Back To Gun Control Safety

Joe Biden knows "there is no silver bullet" to reduce gun violence but he is "shooting" for a proposal by next Tuesday.

File this under 'Thank Heaven for Science' (my emphasis):

Only no one really knows what video game violence does to children and adults. Studies sway between simple causation and direct correlation.

Researchers at the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have pointed to numerous reports that show a causal connection between media violence and antagonistic behavior. A study published in Developmental Psychology last year recognized increased aggression with children who play video games.

But a 2008 study by Harvard professors found that most children who played M-rated video games did not exhibit hostile behavior.

And in related news, most gun owners don't go off on murderous rampages. Problem Solved! Or maybe, if video games are tipping one person in a hundred into madness, we have a problem.

When I have more time I hope to spin the full tirade but for now, do keep in mind various points that have been abandoned as Washington and the media chase the current "crisis":

1. The Trend is Your Friend: Crimes rates have been plunging in this country for twenty years. If increased gun ownership and violent video games are the problem, why is crime down?

2. OK, Maybe The Lack Of A Trend Is Not Your Friend: Per crime expert Alan Fox, the incidence of mass shootings has been roughly trendless for the last thirty years. Why are they resisting the overall downward trend in crime?

Possible answers might include de-institutionalization of the mentally ill, increased use of psychotropic drugs, and increased popularity of desensitizing video games propping up the mass shooting rate at a time when other forces should be pushing it down.

3. Not To Be Tedious, But Just What Is The Problem? Handgun homicides account for about 10,000 deaths per year; all rifles (with "assault weapons" as a subset) account for about 400; shotguns are another 400 and "Unclassified" is about 1,200 (sorry for the no-links, that is my steel-trap wool memory reciting the FBI UCR stats.) If we are talking about reducing gun violence, surely we should be looking at handguns rather than rifles cosmetically tricked up to look like a cool Hollywood prop.

4. There Is No Trust: The NY Times had a LOL article a while back exhorting gun owners to calm down - following the 2008 Heller decision, the Supreme Court now recognizes that the Constitution protects the right to own guns. In TimesWorld, this means that with ownership secure, gun owners should stop worrying about confiscation and be constructive on topics like a national ownership database.

For heaven's sake - in the last few months the Times has also run repeated editorials reminding their readership that the election of Mitt Romney could change the Supreme Court, with Roe v. Wade hanging in the balance. Gee - Roe v. Wade is forty years old and still tenuous. Yet 'Heller', a 5-4 decision, is rock solid and won't be threatened if Obama manages to replace one of the conservative justices.

Really? Obama wouldn't 'evolve' on that topic and decide he opposes it? Justices Ginsburg and Breyer won't need to evolve, since they were on the short side in 2008, and Kagan and Sotomayor will need to find their inner liberal and vote to overturn. Tough call.

And it's not like 'stare decisis' will be a problem, as Lawrence v Texas (2003) and Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) illustrate. When the liberal winds are blowing precedent gets blown away.

As to how our government could persuade the citizenry that their rights are secure and confiscation is not an option, well, I may come back to that. But let me continue this non-tirade...

5. Nobody Will Be Shooting Any Law Officers or Tyrants. The Revolution Will Be Tweeted. This sort of talk - "I’m not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I’m going to start killing people” - is insane. And these impressive arguments about natural law lead to a daft conclusion:

To assure that no government would infringe the natural rights of anyone here, the Founders incorporated Jefferson’s thesis underlying the Declaration into the Constitution and, with respect to self-defense, into the Second Amendment.

Well, yes, 'Heller' spoke to legal self-defense, not armed insurrection.

There have been practical historical reasons for the near universal historical acceptance of the individual possession of this right. The dictators and monsters of the 20th century -- from Stalin to Hitler, from Castro to Pol Pot, from Mao to Assad -- have disarmed their people, and only because some of those people resisted the disarming were all eventually enabled to fight the dictators for freedom. Sometimes they lost. Sometimes they won.

The principal reason the colonists won the American Revolution is that they possessed weapons equivalent in power and precision to those of the British government.

Please, nobody is going to be shooting law enforcement officers or going up against tanks, helicopters, artillery and automatic weapons with a semi-automatic rifle kitted out to scare Diane Feinstein and impress Arnold.

And I recently saw folks mentioning that tyranny in the US is a real possibility, citing the Japanese internment during WWII as an example. Work with me here - worried that the Japanese civilian population in the US represented a dangerous 'enemy within' we passed a deplorable law interning the Japanese in America. Fortunately, they had not availed themselves of their gun right so they went peacefully.

But had they armed themselves and fought back, we would have... concluded that they really weren't that menacing and let the whole thing slide? Really? My guess is we would have gone to a Plan B involving severely escalated violence.

Or maybe there is a deterrent factor to the armed civilian population concept - if we had known the Japanese civilians were heavily armed we would have concluded that they really weren't so menacing, or that neutralizing the possible threat would be too painful, so we would just let them carry on. Again, really?

Look, if the majority in this country really takes into their head the notion of oppressing a minority, the minority is in dire trouble (which is essentially the situation of roughly every minority in history). We could look to the Mormons as a different example, and wonder about their odd treatment in a country founded on religious liberty.

As a practical matter, gun owners need to ask themselves just how close they are to oppressed minority status in their area. My impression is that some of the people screaming the loudest have the least to worry about.

Did Jefferson write "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants"? Yes, but he went on to suggest it must also be refreshed from time to time with bullshit. Or could have.

Guns for lawful self-defense - fine. Guns for hunting and sporting recreation - fine. Guns as preparation against the day we rebel against our governmen? That sort of talk sounds crazy and will only energize the already-committed. Please don't expect to win many converts with it.

LEFT UNSAID: The rationale for our alcohol laws is that a ban would be ineffective, most people enjoy it responsibly, and if 80,000 deaths per year are alcohol-related, well, waddya gonna do? That logic follows a similar course to the logic of the video game manufacturers (where the death toll is obviously lower and less directly linked, if at all), violent movie makers, and gun makers. Hey, people like violent video games, gory movies, and shooting at targets, and who are we to say them nay, even if a few extra deaths are a predictable consequence? No fair asking me if I have any point here other than the absurd inconsistency of our national 'conversation'.

Comments

[Tom Maguire]

Yike. Two hours ago I had five free minutes to bang out a quick thought or two. Who wrote this, and who set all the clocks forward?

[Clarice]

It's a great riff, T. One of your finest. A national conversation with morons is bound to be silly.

Every time we have one of these I hear "Seventy Six trombones" in the background. Tinnitus, friend or foe?

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--Guns for lawful self-defense - fine. Guns for hunting and sporting recreation - fine.--

So the Founders cited well regulated militias to shoot squirrels?
And 'the security of a free state' meant granny got to pop her .22 revolver off at peeping toms?

--Two hours ago I had five free minutes to bang out a quick thought or two.--

You should put in a few more hours and maybe take a look at the news in Afghanistan to see how poorly a few rifles in the hands of a minority fair against tanks and planes and helicopters.

[NKonIPAD]

Did someone hit the liquor cabinet early todat?

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Largest structure in universe discovered.
Michael Moore's ass demands recount.

[Danube of Thought iPad]

When the cops abandon the field to the thugs--see the L.A. riots--an AR 15 is nice to have at hand.

No one seriously contemplates a tyrranical government warranting an armed insurrection in the next few decades. But if the populace is substantially disarmed today, the likelihood of such a government in the next century increases. And there will be no means of resistance.

[Gentlejim]

Afternoon all.

It would be nice to see the media pick up on what happened in my little slice of heaven in NW Indiana last night.

It appears three "baddies" decided to commit a home invasion at the residence of an older gentleman. What the "baddies" didn't know was that the older gentleman was an armed retired cop. Fast forward, two "baddies" ventilated and the third in custody. The two with new holes are still breathing, I believe.

What are the chances the national media will celebrate a citizen exercising his God-given right protecting his life, liberty and property? I think what we will get is some idiot slobbering over some addle-brained skank at a stupid award ceremony.

[Jim Eagle]

A little OT but some levity: From an email I just received.

"Who Knew?

Obama rated 5th Best President


Just read, after four years, Barack Obama was rated the 5th Best President, ever.

Reagan and nine others tied for 1st;

Fifteen Presidents tied for 2nd;

Eighteen Presidents tied for 3rd;

Jimmy Carter was 4th; and

Obama came in 5th."

Another reason for the 2nd Amendment. To keep his Chicago sculptors off Mt. Rushmore.

[sbw]

Look, the purpose of a large capacity magazine isn't to hold 30 bullets, or even to shoot them.

The purpose of a large capacity magazine is to sit on the shelf to remind the government of who it works for.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--Back To Gun Control Safety--

The entire article could be improved by extending the "strike" from item #5 to the end.
I am heartened to learn however, that unlike every previous nation in history we're immune to the threat of tyranny to the extant that it's not even possible.

[Jane on Ipad]

Hi from Charlotte where it is reportedly 71 degrees.

Only 1 guy wearing a mask on the plane. I didn't join him - but if it makes AB feel better the ones we have came directly from the ER.

Next flight isn't until 6:15. Traveling is really a bitch!

[Robbo]

Consider the Civil Rights movement:
A white sheriff who won't stop a lynch mob is part of a tyrannical government.

A white prosecutor who won't charge white men for murdering black men is part of a tyrannical government.

Police officers who murder unarmed, sleeping black citizens (Oakland) are part of a tyrannical government.

African-Americans have used firearms to protect themselves from people who were part of or had the implicit support of the local government fairly recently, the Black Panthers being a prime example.

Another is postwar Athens, Tenn. I would say that when armed deputies steal ballot boxes to ensure that their preferred candidate wins an election, that's a tyrannical government. And it was stopped by citizens with guns.

This is not fantasy. It is the 2d Amendment at work.

[Stephen]

Boy, good thing that wasn't a rant

[henry]

Jane, its 83 where you are going.

[NKonIPAD]

Stephen-- Heh

[Jimmyk]

"Guns for lawful self-defense - fine. Guns for hunting and sporting recreation - fine. Guns as preparation agsint the day we rebel against our government - that sort of talk sounds crazy and will only energize the already-committed. Please don't expect to win many converts with it."

Since when do fundamental rights have to be justified to those who would infringe on them? Get lost, I say.

[Jimmyk]

That "get lost" was not directed at TM, incidentally, just at the leftists who want to have a "conversation." Kind of like the Pallies who want to have a conversation with Israel about how much territory they should fork over.

[Jimmyk]

Or Obama wanting a "conversation" about how much more money we news to fork over to the government.

[Jimmyk]

news = need. (Stupid iPhone)

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

It seems particularly odd in a country founded on the Minuteman principle of citizen soldier and which up until 150 years ago subjected a good portion of its occupants to not just oppression but actual slavery (an issue which was resolved by a particularly nasty armed insurrection which came perilously close to succeeding) to dismiss either the prospect of tyranny, insurrection or the power of armed citizens.

[narciso]

Ask the CEO's which Obama told them, he 'stood between them and the pitchforks' and not to mention the virtu mob, that threatens to proscribe the NRA, the Tea Party et al.

[willem]

Setting aside the orthodoxy driving the post-modern legal quarrels, let us instead look more carefully at our history and the behaviors of concern and common defense which have continued since our nation's founding.

The founders not only cited but specifically dictated non-infringement of an American citizen's right to bear arms so the militia of the nation would be well-regulated.

How else to contemporaneously ensure subsequent militia power will be well-regulated and not run roughshod or rogue over the citizen; particularly in the subject era?

The necessary regulation was an armed citizen populace whose right to bear arms shall not be infringed. The point of the 2nd Amendment was the regulation of current and future militia by an armed citizen populace, whose right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is consistent with theme of the other early enumerated rights set forth in the constitution. Whether rogue, sanctioned by government or by rogue government, there was apparent concern. Central to the regulation of this concern, the framers of our Constitution saw not only an armed citizenry but a citizenry that could not be disarmed as essential to the defense of the Constitution and therefore the survival of the nation and its citizenry.

The framers were so concerned about misdemeanor they specifically named misdemeanor as a stated impeachable offense. Misdemeanor was given the same crisis and threat standing as high crimes such as sedition against the Constitution and Treason against the nation.

Who but a sociopath would demand, without remorse, that law biding citizens who have committed no crime be stripped of their property, their rights under the Constitution and be forcibly disarmed because it makes them, the apparent sociopath, feel better?

How can the question of organized sedition be ignored when foreign and domestic agents of non-human persons are paid to agitate and act in apparent conspiracy to damage and reduce the Constitution of the United States? How does the question of sedition not apply to these paid agents of foreign and domestic non-human persons operating in the United States who actively orchestrate, participate or sell or buy services equivalent to agitation-for-compensation in taking public action to usurp certain enumerated Constitutional rights reserved for the citizens of the United States?

These non-human persons are non-voting citizens. Excluded from voting, they none-the-less apparently conspire to dominate the pathways of due process, the citizens legislatures and the citizens political processes.

Piers Morgan is paid to say what he does. He is free to speak. Yet, on the other hand, is he free to conspire as a paid foreign agent of his non-human person employer and conduct what very much appears to be a sedition against the lawful Constitution of the United States and the enumerated rights reserved and held in trust for its voting citizen persons?

I am less concerned about the guns than the reduction of citizen standing and its usurpation by 'super citizens' funding and controlling non-human persons and their paid agents who, for hire, so clog the politics and political discourse of commons, licensed media and our legislatures.

We are to be a nation of individual citizen human persons. How much longer will we be so if non-human persons are allowed to conduct apparent organized sedition against us with remarkable indemnity granted by employees of government who act selectively with equal impunity?

Is this not what the recent David Gregory episode was really about?

[jimmyk]

It seems particularly odd

Yes, and the kind of tyranny we need to fear most is the creeping kind that we've already had the last 50 years or so. It's not men in black suddenly coming to our doors and taking us away, it's the gradual erosion of our rights, that we seem to be accepting like the mythical frog in a pot of water on the stove. (Apparently the frog will, at some point, say "It's getting warm in here" and jump out. Humans aren't so smart, evidently.)

[Clarice]

Iggy, i don't dismiss the notion. jimmyk nicely states my own views, still as a matter of ensuring broad appeal, don't you think emphasis on protecting oneself and one's family sounds a bit less over the top?

[NKonIPAD]

Jimmyk/Ig-- 2d amendment as the right of the people to defend themselves against their tyrannical gov't? True, even recognized by the SCOTUS. But Tom M gives good advice here to gun rights supporters. Opposing overreaching gun laws based on the right to use guns against the 'government' is a big PR mistake. Oppose the overreaching attempts to ban because they are arbitrary, irrational and -- well-- overreaching. Prove to the middle that the Left are the fascistic extremestists. Prattle on about the right to shoot the IRS revenuers or the jack booted smokey the bear cops and you paint yourselves as the extremeists. You're doing the Left a favor b/c the middle will say a pocks on both of you, and the Left can win when that happens.

[Jane on Ipad]

HENRY,

The thing I'm most looking forward to is it not getting dark at 4 PM.

[henry]

Well at 4 here it will get dark and snow. Enjoy the light and warmth!

[narciso]

Lets get down to brass tacks, what happened in Katrina, when the police skedaddled, or LA, during the riots, when Daryl Gates, forced a standown, that state of nature, 'that is nasty, brutish and short' returned to this land,

[NKonIPAD]

Narc--as the thread post notes the middle agrees with that and that is a persuasive argument against Left overreach. Guns to protect against the government-- is a very different issue.

[Jim Eagle]

Just filled out my NRA-ILA Guns, Hunt contest drawing and gave some money. Decided to pick the 21 gun Grand Prize with a nice gun safe instead of the 10 day Alaska Bear Hunt. Done that before when my Dad lived in Fairbanks on the Pipeline. But to tell Mrs. JiB and Frederick that we need to make room for a 21 gun collection and safe is something I look forward to especially the look on their faces.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

clarice and NK,
Tom doesn't just advise on the best methods of PR but dismisses the power of millions of arms in citizen's hands and the very need for them that the 2nd amendment is primarily written for; opposing a tyrannical government.

That's not too different from saying that, yeah that first amendment thing is OK for saying dirty words in superhero movies and making whacky video games but do we really need it for free political speech anymore? And for heaven's sake don't mention that was why it was written.

As far as PR, I can only say that the hunting/self defense argument was concentrated on for far too long by gun rights advocates and was leading to a gradually dissipated movement.
It was the explosion in the scholarship and research into the real purpose and background of the 2nd amendment which revitalized the gun rights movement and led to Heller.
Talking about popping a cap in some pol's noggin certainly is bad PR, but educating people about the origins and purpose of the 2nd amendment isn't, IMO.

[Jim Eagle]

Jane,

Even here in NE Florida on the First Coast we are at 75F. Calm seas, no wind, lots of sun and no clouds. You are in for a treat. Too bad you have to return to Mass in a few days. Enjoy:)

Does anyone think this is Denver's day. Geesh. 7-0 and we still haven't seen Manning yet.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Bad PR?

[Jim Eagle]

Sorry, Bald'mor fans. Spoke too early. What a throw and what a catch. Champ is an ex-Skin and I saw an older Champ on that play.

[Beasts of England]

Ig@4:46 - Why is that citizen holding an assault rifle?

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

It's a statue celebrating the opening of squirrel season in Massachusetts, Beasts.

[peter]

OT, having a miserable day doing a home repair. I should just stick to fixing cocktails.

[maryrose]

Can't wait for Joe's big shoot-out at the OK Corral on Tuesday.
As VP and Prez don't have anything better to do in their second term'
16 trillion in debt? Oh well, time for another golf game.
Dems: We will raise more money in taxes.
Repubs: Oh no you won't
It's a pathetic lack of leaderhip. The good news-Lautenberg clearing the way for Booker,
Rockefeller clearing the way for hopefully Shelley Capito?
Booker knows trying to defeat Christie will be too hard so Lautenberg obliges.

[Clarice]

Ig, we may in fact come to that sorry day though with modern law enforcement tools, I predict the fight would be hard to win by armed civilians, still on that I think this is TM's main point: "Guns as preparation agsint the day we rebel against our government - that sort of talk sounds crazy and will only energize the already-committed"

It's just not gun rights
supporters strongest argument to the uncommitted.

[Porchlight]

Guns for lawful self-defense - fine. Guns for hunting and sporting recreation - fine. Guns as preparation agsint the day we rebel against our government - that sort of talk sounds crazy and will only energize the already-committed. Please don't expect to win many converts with it.

So what if it wins converts? It's the Constitution and what the founders intended. To wit:

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." --Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." --James Madison, Federalist 46

"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." --Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29

"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" --Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms"--Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

"The great object is that every man be armed" and "everyone who is able may have a gun." (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution. Debates and other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia,...taken in shorthand by David Robertson of Petersburg, at 271, 275 2d ed. Richmond, 1805

"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..." --Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants"--Thomas Jefferson

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." --Thomas Jefferson

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good." --George Washington

But don't worry. The Founders were wrong about so many things, weren't they?

[Danube of Thought iPad]

Never forget that the current Supreme Court has four members who do not bekieve their is a personal right to own firearms. I think that right is in something close to imminent peril.

[Barbara]

No fair asking me if I have any point here other than the absurd inconsistency of our national 'conversation'.

Well that shoots my comment all to hell.

[narciso]

Another example of what happens when civil authority collapses;

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/terrorists-fire-on-italian-consuls-car-in-benghazi/

[Beasts of England]

Ig@4:59 - That's what I thought. Squirrel hunters were very important in the founding of our country. Thankfully, they were crummy shots and hit lots of Redcoats and not too many squirrels...

[Extraneus]

Battle of Athens (1946)

The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of political corruption and voter intimidation. The event is sometimes cited by firearms ownership advocates as an example of the value of the Second Amendment in combating tyranny.

Read the link for the background. Bottom line was that the local government was corrupt and tyrannical. Unfortunately for them, around 3,000 armed veterans had just returned from WWII, making up about 10% of the local citizenry.

Battle

Polls for the county election opened August 1, 1946. About 200 armed deputies turned out to patrol the precincts—the normal complement of 15 deputies significantly augmented by reinforcements from other counties. A number of conflicts arose before the polls closed, the most serious of which was when deputy CM Wise shot and wounded a black man who was trying to vote.[3]

As the polls closed, deputies seized ballot boxes and took them to the jail. Opposition veterans responded by arming themselves and marching there. Some of them had raided the National Guard Armory, obtaining arms and ammunition.[5] Estimates of the number of veterans besieging the jail vary from several hundred[5] to as high as 2,000.[3]

When the men reached the jail, it was barricaded and manned by 55 deputies. The veterans demanded the ballot boxes but were refused. They then opened fire on the jail, initiating a battle that lasted several hours by some accounts,[3][5] considerably less by others.[6] In the end, the door of the jail was dynamited and breached. The barricaded deputies—some with injuries—surrendered, and the ballot boxes were recovered.

During the fight at the jail, rioting had broken out in Athens, mainly targeting police cars.[3][5] This continued even after the ballot boxes were recovered, but subsided by morning.[6]

Aftermath

The recovered ballots certified the election of the five GI Non-Partisan League candidates.[6] Among the reforms instituted was a change in the method of payment and a $5,000 salary cap for officials. In the initial momentum of victory, gambling houses in collusion with the Cantrell regime were raided and their operations demolished. Deputies of the prior administration resigned and were replaced.[6]

[Danube of Thought iPad]

Wonderful stuff, Porch. But just bear in mind that if the five in the Heller majority don't survive the next four years, and if we don't put a Republican in the White House next time, those words will count for nothing at all.

[DrJ]

peter,

OT, having a miserable day doing a home repair. I should just stick to fixing cocktails.

Ugh. I've spent the day completing my annual report on possible research misconduct (ORI/NIH), a (required! and very intrusive!) survey of my business from the Commerce Department, my indirect cost submission for DFAS/DHHS, grant close-out financials, and a few that I've probably missed.

Trade?

[sbw]

that sort of talk sounds crazy and will only energize the already-committed

When someone makes a move on the chessboard, it is appropriate to counter with a stronger piece. In my case I used James Madison who clearly defined the second amendment as providing a citizenry equipped to defend itself from tyranny as essential.

Win any converts? You're telling me that the rules of chess allow the other side to declare use of a chess piece to be Bad Form?

As I said to an editor the other day, I'm getting damn close too using the word "bullshit" on the editorial page.

If the other side believes government is a game, then they have been schooled, not educated.

... By the way, education is too important to centralize. I warned members of the school board the other day that if curricula mandate everything except what is worth knowing, then we are going to have to do what they mandate and teach what is worth knowing, too.

[Clarice]

You could go into business with me, Dr J. We put out something we claim is an instant orgasm, weight reduction pill. Get someone in a white coat to flog it 24/7 on TV, bank the proceeds offshore and live off the fat of the lambs.

But..o..that's just not good enough for you.

[anonamom]

Jane,
I could have driven out and met you for cocktails if I'd known you'd be changing planes here!

Next time!

Broncos Ravesn tied 14 all.

[jimmyk]

It's just not gun rights
supporters strongest argument to the uncommitted.

It may not be, but I'd rather not fall into the trap of turning a right into some kind of pragmatic thing based on specific contingencies. Then it's always becomes about how much the right can be eroded. And emphasizing a limited set of justifications (hunting, self-defense) tends to make those the only ones.

So if we must have the conversation, at the very least it should go beyond hunting and limited self-defense to situations where there is a collapse of civil order, like the LA riots, which weren't exactly unprecedented (Detroit, Newark, Watts, etc.).

[DrJ]

Clarice, all reasonable offers will be considered! "Flog[ging] it 24/7" might be a deal-breaker. I thought the onset of Priapism was four hours.

[Extraneus]

Could an Athens-like situation happen again? Could a corrupt government aid and abet vote fraud to remain in power, even at the national level?

Could a corrupt government withdraw the Border Patrol, leaving border-state citizens with low-capacity hunting rifles to be overrun?

Nah, that's crazy talk.

[Frau Nick Knatterton]

In my youth, the comic books and funny papers were the root cause. I blame Prince Valiant, Plastic Man and Pogo.

[PersonFromPorlock]

I filed a petition today with the Obama White House that needs 150 signatures before it can show up on the Open Petitions section of We the People. Those who want to have a little fun while educating Progressives may find it worth looking at. Common-sense Media Control.

[Clarice]

Flogging the pill, silly. You could wear a lab coat, introduce yourself as a Dr..all true enough --and save us the actor's fee.

Now for a name for the product.

[sbw]

I find hilarious the outrage of the left that insurrection might occur if the citizenry were armed.

We agree with the founders that a citizenry overwhelmingly armed keeps government moderate enough that insurrection remains unnecessary.

[Danube of Thought iPad]

"I'd rather not fall into the trap of turning a right into some kind of pragmatic thing based on specific contingencies"

Cue Andrew Cuomo, bellowing about not needing twenty rounds to kill a deer.

[hoyden]

I want to thank TM and all the commenting folks here for sharing their perspectives and insights today.

[DrJ]

Clarice, have your people talk with my people.

[jimmyk]

Never forget that the current Supreme Court has four members who do not bekieve their is a personal right to own firearms. I think that right is in something close to imminent peril.

That may be so, but does that mean a tactical retreat is in order? Sbw mentioned chess. I'm not exactly a master, but I tried to avoid retreat--if my knight was attacked, I'd try to move it forward, or counterattack one of my opponent's pieces. Maybe offense is the best defense. Why not go back to first principles and explain the real basis for this right?

This is the same discussion we always have, whether it's about this or about candidates. Some would rather be moderate for fear of frightening the middle/muddle, others including myself think the strongest, most honest and uncompromising position will be the most compelling.

[caro]

This post about Africa at Belmont Club is informative scary. Check the maps.

A sample:

And here we were thinking that Osama bin Laden was dead and General Motors was alive. Apparently the situation is more nuanced than that political slogan. But to the casual observer things look like this: North Africa and the Sahel have been destabilized across the whole width of the continent. Egypt is in Muslim Brotherhood hands. Syria is blowing up good, with its chemical weapons possibly up for grabs. Turkey is now a front-line state. The Hezbollah are still in Lebanon. American forces are trapped in Afghanistan. The US military has been cut to the bone. And John Kerry, Chuck Hagel and John Brennan head the American security team.

And here's what Brennan thinks:

“On both sides of the Atlantic, we have a long, painful history of violent extremism, from violent anarchists to violent white supremacists to neo-Nazis.

“This summer, we saw a white supremacist in Wisconsin kill six worshippers and wound four others at a Sikh temple,” Brennan said. “Last year in Norway, we saw Anders Breivik—steeped in a racist and xenophobic ideology—murder 77 innocent men, women and children in a tragedy that truly shocked the world.”…

[jack is Back!]

DoT,

Do you think if there is a Prog SCOTUS that overturns Heller that that would result in confiscation? Or would it be something less fascist like guns can only be kept in the home and never taken outside except for hunting?

Scalia out to think twice about asking Kagan to go hunting with him.

[DrJ]

caro, I missed it the other day, but belated HAPPY BIRTHDAY! May your runs be long and full of powder!

[Jim Eagle]

Boy is Tori Smith making Champ Bailey look like Chump Bailey!

[Danube of Thought iPad]

"but does that mean a tactical retreat is in order?"

Hell no. It means now is the time to acquire the weapons you want.

[anonamom]

I'm with Iggy and Porchlight on this one.

Are those uncommitted folks TM is talking about that we're supposed to be concerned with the folks with the free phones, or the folks with the free condoms?

[DrJ]

Breaking (WSJ):

The U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve said they won't pursue a plan to mint a trillion dollar coin as a device to avoid the debt ceiling.

"Neither the Treasury Department nor the Federal Reserve believes that the law can or should be used to facilitate the production of platinum coins for the purpose of avoiding an increase in the debt limit," said Treasury spokesman Anthony Coley.

[daddy]

Here's our contribution to Gun Safety:

Alaska bill would let teachers pack guns at school

A proposal from an Anchorage lawmaker would allow for teachers or other permanent school employees to carry concealed guns on campus "for defensive use...The proposal, released Friday, would allow for permanent employees, such as teachers and administrators, to carry concealed weapons if they have a permit and have completed training.

[Manuel Transmission]

sbw, The purpose of a large capacity magazine is to sit on the shelf to remind the government of who it works for.

Well, I never thought I would be on the opposite side of the debate table from our fearless leader and Clarice. Gulp.

Here's the disconnect, if I have it right. We are not facing an election where the stupid muddle needs to be convinced that the 2nd Am. should or should not be overturned. I think in the minds of a large number of people we are past that.

I just spent a couple of hours reading and pondering DoT's link to that AT article on Walt Kowalski. This really needs to be vetted by y'all.

My gut has been calibrated to the Kowalski condition for some time. What does that mean? Well, I think there are something like 3-10 percent of the population that have already made a gut call that if the right triggering event occurs (no pun intended), they are ready to lock and load.

This does not mean Red Dawn. It means that whatever comes: Blue Hell riots, some stupid confiscation mandate, whatever, there will not need to be any rally-the-troops clarion call. They will just go solve the problem whether it is bloody or not.

Her is part of what I posted over there:

I don't think we Kowalskis will have to do much more than walk down to our local courthouse or other center for local government and politely suggest that they choose their future. At almost any level outside the worst Blue Hells, there will be a 10:1, if not a 50:1 ratio of Kowalskis to whoever walks out the door.

Now, I'm not saying that there won't be some kind of pushback. I'm suggesting that it took the full force of the FBI to screw up Waco. Multiply that by 10,000. There is no command structure much less enough troops with the right mind set to be sending tanks, or much less, SWAT types out in enough strength to do much more than look stupid. What happened during most of the riots during the latter half of the last century? The cops pretty much stood down and waited for the slugs to drag their TVs back home and quit breaking windows. The Korean shopkeepers dealt with the situation first hand. Multiply that by 10,000.

I have no idea what will come and I don't think it actually matters what the details are. No one on either side of this can create a strategic battle plan. If this is going to happen, it is the collective instincts of the Kowalskis doing it that will determine the outcome and, if you believe in God's Will, I think it will be there just like it was 235 years ago.

[daddy]

And the EPA just issued Shell Oil air pollution violation notices

The violations are for Nitrogen Oxide emissions from their Drill Rig Kulluk, much in the news lately, but as is typical in the ADN, no actual number for the amount of Nitrogen Oxide emission is listed, so it is impossible to know if its teeny or huge, and if it actually has any possible environmental effect---but it makes for great headlines.

[daddy]

Wow! Denver keeps trying to let the Ravens get back in the game and beat them, but then the Bronco's special teams crew comes out and score another touchdown. Very entertaining game.

Weather is absolutely miserable but dogs still have to go out, so see you later.

[Clarice]

Well, I don't know how far apart we are MT. It's just that i read a lot from te other side and I think you have to make your best arguments to them. Constitutional arguments--on which I am certain we are correct--are not for honey Boo Boos. Remember all the fancy pants arguments didn't get thru to those women who voted for Obama because of free contraceptives.

[Extraneus]

Please, nobody is going to be shooting law enforcement officers or going up against tanks, helicopters, artillery and automatic weapons with a semi-automatic rifle kitted out to scare Diane Feinstein and impress Arnold.

So the tyranny argument is a non-starter. Nobody believes that the people could fight the federal government if it ever came to that. What are a few guys with AR-15s gonna do against tanks and fighter jets? Etc., etc.

Then why not talk about local governments, or even state governments, instead? Surely a few thousand armed citizens could match up with some local cops or state troopers, if it ever came to that.

Will it ever come to that? Let's hope not, but I'm not willing to bet on it. (Actually, I think that the trends indicate that it will, and maybe in our lifetimes.)

There's great danger in ceding the tyranny argument.

[Jim Eagle]

daddy,

Chicken shit citations is commonplace with the EPA. Big deal. The drill rig must have big diesels for powerplant and considering the cold air of the Artic Sea pretty hard to control NOx emissions to the degree EPA has regulated. That is how they treat fossil fuels - over regulate them so no one can comply. Pricks!

[Clarice]

When is Alaska going to smarten up and vote to secede? Are you waiting until after th feds have shut down all production there and THEN cut out the flow of tax money to the state?

[sbw]

To be sure, we do not want to sound like knuckle-draggers wanting to drag large capacity magazines.

Regressives care more about their feelings than about consistent thought. Remember that much of the Parisian left-bank intelligentsia didn't spill a drop of their Pernod when the German Panzers rolled into Paris.

What we do want to do, is force them to use what brains they have left. So, we play the naive innocent: "Review for us, Governor Cuomo, the history of the collapse of civil order in this country where firearm ownership has helped."

[Danube of Thought iPad]

I have no idea exactly what will happen if Heller is reversed, but the floodgates will be open. Once that individual right to possess is gone, I'd expect a whole host of restrictions from state and municipal governments, even though it may be a while beforeany can get pushed through congress.

Expect everything from outright bans on semi-automatic rifles to total firearms bans. And the instant criminalization of scores of millions of Americans.

[rse]

Does anyone think it is coincidental that the Joyce Foundation has simultaneously been the big funder of 2nd amendment assaults while also being the seed funding for the education standards to move away from symbol systems that aid the abstract, rational mind? In favor of visual learning, action learning, and social and emotional learning?

All within the context of teaching students that they are the ones with obligations to the government instead of the historic norm of govt having obligtions to US citizens.

What made the uS Constitution work was all the distribution of relevant power centers. The Bill of Rights further clarifies that the citizen is sovereign and that government does not have the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force. That is quite different from most countries.

DOT-having spent most of the afternoon reading what our federal govt via Rick Ballard's link plans to do to change and control human behavior and then following the Ehrlichs I am not in the least bit optimistic about overreaching. Our tax money is to be used to buy off everyone with a say in education until we get the cultural and behavioral changes desired.

So yes the 2nd Amendment is a barrier to the planned overreach. It's not hypothetical in the least.

I wish it were.

[Jim Eagle]

rse,

There is evil lurking and working everywhere and most of it is funded by foundations like Joyce, Heinz, Rockefeller, Ford, Pritzker et. al. But you only hear about the evil Koch brothers and how they are undermining all the neat progessive establishment of a truly fascist empire and the dissolvement of democracy, freedom and individual liberty.

I believe MT is on to something regarding the tipping point and what we may end up doing in response. If DoT is correct and there are over 300 million arms in America then I cannot see how confiscation is going to work without a lot of blood on the streets. Brownells won't be able to keep up with the demand if the Right loses a SCOTUS member during The One's term.

[Manuel Transmission]

Clarice and DoT:

Expect everything from outright bans on semi-automatic rifles to total firearms bans. And the instant criminalization of scores of millions of Americans.

Mulling my previous post, I think what I'm trying to say is that for those of us that crossed the Rubicon on this, the time for rhetoric and persuasion (redundant?) is over. That's not the same as running out the door cocked and locked. It's just that there is no point in still treating this as some political debate.

I come here (live here!) to become informed and humored on a multitude of subjects by an amazing group of people with little persuasion in the mix. Occasionally my firm belief is moved, but it is usually through the educational element. No need for that on this subject, anymore. Yes, we certainly need to keep an eye on the Regressives to see what they are up to, but persuading them is also a waste of time now IMO.

[Jim Eagle]

New York's Other Epidemic

Awaiting Bloomies ban on window ledges, bridges and rooftops.

h/t Insty

[Adenoid Hynkel]

I'm inclined to suspect that a whole lot of generally accepted "givens" will be changing soon, as a result of fairly imminent economic realities.

[sbw]

Yes, MT, but whether or not I persuade them, I can persistently and repeatedly address them as Regressives.

[Extraneus]

Who's going to resist confiscation, Jack? What percentage of gun owners? I've had the knock on my door, during a divorce, after the opposing lawyer got my ex to sign a restraining order she didn't even want. (We were sharing the kids on alternating days, with little conflict and certainly nothing approaching cause for something like that. The legal process excluded me completely, and I didn't even know about it until it was already a done deal.)

The sheriff was sympathetic, but I gave up my guns without a peep. I didn't have cases for them all and had to bunch them together in a bag, and it was a major hassle getting them back even with my ex demanding that they be returned.

My point is that when they knock on your door, it's virtually too late to resist. Maybe a few people will try, but they'll very likely fail, and it'll be their blood, and not on the streets but in their own living rooms. It's a fantasy to think otherwise.

[Frau Selbstverteidigung]

The time to show where we stand on the 2nd amendment is before it is neutered any further and not after it is killed. If this right can be eliminated, so can any other part of that "silly" U.S. Constitution.

[Jim Eagle]

My kind of job

Check out some of the "bulleted" bennies, including Launch Party Scotch:)

I have no idea how to write Java Scripts (I use Apple scripts) but darn it if this job isn't attractive enough to learn.

[matt]

AS a volunteer emergency responder, were were taught that our city of 85,000 has @ 25 cops on duty and a similar number of firefighters at any given moment. When (not if) we get hit with a big one, most of them will high tail it home.

We expect fires, building collapses, and water & sewer to go out. That puts you back pretty quickly. The given time to having emergency supplies and aid on site is 2 weeks. Remember, San Franciscans were living in tents for months in some cases after the 89 quake. People often don't act well in crisis.

You can be sure there will be some looters and that's where the evil black gun tells them, "go elsewhere", just like Koreatown in '92 or outside of New Orleans in '05.

These are real world issues in many places.

The 300 Million number is, I believe perhaps an understatement. Guns don't usually rust away so there's a good chance Mr. Colt's original product is very intact along with everything else built for the past 150 years.Modern metallurgy became a high art in the late 1800's so anything built after that date is probably good to shoot if it has been cared for.

The real culprits for the gun boom are the Left, because every time they announce a drive to ban something, millions of people stampede to acquire that thing.If it were simply on the store shelves there would be no issue. I think, deep down, Obama and Biden are taking bribes from the gun industry (mwah ha ha ha).....

[BumperStickerist]

related to Tom's analogies.

I did some thinkin' ... hormonal birth control has risk factors up to - and including - death, generally from blood clots.

The risk factors were something like 10 in 10,000 per the CDC.

Which leads to the question of handing out potent, potentially lethal medications to thirteen year old without parental notification.

Also, from all accounts, there is no follow-up to determine if the person who is getting the birth control is using it herself or if she can give it to someone else. Or, potentially, selling it.

Strawman sales, if you will.

Plus birth control pills come in high-capacity containers - 30 pills? Them's a lot.

-

Best we should put some oversight on this important safety topic.

[Jim Eagle]

After that TD, Denver doesn't deserve to win the game even in OT. Not letting Manning try to get a 1st down passing was a huge mistake.

[BumperStickerist]

Another factoid -

The NEA alleges that each day 135-180,000 students are carrying a gun in school.

Also, per the NEA, 20-25% of all students reported having carried a gun to school at some point within the previous 30 days.

Which leads me to draw the opposite conclusion than intended: Guns are pretty damn safe.

If every day 100,000+ teenagers and younger are packing heat to school AND we don't have a shooting each day, then something's going right with the gun hardware itself.

Societal issues, media portrayal of weapons, and such ... well, yeah, that's an issue. And should be regulated.

But the guns themselves? not so much.

[NKonIPAD]

Denver is nowhere good as advertised.

[Jim Eagle]

BTW, Larry Ellison has called in from his yacht.

The fix is in for the Java Scripts.

[bio mom]

Go Joe Flacco!!!

[BumperStickerist]

but - screw all that stuff - go Broncos!

[Jim Eagle]

Mel, can read this open letter to Oprah tomorrow in the Chicago Sun Times.

The Long Knives are out for Armstrong

[NKonIPAD]

Armstrong? He doped, probably before and after cancer. So did everyone else. If he coerced his subordinate teammates so they could help him win-- then he's a really bad guy.

[narciso]

Like Shepherd warned Mal Reynold's, they come at you sideways, as well as other ways;

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/07/up-quick-harvard-public-health-docs-call-for-new-federal-tax-on-guns-ammunition-to-reduce-gun-violence/

Odd, that Soros/Joyce has been their benefactor, majic eightball indicates probably

[bgates]

I think you have to make your best arguments to them.

Well I think hunting should be banned anyway because it's bloody and cruel and gross. The Native Americans hunted but it was spiritual for them and they didn't know about vegetarianism yet.

And I mean, so what if someone breaks into your house and steals your stuff? Right? He (or she) probably needed it more than you anyway. Like did you see "Les Mis"? Would you shoot Hugh Jackman? Seriously? Of course not. And you know when those people talk about "crime" it's just code for African-Americans and Hispanics. They think minorities commit a lot of crimes, which just isn't true. I haven't looked up statistics or anything, but it's just not true. That's racist. And what happens with guns? Is that people like that guy in Florida? (I think he's in prison now. I hope he is!) Who aren't even part of the police, just shoot black people for fun. (OMG remember on Ellen when Ellen ran that clip of President Obama saying that young man could have been his son? I cried so much I melted half my fro-yo.)

So nobody needs guns for hunting because they shouldn't be hunting anyway, and if you get robbed sucks to be you but just call the police, okay?

And those are their best arguments. So not convinced.

[Manuel Transmission]

Ext, My point is that when they knock on your door, it's virtually too late to resist. Maybe a few people will try, but they'll very likely fail, and it'll be their blood, and not on the streets but in their own living rooms. It's a fantasy to think otherwise.

I hear ya, but that is a completely different circumstance than a Kowalski who's on his own and knows that other doors are being knocked on. If he has made his peace, those slugs can go through the front door before they knock. If that happens more than about once, the boys in black will decide they have something better to do.

Just as a for instance, think about how much planning and coordination some drug busting team goes through before breaking down a door. (And then still screws up regularly and hits the wrong place.) Again, multiply that by 10,000.