Via a tweet:
Rape is a big fucking deal in Conservative land. It is literally “the most horrific and obscene act imaginable.”
I’d rather you thought me a murderer than believed me a rapist. Ordinary people can imagine circumstances where they’d kill someone, and might have some sympathy for me if they thought I murdered someone.
…
There are literally zero circumstances where raping someone is a good idea. There’s just no justification for it. Even attempted rape puts you outside the tribe. It makes you a non-person. It makes you fair game for anyone to kill on sight.
“Why’d you shoot that guy 27 times in the face and pelvis?”
“Because he raped my sister and that was all the ammo I brought.”
“Oh, ok.”
That’s how rapists are viewed in Conservative land.
So when the Left starts shooting their mouths off about “Rape Culture,” we get bent out shape. When they conflate ordinary boorish behavior with rape, we lose our minds. Because branding a man a rapist is literally telling the rest of the world that he needs killing.
Yet they feel totally ok about deploying the “he’s a rapist!” charge with nothing in the way of evidence, and can’t understand why a decent man, who is married to a woman, who has daughters, who coaches a girls basketball team, might find it incredibly upsetting. They painted a target on his back. They told the world there is no crime he wouldn’t stoop to. They invited the world to kill him. They encouraged him to kill himself.
Sean D Sorrentino
Posted on Facebook October 3, 2018
[This directly relates to what Luke O’Neil thinks is “a good joke”.—Joe]
Via a tweet:
On Sunday morning Ariel Dumas, a writer for The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, apologized for a good joke. Writing on Twitter, she explained that the experience of the Kavanaugh nomination had been hard for the country and for her personally.
…
It is uncertain if Dumas was forced to make a statement by her employers at CBS, or if she volunteered the apology on her own, but one thing that is 100 percent crystal clear is that she never should have found herself in the position in the first place. The joke she posted on Saturday—”Whatever happens, I’m just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh’s life.”—was the latest target of the bad faith destruction machine of the right.
…
It’s another cruel irony that would no doubt also be lost on the humorless scolds on the right that it’s Dumas whose life they are now attempting to ruin. Soon after the joke was published, the wheels of the vexation and spite apparatus on the right who maintain constant vigilance for such alleged missteps from the “liberal media” went to work, broadcasting it far and wide as evidence of the sickness of the left.
Luke O’Neil
October 8, 2018
‘Late Show’ Writer Ariel Dumas Under Fire for Obvious ‘Joke’ About Brett Kavanaugh
[This is from someone of the same political party which just a month ago went ballistic when a political opponent used the phrase “monkey up”.
To think that it was “a good joke” that someone with a previously excellent personal reputation was publicly and repeatedly accused heinous crimes, which could not be supported, is evil.
Of course he also thinks Kathy Griffin holding up a realistic severed head of President Trump was good joke.
Hence it should come at no surprise he says this about people who exercise their right to keep and bear arms:
Almost anyone of any stature in media who dabbles in political humor has found themselves in this scenario by now. I’ve had a number of phony campaigns attempted against me at outlets I’ve written for over the years after comments I’ve made about gamers and gun fetishists were amplified in bad faith.
In addition to being evil, as Mike Cernovich tweeted, he is also lacking in self awareness.—Joe[
Via a tweet:
Serious question, if I punched McConnell in the face with, let’s say a huge dildo, until his face broke open and the fucking sentient turd working him from inside spilled out, how much prison time am I looking at? I’m willing to go up to 100 years.
Elizabeth Weitz @ebethisawesome
Tweeted on October 6, 2018
[Upon reading this my first thought was, “That will come up at your trial.”
Why are progressives so violent? Oh, now I remember. See also here.—Joe]
I was reading I-1639 looking for something else and found the following:
(vi) If purchasing a semiautomatic assault rifle, a statement by the applicant under penalty of perjury that the applicant has completed a recognized firearm safety training program within the last five years, as required by subsection (2) of this section.
(b) The application shall contain ((a)) two warnings substantially stated as follows:
(i) CAUTION: Although state and local laws do not differ, federal law and state law on the possession of firearms differ. If you are prohibited by federal law from possessing a firearm, you may be prosecuted in federal court. State permission to purchase a firearm is not a defense to a federal prosecution; and (ii)
CAUTION: The presence of a firearm in the home has been associated with an increased risk of death to self and others, including an increased risk of suicide, death during domestic violence incidents, and unintentional deaths to children and others.
Notice they say “association”, not causation. This is a carefully constructed deception. The association is because people in high risk environments frequently purchase firearms to lower their risk from violent predators. And, of course, the inclusion of “others” was to pad their numbers. “Others” include those violent predators.
And, still, the ownership of a firearm does lower their risk even if the risk is still higher than if they were to lower their risk in other ways such as hiring 24×7 armed guards and/or getting a safer job such as the mayor of New York city instead of doing pizza delivery late at night in the bad part of town. The writers certainly knew that and deliberately used the deceptive language to cause a chilling effect on the exercise of a specific enumerated right. This is unconstitutional.
And I just “love” this section:
The state, local governmental entities, any public or private agency, and the employees of any state or local governmental entity or public or private agency, acting in good faith, are immune from liability:
(a) For failure to prevent the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person whose receipt or possession of the firearm is unlawful;
(b) For preventing the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person who may lawfully receive or possess a firearm;
(c) For issuing a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person ineligible for such a license;
(d) For failing to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person eligible for such a license;
(e) For revoking or failing to revoke an issued concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;
(f) For errors in preparing or transmitting information as part of determining a person’s eligibility to receive or possess a firearm, or eligibility for a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;
(g) For issuing a dealer’s license to a person ineligible for such a license; or
(h) For failing to issue a dealer’s license to a person eligible for such a license.
Private citizens can be charged with a felony for having their firearms stolen and used in a crime but government officials are immune from liability if they allow a sale to a violent felon to go through or “in good faith” prevent a legitimate sale.
So, all some anti-gun or racist governmental entity has to do is claim they were acting in good faith when they prevent the sale or transfer of a firearm to disfavored group, individual, or even everyone. It does provide for a writ of mandamus with the awarding of attorneys fees if the person denied their rights wins. In addition to the time delayed being a denial of rights for an extended period of time expect people of color and the poor to be the hardest hit.
I also found a loophole for certain issues which I will share, and exploit, privately with people I know and trust well.
While there are civil rights rulings Judge Brett Kavanaugh made which are concerning, from the Second Amendment standpoint it would have been difficult to find someone better.
Two years ago I was not hopeful for a future which included the free exercise of our right to keep and bear arms. The 2016 presidential election gave me a glimmer of hope. The Trump administration has not been nearly as good on this issue as some people hoped. One could even make the case from a legislative and regulatory view point it has been rather dismal. President Hillary Clinton would have been a catastrophe so by comparison so there is that. Our rights under Trump were being sous-vide. Under Clinton they would have been put in the crematorium.
Now Justice Kavanaugh is in a position to help say the final words on this vital issue. I hope those words will make a violent response to the infringement of our rights avoidable.
Via Davidwhitewolf:
“Kavanaugh” (a parody of Van Halen’s “Panama”) from r/The_Donald
Via a tweet:
WACOPS believe that Initiative 1639 contains provision that are in clear violation of both state and federal individual constitutional rights, which, as law enforcement, officers, WACOPS members are sworn to uphold. In addition to the constitutional issues, this 30-page initiative, if passed, would impose significant restrictions on a citizen’s ability to possess and access commonly owned firearms for lawful self-defense. The measure is complicated and confusing, and we don’t believe it will result in good public policy or improved public safety.
Teresa Taylor
Executive Director Washington Council of Police & Sheriffs
Email to National Rifle Association of America
October 1, 2018
[H/T to NRA-ILA for the above quote and this image:
Vote NO on I-1639.—Joe]
Via a tweet:
Initiative 1639 is being promoted as a public safety measure; those actually working law enforcement know that IT WILL DO NOTHING TO STOP A SINGLE CRIME. This initiative has nothing to do with “assault weapons” and is directed only at our good citizens who already pass multiple background checks before owning a firearm.
The Washington State Law Enforcement Association (WSLEFIA) opposes Initiative 1639. I-1639 harms law enforcement officers and all citizens of Washington.
…
The WSLEFIA finds that I-1639 is an attack on civil rights and is an attempt to marginalize all firearm owners, including law enforcement officers. I-1639 will impair public safety, embolden criminals and impose burdensome restrictions on our most law-abiding citizens.
Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association
[H/T to NRA-ILA for link to WSLEFIA and this image:
WSLEFIA also says:
I-1639 creates a new crime of “Community Endangerment” and there is NO law enforcement exemption. If a law enforcement officer should fail to secure either a personal or duty firearm as prescribed by I-1639 then that officer may be subject to felony criminal charges. Even a department-issued firearm must be secured with a trigger lock or in “secure storage.” The trunk of a patrol car is not specified as secure storage.
I-1639 requires a 10 day wait for law enforcement officers who wish to buy a semiautomatic rifle, whether for personal or duty purposes. There is no exemption for either a commissioned officer or a Concealed Pistol License.
I-1639 requires that law enforcement officers attend a “safety” training class before purchasing any semiauto rifle. There is no exemption for law enforcement commissioned personnel and no recognition of either department or BLEA academy training.
I-1639 would require that a law enforcement officer who sells a semiauto rifle to another officer go to a firearm dealer and pay fees. The purchasing officer must wait 10 days, pass additional background checks, and show proof of “safety” training.
I-1639 targets law-abiding citizens–not criminals–by creating a new law that would make the innocent victim subject to CRIMINAL charges if his firearm is accessed by a prohibited person. The ugliness of shaming and blaming the victim of a crime should never be made law. I-1639 ignores the criminals while attacking the victims of theft.
Law enforcement officers will be made to investigate the victims of crime rather than pursuing the perpetrators of crimes.
I-1639 falsely demonizes all semiautomatic sporting rifles as “assault rifles”–the rifles they wish to deny to the public are the most common sporting and hunting firearms–the type of firearms LEAST likely to be used in crimes–this fact is supported by both FBI and Washington State crime statistics.
Youth rifles, plinkers, collector firearms, hunting and self-defense rifles–if they are semiautomatic, I-1639 will re-classify them as “assault rifles.”
I-1639 strips adults under age 21 of their right to self-defense. Law-abiding young adults will no longer be able to possess any modern defensive firearm, neither handgun nor rifle.
I-1639 attacks our safest and best-trained firearm users–licensed and safety trained hunters–by prohibiting the use of modern sporting rifles by those age 18-20.
I-1639 would unlawfully seize semiauto rifles already owned by those under age 21 by prohibiting any possession or use of these rifles at target ranges and for hunting.
I-1639 creates both a literacy test and the equivalent of a poll tax–they call it a fee–to exercise a right guaranteed by both State and Federal Constitutions. You wouldn’t accept this for voting or any other right and neither have the courts.
I-1639 delays the LAWFUL purchase of a rifle by 10 days–even after all background checks are passed! A right delayed is a right denied.
I-1639 impairs a citizen’s defense their home by requiring that the most effective defensive firearms be locked and inaccessible by the homeowner.
I-1639 creates an unnecessary, costly and ill-considered requirement for government-mandated training that is already adequately addressed by Washington Arms Collectors-provided training, National Rifle Association safety instructors, WDFW Hunter Safety training and private clubs and ranges.
I-1639 creates yet another huge unfunded bureaucracy that will only duplicate the background checks already Federally required. Don’t be fooled–the background check system already exists and all semiauto rifle buyers already are required to pass background checks.
I-1639 will prohibit legitimate sales of rifles to fully background checked and Federally-approved purchasers from other states, thus harming all State and Federally licensed firearm dealers.
I-1639 will not stop a single crime or shooting. Criminals are not subject to any of the requirements; only law-abiding citizens go through background checks and they already do so.
I-1639 wrongly burdens our most law-abiding citizens while doing nothing to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.
Vote NO on I-1639.—Joe]
I mentioned the other day that I tried out some 180 grain Hornady Action Pistol (HAP) bullets. In one test of a 20 shot group they gave me better accuracy that any pistol bullet I can recall. I usually shoot a six shot group and “on a good day” get about a 1.5 inch group with the same load with 180 grain Montana JHPs. Using the group calculation feature of Modern Ballistics I converting the 20 shot group into the equivalent six shot group and got 1.26 inches. Hence HAP does appear to be have significantly better accuracy. I’ll shoot some more groups just for fun sometime, but the accuracy criterion for switching bullets, all other things being equal is “nearly as good” as the Montana Gold JHP. It more than meets this criterion.
I also measured the weight variation of the bullets. This is rather important because it can affect whether your ammo will “make major” power factor at USPSA matches. If the chrono man pulls a light bullet or two to compute your power factor you could end up shooting minor power factor.
Here are the results:
| Mean | 180.1 |
| Std Deviation | 0.224 |
| Min | 179.5 |
| Max | 180.4 |
| ES | 0.9 |
| Bullet 1 | 180.2 |
| Bullet 2 | 179.5 |
| Bullet 3 | 179.8 |
| Bullet 4 | 180.0 |
| Bullet 5 | 180.0 |
| Bullet 6 | 180.0 |
| Bullet 7 | 180.4 |
| Bullet 8 | 180.2 |
| Bullet 9 | 180.0 |
| Bullet 10 | 180.3 |
| Bullet 11 | 180.2 |
| Bullet 12 | 179.8 |
| Bullet 13 | 180.1 |
| Bullet 14 | 180.3 |
| Bullet 15 | 180.2 |
| Bullet 16 | 180.0 |
| Bullet 17 | 180.2 |
| Bullet 18 | 180.3 |
| Bullet 19 | 180.4 |
| Bullet 20 | 180.0 |
The extreme spread on the weight distribution would make a different of about +/- 0.44. This isn’t a big deal.
The weight distribution is acceptable to me.
I loaded all 500 bullets and found something a little irritating:
Five (only four shown here) of the bullets had the hollow point clogged with what looked like cleaning media, perhaps ground corn cobs. It was easy to remove the foreign material from the bullets but I have never seen this in the 120K+ rounds I have reloaded. It’s not a big deal but I was surprised they would have a process which would allow this to be possible.
Overall their bullets meet my criteria even though they are a little more expensive than the Montana Gold I am currently using. I am switching bullets because they told New York they would not knowingly sell products to them.
A man in Florida has been arrested after he threatened to shoot senators who don’t support Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court, authorities said.
The narrative against the political left which seems to be most effective in getting people to put distance between them is that they are crazy and violent. There is a lot of evidence to support than.
I want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court because I believe he is much more likely to support the rule of law than a justice appointed by someone from the left. An advocate for Kavanaugh who advocates murder is counterproductive.
Update: Here is someone from the political left to illustrate my point:
Dr. Carol Christine Fair, an associate professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown said white GOP Senators deserve to die miserable deaths “while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps.”
This wasn’t enough for Dr. Fair, she said once the white Republican Senators die miserable deaths, their corpses should be castrated and fed to pigs.
Via a tweet:
Disarming the public is not even remotely a solution to the actions of criminals or insane people. In fact, it only makes matters worse, by leaving the innocent helpless in the face of miscreants and sociopaths. Failure to see this is a sign of untreated hoplophobia.
One way of fighting this, untested at the current time, is creed discrimination. It is illegal to discriminate based upon creed. Though creed is often viewed in a religious context, it is also equally valid in a socio-political context. The fierce attachment with which many Americans cling to their right to arms is indeed a creed, dating back to Colonial times. Singling citizens out for special legal action is creed discrimination and illegal under civil-rights statutes. Where are the creative and ambitious civil-rights attorneys looking to break new ground and make a name for themselves…
Alan Korwin
Infringement is Constitutionally Banned
September 22, 2018
[Interesting idea. It’s worth a try. Toss it into the same lawsuit with the 2nd Amendment claim.
But if the courts won’t recognize the 2nd Amendment then why would one anyone think they would recognize your gun-owner creed?—Joe]
Tonight, October 4th, the Seattle/King-County League of Women Voters is having a debate on Washington State ballot initiatives. This will include I-1639. It will be at The Collective (I’m not kidding!). The following is via a Facebook friend who works for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership:
There will be a ballot initiative Forum organized by the League of Women Voters on Thursday, 4 Oct. Please plan to attend; 1639 is on the agenda. See below for details.
DETAILS
Location: The Collective
Address: 400 Dexter Ave N, Seattle, WA 98109
Neighborhood: South Lake Union
Parking: There’s a pay garage and street parking
Walk into lobby, you may have to check in with security. Tell them you’re there for the League of Women Voters event and proceed to the elevator. Go to the second floor and check in with either Chelsea or myself. This is where our event will be taking place. There will also be signage directing you on where to go. If you get lost or confused give me a ring at (206) 697-2698.SCHEDULE
Before 6:00 PM, informal networking in the Collective’s bar HighTide (this will also be open after the event for similar use)
6:00 PM – 6:55 PM Tabling outside of forum room on second floor, please feel free to bring whatever literature, hand outs, etc. you’d like. The venue should have an area set up for you to do this.
7:00 PM Forum starts
940 Pro (Jack Sorenson) and Con (Mike Sloan) MIKE PLEASE CONFIRM
1631 Pro (Mo McBroom) and Con (Christian Gobel)
1634 Pro (Jim Desler) and Con (Jim Krieger)
1639 Pro (Stephen Paolini) and Con (Keely Hopkins) KEELY PLEASE CONFIRM
Seattle Preschool Promise Levy (LWV Education Committee)
9:00 PM Forum ends
9:00 – 10 PM HighTide is open for informal networking and discussion among speakers and participantsFORUM FORMAT
3 minute opening statements Pro
3 minute opening statements Con
15 minutes of questions (campaigns get 1 minute to answer questions, this should be like five questions per side with time to ask questions; we’ll make sure each side gets the same amount of questions)
2 minute closing statements Pro
2 minute closing statement ConAV will be minimal, we’ll get you all mic’d up but there’s not going to be time for any visual presentations/slides. The current plan is to have chairs available for you to sit, and you can choose to either stand or sit while you talk. We want you to be as comfortable as possible.
Questions will be solicited from our members before the event and during the event from participants. If you need to arrive late/duck out early that is totally fine, but please let me know in case it impacts our schedule.
Our moderator will be either Dan Beakman or Jim Brunner from the Seattle Times. TVW has tentatively agreed to film and broadcast this for us.
Lastly, please feel free to broadcast this far and wide to your networks. We have a large space and want everyone to feel included and heard at this forum.
All the best,
Alyssa—
Alyssa Weed
LWVSKC Second Vice President, Program Chair
My oldest daughter and I will be there. Please attend and show your support for stopping this terrible infringement upon our right to keep and bear arms.
Because I think the meaning of the text of the Constitution should remain the same until it is properly changed by amendment, and that judges have a constitutional duty to invalidate laws that conflict with that meaning, I believe the President’s choice of Brett Kavanaugh—who is otherwise highly qualified—should be confirmed. If Democrats disagree they should specify the approach they think is better.
If their “judicial philosophy” is that a judge should simply reach all the outcomes that a progressive Democrat would like the Supreme Court to reach, they should candidly say so. If they believe that the precedents they like—like Roe v. Wade—are sacrosanct, but those they detest—like Citizens United—are to be discarded, they should identify how we know which precedents are binding and which are not.
Failing that, they too should vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh.
Randy Barnett
The Case for Kavanaugh
October 1, 2018
[I agree.
H/T to David Hardy.—Joe]
This evening I went to the NRA phone bank event and made calls to encourage people to vote against I-1639.
I’m an introvert. It’s uncomfortable for me to make calls to friends. It’s tough to make calls to businesses to ask if they have a particular product or to make an appointment to get my car repaired.
Making calls to people I don’t know, some of whom are openly hostile to what I have to say, puts my stomach in knots. I did this for about an hour two weeks ago before I had to stop. I went back last week but the office we had used the previous week was locked (they moved to a different office when someone forget the key or something, and I didn’t see them). I went back this evening hoping I could handle it better. Nope. It was worse.
I left after about 35 minutes of making calls. I decided my time could be better spent doing something else. I decided to gather up all the memes I could find and post them here (and Twitter, Facebook, and Gab).
In a little over an hour I have collected enough that I have one for every day between now and election day. There is a lot of repetition in the text of the message even though they have a different images so I’ll continue looking for new material (hint to Oleg, Stephanie, and Brian) and will boost the count per day as needed.
You are able to find all my posts on I-1639 by clicking on this link (the category link for “I-1639” at the bottom of this post). Share with people for whom you think will be receptive.
You can donate money (as I have done) here to support video ads like this:
You can also donate here to fund NRA efforts (as I have also done) to defeat I-1639.
Here is the first meme from my collection. Via a tweet:
