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]

Here’s What Happened When I Tried To #WearOrange

Posted on by

I wandered over to Everytown for Gun Control’s site. There, I became aware that a person can: “stand together” to make “real change” for more gun control, and “demand to be heard” — all by simply doing this:

Create your own #WearOrange image, and share it on Facebook or Twitter to show everyone why you’re committed to ending gun violence in America.

I gave it a shot. Here’s what happened:

Truth about #WearOrange is at GunFacts.info

Please share this copyright-free image.

You, too, may play with colors at Everytown’s website, here.

There, you can join the so-called “thousands of Americans” who allegedly wore orange on June 2nd & 3rd to send a powerful message.

Together, we can change the world by cluttering the internet with orange-tinted images.

#WearOrange
#OrangeYouGlad

Quote of the day—JRG #RESISTANCE @SimonSaysBooHoo

Posted on by

your RIDICULOUS lot can go fuck one another w/those pseudo-peenies you love to tote around and point at things.

JRG #RESISTANCE @SimonSaysBooHoo
Tweeted on April 19, 2017
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from BFD @BigFatDave.—Joe]

The future of the violent left

Posted on by

In Portland today:

What began as a tense exchange of name-calling and profane insults took a turn when counterdemonstrators began throwing glass bottles, bricks and balloons of “foul-smelling liquid” at officers, Portland Police said. Officers used pepper spray to push back the counterdemonstrators and closed the park where they had gathered, threatening to arrest anyone who remained.

…

In addition to the arrests, a large pickup truck flying two large American flags cruised past hundreds of anti-fascist protesters and honked its horn. Several people in the group ran up to the truck and ripped out the flags, bringing them into the crowd as others applauded. Others threw multiple large water bottles, sticks and other projectiles at the truck, which then sped away.

Why are progressives so violent? My hypothesis is that we have the fundamental reason, and there is a much more recent reason which has bubbled to the surface.

The recent reason is the loss of political power. Not only are they very weak at the Federal level they are losing big time in the states. They are nearly frantic about making “progress” and they are visibly losing political power. Without political power they are increasing, as historically they have always done, the criminal violence.

My prediction is that this most recent turn to violence will further decrease their political power and after another election cycle or two (two to four years) the criminal violence will decrease as they become aware that their actions are making things worse for them. Between now and then there will likely be some heavy violence but law enforcement and perhaps the National Guard will keep it fairly well contained.

The simple explanation is that these thugs are breaking the law. They don’t have the political power to change the law or, in most areas, cause the laws against street violence to be ignored. So eventually they will tire of the tear gas and jail time. They will then resign themselves to having lost the current (5th generation) war. They may only go into seclusion and pursue a 6th generation war, but they will dramatically scale back the violence.

7 dead, many more wounded, it’s the internet’s fault

Posted on by

Predictably, another attack occurred in London this weekend. Theresa May did at least mention radical Islamism as a problem, but went on to call for more police powers, and to blame the internet.

Centuries upon centuries of Islamist aggression and murder, and it’s the internet’s fault. Your freedom, and mine, is to blame.

One report claimed some fifty shots were fired by police to stop three Muslims armed with knives. I could understand that number of shots if they’d been taking return fire, but against knife wielding punks it seems like an awful lot of shooting.

At least one person was wounded by police gunfire. When that happens (and it sometimes will) and it’s a police bullet, it is a footnote. If a regular concealed carry holder in America were to do the exact same thing, never mind that lives were saved; the howls of accusation would last for weeks.

Practice on moving targets. Aerial clay targets are good, if you can find a place to do it safely;

With only a knife, it is relatively easy to murder innocent, unsuspecting people, in a country that talks about freedom and rights but has forcibly disarmed its citizens and practically turned self defense into a crime.

The Brits have invited this upon themselves with their idiotic policies and their embrace of Progressivism, and we in America are not far behind. They’ll ramp up their police state, clamp down on the internet (control of which has been coveted by authoritarians since its inception) spend more of their tax payers’ wealth, and accomplish next to nothing.

Once again, as always it seems, at least one of the perpetrators was known to the British security network. The result of that knowledge was that they were able to say, after the fact, that they’d been watching that person.

The only way jihad will ever stop is if they’re all convinced that it is utterly hopeless, or foolish, or morally wrong, to continue. There are several ways to accomplish that end, only one of which involves a commitment to total extermination. Theresa May eluded to one of them, but I don’t believe that there is currently a government on this planet that is either principled enough or committed enough, or politically capable of any of those ways.

Maybe it’s not really a government’s problem to solve. What was that saying? Something about a people, or ideology, or process, which created a problem will never be the one to solve it.

Juliannne Moore Hates Guns But Has Armed Bodyguards

Posted on by
Actress Julianne Moore has armed guards but wants to disarm the regular guy

Please share this image wide and far.

Julianne Moore needs to check her privilege. She’s yet another anti-gun celeb who enjoys the luxury of armed bodyguards, but thinks her underling citizens shouldn’t be afforded their 2nd Amendment rights.

Moore, along with her predictable posse of high-class gun controllers, have recently “taken action” via their silly #WearOrange campaign.

The Clockwork Orange gang’s campaign continues through the next 26 days; they’ve declared June to be National Gun Violence Awareness Month. Like clockwork, Moore & Co. are quick to push for more gun control and manipulate statistics, without providing any tangible specifics on how to prevent or control gun crime.

Breitbart points out:

The actors, actresses, and other celebrities do not espouse any particular way to prevent or control gun crime, but many of them do share the exaggerated claim that “93 Americans are killed” by “gun violence” each day.

Further:

Breitbart News has repeatedly pointed out that this figure actually swells the number of people killed via “gun violence” by 66 percent. In reality, the number of people killed via actual “gun violence” ranges from about 10,500 to 12,000 a year. Clinton swelled that number by adding in firearm-related suicides, which number roughly 20,000 to 22,000 per year. Everytown, Moore, and Schumer have done the same thing to swell their figures.

h/t to Joe for nominating to meme Julianne Moore.

#WearOrange
#OrangeYouGlad

Quote of the day—Kevin Imel

Posted on by

A .38 Super vasectomy is not recommended.

Kevin Imel
USPSA NROI Range Instructor
June 3, 2017
[Kevin said this just after showing a video of a USPSA shooter almost shooting himself due to the compensator on his open class gun catching on the pocket of his loose fitting short during the draw.

Participating in USPSA matches are extremely safe. As near as USPSA records can determine no one, in 40 years of the sport, has ever died due to being shot while participating in a match. There have been heart attacks and auto accidents while going to and from matches which resulted in death, but not shooting accidents. Skiing, high school football, and a lot of other sports are far more dangerous.

But, the potential is there for serious injury or death and it is the job of the range officers to keep it safe.

I’m taking the USPS Range Officer class again because I let my RO certification expire in 2014. I just wasn’t shooting enough in 2012 and a few of the following years. I’m now shooting a lot more and I am going through the class again to get caught up with all the changes in the rules since the last time I took the class in 2012.—Joe]

Negative press covfefe

Posted on by

We all make typos. Butt-dials happen. Interruptions occu….

I found the world’s reaction to the partial information broadcast far and wide fascinating at many levels. At 12:06 AM Wednesday morning, the 31st of June, The Real Donald Trump (the God Emperor and President of the united States) sent a tweet. As with so many things said or typed at odd hours of the night, and from our president, it wasn’t phrased with quite the perfect polish and eloquence some might have hoped. Continue reading →

Quote of the day—Kim Kardashian

Posted on by

I’M NOT AGAINST GUNS AND I’M NOT AGAINST PEOPLE OWNING GUNS. AFTER WHAT HAPPENED TO ME IN PARIS, I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO BE SAFE AND TO HAVE ARMED SECURITY. ALL OF MY SECURITY TEAM IS ARMED, BUT THEY ALSO SUPPORT STRICTER GUN CONTROL LAWS AND BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD RESTRICT ACCESS TO FIREARMS FOR PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS, ANYONE PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED OF A MISDEMEANOR, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND THOSE AT A HIGHER RISK OF COMMITTING GUN VIOLENCE.

I HOPE THAT WE WON’T BECOME NUMBED BY THE INCREASING NUMBER OF GUN-RELATED TRAGEDIES WE SEE ON THE NEWS. WE ALL HAVE A VOICE AND A RIGHT TO FEEL SAFE, TO BE PROTECTED FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE A THREAT, PARTICULARLY WHEN HANDED A DEADLY WEAPON. I WANT TO HELP BUILD A SAFER FUTURE FOR MY CHILDREN AND I BELIEVE TOGETHER WE CAN FIND WAYS TO DO THAT, WHILE STILL PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Kim Kardashian
June 2, 2017
FAVS
[Via Elle.

I recognize the difficulty the anti-gun people have in getting knowledgeable people to support their side, but they really should keep highly visible dimwits on a shorter leash. This dimwit is advocating for the denying someone convicted of shoplifting a jar of baby food 30 years ago their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. On top of that she believes she has a right to feel safe and to be protected.

However, the topper is that one paragraph after advocating for the explicit infringement upon the rights of people she claims, “we can find ways to do that, while still protecting the rights of the American people”. You can’t find ways to infringe upon the rights of people while protecting their rights.

This conclusively demonstrates she has crap for brains.—Joe]

#OrangeYouGlad Anti-Gun Celebrities, Politicians Have Armed Guards?

Posted on by

Aren’t you glad anti-gun celebrities and politicians have armed guards?

I’m glad. Self-defense is a no-brainer.

What I’m not glad about is the do as I say, not as I do hypocrisy of anti-gun celebrities and politicians. They push for nonsensical gun laws, whilst padded by their posse of private armed guards.

Today is #WearOrange Day, a jubilee for anti-gun, anti-self-defense elites who dress-up in orange garments, while barking, whining, whimpering to pass more gun laws. They spew sour lies. We tell tasty truths.

Here’s a lineup of prime-time offenders: Kim Kardashian, Amy Schumer, Chuck Schumer, Susan Sarandon, Marty Walsh.

Help these hypocrites check their privilege. Not everyone has the luxury of armed guards. Spread the word, share these images:


If there’s a celebrity/politician I’ve missed, please post their name and a link to their #WearOrange photo in the comments below. I’ll do my best to make a meme to honor their hypocrisy. Thanks!

#OrangeYouGlad
#WearOrange
#Everytown

Famous people who #WearOrange today

Posted on by

Via Firearm Policy Coalition (see also their main website) :

FPC will be adding more on their Facebook page throughout the day. I’ll probably update the list here over the weekend sometime.