Contributors

Showing posts with label Gun Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gun Rights. Show all posts

Thursday, November 07, 2013

Here We Go Again

I guess we have to be reminded every few years just how fucking psycho the gun community is in this country. Good Lord...

There will be no wavering!! There will be only vigilance!!! Any sort of thinking or wavering that is against our vill...sorry...will calls for immediate retribution. Anyone who writes this...

I don’t think requiring 16 hours of training to qualify for a concealed carry permit is infringement But that’s just me.

Or this...

The fact is, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.

Or this...

I’ve seen too many examples of unsafe behavior on too many shooting ranges to believe otherwise. And we’ve all read too many accounts of legally armed individuals dealing with the consequences of not being properly trained or prepared when confronted with a bad situation.

is a fucking pinko commie faggot who needs to be liquidated. Robert Farago summed it up best.

Anyone who says ‘I believe in the Second Amendment but—’ does not believe in the Second Amendment. They are not friends, they are not frenemies, they are enemies of The People of the Gun.

The People of the Gun, huh? Yeah, I''m quaking in my boots (see: there will be no revolution as long as men have titties) Here's Wonkette's take.

Translation: You fuckers scare even us, but we still want your money, so fuck “a healthy exchange of ideas”: Metcalf is history. Please keep buying our magazine, please? Not that the fondlers are satisfied — now many are calling for Bequette to resign for having allowed the piece to run in the first place. 

Update: And as of this afternoon, Guns & Ammo editor Jim Bequette has resigned as well. Business Insider reports that while the magazine had been due to get a new editor January 1, Bequette “announced he would expedite the process and resign immediately.” Because of an editorial suggesting the utterly unthinkable, tyranny-promoting notion that people who own guns should be trained to use them safely. Welcome to America in 2013.

I don't share her fear of the gun people. Honestly, they are a bunch of cowards. The first people to squirt in their pants and hand over their guns to some sort of authority will be them. The reason why they bitch so much about authority is because they themselves are authoritarians who want a return to the aristocracy of the Antebellum South and are obviously self-loathing.

As I have said many times, when an incident occurs that will affect them personally due to their complete ignorance of how irresponsible people are in this country, then they will change. In the meantime, I do find it heartening that they continue to alienate more and more people who are on their side.

Friday, April 05, 2013


Tuesday, March 05, 2013


Thursday, February 28, 2013

Gun Myth #3

Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society. 

Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.

 • Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without. 

• In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10% increase in homicides.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013


Gun Myth #1

Mother Jones recently put a list of gun myths that I'm going to spend the next few days highlighting. Before we get started, we should all remember the scientific method, critical thinking, and the definition of genetic fallacy:)

First up is that ol' chestnut "they's a comin' to git muh gun."

Myth #1: They're coming for your guns. Fact-check: No one knows the exact number of guns in America, but it's clear there's no practical way to round them all up (never mind that no one in Washington is proposing this). Yet if you fantasize about rifle-toting citizens facing down the government, you'll rest easy knowing that America's roughly 80 million gun owners already have the feds and cops outgunned by a factor of around 79 to 1. (Sources: Congressional Research Service, Small Arms Survey)

There isn't any feasible way to seize the guns that people own. I'd say it's nearly impossible given the numbers. So, when your strange uncle starts making strange comments about the government as Easter, just say, "79 to 1."

Friday, February 22, 2013































Yes, they are (see: should be) committed.

Wednesday, February 20, 2013


Indeed, David

David Frum's recent piece on guns is simply brilliant. He's right. The president does need a Plan B. What should that be?

First: The president can direct the surgeon general to compile a scientific study of the health effect of individual gun ownership.

The second step that might be taken -- again without the need for any congressional vote -- is for the Senate to convene hearings into the practices of the gun industry analogous to those it convened into the tobacco industry in the 1990s.

Agree and agree.

Actually, we need more than just one scientific study on the health effects of guns. As Frum notes in an earlier piece, there's a whole lot of lying going on. And bad social science. This jibes with a recent article from the Christian Science Monitor that illustrates, despite the convoluted bullshit from the Right, there is very little date to support the assertion that guns make us safer.

As a 2012 Congressional Research Service report on gun issues points out, law enforcement agencies do not collect self-defense information as a matter of course, and the available research thus depends on limited numbers of surveys and other self-reported information.

That's why Frum points out the obvious in his comment regarding Gayle Trotter's testimony before Congress.

Thrilling. Also wholly imaginary. Such Rambo-like defenses of home and hearth do not happen in real life, unless the home also happens to contain a meth lab. (The oft-cited statistic that gun owners draw in self-defense 2.5 million times a year is a classic of bad social science.)

Yes, managing a fantasy. These types of situations are pure fantasy but that certainly won't stop the right wing media industrial complex from brainwashing their all to willing followers whose brains are already hard wired for more fear. So, we need to fucking bury them in scientific studies that show the effects that guns have on public health.

The other important step is to unfuck the gun makers.

Gun makers often design their weapons in ways that present no benefit for lawful users but that greatly assist criminals. They don't coordinate the issuance of serial numbers so that each gun can be identified with certainty. They stamp serial numbers in places where they can be effaced. 

They reject police requests to etch barrels to uniquely mark each cartridge fired by a particular gun. They sell bullets that can pierce police armor. 

They will not include trigger locks and other child-proofing devices as standard equipment. 

They ignore new technology that would render guns inoperable by anyone except their approved purchaser. 

Why? Why? And why?

Seriously, WTF, gun manufacturers? I had no idea that any of this was happening.

Frum's piece draws an important comparison with the cigarette industry and I think we may be seeing the nascence of a very effective way to deal with gun violence in this country. If we do to the gun manufacturers what we did the tobacco lobby, we're going to reduce the gun violence in this country. If we combine that with dealing with mental health more effectively, it's going to make for an even further reduction in gun related deaths.

Sunday, February 17, 2013

299

One of my great joys on Sunday is to crack open the paper and have a nice, long and leisurely read. Today, though, there was nothing pleasant about this headline.

Appeals of denied permits get guns into questionable hands

Senior Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Toni Beitz said the reason for some reversals is that the carry-permit law puts a high burden on a sheriff to prove that someone shouldn't be issued a permit. Under the carry-permit statute, for example, criminal allegations that are not investigated and documented aren't grounds for denial. "The statute is very limited as to what evidence the sheriff can look at. He's got a very short period of time, and there's only a very narrow room for him to use discretion," Beitz said. "That was the big shift when it used to be in the hands of chiefs of police. They had a lot of discretion to look at maybe whatever they wanted to look at."

Interesting. So, the gun lobby, who was spent the last couple of years screaming at the top of their lungs about gun walking, is now essentially doing the same thing. In their fervent zeal over their warped interpretation of the second amendment, 299 people who have a criminal history get to have guns in my home state.

Perhaps they should heed their own warnings about laws and unintended consequences.

Friday, February 15, 2013

They Deserve A Vote

On Monday night, 34 year old Nhan Tran stood at a busy intersection in Oakdale, a suburb of St. Paul, and started shooting. 9 year old Devin Aryal was shot several times and killed in the back of his mother's minivan. Now, Melissa Aryal becomes yet another parent in a collection of far too many who have lost a child to gun violence. And the response from the Right?

Fuck you. Don't take away my gun, Hitler.

In his State of the Union address, President Obama said the following.

It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the 2nd Amendment – have come together around commonsense reform – like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets, because they are tired of being outgunned. 

Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun. 

One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house. 

Hadiya’s parents, Nate and Cleo, are in this chamber tonight, along with more than two dozen Americans whose lives have been torn apart by gun violence. They deserve a vote. 


Gabby Giffords deserves a vote. 


The families of Newtown deserve a vote. 


The families of Aurora deserve a vote. The families of Oak Creek, and Tucson, and Blacksburg, and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence – they deserve a simple vote. 


Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will perfectly solve all the challenges I’ve outlined tonight. But we were never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government. 


We were sent here to look out for our fellow Americans the same way they look out for one another, every single day, usually without fanfare, all across this country. We should follow their example.


Indeed, we should. So why hasn't their been a vote?

In listening to the chest thumping bravado and imperial declarations of the gun rights folks, one would think that all changes to existing gun laws will fail. Fine. Prove it. Put your vote where your mouth is, ass hats. The Republicans in the House should put together a bill and vote on it. Harry Reid should do the same thing in the Senate. In short, get it fucking done.

Let the American people see where their leaders stand on the issue of gun violence. I want to see who is going to vote no and stand with the old gun laws that are clearly not effective anymore. You can add Melissa Aryal to the list of people who deserve a simple vote. You can rest assured that there will be more added to the list each and every day that passes until there is a vote.

The time is now.

Monday, February 11, 2013

Not Fake

62-Year-Old With Gun Only One Standing Between Nation And Full-Scale Government Takeover

Bailey, who keeps his gun on his person at all times and regularly patrols his property in his truck, has reportedly struck dread into the very highest-ranking members of the U.S. government. According to sources, top government and military officials are fully aware that they remain unable to commence with their oppressive, systematic subjugation of the American populace as long as the 62-year-old owner of a rifle exists. 

I guess The Onion stopped running fake news stories...

Friday, February 08, 2013

There Was Nothing Free About Them

If only people were allowed to carry their guns wherever they felt like it, spree shootings would never happen, gun free zone detractors whine in typical adolescent fashion. It continually amazes me that the core of their argument about this and many other issues revolves around the same basic emotion: I wanna do what I wanna do when I wanna do it and if I don't get my way, bad things will happen. See?!! Told ya!! Fuck you, dad!! (stomp stomp stomp...SLAM!)

Setting aside this perpetual, childish outburst, the assertion that spree shootings are more lethal because they are in gun free zones is patently false. The idea that we can somehow get into the mind of these people and (ahem) reason that they pick these places so they can have the largest body count is one of the finest examples of projection and confirmation bias I have ever witnessed. You would think that they were presenting a conclusion to an argument without having any facts to support it. That couldn't possibly be true!

When Cookie Thornton shot up Kirkwood City Hall, he began his spree by shooting a police officer, taking his gun, and then heading inside to continue his path of destruction. The fact that there were guns in the building had no effect on Thornton's mindset. He went in anyway. Thornton, by the way, was yet another individual with a pathological hatred for government. Jared Loughner walked in to a parking lot that was not a gun free zone and had no compunction about shooting up the joint. People were allowed to carry arms around that area and that certainly didn't stop him. Chris Kyle was a Navy SEAL and heavily armed and trained, when he was shot, along with his friend Chad Littlefield, at a gun range (see: not gun free) by Eddie Ray Routh.

And armed security was present at Columbine when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold went on their rampage, killing 12 people.

So, this notion that getting rid of gun free zones will somehow be a panacea is ludicrous. The above are just a few examples. Whether guns are present or not present has no bearing on whether or not people go on shooting sprees. It's simply another in a nauseating series of proclamations by children who are trying to get their own way. 

Wednesday, February 06, 2013

Relief is Spelled C-O-U-L-T-E-R

Universal background check means universal registration. Universal registration means universal confiscation, universal extermination. That’s how it goes in history.

Well, shit. I was a little concerned that we wouldn't get anywhere on refining our gun laws but now I know for certain that we will. Hell, we might even get an assault weapons ban if we see more stuff like this!

I'm beginning to see a pattern that has developed over the last four years...the Right says something loony tunes, America reacts with revulsion and....good things happen:)

Sunday, February 03, 2013

Now, Maybe?

FORMER SEAL, 'AMERICAN SNIPER' CHRIS KYLE KILLED AT TEXAS GUN RANGE

So, can we perhaps now refine our nation's gun laws so that mentally ill people (especially those with PTSD) don't have access to guns?

Friday, February 01, 2013

Trotter Testimony

Here's some video to go along with Nikto's post below. I love how she uses all too familiar framing techniques and Newspeak to redirect from completely disproving her own point.

Thursday, January 31, 2013


Unbelievable

Here's another example of why the gun laws in this country need to be refined. So what if he's an old man. This is a classic case of someone who should not own a gun.

Part of me thinks, though, that this is what the gun folks want. That way they can point to the violence and say, "See? People need to defend themselves against this sort of thing." The more shootings, the merrier, eh? Maybe they think that Abad should have had a gun and then he could have shot back.

Oh, no, wait, that wouldn't do. He was Latino.