Saturday, May 18, 2013

Louisiana Proves that More Guns Don't Make us Safer



For Louisiana, the stakes could not be higher: it has the worst gun murder rate in the nation, and the highest rate of children killed with guns. Overall, guns have been used to kill more people in Louisiana in recent years than in any other state, according to a new analysis.

Between 2001 and 2010, 4,519 people were killed by guns here, more than a thousand more losses than U.S. combat troops suffered during the Iraq War. More than 75% of those victims were African-American. Haunted by the losses, members of the Black Caucus try again and again to introduce some measure of gun control legislation.

But their efforts are always thwarted while a far more powerful group of Republicans and white Democrats stokes Louisiana’s love affair with guns.

Guns are everywhere. On Mother’s Day, a shooting broke out at a New Orleans parade and two children were among 20 people wounded by gunfire. People were injured during a shooting after the Martin Luther King Day parade, and at another just before Mardi Gras festivities.

Yet the pro-gun beat is only getting louder.

“In Louisiana, as we’ve seen for a few years now, they are introducing legislation to allow more people to carry more guns in more places,” said Brian Malte, director of policy and advocacy for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

“If more guns mean a safer society, Louisiana would be the state with the lowest rates of gun violence. In fact, it has one of the highest because of a lack of gun violence prevention laws.”

Why is that?  Why is Louisiana so much worse than the rest of the country if more guns make us safer?

Let me take a stab at that one?  The "more guns make us safer" suggestion is a blatant lie propagated by the leaders of the gun-rights movement and repeated over and over again by the sheep-like followers who often don't even think for themselves.  If they did, they'd immediately see the foolishness of such a position.  Louisiana is proof.

Allow me to anticipate one of the common retorts we often hear. The above chart and its article is concerned with "gun" murders. When we remove the "gun" part, guess which state is still on top.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Jeffrey Nugent Says Little Brother Ted is Wrong on Background Checks

Courtesty of Jeffrey Nugent - Jeffrey Nugent, left, and Ted Nugent with a wild boar they killed in 2006.

Washington Post

And I agree with Ted that our constitutional right to bear arms should not be undermined. I want all those who are qualified to purchase a gun to be able to do so. But — and here is where I part ways with my brother — not everyone is qualified to own a gun, so expanded background checks should be a legislative priority.

I believe strongly that expanding and improving mandatory background checks will keep a lot of people who aren’t entitled to Second Amendment rights from having easy access to guns. As of today, a convicted felon can find a gun show or a private seller and buy a firearm without a background check. That loophole should be closed. Every gun transaction must include a thorough background check. Why would responsible gun owners want to protect people who threaten not only our safety but our gun rights?

The NRA has it wrong: Irresponsible gun owners are bad for everyone. If you shouldn’t have access to a gun, then there should be no way for you to access a gun! Can anyone argue with that?

No, of course no one could argue with that, not and maintain any credibility.

What's your opinion?  Please leave  a comment.

Utah Man Gets Prison for Shooting Neighbor over ‘Telepathic’ Rape

Melony Selleneit Courtesy Davis County Sheriff's Office

The Salt Lake City Tribune

To this day, Michael Selleneit believes his wife is in danger.

A year and a half after he shot his neighbor in Centerville — claiming self-defense because the neighbor had "telepathically" raped his wife — Selleneit’s attorney said he still hears voices telling him his wife is going to be killed or raped.

"He still to this day is very, very concerned about his wife’s safety," attorney Julie George told 2nd District Judge Thomas Kay during Selleneit’s sentencing Thursday. 

In January, the 55-year-old Selleneit pleaded guilty — but mentally ill — to reduced charges of attempted manslaughter and use of a firearm by a restricted person, both second-degree felonies, for shooting 41-year-old Tony Pierce in October 2011.

On Thursday, Kay ordered Selleneit to serve two consecutive terms of one-to-15 years in the Utah State Prison. However, Kay said he could be confined at the Utah State Hospital until hospital officials determine he no longer needs treatment. At that time, he would be taken to the prison.

It makes you wonder how many crazy people own guns. 

School Shooting Caller Turned Himself in to Psych Services

Students wait across the street from East LA City College after being evacuated because of a threat of violence against the school. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times / May 16, 2013)

LA Times 

A 19-year-old Santa Monica College student who allegedly threatened to “shoot up” a local school Thursday turned himself in to psychological services, where police arrested him, authorities said.
The student, who authorities did not immediately identify, was arrested  about 9:30 a.m. Thursday after police used his phone number to confirm that he was the person who called 911 hours earlier, said Santa Monica College Police Chief Albert Vasquez.

Police said the man was near East Los Angeles College when he called the California Highway Patrol sometime before 8 a.m. saying he had a gun and was going to shoot up a school.

Authorities immediately notified the local sheriff’s station and city police, who shut down nearly a dozen schools in the area.

The man also said he was going to shoot himself on campus.

The threats caused widespread chaos at numerous schools in Santa Monica and Monterey Park.

Jodi Arias - Life in Prison or the Death Penalty?

Jodi Arias
Jodi Arias reacts during the sentencing phase of her trial at Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenix, Wednesday, May 15, 2013. (AP / The Arizona Republic, Rob Schumacher, Pool)

Local news reports

Steven Alexander stood before the jury, looked up at a family picture and grimaced and cried as he ticked off the list of problems that have befallen him in the five years since his brother was murdered: ulcers, depression, a separation from his wife, nightmares.

The dreams consist of someone coming at him with a knife then going after his wife and daughter. Other times, he has nightmares about his brother, "curled up in a shower, thrown in there, left to rot for days, all alone." He feels like a child, unable to sleep alone in the dark.

"I don't want these nightmares anymore. I don't want to see my brother's murderer anymore," he said.
The gut-wrenching comments came as jurors began considering whether Jodi Arias should get a life sentence or be executed for the 2008 stabbing death of Travis Alexander. Jurors became visibly shaken as Steven Alexander and his sister spoke on deeply emotional levels in arguing for the death penalty. Arias sobbed throughout the hearing, with tears streaming down her face and landing on her black shirt.

Arias, 32, acknowledged killing Alexander at his suburban Phoenix home after a day of sex on June 4, 2008. She initially denied any involvement and later blamed the attack on masked intruders. Two years after her arrest, Arias said she killed Alexander in self-defence.

The victim suffered nearly 30 knife wounds, had his throat slit from ear to ear and was shot in the forehead. Prosecutors say the attack was fueled by jealous rage after Alexander wanted to end his affair with Arias and prepared to take a trip to Mexico with another woman.
I blame Arizona. If only she didn't have such easy access to that gun, her boyfriend would be alive today.

Now tell me the truth.  How many of you failed to recognize that as a joke?  C'mon, I won't make fun of you for being stiff and humorless. How many?

The obvious point of the post is about the death penalty.  The blood-thirsty relatives seem to think their nightmares will stop if she's sentenced to death.  Often we hear this. They want closure or they want to move on with their lives. 

I don't believe killing the guilty person provides those things.  Do you?

It's beside the point, anyway.  Capital punishment is state-sanctioned pre-meditated murder and as such should have no place in a civilized society.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Friday, May 17, 2013


I saw one of these flags and thought it looked like a pile of dog shit. I couldn't help wonder when someone would come up with a parody.

Well, someone did!

I do wish the person had made the dog shit look more like the snake, but you can't have everything...

Why paying off the National Debt is a baaadddd idea.

It didn't work so well the last time it happened.  You can listen to this.

And toss in that Andrew Jackson let the Second Bank of the United States' charter expire as well.  That led to a period called the "Free Banking" Era.

At least I know my limitations

Well, I missed the questions on mechanics and algebra.

Algebra--I haven't thought about that in over 40 years.  Although, the circuit diagram was something I should have caught as well, but that's been 30 years.

Before you call me dumb--what's you're score on this test?

Well, I would join the French Foreign Legion if I wanted to show how tough I was anyway.

The Constitution: Only Gold and Silver are Legal Tender

Interesting quote on the internet and Internet anonymity

Former Lulzsec hacker Jake Davis:
"It was my world, but it was a very limited world. You can see and hear it, but you can't touch the internet. It's a world devoid of empathy - and that shows on Twitter, and the mob mentality against politicians and public figures. There is no empathy.

So it was my world, and it was a very cynical world and I became a very cynical person."
So, pardon me if I spend my time offline.

Maryland Gun Rights Groups Splintered by New Gun Laws

Toms River Dad Responsible for Accidental Shooting Death Finally Arrested One Month Later

Brandon Holt (Photo: Provided to The Asbury Park, N.J., Press)

Local news reports further to our post at the time of the tradedy.

The lawyer for the man whose 4-year-old son shot and killed a 6-year-old playmate in Toms River says his client is cooperating.

Robert Ebberup held a news conference this morning in which he criticized the Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office for arresting his client in front of his family while they ate dinner.

The lawyer says Anthony Senatore would have voluntarily turned himself in to face charges of child endangerment and enabling access by a minor to a loaded firearm. He said Senatore and his family “are deeply sorrowed over the death of Brandon Holt.”

Authorities say Senatore's son took a loaded .22-caliber rifle from a bedroom on April 8 and fatally wounded neighbor Brandon Holt while they were playing outdoors.

Officials say four shotguns were found close to ammunition and accessible to Senatore's three young children in their Toms River home. 

I can't get over the fact that it takes so long in certain cases for the actual arrest.  I understand the need for an investigation and for due process, but ONE MONTH in a case like this seems excessive.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Jon Stewart on Rumsfeld and Cheney

Forbes Op-ed Utilizes Two Favorite Pro-gun Lies

Forbes op-ed

According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.

It's so often repeated that it's gaining credibility, at least among the biased gun-rights fanatics who don't mind a bit of mendacity as long as it supports their pre-conceived notions. Firearms crime has decreased while gun ownership has increased.  In order to make this comparison really work for their argument do you see what they did? They went back 18 years in order to maximize the decline in murders and suicides, even admitting that "The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame."

The major increase in gun ownership, as everyone knows, began a mere 6 years ago with the advent of the first black president.  To me, that's blatant dishonesty.

I suppose in an attempt to deliver the old one-two punch to their adversaries' argument, they went on to cite one of the most misleading studies ever, over 40% of criminals obtained guns from other criminals. 

As I've explained before, "other criminals" is not one of the major sources of guns used in crime.

First we need to identify the ways in which they currently do come into possession of weapons. We'll eliminate one common fallacy right away, that criminals get guns from other criminals.  This may be true as far as it goes, but it doesn't help us in our analysis.  We're interested in the original source of guns that are used in crime. If, for example, a gun is stolen during a burglary and passed from criminal to criminal before being used in a murder, that gun came from "Theft," which is one of our main categories.

The question that keeps arising is this: if gun-rights folks have "right" on their side, why do they so often resort to dishonest means to make their points?  The answer to me is obvious.  They do not have "right" on their side. They are dead wrong and they know it.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Thursday, May 16, 2013

No surprises from Gov. Martin O'Malley

I've mentioned that I know Martin O'Malley and my connections to him.

If you think I'm anti-gun: Martin makes me look like one of you lot!

Anyway, he has just signed into effect some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, which comes as no surprise to me.  I'm not sure where Maryland fell in the gun law pile, but I thought they were somewhat strict.

Now, Gun magazines will be limited to 10 bullets, gun ownership by people who have been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility will be banned, and Maryland State Police will be able to suspend the licenses of gun dealers who fail to comply with recordkeeping obligations.

This says several things to me with the main one being that there is the political will to get stronger gun laws in place.

Martin is a politician (I'm too smart to be one).  He wouldn't do something if it were going to cost him political points.  And I think he wants to emulate the Kennedys and take a stab at the presidency.

Well, with some politicians seeing the blowback from failing to vote for background checks--he may have a point.

The real question is where will gun politics go in the US?  Especially now that there may be an end to the Public Health research ban.

And how would I do on a quiz about the Constitution?

I'd ace it--of course!

And how would YOU do?

And while we're at it:

Good advice

Think for yourself and question authority!  Reading something on the internet does not make it true.

A false, or incorrect quotation is not persuasive.

Orlin should ponder this one well:

I should note that this is obviously a fake quote since there are actually people dumb enough (Orlin Sellers) to believe that Lincoln could have said this.

Texas 15-Year-old Dead

The Houston Chronicle

The juvenile, believed to be 15, was shot about 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday while riding with the other young men in west Harris County.

The driver, also a teenager, immediately went to Texas Children's Hospital in Katy. The wounded youth was rushed into the emergency room.

"But they couldn't do anything for him," said Deputy Thomas Gilliland, a Harris County Sheriff's spokesman.

Hospital officials then notified the Harris County Sheriff's Office about the fatal shooting.

Deputies said they believe the teenager was sitting in the front passenger seat. According to preliminary reports, the fatal shot came from the back seat. The bullet went through the front passenger seat and struck the victim in the back, deputies said.

The investigation is continuing, deputies said.
These are the children of Texas gun owners. They were taught gun safety all their lives. Their dads made a special effort to demistify guns so their boys would know and respect them.

This is the result.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Florida 11-Year-old Shot Dead by 4-Year-old Relative

A Good Guy With a Gun Accidentally Shoots a Student at Aurora CO High School

 Huffington Post

Aurora Police are investigating an accidental shooting at a parking lot at Rangeview High School that left one student with a "significant injury" on Monday. 

Close to an hour after school had been dismissed on Monday, a male student was accidentally shot in the leg by an adult who police say "works at the school, but is not a teacher," in a press statement. 

The school employee involved in the shooting accident works a second job as an armed security officer and was giving the victim a ride home. When the school employee moved his gun to the glove box of his vehicle, the gun accidentally went off and struck the student. The security officer then drove the student to the hospital.

I'm not sure if anyone's keeping score, but it seems to me guns do more harm than good in schools.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Charges Dropped on Robert Guerrero for Gun in NY Airport


ESPN reports

Welterweight contender Robert Guerrero, facing up to four years in prison for carrying an unloaded gun in a New York airport, had his case dismissed on Tuesday after pleading guilty to disorderly conduct in New York State Supreme Court for Queens County.

All of the firearm possession charges were dropped as Guerrero pleaded guilty to a violation -- not a crime -- was fined $250 and ordered to complete 50 hours of community service, which he will be allowed to perform in his home state of California.

"I'm pleased that the district attorney's office considered my case carefully and resolved it fairly," Guerrero said in a statement. "I never intended to violate New York law, but I know that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Lesson learned. I'm happy this incident is behind me and looking forward to returning to the ring as well as serving my community as ordered by the court."

I guess all the crybaby gun-rights fanatics were wrong about this one too.  Even in New York they don't put people in jail for stupidity like this.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Jon Stewart on Obama's Reaction to the Scandals

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

More test results

Gun Registration on Hawaii

Why Does the NRA Fear Facts?

nra-ceo.jpgNational Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre is shown at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Md. 

Responding to the toddler’s death, Kentucky lawmaker Robert Damron said, “Why single out firearms? Why not talk about all the other things that endanger children, too?”

Scientific research might show Mr. Damron that, while access to pools, bathtubs and cribs dwarfs access to guns, the former do not kill as surely by drowning or suffocation as does a firearm held by a small child. However, the National Rifle Association has blocked all scientific study into the causes of gun deaths since the mid-1990s. So Damron knows what the NRA wants him to know.
Last year, Congress spent nothing to study 32,000 gun deaths, while it appropriated $860 million to NHTSA to study 34,000 vehicle fatalities. In fact, Congress has spent nothing every year since 1996 by inserting NRA-written language in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention budget, prohibiting any study that may be used to “advocate gun control.”

The 1960s auto industry blamed drivers for traffic deaths.

“Then we learned we could modify the product … and we changed the consequences of bad driving. We could do the same thing with firearms,” said Dr. Garen Wintemute, of the Cal-Davis Violence Prevention Program. “The firearm industry is where the auto industry was, which is fighting regulation tooth and nail.”

“For policy to be effective, it needs to be based on evidence,” Wintemute told the Times. “The NRA and its allies in Congress have largely succeeded in choking off the development of evidence upon which that policy could be based.”

Iowa Man - Lawful Gun Owner - Arrested for Robbery and Other Things

Local news reports

A 61-year-old Iowa City man is accused of pulling a gun on 12-year-old boy Sunday afternoon while the boy was asking neighbors if he could mow their lawns.

According to Iowa City police criminal complaints, about 3:20 p.m. Sunday, the boy was asking neighbors if he could mow their lawns. Police said the boy spoke with Kevin J. Shannon, 61, of 1264 Dover St., at Shannon’s home. Shannon didn’t want the boy to mow his lawn but did give him $10 cash, police said.

Shannon also told the boy he was an “undercover cop,” police said.

Police said the boy left Shannon’s home and continued to speak with other neighbors. Shannon later approached the boy at the intersection of Wayne Avenue and Arthur Street and demanded his $10 back, police said. The boy told police Shannon pulled a gun from his waistband, pointed it at him and said, “Give me my (expletive) money back.”

Shannon threatened to shoot the boy, police said.

Shannon was arrested and now faces charges of first-degree robbery, a class B felony; drunken driving, a serious misdemeanor; assault with a dangerous weapon, first-degree harassment and impersonating a public official; all aggravated misdemeanors, and public intoxication, a simple misdemeanor. He remains in custody at the Johnson County Jail on a $50,000 bond.

No order to turn in his guns after he makes bail.  Incredible.

I suppose he had a concealed carry permit since there was no charge for carrying the weapon in public without one.

Let me anticipate the pro-gun response. He's a rare case, an anomaly. Hardly any gun owners have drinking problems and do stupid things while drunk.  Does that about cover it?

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Jon Stewart on the Recent Scandals

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

And let's see how much YOU know about the Second Amendment?

Can you top my score? Try it here.

If you know more than me, you should at least come close.

And you should stop saying that I don't know my stuff when it comes to the Second Amendment if you can't come close to my score.

Come on, Strut your stuff--if you've got it!

"You don't want to do that..."

"I am an elitist, but I have a respect for people who don't measure up."
"Some of these people haven't taken their medication."

The Tyranny of Granny!

Happy Mothers' Day!

BTW, Oath Keeper said with a cockney accent is "Oaf Keeper".  How apropos!

Gun loons heal thyselves!

"A Texas mom has been charged after allegedly waiting hours to take her wounded son to the hospital following a shooting, instead spending time searching for information on the Internet."

Gender Violence Prevention

Well, they say I know the law:

Take this test here

And while we're at it:

Remember--people who are naturalised citizens have to pass a test before they can become a citizen.

Facts are not a Gun Loon's friend

Yeah, Yeah.  I see the level of intelligence you all show; repeating the same cliched phrases without knowing what they mean ("palladium of liberty" only means something which protects liberty, moron. It is a person's opinion and has been used about the militia and juries--your point?).

I note how the "pro-gun" disinformation fills the internet making it hard to find accurate information.

The best part is that policy has been crippled because money for public health studies can't fund anything which "might lead to gun control". 

Well, the public who do those surveys have something to say about that:

No wonder you lot don't like facts.

It''s bad enough having us tell you that you are more of a danger to yourselves without having the public health data out there to back us up.

Seriously, the problem with "pro-gun" arguments (bedsides not withstanding scrutiny) is that they aren't really helpful to your side.

What would a real insurgency in the US look like?

OK, you don't know the big difference between the British in the War for Independence or the US in places like Viet Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Let's say it takes a lot more than guns to win a war: not to mention the cost is prohibitive in more than one way.

The problem is that you are fighting a civil war--not a foreign invader.  You will be the person starting the war, not the government.  Additionally, you will be trying to persuade people to join your side after you have made efforts to destabilise society.

Look a the reactions to Oklahoma City and Boston to get an idea of what you will be facing: more Boston than Oklahoma City.

And don't think your opponent isn't more than ready for you.

So, don't say "molon labe" if you can't deal with the reality of that scenario.

Of course, you all know way more than I do about this.  I can see that from your comments.{1}

See also:
{1} I should make this clear that this is sarcasm since you lot are too stupid to catch that on your own.

Monsanto Upheld by the Best Court Money Can Buy

Bill Maher Discusses the 3D Gun

Albany Man Arrested Immediately for Accidental Shooting - I Wonder Why?, Albany News, Weather, Sports

Starbucks Shooting in Florida

One person is recovering after being accidentally shot Saturday at the Starbucks coffee shop inside Tyrone Mall, police say.
Local news reports

One person is recovering after being accidentally shot Saturday at the Starbucks coffee shop inside Tyrone Mall, police say.

The incident happened around 5 p.m., and the female victim, who was not identified, suffered non-life-threatening injuries.

Police gave no details about how or why the firearm discharged or who was carrying it. Tyrone Mall is located at the interesection of Tyrone Boulevard and 66th Street in St. Petersburg.
The store closed for the remainder of the night.

Starbucks management issued a statement:

"At Tyrone Square Mall, our primary concern is always for the safety of our customers and store employees, and we are thankful that the injuries sustained are reported to be non-life threatening. Our thoughts are with the victim’s family, and we wish her a speedy recovery."

Now that's just not true.  If their primary concern was really for the safety of the customers they wouldn't allow guns on the premises.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

California Gun Laws Are Too Lax - Oakland Wants to do it Right


A public hearing was scheduled for Friday in Oakland to discuss a proposed state law that would allow Oakland to essentially circumvent California’s existing gun regulations in favor of something one city councilwoman suggested is better suited for violence-plagued Oakland. 

Oakland City Councilwoman Libby Schaaf, who represents District 4, which includes Oakland’s Allendale, Brookdale, Crestmont, Montclair and Oakmore neighborhoods among others, petitioned Assemblyman Rob Bonta, (D-Oakland), to draft AB 180.

“Under AB 180, the City of Oakland would be given the authority to regulate the registration of firearms and licensing of gun owners—areas which are currently pre-empted by state law. AB 180 is a smart and sensible bill that empowers Oakland and provides local control in addressing gun violence,” said Bonta.

“Cities can’t have their own gun licensing and registration laws, so it’s a great tool for Oakland because we have a unique problem with gun violence,” said Schaaf.

“This is not banning guns,” she added. “This is just having tighter controls on who’s owning and who’s selling them and buying them,” she explained. “This law would allow Oakland to actually create that type of procedure and get guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.”
This is not banning guns, except of course, we all know that if this is allowed to pass, confiscations and bans would inevitably follow.

At least that's what the gun-rights folks keep telling us.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Real Hunters Don't Need Guns

Monday, May 13, 2013

You know who you are...

From Media Matters for America

Verb sap

Today's lesson in Latin:
ignorantia legis neminem excusat
I have been known to say that a trained chimp could practise law (and can if he passes the bar).

On the other hand, I have noticed a bad case of why it is said that anyone who has themselves as a lawyer has a fool for a client coupled with why "A little Learning is a dang'rous Thing".

If you can say that waging war is somehow acceptable according to the Constitution.

And don't understand the significance of this quote (even with my little hint here):
The obvious purpose of the statute is to protect existing Government, not from change by peaceable, lawful and constitutional means, but from change by violence, revolution and terrorism. That it is within the power of the Congress to protect the Government of the United States from armed rebellion is a proposition which requires little discussion. Whatever theoretical merit there may be to the argument that there is a “right” to rebellion against dictatorial governments is without force where the existing structure of the government provides for peaceful and orderly change. We reject any principle of governmental helplessness in the face of preparation for revolution, which principle, carried to its logical conclusion, must lead to anarchy. No one could conceive that it is not within the power of Congress to prohibit acts intended to overthrow the Government by force and violence. The question with which we are concerned here is not whether Congress has such power, but whether the means which it has employed conflict with the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951)
Then, you really have no reason to pretend you understand law.

Or to criticise my intellect.

Rachel Maddow on the Ammunition Shortage and other Conspiracies

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

A-10 Warthog: Attack Run

And you know those bad guys aren't having a good day.

And don't forget the AH-1 Apache for close troop support.

Seriously, you think you can take on an enemy armed with things like the MLRS, A10 Warthog, Apache AH1, etcetera?

Gmme a break, you reality challenged morons.

Meet the MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System)

It's nickname in the British Army is the "Grid Square Removal System" because it can wipe out a square kilometre of real estate.

 When you want to announce your arrival turn up the volume--The Sound of Heavy Metal thunder make make even the most determined enemy think twice.

Seriously, if you bozos think you stand a chance against one of these--you are far more reality challenged than I ever gave you credit for being.

Why the Government Should Fear Gun Owners

Texas Colt Carry offered this video as proof that the "civil war" his side keeps talking about between government and the gun-rights people is winnable. The other commenters agreed.

I think they're nuts.  It's self-aggrandizing lunacy, as I mentioned before.

One thing the video does show is that the bullshit those same guys keep throwing out about women being more and more involved in guns is just that, bullshit.  Gun fanaticism is a manly activity. And I noticed there was not one single minority represented there. Now, I realize that doesn't necessarily mean the participants of this shoot are racists, but it does make you wonder.

What I did see is a good showing of fat, white men.  I guess there is something to that stereotype after all.

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.

Why repeating lies and other nonsense won't work

The problem is that when your spout stuff which isn't based in fact, someone can verify the information pretty easily on the internet as this article points out:

There are roughly 30,000 deaths a year in the U.S. due to gunshots. As this week's news makes clear, incidents of children killing themselves or other children are appallingly common. They are also the types of stories -- compact, outrageous, horrifying -- that are readily transmitted through Twitter, Facebook and other forms of social media. As such stories spread, they make it increasingly obvious to increasing numbers of people that American gun laws are uniquely insane.

The NRA has been remarkably successful in suppressing government research on gun violence and hindering dissemination of data on guns. Legislators in Washington and state capitals have been ghoulishly accommodating. The Internet, it seems, won't be so easily bought.

So when you try to lie about the meaning of the Second Amendment, say by using the quote:
The great object is, that every man be armed.
Realise not only can people get the quote in its entirety since Patrick Henry’s “That every man be armed” speech found at The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution (3 Elliot’s Debates 384-7), Virginia, Saturday, June 14, 1788. Page 386-7 (see also 5 June)
. . .
As my worthy friend said, there is a positive partition of power between the two governments. To Congress is given the power of “arming, organizing, and disciplining the militia, and governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States.” To the state legislatures is given the power of “appointing the officers, and training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.” I observed before, that, if the power be concurrent as to arming them, it is concurrent in other respects…May we not discipline and arm them, as well as Congress, if the power be concurrent? so that our militia shall have two sets of arms, double sets of regimentals, &c.; and thus, at a very great cost, we shall be doubly armed. The great object is, that every man be armed. But can the people afford to pay for double sets of arms &c.? Every one who is able may have a gun. But we have learned, by experience, that necessary as it is to have arms, and though our Assembly has, by a succession of laws for many years, endeavoured to have the militia completely armed, it is still far from being the case. When this power is given up to Congress without limitation or bounds, how will your militia be armed? You trust to chance; for sure I am that nation which shall trust its liberties in other hands cannot long exist. If gentlemen are serious when they suppose a concurrent power, where can be the impolicy to amend it? Or, in other words, to say that Congress shall not arm or discipline them, till the states shall have refused or neglected to do it? This is my object. I only wish to bring it to what they themselves say is implied. Implication is to be the foundation of our civil liberties, and when you speak of arming the militia by a concurrence of power, you use implication. But implication will not save you, when a strong army of veterans comes upon you. You would be laughed at by the whole world for trusting your safety implicitly to implication.
We can add in this gloss from an expert on Patrick Henry:
In this connection, however, I need to say something about a recent popular misconception concerning Patrick Henry’s legacy and the genesis of the Second Amendment, which states, “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Despite efforts of a number of misguided scholars to construe this language as justifying individual, unregulated gun ownership, I am firmly convinced that the Second Amendment is concerned with the state’s power to control its own militia as a civilian alternative to a professional standing army. In raising the issue in the Virginia Convention Patrick Henry several times pointed to Art. I, Section 8, Clause 16, as an example of the potentially threatening effect of dual state and congressional jurisdiction over the militia and the possibly dangerous union of the purse and sword vested in Congress. Yet wielding the scholar’s power of the ellipse several partisans of gun ownership have edited Henry’s remarks about how best to regulate the militia into an inflammatory half-truth “The great object is that every man be armed….Every one who is able may have a gun.” The NRA has blown this up into a poster-sized blurb embossed with Patrick Henry’s image.
This is not, I repeat NOT, part of Patrick Henry’s legacy. Clearly speaking of the problem of militia organization, what he actually said is, “The great object is that every man [of the militia] be armed.–But can the people to afford to pay for double sets of arms &c.? Every one who is able may have a gun. But have we not learned by experience, that necessary as it is to have arms, and though our assembly has, by a succession of laws for many years, endeavored to have the militia completely armed, it is still far from being the case. When this power is given up to Congress without limitation or bounds, how will your militia be armed? You trust to chance….”
Not to belabor the argument, but cinch it, I would also remind you that the liberty or death speech itself was in support of a resolution to put the colony in a mode of defense, and the plan proposed by Henry’s committee as a result of its passage included a militia law that described in great detail not only the number of men, but the amount of ammunition to be raised by a collective levy, and a very clear procedure for maintaining county and provincial control over the militia system. If Henry’s remarks were intended to cast doubt upon the adequacy of a hypothetical Congressional militia law, they only affirmed his commitment to the traditional method of state control over a militia that, far from being a privatized collection of gun-toting individuals, was a community temporarily called to arms and always subservient to public authority and law.
from  Henry Mayer, A Patrick Henry Essay (No. 5-98), THE POLITICAL LEGACY OF PATRICK HENRY.

And funny how it seems to back up the things I have been saying.

As I like to say, your arguments don't stand scrutiny--and the internet is extremely unfriendly to them.

Investigation Discovery’s “Homicide Hunter: Lt. Joe Kenda” on guns for self-defence.

Retired Colorado Springs police detective Lt. Joe Kenda. In 1973 he joined the Colorado Springs police department. He retired after more than two decades as a detective in 1996. This is his response on why he no longer carries a gun:

It always amuses me when you see all of these idiots today that want to carry a gun. The human body is not designed to carry a gun. It hurts no matter where you put it — and trust me, I’ve tried them all. I had to carry a gun. But I certainly don’t have to now — and I don’t. I have a neighbor — a little old man who comes over, he listens to the press that says, ‘You’re all going to die any minute. Now the news, brought to you by Chicken Little,’ you know? So he buys a gun. The guy’s 78. And he shows me this handgun he bought. He says, ‘You know a lot about guns — anything I should do?’ I says, ‘Yeah — do you have a vice in your garage?’ ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘Go put that in the vice and file off that front sight blade.’ ‘Well, why should I do that?’ I said, ‘So when somebody takes it away from you and sticks it up your @#$%, it won’t hurt so bad when they take it out.’ And he just looked at me … he took the gun back to the store. Good choice. You don’t need a gun.
I used to do a lot of public speaking for the police department. I’d say, ‘What’s the position of the department on gun control?’ They’d say, ‘The department doesn’t have a position — we enforce the law as it’s written.’ ‘Would you like to know my personal opinion?’ ‘Absolutely!’ — because it’s always a gun freak that’s asking you the question. So I said, ‘Picture yourself at Mile High [Stadium] in Denver during a Bronco game. You’re on the 50-yard line at halftime. You are surrounded by 74,000 emotional drunks. Behind you on a table are 74,000 guns. Would you give one to everybody there? Or would you try to be selective on who you gave one to?’ And the crowd would laugh, and the guy would sit down. Nobody needs a gun. They all need a brain — but they don’t need a gun. We shouldn’t even let people drive, let alone people have guns. But they have cars, and they drive. But not guns — this society doesn’t need guns. But it’s too late. There are 150 million guns in private hands. I can’t tell you how many times I have investigated a death in a private home caused by a gun that was purchased to protect that same person — who is now dead from that gun, by accident; by suicide or by murder. So how did that purchase work out? Not very well.

And before you make stupid comments--my concealed carry permit expired in 2007.

New Yorker Arrested for Playing with a Toy Gun in the Park

Dropped Gun Death Results in Lawsuit against Gun Dealer and Gun Manufacturer

Local news reports

The family of a Springfield, Vt., man who died when a revolver he accidentally dropped fired a bullet that struck him in the head has sued the shop where he purchased the weapon and several gun manufacturers, claiming a faulty safety mechanism allowed the discharge.

The estate of Edward Davis, 39, who died in 2010 while trying to show the revolver to his mother, is seeking compensation from the Alstead Gun Shop and various firearms companies, alleging he was sold a defective product.

In an interview, Ed Van Dorn, the Davis family’s attorney, said that Davis is not to blame for the incident. Van Dorn said it is relatively common for people to drop guns — he cited a New Hampshire lawmaker who dropped his concealed firearm during a legislative hearing in 2012 — without having them fire.

The lawsuit features 10 claims, including negligence, breach of warranty and misrepresentation of the gun’s safety, and focuses on a hammer block that failed to prevent the gun from firing. The gun has been identified in court papers as a Uberti Regulator SAA Revolver, which was modeled on old Colt revolvers, Van Dorn said.

A dropped gun is always an interesting story. I love the way gun-rights fanatics insist that modern guns cannot fire when dropped.  I guess this one doesn't count being a replica of an older model.

Another interesting angle is the shirking of responsibility that the law suit implies. 

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

New Jersey Hostage Taker Dead

Yahoo News reports

Police stormed a New Jersey home early Sunday and fatally shot a registered sex offender who had held his girlfriend's three children hostage, ending their 37-hour ordeal and recovering the bodies of the captives' mother and another sibling, authorities said.

They found 38-year-old Gerald "Skip" Tyrone Murphy in an upstairs bedroom and he told them he was armed with a gun and explosives and had three children with him, Mercer County Prosecutor Joseph L. Bocchini Jr. said. Officers noticed one of the dead victims before they retreated from the second floor and rescued Stevens' 19-year-old son from the basement, who said he hadn't seen her or his siblings since about April 24.

Murphy had a long criminal history including convictions for aggravated assault and criminal conspiracy, Bocchini said. He had previously been arrested for robbery and weapons offenses and child endangerment. He also had an arrest warrant in Pennsylvania for failing to register as a sex offender.

17 Wounded in New Orleans during Mothers' Day Parade

Yahoo reports with video

Gunmen opened fire on dozens of people marching in a Mother's Day second-line parade in New Orleans on Sunday, wounding at least 17 people, police said.

Police spokeswoman Remi Braden said in an email that many of the 17 victims were grazed and most of the wounds weren't life-threatening. No deaths were reported.

Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas told reporters that a 10-year-old girl was grazed in the shooting around 2 p.m. She was in good condition. He said three or four people were in surgery, but he didn't have their conditions.

Officers were interspersed with the marchers, which is routine for such events. As many as 400 people joined in the procession that stretched for about 3 blocks, though only half that many were in the immediate vicinity of the shooting, Serpas said.

Police saw three suspects running from the scene in the city's 7th Ward neighborhood. No arrests had been made as of late afternoon.

I guess La Pierre's nonsense about a good guy with a gun didn't work.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Today's bullet points!

You should believe what we believe because...


I'm sorry, but I have heard your "arguments" before and find them highly unpersuasive.

I prefer intelligence to ignorance and well documented to "just 'cos".

Texas 5-Year-old Shot in the Head - No One Held Accountable

CBS reports

Denton police are investigating what they’re calling an accidental shooting of a 5-year-old boy. It happened close to noon on Saturday while the two boys were in a bedroom alone at a home in 2700 block of Stockton Street in Denton. 

Police say an 8-year-old accidentally shot the 5-year-old in the head with a .22 caliber rifle while they were playing.

Two adults and a teenager were inside the house when the shooting happened. 

The 5-year-old victim was taken to Denton Regional Medical Center ED by the Denton Fire Department and then flown by CareFlite to Children’s Medical Center in Dallas. 

He is presently on a ventilator at this time.
Day in and day out, kids are dropping like flies. The immediate fault is that of the gun owners who leave their guns loaded and accessible to kids.  The secondary fault is that of the gun-rights fanatics who fight so strenuously to keep gun laws lax. And, last but not least, I blame the NRA and the gun manufacturers for the same reason, except unlike the gun-rights folks, whose motivation is convenience for themselves, the NRA and gun manufacturers have a pure profit motive.

None of them, not the gun-owning parents, not the gun-rights supporters and certainly not the NRA and gun manufacturers, care enough about the victims of gun violence to do anything about it.

Shame on them all.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Julian Cope: World Shut Your Mouth

The BBC World Service has a programme called World Have your Say, those who know me know that I would prefer it this way:

Of course, really good, useful comments are always welcome.

But, I'm not holding my breath to see them.

Anyone who lives near Avebury and is “a fierce critic of contemporary Western society (with a noted and public interest in occultism, paganism and Goddess worship)” who went to School in Liverpool can’t be all bad.