If Anyone Can Use Your Gun, It Doesn't Make You Safer

I live in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, and the big news around here lately has been the shooting of Jamar Clark, an unarmed black man. NAACP leaders have come to Minneapolis and are meeting the mayor and the governor. Protesters are camped out around a police station. Interlopers used the protest to throw rocks and Molotov cocktails at police. 

The demonstrators want video of the incident released, and law enforcement doesn't want to release it yet for fear of contaminating witness statements.

From what we can tell, the following happened: Jamar Clark beat up his girlfriend. Paramedics were called and began to treat her. Clark hassled the paramedics. The cops tried to stop him. He allegedly got his hand on the gun of one of the cops. Then the cops shot him in the head. The demonstrators say Clark was handcuffed, the cops say he wasn't.

The video probably won't clear anything up: it's probably of poor quality, shot from a building surveillance camera with a poor angle.

Now, Jamar Clark wasn't some innocent motorist. He instigated the incident. But the punishment for being a violent idiot shouldn't be the death penalty.

But there is a common thread in most of these shootings of unarmed black men: cops are afraid their own weapons will be used against them. In Ferguson Michael Brown was shot after supposedly trying to take a cop's gun. Last December a cop shot Ezell Ford, a black man who supposedly tried to grab his gun. In 2013 Jonathan Ferrel, a former football player, whose car broke down was killed because the cop said he tried to take his gun.

My guess is that a lot of cops just say this to cover up bad shootings because there's no way to prove it unless there's video. But it does happen, and apparently it happens all the time.

On March 11, a defendant on trial for rape in Atlanta allegedly overpowered a courthouse deputy, took her gun and killed four people, including two law enforcement officers. A little over a month later, a Providence detective was killed with his own weapon while interviewing a suspect at police headquarters.

Police in Augusta, Ga., killed an inmate who fled on April 21 after overpowering a state corrections officer and taking his gun, authorities said. Two days later, a man under arrest in Spring Valley, Ill., wrested away an officer's gun and beat him with it. The suspect then fatally shot himself, police said.

This shows the fallacy of "guns make us safer." If your weapon can be used by anyone who picks it up, it represents a hazard to you and everyone around you.

A gun is like a hand grenade with the pin pulled. Cops run around all day and all night with this armed grenade on their hips, just waiting for it to go off. No wonder they have itchy trigger fingers.

Now, if these cops had guns that only they could fire, how many lives would be saved? And it goes beyond cops: how many kids shoot their little brothers because daddy left his gun where the kiddies could get it? How many teenagers have committed suicide with a stolen weapon? How many people have been shot by their own weapons because they dropped them on the bathroom floor?

The NRA has opposed guns that are keyed to individuals because they're afraid they would malfunction when they're most needed. And I agree that guns activated by a fingerprint reader, or an embedded chip, or some other equally esoteric technology are insufficiently reliable.

Simpler is better. There has to be a simple foolproof unlocking mechanism for a gun. It might be a ring that acts as a key when it's inserted into the grip. It might be some kind of coded safety that takes just a moment to activate while you're aiming (because cops had better damn well be aiming). This would also reduce the number of accidental shootings that occur when cops clean an "empty" gun.

The basic design of police sidearms hasn't really changed in century. It's time to use some of that American exceptionalism to design weapons that really do make us safer.

As long as anyone can shoot a cop's gun, the weapon poses a deadly threat to bystanders, suspects and the cops themselves.

Good Words

Good Words

What I didn’t fully appreciate, and nobody can appreciate until they’re in the position, is how decentralized power is in this system. When you’re in the seat and you’re seeing the housing market collapse and you are seeing unemployment skyrocketing and you have a sense of what the right thing to do is, then you realize, "Okay, not only do I have to persuade my own party, not only do I have to prevent the other party from blocking what the right thing to do is, but now I can anticipate this lawsuit, this lobbying taking place, and this federal agency that technically is independent, so I can’t tell them what to do. 

I’ve got the Federal Reserve, and I’m hoping that they do the right thing—and by the way, since the economy now is global, I’ve got to make sure that the Europeans, the Asians, the Chinese, everybody is on board." A lot of the work is not just identifying the right policy but now constantly building these ever shifting coalitions to be able to actually implement and execute and get it done.

---Barack Obama, November 17, 2015

The Gun Laws I Want Here In The United States

Here are the kind of gun laws I'd like to see here in the United States. This was from a comment on Quora.

I find it interesting some Americans think it's hard to get a gun in the US. Sounds much too easy to me.

Australian method [it helps we're an island continent with fairly tight border control]

1. Go do a gun handling safety course at a firearms shop. Takes 2 hours. Send forms off. Certificate comes back 1 week later.

2. Fill out license application for your state registry. You must include a genuine reason (for ownership). This includes recreational hunting/vermin control (on a property big enough) or as part of a sporting shooter's association (state based). Or animal welfare/primary production (i.e. cattle grazing). 

3. Pistols heavily restricted to certain employment types (security) or gun club. Very very hard for average citizen to own hand gun.

4. Long arms are broken into 3 main categories: A, B, C (there are others). A are air guns, rim fire etc. As a primary producer, say, you can pretty easily get one (pest control, animal welfare), even on small lots (say 4 Ha/10 acres). Category B include centrefires. Must have at least 25 acres to own one, or, be in a shooting assoc, or, have permission to shoot on a larger landowner's land.

5. Send forms off. Registry does check. No one with any assault/AVO/serious criminal conviction can legally own a firearm.

6. For land owners, registry checks land size/aspect and proximity to neighbours on google maps/earth/etc.

7. Licence approved/or not.

8. Take forms to motor registry and get license.

9. Go to gun shop and get a permit to acquire. 1 PTA per firearm. You can only apply for and have approved, PTAs for your allowed firearm classification. Each PTA costs money.

10. PTA approved: first PTA takes 28 days (the cooling off period). After that subsequent PTAs apparently are quicker.

11. Take PTA to firearms dealer, acquire.

12. You can only buy ammunition for the type of firearm you have.

Other notes:
Transporting firearms requires the ammo is locked separately from firearm. Preferably bolt actions have the bolt removed and store separately. Firearm locked in car or in special lockbox attached to vehicle.

Very strict laws as to storage.

All firearms must be acquired through a dealer - no person to person sales.

You cannot carry a concealed weapon in public even if you legally own it.

Arguably, this is a pain in the bum, but you can be reasonably sure most legal firearms holders are responsible.

Some (Americans especially) might see this as a curtailment of rights. Maybe in 1800 when the Wild West was as it was, but in 2015 Australia (and any civil society, really), this is a very, very small price to pay to ensure a mostly safe, civil society.

Yep.

I'm done living under their rules for guns...rules that are currently the most acute threat to our national security....rules that a small percentage of our population gets to dictate.

I'm even more tired of the current strategy that gun safety proponents are advocating. They are making the same mistake that President Obama made when he tried to meet the Cult halfway. They don't want to meet halfway. They are on the one yard one on the right side of the field, especially when it comes to this issue. So, gun safety advocates have to start on the one yard line on the left side of the field and work to the middle.

Let's begin with this: FUCK THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

Cue The Islamophobia

You could see this one coming from a mile away. Brown people-GET OUT!!! You are all terroristy and stuff,,,

From someone who went through their own issues with anger, hate and fear after 9/11, I can safely say that this sort of bullshit accomplishes nothing. It only serves to embolden those who claim to be Muslim. ISIL isn't anymore a representation of Islam than the KKK is a representation of Christianity. Giving them more reasons to hate us isn't a good strategy.

I've stated this many times but military action alone accomplishes nothing. This is a battle over ideology and it can only be one through free trade and free markets in those areas of the world that are currently ruled by dictators. This is really at the heart of why people around the world flock to ISIL. They are angry at the lack of freedom.

Giving them that freedom, both in economy and in civil rights, changes all of that.

Study on Background Checks

Between January 1, 2009 and July 31, 2015, there were 37 mass shootings in states where background checks were required for all handgun sales and 96 mass shootings in states where they were not. Controlling for population, there were 52 percent fewer mass shootings in states that require background checks for all handgun sales than in states that do not.

The difference was more pronounced among shootings committed by prohibited people. During the period of observation, there were 44 mass shootings committed by assailants known to be prohibited from possessing firearms—10 in states that require background checks for all handgun sales and 34 in states that do not. Controlling for population, there were 63 percent fewer mass shootings committed by people prohibited from possessing firearms in states that require background checks for all handgun sales than in those that do not.

A White American Christian

Never forget. This person killed 168 American men, women and CHILDREN. He injured 600 more. He perpetrated the worst case of domestic terrorism in United States history. He wasn't black or brown. He wasn't a Hindu or a Muslim or Syrian. He was A WHITE AMERICAN CHRISTIAN. Now think on that before you spread your anti Islamic and anti people of color BULLSHIT on social media.

Strategy Shift

Here's an interesting piece from today's Times regarding the strategy shift of ISIL. I find most of it to be on the mark save for one glaring omission: wasn't this always going to be their strategy?

Like Al Qaeda before it, ISIL is an organization that wants the world returned to the year 700 with old style Islamic values. They don't just want their little corner to rule over. They want the whole thing and want to eradicate anyone that stands in their way.

So, now the question becomes how do we stop them? We area already bombing them so that's good. If we decide to put boots on the ground, we could take out their main force of 20,000 guys and 1970s pickup trucks. Neither of these actions, however, would defeat them because we're talking about a worldwide ideology. This, of course, brings us back to the problem we had with Al Qaeda. How do you stop an idea?

At the core of the solution to this problem lies free trade and free markets. When people get a taste of the wealth and prosperity that capitalism brings, they tend to not want to shoot each other or blow themselves up anymore. That's why Muslims in the United States aren't radicalized. They love their lives here and are comfortable.

No doubt there will still be Islamic groups that will not go gently into that good night but that's where international crime fighting efforts have to be massively increased. Intelligence...human intelligence...is where we can really take the fight to ISIL.

Paris

As the world reacts with horror and sympathy to the attacks in Paris, please note that by this time tomorrow morning, the same number of US citizens will be dead due to gun violence on our own home soil. In another 36 hours, that number will double. In another 36..tripled.

And all with none of the media attention that Paris is getting right now....

Conservatives and The Gold Standard

For years many conservatives have been insisting the United States return to the gold standard, with putzes like Glenn Beck hawking gold on TV at inflated prices.

Ted Cruz and Ben Carson pulled the gold standard out of their asses in the most recent Republican presidential debate. The New York Times has an article that explains the technical reasons why some conservatives want it (to limit government spending) and why it's stupid (it causes deflationary spirals and depressions).

But the gold standard is bad for other reasons. It would give more power to countries that produce gold. What countries produce the most gold? In order of production in 2014: China, Australia, Russia and the United States. We're number 4! We're number 4!

Do we really want to give China and Russia that much control over the United States' economy?

And there really isn't very much gold in the world: last year the entire world's production was 2,860 metric tons. A cubic meter of gold weighs 19 metric tons. That means that the entire output of all the gold mines in the world was only 150 cubic meters, or a cube measuring 5.3 meters on a side, about 17 feet.

I could store the entire annual global production of gold in my basement. All the gold produced in history would fit in a cube 68 feet on a side -- you could stack it all on the basketball court in Madison Square Garden.

The idea that the best use of gold is to have it sit around in vaults collecting dust is sheer stupidity. Gold should be used for things of real, practical value. It's extremely useful in electronics because it's a good conductor and doesn't corrode. It's used in spacecraft for the same reasons, plus it acts as a lubricant. It's used in dentistry and medicine, timepieces and jewelry. And of course, to plate every knick-knack in Donald Trump's apartment.

It's crazy that Ted Cruz thinks the best use of US government resources is to buy gold from China and Russia and then let it sit in Fort Knox doing absolutely nothing, meanwhile jacking up the price of every wedding ring, computer, cellphone and television set on the planet.

But the real reason the gold standard is coming up now? Because it sounds cool. The phrase "gold standard" has a cachet of excellence. It was a Democrat, Franklin Roosevelt, who got the United States off the gold standard -- and ended the Great Depression, but never mind that. Gold standard -- good, Democrats -- bad!

Ted Cruz is bringing up the gold standard not because it has any merit, but because he wants to associate himself with something that sounds cool. He thinks most conservatives are dumb and easily duped by promises of wealth, and a country on the gold standard would be really wealthy! That, and it would make his gold-hoarding speculator pals incredibly rich overnight.

The gold standard is emblematic of the conservative mindset of flash over substance, and the overriding emphasis of money over human well-being.

Just How Bad George W. Bush Was....

Check out this recent piece from Politico.

By May of 2001, says Cofer Black, then chief of the CIA’s counterterrorism center, “it was very evident that we were going to be struck, we were gonna be struck hard and lots of Americans were going to die.” “There were real plots being manifested,” Cofer’s former boss, George Tenet, told me in his first interview in eight years. “The world felt like it was on the edge of eruption. In this time period of June and July, the threat continues to rise. Terrorists were disappearing [as if in hiding, in preparation for an attack]. Camps were closing. Threat reportings on the rise.” 

And yet the Right gives him a pass and are blowing a bowel about Benghazi. What a bunch of assholes...

Another GOP debate? Yawn...

I think the Democrats got yet another thing right: less debates. The Republicans have too many...which kinda goes along with their too many candidates. I'm pretty fucking bored with them, to be honest, because they are essentially saying the same thing over and over again.

Obama sucks...the world is fire...Hillary is evil...we hate brown people (ex: Bush, Kasich) and don't take my fucking guns. The GOP debates have become like a cover band in a shitty bar that plays all the songs that the people who support them want to hear.

Where are their new ideas backed up by evidence that their policies will work?

Happy Veteran's Day!

Go find a veteran.

Touch them on the shoulder.

Say "Thank you for your service."

Why Christians Need to Talk About Guns

Here's a great piece on how inroads might be made into the evangelical community in terms of gun safety. I was very heartened to read about Rob Schenk's conversion and the action he has taken as a result. Here's a nice bit from filmmaker Abigail Disney.

What we’re increasingly seeing is terrible fear among evangelical conservatives. I think evangelicals have always kind of seen themselves as outside the mainstream and as having less political power. There’s always been a sense among them that [someone was] coming to get them. 

And then you pour ISIS into that, and then you pour this kind of Fox news always amping up the fear, and then you have the NRA, which is also playing on that fear pretty unscrupulously. So you have people who are convinced that on any given night, someone’s going to break in and shoot them in their home, which is just statistically just as close to impossible as it gets. You’re much more likely to be hit by lightning. 

All too true. Stop being afraid.

More importantly, stop listening to the Gun Cult.

Carry A Big Stick

Good Words

From a gun owner on Quora...

A lot of noise. Any time there is a question like this there is a lot of noise. The truth though? We just don't know. Here are some other truths though that we should take into account. The odds of you using your gun to defend yourself or your family from a violent crime is many times smaller than the odds of your gun being used by a family member or intruder to shoot you. The odds of you using your gun to defend yourself are many times smaller than the odds of your gun being involved in an accidental discharge. The odds of you successfully defending yourself from an intruder are many times smaller than the odds of you blowing your own brains out in a suicide by gun.
 
Here is a Harvard study refuting much of the 'self defense' noise you hear all the time.
 
Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use
 
Not that is it not a phony study like the John Lott Gun and Gun Crime paper which was not peer reviewed NOR was it a study but merely a self serving polemic by an avid gun aficionado.
 
You may next hear 'noise' about the UK or Australia. And ho their violent crime rate actually went up after gun control. It may interest you to know that the UK defines violent crime much more broadly than we do in the United States as they include simple assault and sexual assault (that does not have to be rape). Our FBI considers only four crimes in it's violent crimes calculations. Therefore we know right off the bat we are not comparing apples to apples.
 
The next noise you hear will be constitutional trumpet blowing ad some talk about a 'doomsday clause'. Will the first gun owner who defended my liberty from our own tyrannical government please raise your hand? No sorry David Koresh much as the government botched that raid, you were not defending anything but your own twisted beliefs at Waco. The founding fathers wanted Americans to be able to muster and form a well regulated militia, they wanted them to bring their own muskets and flintlock pistols, hell back in the day private parties owned cannon and frigates that could be issued letters of marque. We were a young country, relatively defenseless, it made total sense. Even then the founding fathers did not say, 'In order to prevent the Feds form getting too uppity citizens should own and carry around guns'. It is my belief , and I am no constitutional scholar, that future SCOTUS rulings will give state and federal governments more authority to restrict and control gun purchase and gun bearing and that this is entirely constitutional and would be a good thing.
 
Finally there will be noise about what a leftist fascist I am (not a possibility by definition but ok), and how if the Jews had some guns old Adolph couldn't have done what he did and maybe even how the U.N wants to get rid of guns and people in Europe are essentially slaves or victims.
 
To the above I have a few responses. I own two guns. I will probably but a couple more. I would gladly surrender them (for money of course) if everyone else had to and the government was collecting them. They are for me fun to shoot at the range and a relatively inexpensive ultimate insurance policy. Not for home defense on a regular basis, not for stopping tyranny (not sure my 10-22 Ruger will penetrate the Kevlar and ceramic plates on the FEMA storm troopers), not they are my insurance policy against a complete breakdown of social order-a descent in anarchy, the failure of the electric grid, a plague, the Zompacolypse, that sort of thing.
 
For those who feel bad for the Europeans, drag your butt over there and eat that delicious food, look at the smiles on their faces, soak up the Tuscan sun, dip your toes on the Amalfi Coast-then tell me about those poor stupid European slaves who compared to us really have no guns at all.
 
My last point is to bemoan the Jewish argument. If only the Jews had guns they could have....they could have what? The Polish Army had guns and training, so did the French, and guess what-the Wehrmacht rolled through them like a hot knife through butter. Guns weren't gonna stop Hitler from is insane designs on the world, not in the hands of scattered Jews or Romanovs or Slavs.
 
It's all just noise. It's ok to live having guns to feel like it's your right but please let's not pretend that we are defending the constitution-that's the militaries job-or that we are defending our family-from what? You think there are armed men out there just waiting to attack you? That is our police forces and courts job. They do a better job every year too as evidenced by declining rates of violence.

Very well said!!

Three Tour Iraq Vet Murdered By Gun Cult

Andrew Meyers served three tours of duty in Iraq and survived. But he couldn't survive a bicycle ride in Colorado Springs. He was one of the victims of Noah Haphram's shooting spree last Saturday. The shooting spree would likely have been stopped had Colorado Springs not allowed open carry.

Worse than any Islamic extremist, the Gun Cult gets blood like this on its hands every single day. It's time we stopped them as we would any other threat to national security and I can't think of any entity more equipped than the federal government:)

Good Words

From George Will...

Donald Trump is just one symptom of today’s cultural pathology of self-validating vehemence with blustery certitudes substituting for evidence. Another is the fact that the book atop the New York Times nonfiction bestseller list is a tissue of unsubstantiated assertions. Because of its vast readership, “Killing Reagan: The Violent Assault That Changed a Presidency” by Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and his collaborator Martin Dugard will distort public understanding of Ronald Reagan’s presidency more than hostile but conscientious scholars could.

My bold emphasis above perfectly epitomizes today's conservative...especially the right wing blogger and the right wing blog commenter. Blustery certitudes, indeed:)

And this is the guy who's beating Trump...

Ben Carson thinks that the Egyptian pyramids were built not as tombs for pharaohs, but to store grain. In a college commencement speech he said:

"My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain. Now all the archaeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs' graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it.

It's flatly ridiculous: the pyramids would be useless for storing grain, because they are almost completely solid stone.  We know this because Egyptologists have been excavating these tombs for centuries and have found only tiny chambers and corridors inside them, as shown in this diagram:

Granaries are hollow shells, empty on the inside so that you can store large quantities of grain. What idiot would build a 450-foot-tall, six-million-ton pyramid that would hold less grain than would fill one barge going down the Mississippi?

Pyramids are massive structures filled with stone because the pharaohs wanted them to be huge and impressive, and the pyramid is the only structure primitive Egyptian technology could build that large.

And the times don't line up. The Great Pyramid was built about 2560 BC, and evangelicals' own biblical timelines put Joseph around 1916 BC, centuries later.

Then Carson spat out this gem:

And when you look at the way that the pyramids were made, with many chambers that are hermetically sealed, they’d have to be that way for various reasons. And various of scientists [sic] have said, ‘Well, you know there were alien beings that came down and they have special knowledge and that’s how, you know, it doesn’t require an alien being when God is with you.’

"Various of scientists" think aliens built the pyramids? No. No real scientists think that. Only kooks like Erich von Däniken think aliens built the pyramids.

You don't need aliens when you have human ingenuity. Scientists know that ordinary people built the pyramids, using any number of techniques that we know they had access to. We found the pyramid builders' homes, tools, and graves. Scientists have tested these methods and found that humans could have designed and built the pyramids without any special magical knowledge or help from aliens or gods. It doesn't take a genius to build a pyramid: you basically just stack a bunch of rocks.

The same is true for the giant stone moai on Easter Island and Stonehenge in England: when people put their minds to it, they can usually figure out how to do something, especially when it's relatively straightforward, like moving big rocks around. Building colossal yet simple memorial structures is, as they say, not brain surgery.

The pyramids were hermetically sealed because tombs are sealed to preserve the corpses inside. And to keep out grave robbers (which they failed to do in almost all cases in Egypt). It's true, some small amount of grain was probably stored in some of the pyramids: all manner of food and other necessities of pharaonic life (food, gold, dolls, chairs, boats, slaves) were placed in the pyramids and other tombs, such as those in the Valley of Kings where Tutankhamun's tomb was located.

Carson continues to this day to defend this nonsense:

"Some people believe in the Bible, like I do," Carson told reporters. "And don't find that to be silly at all and believe that God created the earth and don't find that to be silly at all. The secular progressives try to ridicule it anytime it comes up and they're welcome to do that." 

What does this pyramid gimmick have to do with the creation of the earth? The bible doesn't say that the pyramids were granaries, it just says that Joseph stored grain. The pyramid idea is Carson's pet theory. And it's a stupid and patently false one.

But when someone calls him on it, he starts whining that he's the victim of secular progressives. Why does he change the subject to god creating the earth when the question is about his stupid pyramid granary idea?

Something is seriously wrong with Ben Carson's brain. When you read about all the various ways he's said he tried to stab another kid, his dealings with the snake-oil sales salesmen who run Mannatech, his love for kooky conspiracy theorist Cleon Skousen, and the virulently anti-mainstream Christian teachings of his Seventh Day Adventist church, and now this pyramid nonsense, you really have to wonder about his grip on reality.

Another Gotcha Question!!!

The Libertarian Fantasy

Here's a pretty scary piece from the New York Times regarding arbitration and it really shows what happens if more elements of our society are privatized. As Adam Smith noted, if left to their own devices, owners will collude.

And workers will be fucked.

Exactly Why He Won Twice

The Republican Base is Dying Even Faster than We Thought

A study released yesterday finds that death rates for low-income white middle-aged Americans are rising significantly:

That finding was reported Monday by two Princeton economists, Angus Deaton, who last month won the 2015 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science, and Anne Case. Analyzing health and mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and from other sources, they concluded that rising annual death rates among this group are being driven not by the big killers like heart disease and diabetes but by an epidemic of suicides and afflictions stemming from substance abuse: alcoholic liver disease and overdoses of heroin and prescription opioids.

In other words, the Republican base is dying even faster than we thought.

My sister's ex-husband is one of these statistics. He was a hard-drinking, gun-loving conservative who ran industrial ovens, but struggled with learning how to program the newest equipment; he barely passed high school. He lost his job after the financial meltdown, started drinking heavily, and my sister finally divorced him when he got violent. He recently died at age 50 from organ failure after years of alcohol abuse. It was very sad, because he was starting to turn it around.

And this same thing is happening across the country:

Dr. Case, investigating indicators of poor health, discovered that middle-aged people, unlike the young and unlike the elderly, were reporting more pain in recent years than in the past. A third in this group reported they had chronic joint pain over the years 2011 to 2013, and one in seven said they had sciatica. Those with the least education reported the most pain and the worst general health.

In other words, these people hurt and they self-medicate with alcohol. The article doesn't say it, but a lot of this pain is due to obesity: when you're poor you eat junk food and gain weight. When you're overweight, your joints all hurt and you develop conditions like sciatica, which reduces mobility, exacerbates weight gain and causes more pain. You take narcotics and drink to numb that pain.

That cycle will kill you in a few short years.

Since the turn of the millennium, income inequality has crushed middle- to low-income whites. The financial collapse the Big Banks caused hit middle-aged Americans particularly hard: because of their age, they were the first to get fired and the last to get hired.

The total destruction of private-sector labor unions has made it impossible for these people to negotiate fair wages and exert any control over their fates. Gigantic companies like McDonalds, Walmart and Dollar General have destroyed most of the small businesses that used to dot the countryside, making everyone with a minimal education a minimum-wage drone.

Now these poor uneducated whites are mad because they're in the same boat that blacks and Hispanics have been in for centuries.

Are these the people backing Donald Trump and Ben Carson? People whose personal circumstances are miserable, who blame society for their inability to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

Even though things seem bad to folks like this, the United States is still the richest country in the world. The problem isn't that the government is spending too much money on welfare: it's that giant companies shipped jobs overseas and keep all the profits for CEOs and shareholders while paying the people still employed in the states next to nothing.

For the last 15 years all the new money in the economy has gone into the pockets of a very few guys like the Walmart heirs, the oil baron Koch brothers, bank CEO Jamie Dimon, casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, drug extortionist Martin Shkreli, and -- yes -- presidential candidate Donald Trump.

The business decisions of these billionaires are why uneducated white guys can't make a decent living anymore. It's not blacks on welfare, or 11 million Hispanic immigrants picking vegetables and cleaning hotel rooms.

The entirety of all the Republican candidates' economic plan is more tax breaks. That's all they have, because they're either billionaires like Trump or selling out to billionaires like Rubio. But tax breaks will all go to the billionaires. Because if you're not making any money, a tax break is useless.

The intrinsic problem of our economy is that people who run companies pay their employees too little and themselves too much. And the Republican presidential candidates intent on bringing about the new Gilded Age like it this way.

This is exactly the same problem this country had in the 1890s. It took a while, but it was fixed by organizing labor unions, raising taxes on the wealthy and reducing the ability of banks to speculate.

It's no accident that middle-aged, middle-class whites have suffered as labor unions have been destroyed, taxes on the wealthy have been slashed and banks have been deregulated.

What Open Carry Does

Regarding the recent Colorado Springs shooting rampage...

Bettis said she recognized the gunman as her neighbor — whom she didn't know by name — and that before the initial slaying she saw him roaming outside with a rifle. She called 911 to report the man, but a dispatcher explained that Colorado has an open carry law that allows public handling of firearms.

Again...the Gun Cult is a more clear and present danger to our nation's safety than ISIL or any other terrorist organization. They must be stopped. Yesterday.

For a group that caterwauls all the time about Nazis and gun free zones being dangerous, they sure seem to be doing a great job of actually creating and supporting that type of totalitarianism.

Why He Quit The NRA (Good Words)

Reprinted in its entirety because it's just that fucking good.

I was a member of the National Rifle Association for more than 50 years. In 2012, I decided not to renew my membership.

My NRA was all about marksmanship, safety and responsibly. But the NRA today is off the rails. It’s being irresponsible, and it has been for years. NRA leaders should be sponsoring responsible gun laws instead of opposing them, in my opinion.

In 2006 my daughter was one of the victims in thes hooting at the Jewish Federation in Seattle, where a shooter killed one and inured five. My daughter survived, barely. After she recovered, she wanted to put the tragedy behind her, but she found that it was too life-changing. She started telling her story, and she began advocating for more effective gun-control laws in Washington.

I’ve always enjoyed shooting sports. As a Boy Scout and an Explorer Scout, I joined the NRA in high school. I then spent 20 years in the Navy, where I qualified as an expert in both rifles and pistols. I still own guns: four modern firearms and two old-fashioned pistols that are more than 100 years old.

But I strongly believe that being a responsible gun owner means supporting sensible laws to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people. This belief was cemented by the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., in 2012. The shooting in Oregon last week was another tragic reminder.

I feel that four things can help prevent such tragedies in the future. Requiring background checks on the state and federal level is the sensible first step. In addition, there should be penalties for officials of city, state and county governments who fail to enter people’s names in the database when they’re judged to be mentally ill, or a danger to themselves or others, or have convictions that would make them no longer eligible to own firearms.

Another safety precaution would be to make sure that when a protection order is issued by a judge, that person’s guns are confiscated until the order is lifted. Finally, no one needs high-capacity magazines, firearms capable of holding more than 10 rounds, for target shooting, hunting for personal protection. Not only should they not be sold, but their possession should also be illegal.

Many NRA members would agree that we need more common-sense gun laws: A 2013 survey found that about 75% of members support stronger restrictions on guns. The NRA leaders should listen to the members and do more to make sure that gun ownership goes hand-in-hand with responsibility and safety.

Gun-rights advocates often make the argument: “Guns don’t kill people; people do.” But the reality is: People with guns kill people. And there’s a lot more we can do to stop them.

Fake Christians

Neighbors upset over church’s homeless family program

Not surprisingly, this happened in the South where the alleged "real Christians" are located.

“If your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you. Take no interest from him or profit, but fear your God, that your brother may live beside you. -- Leviticus 25:35-36

Republicans Take Ball, Go Home

In a not very surprising move, the GOP has suspended its relationship with NBC due to the poor questioning at last Wednesday night's debate. In short, they are taking their ball and going home.

Although, home ain't what it used to be. Similar complaints were aired about Megyn Kelly and Fox News after the first debate. CNN also received a a laundry list of beefs. Essentially, if it's not Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin, Republicans don't have the balls to face anyone who is even remotely contrary to them.

Once again, we see The Adolescent in full play. Whining about fairness...blaming others (the media, liberals) for their problems...tantrums...shutting out reality. They don't want any sort of pesky facts like...oh, the fact that the USA ranks #1 in the world in terms of economic competitiveness...getting out there.

Perhaps they should have a debate exclusively run by conservative media. I think the United States should get unfettered access to life inside the bubble.

I don't have much else to say about the debate. No one really "won" or "lost" in my opinion. All I heard was the same wacky, ideological nonsense combined with fevered predictions of doom and gloom. The media is saying Rubio, Cruz and Christie won and Bush lost. Who really cares?

The Flea on the Tail Wagging the Dog

When the "Freedom Caucus" ousted John Boehner they claimed to represent "the will of the American people."

So, exactly how representative of America are the 38 Republicans who make up the group that made John Boehner go home crying?

That's something we can figure out with a ballpark estimate: how many people actually voted for these 38 guys (and they're all guys but one) as a percentage of the population of the United States?

The average size of a congressional district is 710,767. The average turnout nationwide in 2014 was 36.6%. The population of the United States is about 322 million.

The final number we need to know is the average margin of victory. Of the Republican seats, most (192) were won by 20% or more, so we'll assume on average that 60% of the votes were cast for the "Freedom Caucus" winner.

If we multiply all this out, we get

38 "Freedom Caucus" members ˟ 710,767 people per congressional district ˟ 36.6% voter turnout ˟ 60% victory margin = 5.9 million people who voted for a Freedom Caucus member

How representative is that of the population of the United States?

5.9 million "Freedom Caucus" voters / 322 million Americans = 1.8%

The "Freedom Caucus" represents the will of less than 2% of the population of the United States. Yet they somehow think that they should be able to control every policy detail for the rest of the country and dictate who the speaker of the House should be.

The "Freedom Caucus" and the Tea Party represent a tiny percentage of the American population. Because they stay inside the bubble 24/7, associating only with themselves, and only watching Fox News and listening to Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, they have fooled themselves into thinking they are in the majority.

But in their hearts they know the truth: the reason they're so hysterical is that they are drastically outnumbered, and with each passing year more and more of them are dying off.

The Republican Party barely escaped total implosion with the Boehner resignation. The old saw about the tail wagging the dog doesn't even apply: the "Freedom Caucus" is the flea on the tail of the dog.

The House and Senate just passed a budget bill that will fund the government for the next two years, freeing us from the tyranny of the "Free Dumb Caucus" threatening to trash the economy every couple of weeks.

The "Free Dumb Caucus" wailed bitterly about the unfairness of "the process." But that process is representative democracy. In a democracy majority rules. And the majority of the House and Senate voted for the measure. (If they want to talk about patently undemocratic unfairness in Congress, they should start with the Hastert Rule.)

Now that the "Free Dumb Caucus" is finding themselves in the same situation that Hispanics and African Americans have been in for centuries, you'd think they'd have a little more sympathy for the historical plight of minorities.

The Gun Free Zone Lie (Again)

The Gun Cult has apparently gotten to Donald Trump. In Wednesday night's debate (more to follow this weekend), Trump had the following to say.

I feel that the gun-free zones and, you know, when you say that, that's target practice for the sickos and for the mentally ill. That's target [practice]. They look around for gun-free zones.

We've heard this giant pile of shit before. Thankfully, the Washington Post today put up a piece how there is zero evidence for this. They link all current studies which show that this claim is FALSE. 

We all have to realize that the Gun Cult is largely made up of old, fat white men with tits who were picked on in high school. Having a gun (or 8 guns, as we have recently learned) makes them feel empowered over all past and future bullies. They likely spend hours fantasizing about being Jack Bauer or ___________________ (insert Michael Bay action hero here) and taking down spree shooters should they every come across one.

Yet both the recent shooting at Umpqua Community College and at the Gabby Giffords shooting had good guys with guns who didn't do anything. So WTF are they talking about?

Tell Me Again About the NRA

The NRA Is Making Sure Scientists Can't Tell You the Truth About Guns

But since the mid-1990s, the federal government has done exceptionally little to investigate the threat posed by firearms, thanks largely to successful efforts by the National Rifle Association to intimidate, threaten and harass the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies.

Indeed.

I Promissssssss

Good Words

This, Too, Shall Pass...

Donald Trump, as is his wont, has stirred up another hornet's nest by ridiculing Ben Carson's Seventh-Day Adventist religion and refusing to apologize. It started at a rally in Florida when Trump said:

I'm Presbyterian. Boy, that's down the middle of the road, folks, in all fairness. I mean, Seventh-day Adventist, I don't know about. I just don't know about.

When asked about this comment on This Week, Trump said:

I would certainly give an apology if I said something bad about it. But I didn't. All I said was I don't know about it.

Yeah, right. It's the old Fox News trick of condemning something by asking leading questions about it.

But this was after Carson questioned Trump's religiousness, saying,

By humility and the fear of the Lord are riches and honor and life and that's a very big part of who I am. I don't get that impression with [Trump]. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't get that.

And this is also after Carson made lots of political hay among conservative voters by claiming that Muslims cannot be president because Islam is incompatible with the Constitution.

Now, I'm sure Carson is right about Trump: Trump doesn't give a crap about religion; he never has and never will, because it doesn't make him any richer, and money is the only thing Trump cares about.

But Trump is also right about Seventh-Day Adventism: it's a kooky apocalyptic annihilationistic religion. It shares many features with conservative Islam: they insist on an absolutist and "literal" (i.e., their own) interpretation of the Bible. They have a self-proclaimed prophet (more than one, actually) who claimed intimate knowledge of God's holy plan. Their holy day of rest is not on Sunday, in opposition to most of Christianity. They anticipate the world will end soon in a conflagration between the true believers (them) and mainstream Christianity, which they believe is in league with Satan. And this global conflagration will be caused by Christians trying to force the Sabbath to be on Sundays, persecuting Adventists who celebrate the Sabbath on Saturday.

This is Adventist's major concern, and it's totally ridiculous: with each passing year we are getting further and further from forcing the Sabbath to be observed on Sundays, with almost every state eliminating mandatory Sunday closing laws and allowing the sale of everything from automobile to alcohol sales.

But more importantly, why would the creator of the universe care how humans set up their calendar? Which day is the seventh day of rest comes down to whether you define the first day of the week as Sunday or Monday. And that depends on the date when you start the cycle of days of the week.

Adam never wrote a damned thing down: no one did for thousands of years. Moses didn't get the tablets from God telling him to to keep the Sabbath holy until some time between 1600 and 1200 BC. Given that writing didn't exist when the world was created, and arithmetic and calendars wouldn't be created for three or four millennia after the ostensible day of creation, we have absolutely no way of knowing what day should be the first day of the week. Thus, the exact day on which the Sabbath is celebrated is totally arbitrary and essentially random.

Christians have switched calendars four times since the time of Christ: from the Hebrew, to the Roman Julian calendar, to the Christian Julian calendar, to the Gregorian calendar. So how can know really know anything about what the right day is to celebrate the Sabbath?

William Miller, the founder of Carson's religion, predicted the Second Coming would occur on various dates in 1843 and 1844, recalculating the End Times several times. Adventists called it "The Great Disappointment" when Christ failed to appear. Yeah, it's so disappointing that the world didn't end and millions of Christians who weren't Adventists didn't die because they honor Sunday as the Sabbath.

Most Adventists also revere Ellen White as a prophet, even though the Bible is supposed to be God's last word and the Bible warns against false prophets.

Carson himself believes literally that the world was created in six days just a few thousand years ago, and that evolution is the work of Satan.

Like Trump, the average Republican voter knows nothing about Adventism. If they did, they would lump Carson and his religion in with the Jehovah's Witnesses, Scientologists, Muslims and Wiccans.

The Republican race is beginning to look a lot like the last Republican primary, when they cycled through nuts like Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, and Cain before finally deciding on boring Mitt Romney. This time they started out the the boring guys like Bush and Christie, then flirted with Trump because of his big mouth. They're getting tired of the bombast, and already they're toying with Carson because they find his somnolent droning a soothing change of pace.

Carson, too, shall pass, probably when Ted Cruz goes bananas because he's bored and running out of cash.

Fucking. Brilliant.

Start Shittin' Yo Self

Backed by moms and money, gun-safety group expands its clout

Everytown for Gun Safety and its subsidiary, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, have helped push six states since 2013 to adopt more background checks on gun sales — what they consider the single most important measure to prevent shootings. They have also helped thwart legislation in several states that would make it easier to obtain firearms and carry them in more places such as schools.

The biggest weapon the Gun Cult has is fear. They use it every effectively and illogical people fall for it every time. Yet the Gun Cult also has a very big Achilles heel-their own hubris. They think they are invincible and this ever growing group of sensible people proved that they are not.

If I were the Gun Cult, I'd be shitting my self right about now. Pissing off a large group of women who are about to put the first woman in the White House is never a good idea.

The Fallacy of the Hot Hand Fallacy

In sports there's this thing called the "hot hand." This is where a player gets on a roll and feels he can do no wrong. The Mets' Daniel Murphy is the latest person to be pegged as having a hot hand, hitting a bunch of home runs recently, after having a recent slump and being rather average for most of his career.

Statisticians claim there's no such thing as as a "hot hand," calling it a fallacious belief:

The "hot-hand fallacy" (also known as the "hot hand phenomenon" or "hot hand") is the fallacious belief that a person who has experienced success with a random event has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts. The concept has been applied to gambling and sports, such as basketball.

With random events, such as tossing coins and rolling dice, each toss or roll is independent of all others. If you roll two six-sided die the chance of a rolling a 7 is 16.7% every time, even if you just rolled a 7 the time before. If you roll 10 7s in row, the chance of rolling a 7 is still only 16.7% the 11th time.

In gambling statistical fallacies take two forms: first is the idea that if you're losing, you're eventually "due" a success. Second is the idea that if you're on a roll, your odds of success are increased. Both are wrong in games of chance like craps and roulette, where each event is random and independent of other events.

Some studies have indicated that success in sports like baseball and basketball has the same characteristic of randomness. This has lead statisticians to believe that one play has no bearing on the probability of success on the next play. That is, if a batter has a record of hitting home runs 16.7% of the time and hits a home run in the first inning, he still only has a 16.7% chance of hitting a home in third inning.

But plays in sports are not random and independent events. They are dependent on the individuals and conditions involved. During a single game, it's the same day, the same stadium, the same batter, the same pitcher, the same defensive lineup, the same weather conditions. Some days batters won't get a good night's sleep. Sometimes the pitcher had and argument with his wife and his mind's not really on the game. On a particular day, a player can play better than he ever has in his life, and his chances of success are better than his career average that whole day.

Thus, a batter hitting a ball is not a totally random independent event, like rolling dice. Many of the conditions are under the batter's or the pitcher's control.

For example, the pitcher can guarantee the batter won't get a home run by walking him intentionally. (This comes at a cost, of course.)

Similarly, if you take a professional baseball player and put him on the plate facing a 9-year-old little league pitcher, he would probably hit a home run every time the kid put the ball over the plate.

Thus, hitting a baseball is not totally random.

The "randomness" in sports comes from two sources: external and internal. External sources of randomness arise from things like air pressure, wind and lighting that may affect the flight of the ball or the player's perception of it. Internal sources of randomness arise from human beings' inability to repeat tasks identically: a pitcher cannot throw a ball at exactly the same speed along the same trajectory every time.

Finally, the player's mental state has a huge impact on performance. People who are wracked with doubts don't usually perform very well. Success breeds success by inspiring confidence and eliminating hesitation and second guessing oneself.

Having said all that, however, any hot hand effects are going to be fairly small, because human beings cannot repeatedly execute physical actions with extreme precision.

The epitome of randomness is flipping a coin. But this is random only because humans cannot consistently apply all the same forces to a coin each time it is flipped, or even flip it from the same height and location.

But if we built a device that flipped a coin in a vacuum, applying exactly the same forces each time with extremely high precision, we could increase the probability of getting the same result by reducing the variation in each iteration. We could potentially build a machine that could make a coin come up heads 9 out of 10 times, or 99 out of 100 times. (100% certainty is unlikely due to quantum effects.)

In gambling the hot hand fallacy still applies to games of chance like roulette and craps (but not necessarily to poker or blackjack, where skill matters).

But in sports where human is pitted against human and most of the factors are controlled by the actors, it is a fallacy to think that the outcome is completely random.

The Republican Brain Part Six: Political Personalities

Getting back to Chris Mooney's book, The Republican Brain, we now turn to "Political Personalities." Recall that Mooney has now firmly established that when people, especially conservatives, here something that causes cognitive dissonance, they feel like they are being physically attacked. So, they experience dis-confirmation bias and furiously hunt for "evidence" that proves that what is causing them physical discomfort simply can't be true. In short, they tell themselves a nice story.

There are many studies to back this up and they are detailed extensively in the first 50+ pages of the book. Now, however, Mooney details the study that blew it all open: The American Psychological Association's study from 2003 that found links between political ideology and personality traits. The psychologists sought patterns among 88 samples, involving 22,818 participants, taken from journal articles, books and conference papers. The material originating from 12 countries included speeches and interviews given by politicians, opinions and verdicts rendered by judges, as well as experimental, field and survey studies.

So what did they find?

Conservatives are dogmatic, intolerant of ambiguity and uncertainty, fear death, less open to new experiences, less "integrative complexity" in thinking and have more need for closure. Essentially, everything I have been saying on here for years...now backed up by peer reviewed science.

The reaction from conservatives was not surprising. The denounced and condemned the study as "left wing rhetoric." They deluged lead researcher, Stanford's John Jost, with emails that were "incredibly aggressive, obnoxious and threatening." Jost remarked, "Ironically, they epitomized all the things they were trying to deny."

Since their report was released over a decade ago, there have been a myriad of studies which have affirmed the report. So, this report, which was  based on 88 different peer reviewed studies, now has just about as many studies, according to Jost. His study has been cited over 800 times since its publication. The science is solid: conservatives have different brains than liberals. It's not merely a matter of philosophy or environment. The way their brains are wired lead them to be dogmatic, intolerant of ambiguity and uncertainty, fear death, less open to new experiences, less "integrative complexity" in thinking and have more need for closure.

In a great number of ways, this explains why we have so much trouble progressing in this country. We certainly have made great strides since Barack Obama took office but we could be so much farther if it weren't for this brain type holding us back. Perhaps we could start by helping conservatives deal with uncertainty and ambiguity in a better fashion. As Mooney notes, dealing with the grays of reality depends on how you fall in the "Big Five" traits of human personality.

He goes on to describe how open minded people (mostly liberals) tend to congregate together. Close minded people (mostly conservatives) do the same thing. So, what tends to happen is that patterns are reinforced that strengthen a person's resistance to objective reality. And the places where each group hangs out is also different with open minded people and close minded people with the latter going to the same, comfortable places all the time. Open minded people tend to try new places to go and are more open to new experiences. It's no wonder conservatives react like they are being physically attacked when they are confronted by new facts. They are likely also in some sort of new environment that makes their cognitive dissonance even worse.

In putting all of this stuff together, it's easy to see that conservatives are in a great need for cognitive closure whereas liberals have a need for cognition. We want more complex problems and don't necessarily see open ended and ongoing issues as the end of the fucking universe. As I tell my teenagers (children and students), that's life. Deal with it. Money offers the example of abortion as a great example of this dichotomy between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives see this issue as very black and white. It's a child life and it's murder. They don't take into the complexity of child birth from an evolutionary standpoint nor do they consider the rights of the mother. Liberals, however, see that there are many factors to consider and the ultimate conclusion, while most definitely not perfect, is that abortion should be safe and legal.

Near the end of the chapter Mooney states

Authoritarians are very intolerant of ambiguity, are very inclined toward group think and are distrustful of outsiders. They have a need for order.

This really sums up today's conservative. They look at our changing culture and are completely horrified. In five years, white people will not be in the majority. Gay marriage is legal in all fifty states. A black man has served as president for the last two terms and a woman is likely to win the next term.

Their entire world is falling apart.

Thank God.

I Agree With Donald Trump!!

I have been saying this since this site started.

And conservatives can't let go of the Benghazi Frisbee?

Even Conservatives Are Calling It A TKO

Benghazi bust

So a hearing billed as an epic, High Noon-style confrontation — granted, the hype came from the media, not Republican committee members themselves — instead turned out to be a somewhat interesting look at a few limited aspects of the Benghazi affair. In other words, no big deal. And that is very, very good news for Hillary Clinton.

Even the New Yorker's Andy Borowitz had this to say...

Clinton Thanks Benghazi Committee for Invaluable Service to Her Campaign

Hilarious!!

Sitting there for 11 hours looking calm, cool and collected (see also: presidential), the Hilz took everything they had to dish out. And the Republicans looked like the children I have always said they are:)

Testimony Analysis

The post testimony analysis is in and it sure makes the Republicans look like fools. Other than Cult news outlets, the rest of the media was mighty impressed that the Hilz stood up to the SS the way she did. If there was ever any doubt that conservatives in this country have authoritarian fantasies (even though they CONSTANTLY complain about authoritarian governments), it was erased yesterday after their Gestapo tactics were revealed in yesterday's 11 hour hearing.

Hillary Rodham Clinton turned an 11-hour congressional grilling into a campaign call to action on foreign policy, using a make-or-break appearance before the Republican-led Benghazi committee to display a commanding, presidential presence under a barrage of questions. For months, Clinton's campaign had circled Thursday's hearing on the calendar as a key hurdle for a candidate who has struggled to fend off a flood of criticism over her use of a private email system as secretary of state. 

Instead, amid questioning that often bordered on a courtroom-style interrogation, Clinton avoided any major gaffes, and sought to portray herself above the partisan fray as committee members bickered. At points, she dipped into her campaign arguments, declaring that the U.S. must promote American exceptionalism around the globe.

and


Clinton — who famously fumed last time she testified on Benghazi — didn’t lose her cool this time. But she didn’t look happy either, passing much of the marathon session with an impatient hand on puckered chin, as Republicans droned on like a traffic court judge with a pending dinner reservation. Anti-Clinton conservatives outside the room fumed at how upstanding Clinton looked in comparison to her inquisitors. “Why doesn't Pompeo just go over and swear her in for president now—if he goes on like this, he'll practically get her elected,” tweeted John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine.

I think they just did get her elected, especially given this simple fact.

Enter: The Gestapo!!

If there were any doubts about how low the Republicans are these days, the ELEVEN HOURS they spent today grilling Hillary Clinton pretty much illustrated how sadistic they are. They treated her like some sort of evil traitor to our country and why?

Because Obama got bin Laden and made them look bad. What a bunch of fucking assholes!!

Seriously, why didn't they just put on the rack and shine a spotlight on her face while water boarding her.

Sign Me Up!

Government To Confiscate One Person’s Guns Just To Make Rest Of Them Squirm

In a massive, highly coordinated raid, 50 armed agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives will reportedly storm the home of a randomly selected law-abiding gun owner in the dead of night and seize every weapon on the premises. According to sources, the surprise operation has been several months in the planning stages and is being conducted entirely for the sake of watching the individual gun owner—and subsequently, the nation’s gun-rights activists as a whole—completely freak out over it.

I say we expand this program to cover all gun bloggers and commenters on gun blog sites:)

What Part Of Infringed Did She Not Understand?

Four-Year-Old Fatally Shot in Head in Albuquerque Road Rage Incident: Police

Gallup: More Americans Favor Stricter Gun Laws

Tired of being held hostage by the American Taliban? Well, you're not the only one.  More Americans favor stricter gun laws and it's not just them. More gun owners want stricter laws as well. Perhaps some are beginning to see the writing on the wall...

The greatest threat to our national security right now is the fucking Gun Cult. As we have done with international extremists, our own local nutjobs need to be taken out. In many ways, this is a form of sedition and they need to be held accountable for their actions.

Responsible Gun Owners?

*10/11, SC: grandmother shot by 2-year-old grandson
*10/10, NV: 8-year-old boy fatally shot self
*10/10, MD: 75-year-old man fatally shot by 14-year-old boy 
*10/07, CA: 13-year-old girl shot self in hand
*10/02, OH: 12-year-old boy fatally shot 11-year-old brother
*9/26, IN: 18-year-old boy fatally shot by 15-year-old boy
*9/24, OR: 2-year-old boy shot self in leg
*9/24, MI: 6-year-old boy shot self in hand
*9/22, NY 24-year-old mother shot by 3-year-old son
*9/20, UT: 13-year-old girl shot by 11-year-old sister
*9/18, IN: 3-year-old girl shot by 13-year-old boy
*9/14, OK: 16-year-old boy shot self in leg
*9/11, NY: 15-year-old girl fatally shot by 15-year-old boy
*9/08, IL: 15-year-old boy shot self in head


And that's just in the last month...

Get Them Laid?

Last week, both Bill Maher and The Christian Science Monitor laid the blame for spree shooters at the foot of a heretofore unmentioned culprit: the male libido. Consider that all spree shooters are young men and nearly all of them have complained about a lack of sex in their lives. Both Maher and the Monitor posit that if these guys got laid more often...or at all...there wouldn't be as many spree shooters.

Of course, that translate into our society becoming massively less uptight about sex, including the legalization of prostitution. Honestly, our culture needs to unclench about sex and many other problems would go away as well.

Here's the Maher clip. It's the last new rule.

 

Hilz and NH

Check out Hillary's poll numbers in New Hampshire. She was trailing Bernie pretty badly until the debate and now it looks like she's basically even with him.

Will This Prophecy Come True?

Lights Out!

The Other Gun Lobby

If I were the Gun Lobby, I'd start shitting myself now.

You may laugh and not see it right away but you've already lost. We're coming for you, assholes.