Numbers aren’t their thing

Posted on by

Sometimes we point out anti-gun people and those on the political left not being able to do math or even arithmetic. But, as I have pointed out before, it’s worse than that. It’s numbers they have trouble with:

Terry McAuliffe (D) called for gun control. McAuliffe called for more background checks and ending “gunshow loopholes.” McAuliffe said 93 million people are a victim of gun violence a day.

“This is not what today is about but there are too many guns on the street,” the governor said Wednesday morning. “We lose 93 million Americans a day to gun violence.”
“It’s not just about politicians, we worry about all of our citizens,” he said.

“Why are you bringing it up? People are going to criticize that you are bringing up gun control at this time?” a reporter asked.

“I’m talking about it today. This is a very serious issue,” he replied.

McAuliffe repeated the 93 million number once more before he was corrected by reporters.

“With 93 million people a day it’s just something,” McAuliffe said before reporters jumped in.

Even if you give McAuliffe some serious slack and let him get away with saying he really meant 93 per day then he is including suicides and legal shootings by police and private individuals protecting innocent life. This is deliberate deception on his part.

When someone is anti-gun then numbers, arithmetic, and math, not to mention constitutional law and political philosophy, are a threat to what is really important to them. That is their delusions and their desire to control other people.

When will it stop?

Posted on by

It happened again. Someone on the political left went on a mass shooting rampage. Almost all mass shooters are from the political left. And although it doesn’t show up in the major news media reports I have seen so far it is clear this was a political act:

“A guy…walked up to us that was asking whether it was Republicans or Democrats out there,” Representative Ron DeSantis told Fox News Wednesday morning. “And it was just a little odd then he walked towards the area where this all happened.”

This is consistent with my prediction of 10 days ago. I expect it will continue to escalate. As long as people let law enforcement deal with those on the left who initiate violence, other than immediate defense of innocent life, the left will continue to lose supporters and political power. In another couple of election cycles the Democrats will be approaching third party status. Then the violence of the left will fade and mostly stop.

Update: The shooter has been identified as James T. Hodgkinson. And, as expected, he was on the political left:

James’ Facebook page is full of posts that are anti-Donald Trump, including one from March 22, which reads, “Trump is a traitor. Trump has destroyed our democracy. It’s time to destroy Trump & Co.”

…

James was a supporter of Bernie Sanders.

But, so far, and as expected, this hasn’t been reported in the major news outlets.

Quote of the day—Toastrider

Posted on by

Once people start taking responsibility for their own safety, they begin to move away from the progressive lie. Even if they still hold such beliefs, they will find themselves labeled as heretics because personal responsibility is anathema to progressivism.

The good news is that those of us who value autonomy and liberty will welcome them in with open arms.

Toastrider
June 13, 2017
Comment to Pulse: One Year Later
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—How_To_Liberty

Posted on by

I work at a grocery store, and it’s usually a comfy job. Comfy enough that I was able to sincerely hold on to my Ancap beliefs, until today. Today, a line was crossed that made me see the error of my ways.

They were doing inventory, and they needed us, or more specifically, me alone to push all the items in every shelf in the entire store all the way back, and then dust the shelf off.

At first it didn’t seem all that bad, but then I realized I was the only one doing it, and I would have to spend the rest of my shift on this. After only about five minutes, I felt like I was going crazy.

Push, spray, dust, move down, push, spray dust, move down, push spray, dust, move down, push, spray dust, move slightly to the left, and repeat.

I had to do that at least 30 times to only get one side of one aisle done. Took me at least half an hour to do that, and there were still 20 more aisles left in the store. The repetitive motion, the maddeningly slow progress, and being alone for the entire 8 hour shift (including an hour of overtime) was exhausting in every way imaginable.

By the time I was done, I was infuriated, not just with the fact that I had to do this, but because of how little I got out of it. $9.30 / hour of that insanity? What kind of heartless monster would tell someone in severe poverty doing this kind of work, to just “pull himself up by his bootstraps”? A sociopath, that’s who.

I finally understood what socialists have been talking about all this time.

“If only I were in a socialist country,” I thought, “the shelves would be completely empty and I could have finished this in like, an hour.”

How_To_Liberty
May 23, 2017
I used to be an Ancap, but my job made me turn to socialism.
[Via a tweet by Michael Z Williamson.

I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Wanted: Million Mom March Media Kit From 2000

Posted on by

2000 Logo of Million Misinformed Mom March Attempted Gun GrabCalling all Internet Wayback Gun Rights History Nerds:

In the spring of 2000, Million Mom March (an extension of Brady Gun Control & Co.) published a media kit on their website, MillionMomMarch.org.

The kit contained talking points for even organizers, fact sheets (wrong, of course), and other guidelines. Most notable was a clear warning to never debate pro-gun opponents.

The Million Mom March took place on May 14, 2000. Unsurprisingly, a million people did not showup. Not even close.

I used to have a copy of their 2000 media kit (maybe it was called an “organizer kit” or something like that)  on my computer waaayback, but that’s long gone. Can someone out there dredge up their media packet from ages ago? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Heston? Bueller?

Thanks!

Quote of the day—MB @NitramBeaulieu

Posted on by

You’re from Texas… Humm that explains a lot. Pictures of guns, clearly overcompensating… Have you seen your dick lately?

MB‏ @NitramBeaulieu
Tweeted on April 10, 2017
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from BFD‏ @BigFatDave.—Joe]

Bambi!

Posted on by

There has been more venison visiting the Boomershoot property. It’s almost once a day I see a glimpse of a deer in the shooting line webcam archives.

Yesterday morning deer showed up for a few minutes at the edge of the frame. Then during twilight a doe and her fawn posed directly in front of the camera:

P17061020184310

P17061020184310Web

Quote of the day—ren

Posted on by

10 shots in 3 seconds from a 6 caliber magazine revolver.

That is a ghost gun.

ren
April 18, 2017
Post to “…gunman fired 10 shots before stopping to reload his six-shot revolver…”
[Mocking the ignorance of the anti-gun crowd can be quite entertaining. Just don’t forget that it is mostly entertainment. Taking a new shooter to the range is more productive in the long term.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

Posted on by

The left remains convinced that it can create through destruction, that it can build a fair society through theft, an ethical society by destroying its values and a high-minded society through contempt.

It must believe in the redemptive power of its thievery, amorality and hatred. Or face a moral reckoning.

Daniel Greenfield
May 2017
The War of Two Americas
[Via Robert J. Avrech and email from Paul Koning.

I long ago came to the conclusion the left has no morals. Deception and flat out lies are an integral part of their culture. Moral reckoning? Not of their own accord. They will, and their political brethren have, murdered tens of millions and still claim they hold the ethical high ground. Their propensity for violence is obvious and ever present.

Read the whole thing. I alternated between seeing it as a nearly unbelievable conspiracy theory and brilliant insight. Perhaps it is both.—Joe]

Sleep naked

Posted on by

I’ve said it before and here is someone else piling on:

Whether you are a male or a woman, sleeping in the buff offers both of you some pretty great health benefits.

The article goes on to explain each of the following points:

  1. It Can Boost Your Love Life
  2. Better Sleep Quality
  3. Burns More Calories
  4. It’s Easier and You Save Money
  5. You’ll Always Be Ready To Go
  6. It’s More Comfortable
  7. Benefits Of Skin on Skin Contact
  8. Better Skin
  9. Human Growth Hormone
  10. Temperature Regulation
  11. Benefits for Men
  12. Benefits for Women

Sounds good to me. In fact, I don’t have a problem with extending the nudity to any other time of the day. In general, I think clothes really only serve two purposes:

  1. To protect you from the elements
  2. To prevent your arrest (this can also be considered a special case of purpose 1).

Quote of the day—Chelsea Handler

Posted on by

It’s about the gun lobbies, the people who — you know, it’s all about money in people’s pockets — the people who argue this and say, “We want our rights to guns.” Nobody is trying to take away your guns. If you want to go shoot, you know, whatever, in the woods, that’s fine, but it’s a hobby. If your hobby is [affecting] innocent people being killed all the time, children included, don’t you think you should reconsider the lack of restrictions placed on your hobby?

Chelsea Handler
June 6, 2017
Chelsea Handler Talks Gun Violence, Activism and Kathy Griffin
[Amazing! The stupid and/or ignorance is so abundant she has trouble expressing it.

The gun lobbies she refers to represent gun owners, not gun manufactures. How can it be “all about money in people’s pockets”? It’s not.

“Nobody is trying to take away your guns”? Wrong.

“It’s a hobby”. No. It’s a natural right which is specific enumerated for protection against government infringement.

“Don’t you think you should reconsider the lack of restrictions placed on your hobby?” No. Don’t you think you should reconsider your speaking in public when you are so profoundly stupid and/or ignorant?—Joe]

Update: I’d like to add that it’s called The Bill of Rights. Not The Bill of Hobbies.

There is no substitute for testing

Posted on by

Hypothesis are easy to generate for almost any topic. And in a surprising number of cases people are so confident in them they think testing them is pointless.

“The earth is flat, if you sail far enough you will fall of the edge!” Odd, that didn’t happen to the Chinese in 1421 or 100 years later to Ferdinand Magellan’s and his crew.

“If people carry guns there will be blood in the streets!” Nope, not really.

“A ban on ‘assault weapons’ will make people safer!” The data indicates otherwise, “the ban might reduce gunshot victimizations. This effect is likely to be small at best and possibly too small for reliable measurement.”

“The more education about sex and birth control the lower the teen pregnancy rate.” Surprise! Maybe not:

The reigning orthodoxy among public health officials is that the more government spends on sex education the fewer teen pregnancies there will be. Now, however, British researchers have found empirical evidence that appears to demonstrate the exact opposite.

In findings published in the Journal of Health Economics, Nottingham University Business School Professor David Paton and Liam Wright, a research assistant at the University of Sheffield, found budget cuts to sex education classes may have contributed to lower rates of teenage pregnancy in England.

Paton’s study compared changes in the rate of teen pregnancy with the change in the annual funding of teenage pregnancy services for 149 English local authorities between 2008 and 2014.

To their surprise, the researchers found that after sex education budgets were slashed, teen pregnancy rates fell by 42.6 percent.

Of course if you read that closely you should notice the data it is not about “more education” but “more government spending on sex education”.

I’m reminded that for many decades the USSR attempted to increase farm production and failed. While, during the same time period, the US government attempted to decrease farm production and failed.

I am of the opinion all laws intended to modify human behavior should be tested to make sure they achieve the stated benefits with minimal undesired side effects and are an effective use of resources. If they don’t, then the law should be repealed. But, as we know, politicians are more interested in increasing power and virtue signaling than in using government to improve the lives of citizens.

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. to appeal Couric decision

Posted on by

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. has announced:

The VCDL Board of Directors, after careful consideration, has decided that the recent ruling dismissing the VCDL case against Katie Couric, et al, CANNOT STAND!

The lawsuit has far reaching implications for all Americans. If the media can be allowed to change a person’s words to suit the media’s own needs or beliefs, then a grievous blow will have been struck against the very core of the freedom that the United States stands for!

NO! We are going to fight this because too much is at stake.

Today, I have directed VCDL’s attorneys to move forward with the appeal to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, where it will be heard by a three-judge panel “de novo” (which means the merits of the case will be heard anew with no consideration of the judge’s ruling that recently dismissed the case).

…

If you wish to contribute to help covering VCDL’s legal fees, click here:

http://vcdl.org/Donate

I’m not a lawyer but it would appear to me that it’s going to be a tough case to win. Apparently the bar they have to get over is:

Despite Couric’s admission, Judge Gibney dismissed the defamation suit against her last week. He ruled that the depiction of VCDL members did not meet the threshold of making them appear “unfit as a gun rights advocacy organization.”

I’m all for making anti-gun people pay a price for their lies and deception and I don’t know of any better hills to take a stand on, but it would be best if you had a good chance of winning the battle.

Deception through framing

Posted on by

As we have been saying for a long time, they have to use deception to advance their agenda:

It’s never a “used car’’ but rather a “pre-owned vehicle.’’ Instead of “torture,’’ it’s “enhanced interrogation methods.’’ There are some things you just don’t say — and Rep. Elizabeth Esty is here to tell you why, at least in terms of the gun debate.

Esty told audience members at a Pride Fund event Wednesday to always sub in “gun safety’’ for “gun control,’’ lest you lose the support of 15 percent of men.

By framing the issue as “safety” they avoid the negative connotations of “control”. Nevermind that it is extremely rare any of them have ever taken a gun safety class, let alone advocate that people take such a class.

They have a culture of lies and deception, so, what do you expect?

Quote of the day—Thomas Fuller

Posted on by

Seduced by the lure of power, drunk on visions from “higher” dimensions, visions that tell them the violence they do is just, both coalitions have betrayed this chance at peace. Neither coalition will ever persuade the other to see things its way. There will never be a pan-American consensus. There will never be a universal vision of the common good. And because the “reasons” that justify each vision come from “higher” realms that are invisible to the uninitiated, reason will be impotent to bring these coalitions closer together.

And when men and women cannot deal with one another with reason, they will deal with one another by force.

Thomas Fuller
November 6th, 2016
Hillary Versus America: Knowledge Is Power
[H/T to Kevin.

I don’t agree with everything Fuller has to say but there are many other passages that resonate with me.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Hardy

Posted on by

What we’re seeing is a long term trend as Americans rediscover their love of guns and shooting. This is catastrophic for the antigun movement.

David Hardy
June 5, 2017
Additional confirmation of a theory
[At the USPSA range officer class last weekend a data point was mentioned that supports this view. The observation was made that local USPSA matches have a lot of people in them. The last match I was at (May 21st USPSA match at the Marysville Rifle Club) had 108 shooters.—Joe]

Boomershoot venison

Posted on by

I’ve seen lots of deer on my land near the Boomershoot site but I don’t ever recall seeing any at the actual Boomershoot site. Near the Taj (I’ve seen moose there), yes.

I’ve looked at thousands of images from the webcams at Boomershoot and haven’t seen any deer here either, until day before yesterday. The day before yesterday, at about 11:00 AM, there was a deer off in the distance. Yesterday, at 10:39 AM, there were two much closer:

P17060510391510

It is odd to see deer out in the middle of the day. About the only time I ever see them is just before dark in the evening.

Soooo… As I continued to scan the images I came across another deer image in the late evening yesterday:

P17060520212610

They are rather small now but in a year or so they should make good Boomershoot venison.

Precision Shooting

Posted on by

Rolf has a post about precision shooting at Men of the West.

Don’t do this at home

Posted on by

Via email from Sean who says

How Not To Do Boomershoot

Huffman’s first rule of recreational explosives:

Never put anything between you and explosives which a surgeon might be required to remove from your body.

Note that this guy didn’t move out of the way until after the debris hit the tree. This is typical. Even from very small charges, unless you are hundreds of yards away you won’t have time to move before impact.

Also from Sean is another example.

Quote of the day—Zachary Leeman

Posted on by

If there’s one thing gun owners in America don’t need, it’s the star of “Keeping Up with the Kardashians” telling them whether or not they can own and operate firearms.

Zachary Leeman
Just What We Need: Kim K Calls for Gun Control
[I think what is happening is a perverted form of “argument by authority”. If someone has a high status/visibility they are viewed, by some, as being an authority regardless of the subject matter. I suspect it is “hardwired” into our brains and served a valuable evolutionary purpose. Just because someone is well known, that, obviously, does not make them a subject matter expert. But at some level it satisfies a need for an authority opinion on the subject.

When, in high school, I first noticed this sort of thing I thought it was one of the most bizarre things I had ever heard of. Decades later during the I-676 campaign our anti-gun opponents used the approach and I was confused. Who, I wondered, would care whether some well known, but ignorant and/or stupid, person supported a law. Our side ended up doing the same thing and I still thought it was weird and felt rather “soiled” to be associated with that. But now, decades later, I realize that advertising uses celebrity endorsements all the time and they wouldn’t do that if wasn’t effective. If it works, it’s not stupid.

I still think it’s weird but I now think of it as a quirk of our brain evolution. Most people do not have a process by which they can accurately determine if something is true or false. Having such a process is an, in evolutionary timescales, extremely recent development. A quick and dirty test to determine truth of falsity that improved the odds of a correct determination by 20% is a huge evolutionary advantage over a ecological niche competitor. And quick and dirty test can even beat out competitors which use a more rigorous test that takes much longer. Hence even when more rigorous tests are available something as stupid as getting your firearms law recommendations from Kim Kardashian will feel entirely appropriate to people who appear to function normally. This is because it works often enough that they don’t remove themselves from gene pool.—Joe]