Is Charles Blow's latest column some sort of coded hostage message? His topic is guns and he actually makes some sense. Yes, I wrote that, and he wrote this:
Focus on Illegal Guns
...
Our current discussion about increasing gun regulations often centers on efforts that would mostly affect people who legally buy firearms. Many of them make sense, in theory, but the truth is that they would not be likely to have a huge impact on criminal gun violence, because many of those criminals obtain their weapons illegally.
So, when the gun lobby and gun owners make this case, we must admit that they have a point.
What?!? A NY Times columnist not named Douthat cracking the progressive monolith on "gun owners = bad"?
Mr. Blow continues his tour of the lands beyond the progressive planatation:
Rather than focusing on all guns, the vast, vast majority of which are owned by responsible people and are never used in the commission of a crime, we have to focus on keeping guns out of the hands of this relatively small number of criminals.
People, including the president in his speech and town hall meeting last week, like to compare increasing gun regulations to the way cars are regulated. But they didn’t simply get safer due to regulations. They also got safer because the market desired more safety, as well as anti-theft features. Many of the innovations, carmakers came up with on their own. The gun market doesn’t behave that way.
Furthermore, cars are required to be licensed, registered, insured and periodically inspected. Also, you can’t hide a car the way you can hide a gun. Cars are operated on public roads.
Wow! Nick Kristof was all about the deeply flawed gun-car analogy a few years ago. Now Charles Blow is up in his grill?
I must note that Mr. Blow does recycle one common error also made by Mr. Kristof's when he writes that
"cars are required to be licensed, registered, insured and periodically inspected".
That is all true if a driver wants to operate the vehicle on a public road. if the goal is to leave the car in a private garage and tinker with/restore it, none of the registration or insurance rules apply. But try owning an unregistered handgun in your New York City apartment for self-defense and see what happens if it is discovered. Actually, don't try that.
Mr. Blow continues his brief tour of the dark side:
If we want to truly put a dent in gun violence, we must take some incredibly unpopular steps in some pockets. Safety features — including smart guns that can only be fired by the owner — are going to have to be added to the market. That will be hard to sell because no one wants a gun to fail to because it lacks a charge or due to a technology glitch. One of benefits of traditional guns is that, technologically, they are simple and ancient. There are no batteries or chips.
We are also likely to have to register guns and require insurance. This would be almost impossible, given the gun lobby’s and many gun owners’ current stance and the paranoid fears of confiscation, a fear some liberals feed.
All of Obama's talk about Australia actually registered?
Fortunately there is no need to worry that Mr. Blow will eventually be found wandering in your neighborhood mumbling that guns don't kill people - he eventually finds his way home to a progressive safe space:
Making guns safer and keeping more of them out of the hands of criminals and in the hands of responsible owners can be done, but not as long as many responsible owners are also unreasonable ones.
So gun owners who worry about technology locking up their gun at a desperate moment or fear that Obama and Cuomo are serious about confiscation are now "unreasonable", despite the reasons Mr. Blow just provided?
Maybe he needed to throw the editors a bone.
I apologize too, Cecil. I thought you had directed a statement to me, and I really thought I asked a meaningful question that related.
Yes, I accept the terms.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 12, 2016 at 04:40 PM
Stephen Miller @redsteeze 8m8 minutes ago
Good news. About 30 minutes of Obama's speech on the Iran deal was just edited out.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 12, 2016 at 04:41 PM
I just Stroll on by when the conversation turns "birther" or "truther".
Tonight, I guess "the squirrels ARE back in the attic".
It's in the news. It was the years when it wasn't that it was truly obnoxious.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 12, 2016 at 04:42 PM
Yes, I accept the terms.
Thanks. I'll also apologize for that last comment, and avoid such in the future.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 12, 2016 at 04:43 PM
JIB,
Why would you capitalize Carter's name and not mine? That is very insulting. But you know that.
Okay I'm going to pledge to ignore the people who bug me. And yes, they are sailors.
~~
Clarice, we'll see. I think Iran is into showing Obama that he's an idiot.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2016 at 04:44 PM
Why would 404 need 30 minutes to tell us the Iran "deal" is bad for all except Iran?
Posted by: Gentlejim | January 12, 2016 at 04:45 PM
A legitimate state escorts or tows a vessel with mechanical difficulty out of claimed waters. It doesn't 'seize' vessel and crew, pirate regimes like the NorKs and Mullahs do that. This highlights the idiocy of handing the Mullahs terrorism $$$$, in exchange for what they consider not to even be a 'binding agreement'.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2016 at 04:46 PM
Actually it's not possible to show Obama he's an idiot.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2016 at 04:46 PM
Our lurker noted the two ships being captured. I'm not finding much on the web about it. Let's hope it's nothing.
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 12, 2016 at 04:48 PM
here is an NBC report: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pentagon-2-u-s-navy-boats-held-iran-military-n495031
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2016 at 04:49 PM
Fox isn't convinced it's not nothing, nor are they convinced it is.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2016 at 04:50 PM
Heh. John Huntsman is still alive and tanned.
Posted by: Jack is Back (but On Alert)! | January 12, 2016 at 04:53 PM
Jane,
My apologies. Blame fat fingers not me. I have no control over them.
BTW, can someone capsulize what the hell happened in re Iggy being insulted by who and why? I saw some posts by Rick Ballard but they seemed so out of character that I knew they were trolls.
Posted by: Jack is Back (but On Alert)! | January 12, 2016 at 04:56 PM
Maybe the republicans can hustle and get a family member of one of the crew to make a statement before the SOTU
Posted by: clarice | January 12, 2016 at 04:56 PM
Jeb donor on Cavuto who says he will vote for Trump if he's the nominee.
Of course, Jeb is his first choice but he does understand why Trump gets support.
This is a guy who would probably like his money back.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 12, 2016 at 04:57 PM
New Trier high school jumps the pc shark:http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/12/racial-identity-mlk-new-trier/
Posted by: clarice | January 12, 2016 at 04:58 PM
Maybe the republicans can hustle and get a family member of one of the crew to make a statement before the SOTU
Obama and his crew would just call them liars or misinformed.
Posted by: Jack is Back (but On Alert)! | January 12, 2016 at 04:58 PM
Now this has popped up on Twitter:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/iran-fires-warning-shots-cargo-ship-strait-hormuz/story?id=30644930
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 12, 2016 at 04:59 PM
Another one of our betters in the GOPe journal ist class let's us know how the real world works:
http://spectator.org/articles/65160/how-help-clinton-win
No hints as to whom he refers.
Posted by: lyle | January 12, 2016 at 05:00 PM
This highlights the idiocy of handing the Mullahs terrorism $$$$, in exchange for what they consider not to even be a 'binding agreement'.
The tiny sliver of silver lining is the LEU turnover . . . but I have no idea about the compliance measures or the actual impact on the Mullahs' capability to produce a weapon. I strongly doubt it is as hobbling as the spin would have it.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 12, 2016 at 05:01 PM
CT,
Are the Brown of daddy's Blue and Red? Aviator living in L,Ville sort makes me wonder. Do Brown pilots never turn starboard like the drivers?
Posted by: Jack is Back (but On Alert)! | January 12, 2016 at 05:01 PM
...Are You the Brown....
Posted by: Jack is Back (but On Alert)! | January 12, 2016 at 05:01 PM
New trier is Rumsfeld and David asman's alma mater, well Romans seems on point.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | January 12, 2016 at 05:05 PM
Did all the Texan common sense get shaken out of him?
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | January 12, 2016 at 05:08 PM
MissM-- that story claims that the Mullahs (Rev Guardsmen) seized that merchantman. More piracy.
Posted by: NK | January 12, 2016 at 05:10 PM
As it happens I have managed to piss off Jimmyk
Really? Like I said, I'm not perfect, but at least I don't think I responded with name-calling and expletives.
Anyway, best not to clutter the thread with more such discussion, so here's a semi-on-topic question: Does Charles Blow pronounce his name as in the word "blow" or like the more common last name Blau (i.e. rhymes with "wow")? I would think the former would have resulted in merciless beatings as a grade-schooler.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 12, 2016 at 05:11 PM
Greta Van Susteren @greta 26m26 minutes ago
If Iranians are releasing our sailors,could they throw in Marine Hekmati,Pastor Abedini,Journo Rezain and FBI Bob Levinson ?
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 12, 2016 at 05:13 PM
Related...our crap media & religion
the late Michael Crichton’s 2002 essay “Why Speculate?”:
Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I call it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all.
But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.
Posted by: Janet | January 12, 2016 at 05:15 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/12/poll-hillary-clinton-dropped-16-points-in-iowa-in-a-month/
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 12, 2016 at 05:16 PM
Rick,
A Great RINO Hunt doesn't make sense in '16 but '18 should keep taxidermists very busy.
I find the added phrase read some time ago as being clarifying:
Hunting them with dogs. :)
Posted by: Man Tran | January 12, 2016 at 05:18 PM
new sotu thread....
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | January 12, 2016 at 05:20 PM
JiB,
Yes and no. But not nearly as cool as daddy . . .
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 12, 2016 at 05:20 PM
No chance these guys will be released before the SOTU is over.
Thanks for the apology JIB. I have no idea why that bothers me so much, but it does.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2016 at 05:21 PM
--BTW, can someone capsulize what the hell happened in re Iggy being insulted by who and why? --
It was nothing. Not worth wasting the time to look it up.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 12, 2016 at 05:24 PM
Classy. Previous apology was implied, please consider it explicit.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 12, 2016 at 05:27 PM
Jane, is CAPITALIZATION REALLY THAT IMPORTANT????
Why YES, YES IT IS!!
Posted by: GUS | January 12, 2016 at 05:53 PM
Janet: Excellent excerpt from Crichton!
Clarice:
Fun to see my name in lights! I was reading the Free Beacon's story about Bernie Sanders steering money to various friends and family members, and thinking how utterly disproportionate the scale of Clinton corruption is in comparison. The fact that even such monumentally venal grifting is still not enough to prop her up decisively in the polls is one of the few political bright spots, imo.
Posted by: JMHanes | January 12, 2016 at 05:57 PM
Janet - great link!!!!
Posted by: Texas Liberty Gal | January 12, 2016 at 07:00 PM
What a dilemma-I hate that the Iranians have seized our vessels but I love that it makes Obama look like a fool. And I feel awful that I feel that way!!!
Posted by: Texas Liberty Gal | January 12, 2016 at 07:13 PM
Fox 10 live link to the rally - 10 year "guest" of Hanoi Hilton talking now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mq5hrUDoYo
Posted by: cheerleader | January 13, 2016 at 08:02 PM