steve O.

MarkleysLawExchange

That’s one way to deal with those who invoke Markley’s Law.

Quote of the day—Sign43 @Sign431

Posted on by

It’s stupid. You do not need a gun period. Self defense isn’t something that floats away if your gun is at home. I have fists, I have a pocket knife. A gun is not a necessity. I stand with New York’s laws. We need to get guns out of our cities, not in.

Sign43 @Sign431
Tweeted on January 22, 2019
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you, “No one wants to take your guns”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Yarmuth‏ @RepJohnYarmuth

Posted on by

I am calling for a total and complete shutdown of teenagers wearing MAGA hats until we can figure out what is going on. They seem to be poisoning young minds.

John Yarmuth‏ @RepJohnYarmuth
Chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Budget Committee
Tweeted on January 20, 2019
[Democrats consider the First, as well as the Second Amendment, toxic.

Vote them out of office before they get a chance to deny us our right to vote as well.—Joe]

Gun case accepted by SCOTUS

Posted on by

This is, almost for certain, great news:

U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday stepped into the divisive issue of gun rights by agreeing to take up a challenge backed by the National Rifle Association to New York City’s strict limits on handgun owners toward transporting their firearms outside of the home.

The nine justices will review a 2018 lower court ruling upholding the city’s restrictions after three gun owners and the NRA’s New York state affiliate sued claiming the regulations violated the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”

The case will be heard and decided in the court’s next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2020.

…

The New York case concerned people who have licenses to have guns at home, known as “premises” licenses, who are already allowed to take unloaded guns to shooting ranges within New York City. The plaintiffs said the city’s rules forbidding them from taking their guns to ranges or other homes outside city limits amounted to a “draconian” transport ban.

Small steps which have a high likelihood of success are required to make sure we don’t stumble along the way. This looks to me like a good step in the right direction.

Translation of The Gods of the Copybook Headings

Posted on by

Via a comment from bob r is this translation into modern day English of Rudyard Kipling’s poem I quoted from yesterday:

The simple substitution of a couple phrases made a huge difference in my understanding of this poem. Listen and marvel at so much substance packed into so few words and rhyme.

Quote of the day—NRA @NRA

Posted on by

Today, the men and women of the @NRA honor the profound life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. King applied for a concealed carry permit in a “may issue” state and was denied. We will never stop fighting for every law-abiding citizen’s right to self-defense. #MLKDay

NRA @NRA
Tweeted on January 21, 2019
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Agitators

Posted on by

Twitter suspends account that helped ignite controversy over viral encounter

Twitter suspended an account on Monday afternoon that helped spread a controversial encounter between a Native American elder and a group of high school students wearing Make America Great Again hats.

The account claimed to belong to a California schoolteacher. Its profile photo was not of a schoolteacher, but of a blogger based in Brazil, CNN Business found. Twitter suspended the account soon after CNN Business asked about it.

The account, with the username @2020fight, was set up in December 2016 and appeared to be the tweets of a woman named Talia living in California. “Teacher & Advocate. Fighting for 2020,” its Twitter bio read. Since the beginning of this year, the account had tweeted on average 130 times a day and had more than 40,000 followers.

Late on Friday, the account posted a minute-long video showing the now-iconic confrontation between a Native American elder and the high school students, with the caption, “This MAGA loser gleefully bothering a Native American protester at the Indigenous Peoples March.”

…

Molly McKew, an information warfare researcher who saw the tweet and shared it herself on Saturday, later realized that a network of anonymous accounts were working to amplify the video.

Speaking about the nature of fake accounts on social media, McKew told CNN Business, “This is the new landscape: where bad actors monitor us and appropriate content that fits their needs. They know how to get it where they need to go so it amplifies naturally. And at this point, we are all conditioned to react and engage or deny in specific ways. And we all did.”

Basically someone, who probably is not a U.S. citizen, deliberated created a narrative and publicized a fake story to inflame millions of people against each other in this country.

We live in interesting times.

Quote of the day—Rudyard Kipling

Posted on by

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.“

Rudyard Kipling
1919
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
[This truth was well known 100 years ago yet people still believe the lie it refutes.

Closely related.—Joe]

Quote of the day—U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez

Posted on by

There is absolutely no reason at all for anyone to buy an assault weapon. These high power firearms have one sole purpose — to commit mass murder.

U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez
January 19, 2019
Gun control push is back in Washington, and N.J. lawmakers are all in
[Interesting. Since there are tens of millions of these guns in circulation in the U.S. and only about 400 murders committed each year with rifles of all types we have a limited number of possible conclusions:

  1. Those tens of millions of “assault weapons” are almost all being misused for peaceful purposes.
  2. Menendez is lying.
  3. Menendez is living in an alternate universe.

I’m going with #2 with the added extrapolation that he probably has evil intentions as his motivation to pursue this legislation.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Noah Smith

Posted on by

What if the government doesn’t have to pay back what it borrows, now or ever? This is the provocative thesis of an unorthodox economic theory that is rapidly gaining credence on the political left called modern monetary theory, or MMT.

Noah Smith
January 10, 2019
Don’t Be So Sure Hyperinflation Can’t Hit the U.S.
[Delusions are often functional. This particular delusion will give the political left a good shot at gaining absolute power over and destroying the United States.

Prepare for a civil war and/or buy gold and secure it in some other country.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jacob Sullum

Posted on by

Once you realize that “assault weapons” are in the eye of the beholder, it’s hard to take seriously the extravagant promises of legislators who want to ban them. Feinstein claims her bill would “put a stop to mass shootings.” Yet even if it eliminated the millions of “assault weapons” that Americans already own (something it does not even purport to do), mass shooters would still have plenty of equally lethal alternatives.

After three decades of this nonsense, Americans may be starting to wise up. According to Gallup, support for legislation like Feinstein’s fell from a peak of 59 percent in 2000 to 40 percent last year.

Jacob Sullum
January 16, 2019
The Whimsical Illogic of ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans
[At a national scale I think we are making progress. At the state level we are losing. Ultimately it will be decided in Federal courts. I think we need to fight a holding action at the state level and put as much resources as we can into winning in the courts.—Joe]

Risks posed by social media and cell phones

Posted on by

Via email from Chet.

Suicide prediction technology is revolutionary. It badly needs oversight:

Facebook is the largest and most visible company engaged in suicide prediction. After it introduced a live-streaming service in early 2016, dozens of users broadcast suicide attempts in real time on the platform. In response, on Feb. 16, 2017, CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that Facebook was experimenting with AI-based suicide prediction. Its software analyzes user-generated posts for signs of suicidal intent — the word “Goodbye” paired with responses like “Are you OK?,” for example, or “Please don’t do this” in response to a live stream — and assigns them risk scores. Cases with high scores are forwarded to Facebook’s community operations team, which reviews them and notifies police of severe cases. Facebook also helps pinpoint users’ locations so first responders can find them. In the past 12 months, the company initiated 3,500 of these “wellness checks,” contacting police about 10 times per day, Antigone Davis, Facebook’s head of global safety, said in a recent interview with NPR.

Chet comments:

Are there no limit? They have other avenues to explore to save lives. They could also use it to report crime. Anything that would potentially save lives. And why stop with saving live? Society has plenty of bad actors.

I suspect that if you have the Facebook application running on your cellphone it tracks your location. Furthermore, since you have given your permission for it to do so that data is now theirs to do with what they want. For the police, and others, to obtain that data is probably easier than getting it from your cellphone provider.

Now imagine you live in a relatively free state like, say, Idaho. And your social media posts have been tagged as you are almost certainly an owner of an evil “assault weapon” and you travel on vacation to a tyrannical state like California, New Jersey, or New York. Wouldn’t it be “the right thing to do” for Facebook, et. al. to notify the police? And might not the police and some judges view that as probable cause to search you and your vehicle?

And it need not be just gun ownership and the police involved. Recreational drug users, homosexuals, transsexuals, Jews, Christians, or the targeted group du jour. And they could be reported to employers, family, and spouses. Do you want your visits to a gay bar, strip club, abortion clinic, pot shop, gun store, women’s shelter, divorce lawyer, or Christian/Jewish/Islamic book store be for sale to companies or private investigators who pay for the service?

I’m not sure I want the government writing laws to prohibit such “services”. If you claim the government has the power to prohibit such activity you are also saying the government has the power to mandate that activity.

But I’m not comfortable with my activities being recorded. It violates my Jews In The Attic Test no matter who has the data.

Truth

Posted on by

Via someplace on Facebook:

YOU KNOW YOU ARE FROM WASHINGTON STATE WHEN:

You know the Vitamin d deficiency struggle is real.

You know how to pronounce Sequim, Puyallup, Sammamish, Enumclaw and Issaquah.

You avoid driving through Seattle at all costs.

You know what a Geoduck is.

You consider swimming an indoor sport.

You see a person carrying an umbrella and instantly think tourist.

Your lawn is mostly moss and you don’t really care.

Honking your car horn is for absolute emergencies.

You’re EXTREMELY picky about your coffee.

“The mountain is out today”, isn’t a strange statement.

While out of state you just tell people you’re from Seattle since that’s the only known city in Washington according to the rest of the world.

You remember Almost Live.

You’ve eaten in the Space Needle, and while it was delicious, you’re never paying $50 for a meal in the sky again.

You rarely wash your car because it’s just going to get washed by the rain tomorrow.

You’re used to the phrase “No, not DC” when telling out of staters where you’re from.

Northface is always in fashion.

You take a warm coat and a hat with you for a day at the beach.

You have mastered the art of doing everything in the rain, because, well, Washington.

You play the “no you go” at four-way stop.

You have had both the thought of how beautiful Mount Rainier is, while simultaneously accepting that it will probably kill you someday.

You get a little twitchy if it’s been more than a week since it last rained.

You believe Twilight ruined Forks.

You can say Humptulips, Lilliwap and Dosewallips without giggling.

Add Mukilteo, Snohomish, and Snoqualmie to the list of places you can pronounce correctly. And in Barb’s case she fought Moss War 2015, and finally won in 2016.