Saturday, May 17, 2014

The NRA's attempt at a hip new image.

They have little Billy with his sensitive attempt to be intelligent while showing what an ignorant asshole he really is.  And if he isn't a total fuckwit, he's seen the numbers I've posted which show he is full of shit.

But, Gawker really hit the nail on the head with:

The NRA's Hot New Web Show For Youngs Is Hilariously Bad Poser Garbage

They sum it up really well with:
Also, how trustworthy is this Colion Noir? Put another way: Who in good conscience can wear a Yankees hat... and a Phillies hat? A fucking poser, that's who.
The NRA's Hot New Web Show For Youngs Is Hilariously Bad Poser Garbage
Will Colion Noir show us how in touch he is with real urban, black culture by actually getting shot, or is that too much to ask for?

Better to keep your mouth shut...

But, this person opened it and confirmed himself to be a total fuckwit on the Esquire forum.  He thought he would be clever and delete the second comment, but it had already been screen capped:

No, asswipe, we think about your type all the time.  We do count on people like you since you are the type of asshole we think shouldn't have a gun because you are irresponsible. You make our job easier by making statements like this.

And you are dumb enough to make a statement where admit you are irresponsible.

What would your friends say if you said stupid shit like this to them?  Or are your friends assholes like yourself?

I'm a nice guy and redacted your info, but you know who you are.  Live with your stupidity.

I know it must be tough being you.

Oh, Dear

Another loss for "gun rights" as "intermediate scrutiny" is applied and long standing prohibitions are considered constitutional from the latest Heller decision:
Nevertheless, based upon the record as it stands, we cannot be certain whether these weapons are commonly used or are useful specifically for self-defense or hunting and therefore whether the prohibitions of certain semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds meaningfully affect the right to keep and bear arms. We need not resolve that question, however, because even assuming they do impinge upon the right protected by the Second Amendment, we think intermediate scrutiny is the appropriate standard of review and the prohibitions survive that standard.

b. Intermediate scrutiny is appropriate

 As we did in evaluating the constitutionality of certain of the registration requirements, we determine the appropriate standard of review by assessing how severely the prohibitions burden the Second Amendment right. Unlike the law held unconstitutional in Heller, the laws at issue here do not prohibit the possession of "the quintessential self-defense weapon," to wit, [*45] the handgun. 554 U.S. at 629. Nor does the ban on certain semi-automatic rifles prevent a person from keeping a suitable and commonly used weapon for protection in the home or for hunting, whether a handgun or a non-automatic long gun. See Gary Kleck & Marc Gertz, Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 86 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 150, 185 (1995) (revolvers and semi-automatic pistols are together used almost 80% of the time in incidents of self-defense with a gun); Dep't of Treasury, Study on the Sporting Suitability of Modified Semiautomatic Assault Rifles 38 (1998) (semi-automatic assault rifles studied are "not generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes"). Although we cannot be confident the prohibitions impinge at all upon the core right protected by the Second Amendment, we are reasonably certain the prohibitions do not impose a substantial burden upon that right. As the District points out, the plaintiffs present hardly any evidence that semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds are well-suited to or preferred for the purpose of self-defense or sport.

I guess it helps to have Cato running the show rather than the NRA if you want to see unconstitutional changes made to the Constitution.

Noir - The New Show Starring Colion Noir

Guns dot com

After quoting several harsh critics, such as this one:
Mike Spies for Vocativ slammed ‘Noir’ as being “produced by aliens who spent an hour studying American pop culture,” claiming that the “NRA employs millenial-friendly tropes to attract younger members — and fails miserably.”
the authors over at Guns dot com asked this question: 
Well, here’s the question? Is ‘Noir’ really that bad of a show?
I say no.  He wasn't that bad.  In fact I thought he did a pretty good job at it.

To the Teabaggers

To the Obama Haters

Firing Squads in Utah???

Rep. Paul Ray, a Utah Republican legislator plans on introducing execution by firing squad after the botched Oklahoma attempt at lethal injection.

His reason is that it would be more humane, which shows some historical ignorance: in particular of the Holocaust.  The gas chambers were introduced as a more humane method of execution since the firing squad executions caused the soldiers to suffer pangs of conscience.

Of course, this method of execution didn't really have much of a deterrent effect as this resistance member demonstrates.

All in all, it sounds like a really bad idea and is getting a lot of play--mostly negative.

Although, I am sure there are enough blood thirsty people in the US willing to volunteer for this duty.

Friday, May 16, 2014

What if they gave a revolution and nobody came?

Yes, I'm talking about that 10-30 Million turn out for Operation American Spring, which probably had more people watching it than attending it. And only a few thousand watching it.

And probably most of the people watching it were "libtards" who wanted to laugh at the feebleminded doing what the feebleminded do.

Sorry, but political correctness will never win out over human nature and people love to make fun of feebs--especially if the feebs are making a show of themselves.

I think most of the comments were coming from the "libtard" contingent as well.

I didn't make any comments at the live feeds, but I do have to say that the 97% don't have too much to fear from the III% if this is any indication of their efficacy or intelligence.

In fact, we don't need for the guvment to take you out as you are doing a wonderful job of it yourselves.

Even the Washington Times had this admission from the people who generated this fuck up:
“We were getting over two inches of rain in hour in parts of Virginia this morning,” Mr. Milton said. “Now it’s a nice sunny day. But this is a very poor turnout. It ain’t no millions. And it ain’t looking like there’s going to be millions. Hundreds is more like it.”
Something about not being able to run a piss up in a brewery comes to mind as I watched the sideways footage at the Washington Monument.  On the site where I was making comments with other "libtards" as we watched some real "tards" who were trying to mainstream, another commenter pointed out:
Definition of go sideways
go sideways, verb, to become worse.
In fact, if anything, we are watching your movement self-destruct.

Which, if we are grateful for anything you do--it will be that your movement collapses on its own from your being fuckwits.

Thank you for being yourselves.

Anyway, I'm sure that "the Mainstream Media" will mention you: Rachel Maddow is always up for a laugh at your expense.

See also:

The One and Only Ex-Chief Mark Kessler

Further to Laci's post with the French parody.

Not sure if this is for real, but...

It's pretty good.

I've been waiting for that "Face in the Crowd" moment when one of these assholes blows their cover and actually DOES do something like this and tell you assholes how you have been taken for a ride.

Maybe it will happen before one of your kids kills himself with one of the guns you have lying about the home to keep them safe.

I found out a friend of mine created it--I told him it was brilliant.

Jon Stewart on the State of Gun Rights

Southern Beale's Take on the 93-Year-old Texas Woman Shot By the Police

Southern Beale

Right now everyone is focusing on whether the officer, who was subsequently fired, was right to shoot the woman. I think it’s debatable either way without seeing video. What I want to know is, if a 93-year-old woman isn’t able to operate a motor vehicle without endangering public safety, why did anyone think she was capable of handling a firearm? Based on how this story unfolded, clearly she was not.

Gun extremists and intimidation

From Chris Hayes "All In"

Mass Shooting in Georgia - Five Wounded - Teen Shooter Arrested

Local news reports

A teen is accused of shooting five people near an Atlanta high school on Tuesday.
Marcellus Brooks, 17, made his first appearance in court Wednesday. He is charged with five counts of aggravated assault for allegedly shooting five people at Therrell High School in southwest Atlanta on Tuesday. His public defender's request to the judge to put his client - who is in school and employed - on house arrest was refused, according to the station.
Witnesses described to WGCL seeing a large group of about 30 people near the high school when a man reported to be the suspect grabbed a gun from his waistband. One witness told the station that Brooks said he was going to "mess this (expletive) up" before he started shooting. Four students were among the five injured.
Atlanta police said they are investigating possible motives for the shooting. Sgt. Greg Lyon said they have received reports of some type of argument taking place among the group before shots were fired, according to the station.

Prom Photo Tennessee Style

via Southern Beale

7th Circuit Upholds Warrantless Entry, Seizure of Gun Rights Activist and Confiscation of Guns

Local news reports

Milwaukee police who forced their way into a gun rights advocate's home without a warrant, took her for an emergency mental evaluation and seized her gun were justified under the circumstances and protected from her civil rights claims, a federal appeals court has ruled.
Krysta Sutterfield, who twice made news because of her practice of openly carrying a handgun — at a Brookfield church and outside a Sherman Park coffee shop — drew police attention in 2011 after her psychiatrist reported a suicidal remark Sutterfield made during a difficult appointment.
Sutterfield, 45, claimed police violated her rights against unreasonable search and seizure and Second Amendment rights to keep a gun, but a district judge dismissed the case.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 75-page opinion analyzing existing law about when police may act without search warrants, upheld the decision but suggested there might be better ways to balance personal privacy rights in the context of emergency mental health evaluations.
According to the opinion:
Sutterfield's doctor called police after Sutterfield left an appointment by saying she might as well go home and "blow her brains out," after Sutterfield had gotten some bad news. Sutterfield was wearing an empty gun holster to the appointment, so her doctor assumed Sutterfield had a gun.
Sutterfield later disputed making the comment.
Police went to Sutterfield's home but didn't find her. Later, Sutterfield called her doctor and said she was not in need of assistance and to call off the police.
But officers returned to Sutterfield's residence that evening, some nine hours after her comment to her doctor. They found her at home. She told them she was fine, did not want their help and asked them to leave, and called 911 when they would not.
The officers forcibly entered, handcuffed Sutterfield and took her to the county's Mental Health Complex.
They also seized a handgun and several out-of-state concealed-carry licenses, found inside a locked CD case, and a BB gun that resembled a Glock firearm.
Sutterfield later sued.

How many Mass Shootings REALLY HAPPEN in the US?

Let's use the FBI definition=four killed [or wounded] not including the shooter.

That means that incidents like this are mass shootings, but they never make the news:

Tuscaloosa shooting at Copper Top bar leaves 17 wounded

 Seventeen people were transported to DCH Regional Medical Center and five were admitted for their injuries, DCH spokesman Brad Fisher said at 9:10 a.m. Two are in the ICU, with one in critical condition and one in serious condition. Three others are in regular care and are listed in fair condition. Twelve victims have been treated and released.

 How long will it take before people realise that firearms are a problem in the US?

BTW, here are the latest verified GV stats:

Anybody keeping track of the mass shootings?

Thursday, May 15, 2014


Remember him?  The cop from some shite-hole in MOFN Pennsylvania who thought he would start a revolution, but lost his job.

Well, Kessler's back with an overblown opinion of himself.  I won't get into it, but he needs to learn to take the fifth since he really does show he's a fuckwit every time he opens his mouth.
Kessler was suspended without pay from his $15.25-an-hour job for using borough weapons in the videos. Borough Council subsequently moved to terminate him on unrelated matters. Kessler had a five-year contract, which began in 2010.

This is in French, but it portrays the type of cop Kessler was:

This is a parody of Braquo (a Kick ass show).  It is on Hulu with subtitles--I suggest that you catch it.

The municipal police in France are low level cops who basically direct traffic and catch people who let their dogs shit on the street.

I'm not terribly worried about Mark Kessler with a gun.

He'll just shoot himself.

He should stick to picking up dogshit.

In the mean time, watch a French Cop show if you're man enough to take it!

Active, Inactive, Retired, suspended, and disbarred lawyers

Since it has become an issue with the Obamas, I have been asked about the differences between the categories of lawyer.

I would have to say that it is highly likely that the people making an issue of this are people who are unfamiliar with professional practise and licensing.  That is because professions such as medicine and law require that you are licensed to practise in a jurisdiction: otherwise, you can be liable for unauthorised practise of law (or medicine, etc.).

If one quits the active practise of a profession for whatever reason, they may want to switch to retired or inactive status, which is different from being suspended or disbarred: although I know that being inactive, suspended, or disbarred requires the person to petition for reinstatement before resuming practise.

On the other hand, being inactive is not a statement that the person is unfit for practise: merely that they no longer practise law for whatever reason.  This is the relevant section of Pennsylvania law regarding inactive status as a lawyer--204 Pa. Code § 93.146:
 (b)  Inactive Status. Enforcement Rule 219(j) provides that:
   (1)  An attorney who is not engaged in practice in Pennsylvania, has sold his or her practice pursuant to Rule 1.17 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct, or is not required by virtue of his or her practice elsewhere to maintain active licensure in the Commonwealth may request inactive status or continue that status once assumed. The attorney shall file either the annual form required by §  93.142(b) and request inactive status or file Form DB-28 (Notice of Voluntary Assumption of Inactive Status). The attorney shall be removed from the roll of those classified as active until and unless such inactive attorney makes a request under paragraph (3) of this section for an administrative return to active status and satisfies all conditions precedent to the grant of such request; or files a petition for reinstatement under §  89.273(b) (relating to procedure for reinstatement of an attorney who has been on inactive status for more than three years, or who is on inactive status and had not been on active status at any time within the prior three years) and is granted reinstatement pursuant to the provisions of §  89.273(b) of these rules.
   (2)  An inactive attorney under this subsection (b) shall continue to file the annual form required by §  93.142(b) and shall pay an annual fee of $70.00. Noncompliance with this provision will result in the inactive attorney incurring late payment penalites, incurring a collection fee for any check in payment that has been returned to the Board unpaid, and being placed on administrative suspension in accordance with the provisions of §  93.144.
   (3)  Administrative Change in Status from Inactive Status to Active Status: An attorney on inactive status may request resumption of active status by filing Form DB-29 (Application for Resumption of Active Status) with the Attorney Registration Office. Resumption of active status shall be granted unless the inactive attorney is subject to an outstanding order of suspension or disbarment, unless the inactive attorney has sold his or her practice pursuant to Rule 1.17 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct (see §  89.273(b)), unless the inactive status has been in effect for more than three years, or unless the inactive attorney had not been on active status at any time within the preceding three years (see §  89.273(b)), upon the payment of:
     (i)   the active fee for the registration year in which the application for resumption of active status is made or the difference between the active fee and the inactive fee that has been paid for that year; and
     (ii)   any collection fee or late payment penalty that may have been assessed pursuant to §  93.144 of these rules, prior to the inactive attorney’s request for resumption of active status.
     Where a check in payment of the fees and penalties has been returned to the Board unpaid, the Attorney Registration Office shall immediately return the attorney to inactive status, and the arrears shall not be deemed to have been paid until a collection fee, as established by the Board under §  93.142(b)(2), shall also have been paid.
In other words, one no longer practises in that jurisdiction and does not have to pay full licence fees or take continuing legal education (CLE).  That also applies to being retired (same section) although there is no fee associated with being retired. The annual fee for inactive status is less than the  annual fee assessed active attorneys, and inactive attorneys are exempt from paying the additional annual fees imposed upon active attorneys.

One can be reinstated to active status from inactive by petitioning the court and paying the fees for the period of being in inactive status.

Of course, one can not take new cases or actively practise law, yet remain on the active list, but one is obligated to pay the full licence fees and take CLE to remain active (if there is a CLE requirement) as well as any other obligations which come with being licenced.  Also, one cannot be listed on a firm's letterhead if one is inactive since they aren't supposed to be practising law.

Also, some jurisdictions make retirement final (as opposed to being inactive), which would mean that one would have to retake the bar if they wished to resume the practise of law.

Whether one remains active, inactive, or retired depends upon a lot of things, but ethical issues are not a part of that: the real question is more like will you be likely to practise your profession?  You would be better served by keeping your licence if the answer is yes.

On the other hand, some people do not need to practise law, but may wish to resume at some future time.

An Almost-Convincing Argument that Gun Availability is Not the Problem

In Utah, Bumbling Lawful Gun Owner Accidentally Shoots his Father - No Charges

Local news reports 

 A 21-year-old man accidentally shot his father in the leg Monday night while cleaning a .22-caliber rifle at a cabin in Ogden, police said. 

Earlier in the evening, the man and one of his friends went shooting and came home about dark. 

A couple of hours later, the man decided to clean the rifle, police said. He claims he took the magazine out and cleared the gun, but when he sat down, his finger accidentally pulled the trigger and a chambered round discharged, according to Weber County Sheriff's Sgt. Lane Findlay. The bullet struck the man's 49-year-old father, shattering his femur, Findlay said.

Texas Accidental Shooting - Alcohol Involved

Local news reports

Alcohol seems to have been a factor in the apparent accidental shooting that occurred in Harleton Sunday night, killing 25-year-old Ivan Dolley.
“Alcohol was involved, and the investigation is ongoing,” Jay Webb, administrative deputy with the sheriff’s office, confirmed Monday.
Webb said the entire case will most likely be referred to a grand jury.
“As it is right now, we got several witnesses at the location that were there (saying) they were shooting at beer cans,” said Webb. He said the alleged shooter, Mitchell Morgan, was questioned and released.
“He gave us a statement that coincides (with) what was told to us by witnesses,” said Webb.
“It is considered accidental; however, we are continuing to investigate,” he said.
The incident occurred at 1097 Ragon Road, in the northwest area of the county. Emergency dispatchers were alerted of the incident around 11:45 p.m. “The caller stated that a shot had been fired, and one person had been injured,” Webb noted.
Upon arrival to the scene, deputies and emergency personnel discovered Dolley with a gunshot wound to his upper abdomen. “Deputies found a witness doing CPR compressions on the victim, and he was then transported to Good Shepherd Hospital in Longview where he was pronounced deceased from the gunshot wound at approximately 12:40 a.m., May 11,” Webb advised.

He said the incident appears to have occurred when the loaded weapon was handed to the victim barrel first.

3rd Loaded Gun Confiscated at Detroit Metro Airport in a Week

Detroit Free Press
For the third time in a week, federal agents caught a person with a gun at a checkpoint at Detroit Metro Airport.
This weapon was loaded, too, just like the last one snagged by security.
The latest incident happened early Saturday morning when a Detroit woman was arrested after she was caught with a loaded .357 handgun as she was passing through the airport checkpoint, according to the Transportation Safety Administration. A TSA officer who was staffing the checkpoint X-ray machine spotted the handgun in the woman’s bag as it passed along the conveyor belt.
Wayne County Airport Police were contacted and responded to the checkpoint, where the woman was arrested on a weapons charge.
The gun was loaded with five rounds.
This incident came days after airport police arrested two other individuals who were found with guns at the checkpoint. One of the arrested is an airport employee who was caught with a gun on May 4, as she was headed to work at one of the airport shops. Four days later, a male passenger was arrested when TSA officers caught him with a gun in his bag as it passed along the conveyor belt.
No names have yet been provided.
TSA stresses that weapons—including firearms, firearm parts and ammunition—are not permitted in carry-on bags, but can be transported in checked bags if they are unloaded, properly packed and declared to the airline. Passengers who bring firearms to the checkpoint are subject to possible criminal charges from law enforcement and civil penalties from TSA.

Washington Man Dead in Dispute over Shot Dog

Local news reports

A 28-year-old Salkum man upset over the shooting of a neighborhood dog has died after he was shot twice during a physical altercation in the front yard of a neighbor's home in this small Lewis County community southeast of Centralia.

Deputies responded to the home, in the 200 block of Stowell Road in Salkum, Saturday night after receiving a report of a shooting, said Chief Deputy Stacy Brown of the Lewis County Sheriff's Office.

The 56-year-old man who lives at the home told deputies the 28-year-old, later identified as Travis Shive, came onto his front porch “ranting” and accusing him of shooting a neighborhood dog. 

The 56-year-old homeowner said he repeatedly told Shive to leave, but he refused and continued to yell at him. The homeowner told deputies he then armed himself with a .380 semi-automatic handgun, as he felt threatened, and went outside again to tell Shive to leave.

Shive then lunged at the homeowner and was shot. He was able to walk off the property before collapsing, Brown said.

Bystanders at the scene initiated CPR until medics arrived. Shive was taken to Providence Centralia Hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

Detectives continue to talk to the numerous witnesses who saw the incident, and the investigation is ongoing. Detectives are awaiting the results of the autopsy, which will be scheduled later this week, Brown said.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Tyrannical Government--the reality

This is Homs in Syria:
The headline which accompanied this picture reads:
Syrian army crushes key rebel stronghold in Homs

There is this description of the Syrian Army's attack:
“In every single second you can hear the sound of mortars and rockets and air strikes,” said an activist calling himself Abu Rami speaking from Khalidiya. “The regime is so close you hear the sound of them launching the missile, and then you hear them land.”
The Syrian rebels were armed, but seriously outgunned by a force which had an objective of crushing the rebellion:
Last week one rebel fighter said the outlook was so bleak that he and his colleagues went to battle in suicide belts, to detonate should they be captured.

“If we are captured we use it when we are crowded among the soldiers,” said Adnan, 27.

His voice tired and his tone hopeless, Mohammed, the activist who had just managed to flee, said: “Most of my friends have died fighting in Khalidiya these last years. Now I have no news about the ones that are left.”
A truly tyrannical regime has no qualms about wiping out any rebellion, no matter how much force it takes or what kind of force is needed.

Does Halabja mean anything to you?

If the US were truly a tyranny, you would have quietly disappeared in the night never to be heard from again.

Or,  as Matthew White says about the old gun control=genocide argument:
Frankly, this list is a pitifully weak argument against gun control, simply because most of the victims listed here did fight back. In fact, if there's a real lesson to be learned from this roster of oppressions, it's that sometimes a heavily armed and determined opposition is just swept up and crushed-- guns or no guns.

You know who you are...

Under a tyrannical government, you would have quietly disappeared long ago...

Instead, you want to overthrow a constitutionally elected government.

If you had brains, you would be dangerous.

Go figure!

The usual criticism of the "anti-gun" crowd is that we wouldn't protect our families (or is that couldn't without a gun?).

Well, what do you say about this comment from the Open Carry Texas Facebook page?:
Admit it, you lot are useless even with guns.

New Jersey Senate Passes Magazine Ban; Bill Limits Capacity to 10 Rounds

guns dot com

What about gun responsibilities?

What says more about our gun culture: that people can just lose semi-automatic weapons or that they don't worry they'll be prosecuted for negligence?

No wonder gun owners are afraid of lost and stolen gun bills--not only will it stop them from selling to disqualified persons, but it will keep their irresponsibility from being scrutinised.

Gun Rights Spending vs. Gun Control Spending

The Declining CDC Research into Firearm Injury Prevention

Embedded image permalink

Tennessee Gun Nut Obsessed with Rape and Sodomy

Further to Laci's post below. I couldn't get that video to work, so here it is again.


Lefties don't criticise Obama

You really need to get in touch with reality if you believe that one.  Either that or find some real lefty news sources instead of believing the bullshit you get from the Blaze and Faux news.

You realise...

This is my personal opinion and does not reflect those of my co-bloggers, but something ssgmarkcr said made me want to respond.
You realise that I mostly post to annoy you that I am still here and "anti-gun" (as if your actions are really "pro-gun").

I could care less if you don't comment. 

In fact, I am really not terribly interested in what you have to say if you can't make an intelligent comment.  Try and catch the show QI and pretend that I am Stephen Fry.  That is a pretend since I am far more Alan Davies than Stephen Fry in real life.[1]

BTW, someone told me off line that you cannot refute my arguments (unless, of course, you are Greg Camp).

You know everything better than the experts if you are Greg Camp.
[1] I do like hanging around Stephen Fry types since they can make me seem much more intelligent when I listen to what they say. Although, they tell me I tend to underestimate my intelligence.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Putting the Twitt in Twitter

OK,I'll admit that this thought passed through my head, but I know the difference between Boko Haram and Procol Harum.

The group's official  name is "the Congregation of the People of Tradition for Proselytism and Jihad" or "The Group of the People of Sunnah for Preaching and Struggle" are translations of Arabic Jamā'at ahl as-sunnah li-d-da'wa wa-l-jihād (جماعة أهل السنة للدعوة والجهاد).

In the town of Maiduguri, where the group was formed, the residents dubbed it Boko Haram. The term "Boko Haram" comes from the Hausa word boko, originally derived from a Hausa word with meanings such as "fraud" and "inauthenticity", [a] and the Arabic word haram figuratively meaning "sin" (literally, "forbidden").  Loosely translated, the name could mean "western education is sinful", which would symbolize its strong opposition to anything Western, which it sees as corrupting Muslims. Locals who speak Hausa are unsure what it actually means.

Literally speaking, the name may be meant to convey the message that "bogus education is sinful". Dr Ahmad Murtada of the Islamic Studies Department, University of Bayero, Kano has noted in his research of the group that the name of the movement should not be understood literally from the Hausa, but rather as meaning "traversing the Western system of education is haram".
Nothing like another group of fundamentalist, anti-intellectuals.

Why does this man still have a cc permit?

cross-post by Dog Gone from Penigma

We are asked by the gun hugger crowd who insist on intruding their firearms everywhere in our public space to believe that they are safe, trustworthy, responsible.

But that does not appear to be the case, which is why Gov. Dayton signed legislation that in Minnesota takes away the guns of domestic abusers, child abusers, and those with protective orders.

Courtesy of the NRA, in most states, gun rights trump the right to be safe from bad guys with guns, against whom a person has an order of protection, including allowing them to carry concealed weapons.

One such person, 32 year old Brandon J. Thompson, demonstrated how much of a scofflaw he is, by threatening speaker of the House John Boehner, second behind Joe Biden to the authority of the position of president of the United States.  He admitted to making the threats when arrested by the FBI.

He has had 5 restraining orders against him since 2001.

It makes no sense that someone who has presented a sufficient threat that an order of protection has been issued even once is trusted to safely carry a concealed firearm, much less 5 of them.  The existence of 5 Orders of Protection should strongly argue that this is a person who has a problem with issues like anger and intimidation.

So far, a few of the lefty echo chamber hacks are trying to portray Thompson as a lefty/'liberul' for having threatened Boehner (over the issue of cutting off unemployment benefits extensions).  Thompson specifically threatened to shoot John Boehner with an assault rifle.

But there is nothing that I can identify about Thompson that indicates either that he was politically active, much less that he was liberal.  Boehner has routinely upset and even antagonized many on the right, including over this issue, and given the predominance of conservatives in the part of Indiana where Thompson lives, it is more likely that to the extent he has any political orientation, he is conservative, given the racial makeup of the area, and that it has been strongly republican dating  back to at least 1983.

As noted from USA Today's coverage:
“Free speech is the cornerstone of our democracy but threats of violence have no place in our civil society,” said Joseph H. Hogsett, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, in a statement announcing the arrest. “People who are inclined to make them need to know that they violate the law and they will be aggressively pursued.”

I have a better idea; let's not have those who habitually threaten violence be allowed to be armed in the 1st place.  Those who threaten people should never be allowed to possess a firearm of any kind, permanently, period.  Threatening people should be an automatic disqualification for having a firearm --- which would distinctly thin out the number of people who currently both possess one or more firearms, and who too-frequently threaten others, including for disagreeing with them - as we saw during the same period with the threats made by gun-huggers towards a gun store owner for wanting to offer 'smart' guns for sale.

It's time for a new rule, nationwide one threat of violence or intimidation with a firearm -- no more firearm, EVER, much less a cc permit.

People unclear on the issue

Meet Mike Lynn, from Memphis, Tennesse, the spokesperson for Fathers for Gun Violence [1]:

Nothing like using fear and emotion to make your point.

He asks a question which he should have thought about before he made this phone call:

"Are you guys for real?"

But, from his phone message--it sounds as if he is indeed for gun violence.

The type of person we really want walking around with a gun.

[1] Before you people go apeshit for me giving his "personal information"--he already does that in the video--if you actually watched it.

If you actually understood it.

More Thunder from Down Under

These were made by an Australian in regard to their tightened gun regulations.

The data that supports these are found here:

Very Unfunny Comic Strip

Why We Need Effective Gun Control Today

Why We Need Effective Gun Control Today


Daphne Holmes contributed this guest post. She is a writer from and you can reach her at

The gun control debate ebbs and flows through political cycles without consistent direction, or even proper attention.  Occasional atrocities reignite the controversy and put heat on legislators to make a showing on the issue, but the momentum and long-term vision are never enough to result in adequate consideration of the problems and solutions relating to gun violence in the United States.

Unfortunately as gun law reform languishes in a political no man's land, incidents of gun violence continue to unfold, capturing innocent victims in the crossfire.  School shootings, explosive violence movie theaters and, even repeated shootings at military facilities are all writing on the wall for legislators and civilians, who need to turn their attention to the issue.

Gun rights advocates put-forth arguments backed by Constitutional provisions protecting the right to bear arms, but collateral killing nonetheless continues to rise in a society that too frequently turns to firearms for deadly force.  Modern incidents of gun violence reflect a new cultural paradigm, which must be accounted for in the laws applied to safe firearms acquisition and ownership.  For the following reasons, we need effective gun control today.

Downside is Insignificant by Comparison
Drawing the line on gun control means different things to different people.  As in any other impassioned debate, there are extremes on both sides.  In reality, however, most proposed gun control measures are not particularly significant to ownership rights.  Expanding background checks, for example, does not interfere with the right to bear arms.  Rather, it fortifies the law of the land by adding a responsibility component to the rights outlined by the Constitution.
The upside of gun control measures, on the other hand, can be measured with human lives.  The United States is far ahead of other countries in terms of the number of citizens killed annually by guns, so assault weapons bans and exhaustive background checks furnish sensible first-steps toward reducing gun violence in the U.S.

Criminals are Not the Only Ones Killing with Guns
In a growing trend, unconventional scenarios lead to increasing gun deaths in the United States.  Criminals are not the only shooters these days.  In fact, children account for a rising share of individuals involved in gun related incidents both as victims and shooters.  While protecting the citizenry is a strong argument for gun control, shielding the nation's young people from gun violence is an even more pressing agenda, because children are always innocent victims.

Access leads to Gun Violence
Education and other measures provide worthwhile contributions to gun safety, but stricter controls must be put in place to reduce incidents of gun violence in the United States.  While ignorance and complacency contribute to gun tragedies, simple access to guns also plays a significant role in many gun-related disasters.  Limiting access by enacting gun buying restrictions and imposing locked storage requirements are prudent parts of comprehensive gun control.

Guns are the Most Common Killing Weapons
In many cases, improving social conditions requires us to look at dilemmas in very stark ways.  We prioritize, for example, in ways that stand to contribute the greatest possible benefits across society.  Devastating diseases, for example, receive more attention from researchers and doctors than minor ailments, simply because of the toll they tackle on society.  In much the same way, guns are the tools most frequently used to take lives, so the must be given the lion's share of attention by reformers striving to reduce body counts.

Gun Control Reflects Societal Change
Laws and customs evolve alongside civilizations, as citizens adapt their approaches to the ever-changing fabric of society.  It is prudent to roll with the changes, rather than turning a blind eye to the new requirements they present.  As human interactions have evolved, guns have taken-up an increasingly negative place in society.  As a result, gun control is a prudent course-correcting intervention, which can only serve the greater good.

Today, more than ever, social phenomena support the call for gun control.  Too many gun-related incidents involve innocent victims, and they are increasingly made up of children touched by gun violence.  Curbing easy-access and accounting for societal change provide common sense strategies for reducing tragic outcomes.


Daphne Holmes contributed this guest post. She is a writer from and you can reach her at

Concealed Carry on Guam

via ssgmarkcr

 Here is another ripple caused by the 9th Circuit ruling that repealed "may issue" permit laws in its jurisdiction. 

"Residents could soon be able to get a concealed firearms permit if they meet certain qualifications, if the governor signs a bill that was passed into law by the Legislature yesterday.
Bill 296 would align Guam's firearms law with other jurisdictions and require the police department to issue concealed firearms permits to residents who meet certain requirements."

"The bill was one of many that senators voted to pass during the last day of session yesterday. The bill received 13 "yes" votes and two "no" votes from Speaker Judith Won Pat and Vice Speaker Benjamin Cruz."

"The bill would require the Guam Police Department to issue concealed firearms permits to applicants who have shown, among other requirements:
• they are not a convicted felon;
• they have not been imprisoned; or
• they have not been committed to programs for substance abuse.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in February and March repealed "may issue" laws in California and Hawaii, respectively."

    Data about crime in Guam isn't very current, though it seemed to take up a sizable portion of governor's State of The Island address.

Monday, May 12, 2014

And while you're playing with your Glocks

Nothing like a little make up hints from the World's Most Famous Austrian, Conchita Wurst, to help you look your best!

Zappa - Dumb All Over, A Little Ugly on the Side

A Gun in the Home

Embedded image permalink

John Lott Denies the Racially Discriminatory Aspect of Capital Punishment

It’s when Lott starts citing statistics that his piece begins to fall apart. First, Lott attempts to debunk the notion that the death penalty is applied in a racially discriminatory manner by noting that white people are executed at a higher rate than the rate at which white people commit murders. That’s true. It’s also a rather facile way of looking at this particular aspect of the death penalty. Prosecutors seek death only in cases where they can show aggravating circumstances — the particularly heinous crimes. If you’re looking at race and execution statistics, then, it’s important to factor in the severity of the crime. And when a black defendant and a white defendant are convicted of murders with similar aggravating circumstances, the black defendant is significantly more likely to get the death penalty. In fact, a convicted black defendant is a better predictor of a death sentence than a conviction involving multiple stab wounds, or a murder committed in conjunction with another felony.
I think the far more troubling measure of the death penalty and race is the influence of the race of the victim. In most states, defendants convicted of killing white people are quite a bit more likely to be sentenced to death than defendants convicted of killing black people. That suggests that, whether intentionally or not, the criminal justice system puts a higher value on white lives than black lives. Moreover, studies that combine the race of both defendant and victim have found that a black defendant with a nonblack victim is by far the most likely to be executed, followed by a black defendant and black victim, a nonblack defendant and nonblack victim, and, far behind, a nonblack defendant and a black victim. These are percentages, by the way, not raw numbers. So they account for the fact that some of those categories have a larger sample size than others. (The Death Penalty Information Project has a summary of all of the aforementioned research, with footnotes, here.)

More on the Jack in the Box Story

ssgmarkcr wrote:

    Laci posted this last week,

And since its Laci, there are times that no one comments.  I personally believe that some of these open carry events end up as an overall negative outcome, though they are quite within their rights to conduct them. 
    And many gun control advocates have made a lot of media hay with this event,

"The company's statement comes in response to a social media campaign and national petition launched just over 24 hours ago by Moms Demand Action to ask Jack in the Box to enforce its policy after last week's semi-automatic rifle carrying demonstration at a Fort Worth Jack in the Box store that terrified employees so much that they locked themselves in the freezer, according to local police."

    The problem is that it now appears that it never really happened.  To his credit, Joe Nocera printed a correction when an official from Jack In The Box contacted him. 

"An earlier version of this post included information from Sgt. Ray Bush of the Forth Worth Police Department, who wrote in an email last week that the employees at the Jack in the Box where Open Carry Texas staged a demonstration “locked themselves inside a freezer for protection out of fear the rifle-carrying men would rob them.” However, Brian Luscomb, vice president of corporate communications for Jack in the Box, told the New York Times this evening, “Our employees told us that they did not hide in the freezer.” We have amended the post to reflect this new information. "

    And of course, the next challenge will be to find out why Sgt. Bush of the Fort Worth PD sent out an inaccurate email concerning this event.  I'm not going to call it an outright lie yet because this being the weekend, we haven't heard from the Sergeant in question.  For example, its possible his statement was based on something he heard from another officer, etc.
    The rumors are already flying on the blogs now.  I've even seen one suggesting that the police being called amounted to a SWATing call.  Whatever happened, the MOMs took hold and rode it for all it was worth, and by doing so may have attached themselves to an event that will affect whatever credibility they now enjoy.
    I imagine this will develop as the new week progresses, and hopefully will just turn out to be some miscommunication issue happens from time to time in modern day news's push to release breaking news first and not something more overt like NBC's editing of Zimmerman's 911 call, which has grown into a defamation suit that is now progressing through the courts.
    Might be an interesting week.