The Stupid Grows

7 Comments

If you enjoyed the lunatic Moms Demand Action leader in my last post pontificating about what a wise man Josef Goebbels was, you’ll LOVE this!

Found this through Bob Owens at Bearing Arms asking if this is possibly the most ignorant gun control op-ed in history.

I think it just may be. The historically ignorant, obtuse blatherings contained in this editorial are burning stupid. Flame retardant stupid. Weapons grade stupid. Beat your head against the wall until cerebrospinal fluid leaks out of your eyes stupid. Are we getting the message here?

I won’t fisk the whole thing, because frankly I value my sanity, and I can’t look at this cross-eyed dimbulbery without wanting to burn my own eyes out with sulfuric acid. I will just point you to a few items of note.

Kasie Strickland, the author of the abject dumbassery in question, thinks that:

1) The First Amendment protects a “right to life”

2) The 1993 Brady Bill and 1994 Assault Weapons Ban were both passed by a Republican president (George H.W. Bush).

3) Our forefathers in 1791 had no idea about the weapons technology we would have in the future.

She also feels it’s not actually necessary to bring facts into her diatribe, because it’s an “opinion piece.”

One can only shake one’s head in disbelief. But then after Allison A. Martin’s laudatory words for the wise Josef Goebbels, nothing much surprises me.

Maybe we should make it mandatory that newspaper columnists actually pass a history class before being allowed to spew. After all, we’re not limiting their right to free press. We’re just making sure that they publish the truth – for the common good…

Or maybe we should just beat this dumb harpy over the head with a history book. I’m thinking this is the only way anything will penetrate her thick skull.

 

Submitted for your information

5 Comments

There’s nothing I can say about this clueless, feckless twit that hasn’t been said already by the Internets. I’m just here to show you irrefutable proof that Moms Demand Action frothing lunatics are also ignorant of history.

Exhibit A:

image58

Yes, this was from an actual conversation one of the guys I follow on Twitter had with a Moms Demand Action leader!

It’s quite obvious Alison A. Martin had no idea who Josef Goebbels was, so she replied in the usual gun-grabber flippancy.

I’m betting that after a cursory Google search, she realized what she said. But in typical gun grabber style, she deactivated her Twitter account and went into hiding, so to speak, rather than admit and own her mistake.

Cowardice, ignorance, and lack of personal responsibility… all trademarks of Bloombergian idiots.

Meet your adversary, and take the time to ridicule it.

“Health Professional” bloviates about guns, paints himself to be a doofus

12 Comments

I apologize – I should have blogged about this earlier, but between my business trips and jetlag, I have dropped the ball. A week ago, a fellow Johns Hopkins alum and public heath professional Vik Khanna penned an essay that gave some doctors and other health professionals a bit of heartburn, because unlike many health professionals, Vik actually understands and appreciates firearms and the right to keep and bear arms.

In his essay, Vik addressed the so-called “gun problem” from a health care perspective, advocating for public education, training, and giving gun owners the benefit of the doubt that they are, for the most part, responsible, peaceable citizens. He was respectful, and he linked to credible studies and statistics to bolster his view.

Interestingly, and perhaps unintentionally, Vik also predicted pretty accurately what the response from the medical community would be to his essay.

Ironically, public health academics happily assert that there is a clear Constitutional right to privacy, even as they vilify a right that is actually expressed in the document, and they merrily condescend to its adherents, whom they regard as pathetic rubes.

Enter this arrogant, fat fuck.

Art-Caplan-2

Meet Art Caplan, MD. Art heads the bioethics program at the University of Pennsylvania, but judging from his snide, sarcastic, arrogant writing, he doesn’t know a whole lot about actual ethics, human interaction, or effective, respectful communication.

Instead of refuting any actual facts in Vik’s essay, Art simply proceeded to sneer out a “you’re a paranoid gun nut” reply, and in the process showed his absolute ignorance not just about firearms, but about current technologies, training opportunities, and laws.

Vik, buddy, no one and especially the roughly 28 folks in public health not completely distracted by their lack of funding and inability to secure tenure is capable of doing anything that will pry your gun from your warm-blooded grip. There is no political movement to take away anyone’s guns. The NRA is the mightiest lobbying outfit in these United States and the best Mike Bloomberg or Bill Gates are going to be able to do is to get the anti-gun lobby a few more op-eds and soundbites.

See that? No one wants to take your guns away. You’re paranoid. And by the way, GIVE US MORE MONEY!

My reply to Art’s patronizing gibberish is below. I also posted it in the comments section. The bolded text is my additional comments added in this blog post. I wonder how long it will last before it’s deleted…

Wow… condescending jerk much?

Someone offers an alternative view to your “kale crunching, fitbit wearing hordes of public health types” who cannot help but hysterically ascribe human traits to an inanimate object, and you have to come back with snide derision?

To be sure, Art, “buddy,” no you are not capable of prying anyone’s guns from their warm blooded grip. But make no mistake – when you “public health types” parade your medical authority as credibility on the gun issue, people who genuflect at the altar of your so-called “eruditeness,” will cite you as authorities on the issue.

So, to refute some of your histrionics…

1) Carnage is not CAUSED by guns. We analysts understand that using the passive voice in this manner serves those with an agenda well to obfuscate the problem. If you can’t determine the culprit, you will focus on the tool. The carnage is caused by criminals, and those who are ignorant and irresponsible on the proper handling of firearms.

2) “There is no political movement to take away anyone’s guns.” – Actually, you’re wrong there. There was a federal assault weapons BAN, which, even by the New York Times’ own admission, served merely to ban cosmetic features that had nothing to do with actual fatality rates. Until very recently guns were BANNED in certain cities such as Washington DC, and in many other locales, you have to ask permission from sometimes unwilling government authorities to exercise your basic right to keep and bear arms.

3) “Do public health folks have anything to offer that might reduce the mayhem while letting you hunt deer or shoot partridge or blast targets or whatever it is you and your son like to do with your guns?” — The Second Amendment is not about hunting, Art, “Buddy.” If you have any doubt about this, you should read the documents written by the men who founded this nation. (I would refer Art to Federalist 28, and this passage in particular: If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.)

4) “How about encouraging doctors, ministers, sporting goods salespeople and other community leaders to learn about and then talk about gun safety?” — The key here is LEARN about gun safety. Most doctors and other public health professionals with whom I have spoken don’t know which way the business end of a rifle points. When you learn the intricacies of using these tools, I might give some credibility to you when you discuss them. Otherwise, it’s much like turning to your plumber for a vasectomy. It might be cheaper, but I don’t recommend it.

5) “How about greater efforts to get gun owners to lock up their guns and ammo properly.” — Do tell me about proper storage for a tool of self defense, Art “Buddy.” Tell me how long it takes to unlock your pistol and load it during a home invasion. Have you ever experienced such an event in your safe, lily-white community? Didn’t think so.

6) “How’s about getting hunters to wear the right high-visibility gear.” — I’m all for it, but much like with seat belts, there are some folks who just don’t wear it, and won’t. You going to fine them? Throw them in jail for violation of safety rules?

7) “Is there any merit to making guns safer including ‘smart’ guns?” — The fact that you even ask that question shows your ignorance on the issue. There has been plenty of discussion on the topic, and there are some serious safety concerns with your “smart guns.” Until you get properly educated and informed on the topic, you have no credibility to speak on the matter, and yet here you are, hiding behind your “medical professional” shield and bloviating about things you obviously know nothing about. (There’s a good article in Forbes magazine on smart gun technology you should probably read, if you haven’t already)

8) “Can we teach people to call the cops when they know there is a gun in the house of someone who is mentally ill or under a restraining order?” Oh, so everyone is now a mental health professional? Everyone knows who is under an RO, or are we relying on ESP to tell us when is a good time to report your neighbor? 

9) “A little training for kids about what to do if they find a gun?” – It’s called Eddie the Eagle. Look it up, “buddy.”

In other words, Art. You obviously have no credibility on this issue, and your little sneering note toward Mr. Khanna shows you to be a supercilious, arrogant wad.

Have a nice day.

Hey, I didn’t even curse. Are you proud of me?

Trouble in Paradise

8 Comments

Many of you know that I’ve been writing for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership for about four months now. JPFO is an amazing organization! It was founded 25 years ago on the principle that our rights should never be compromised away.

It is an organization with integrity, honor and a sense of purpose.

But trouble is brewing, and I cannot in good conscience say nothing.

The Great Claire Wolfe, whom I consider a good friend, and whom I have admired for years, has resigned from JPFO. Claire has been a driving force in the organization for years, and she has my trust and respect. Always. Claire is a firebrand in the liberty movement, and a tour-de-force in gun rights.

Here is the reason for her resignation.

We have recently learned that a single board member has unilaterally decided to merge JPFO with the Second Amendment Foundation.

I can not and will not tell you what you should do about this matter. I still work for JPFO, and I have hopes that the organization’s autonomy and no-compromise stance will be preserved. There are options.

The only thing I will say is go read Claire’s blog, and decide for yourselves.

I will also confirm this: should JPFO’s honor, integrity, passion and no-compromise status be diluted or eroded in any way, I will resign as Claire did.

Now go read. Carefully and fully.

Out.

Kroger Rejects Statist Mommies

5 Comments

This is my latest entry for the JPFO blog.

Kroger Rejects Statist Mommies.

The butthurt on Twitter is real. The whining, petulant, statist Moms just can’t seem to get over the fact that there are businesses out there who respect everyone, not just the paranoid loons.

Come check it out.

Bring the popcorn.

Maryland Judge Upholds Ban of Weapon Hardly ever used in Murders

3 Comments

A federal judge last week upheld Maryland’s “assault” weapons ban – a prohibition on nebulously-named “assault” rifles and and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

State officials claim the law will ward off mass shootings (like the 1994 “assault weapons” ban prevented Columbine), and Judge Catherine C. Blake agreed.

The burning stupid of this is… well… stupid.

Nationwide, rifles – just regular rifles – not even specific “assault rifles” about which Blake and the Maryland officials are shitting their pants are barely ever used in homicides. FBI data shows that rifles were used in just 2.5 percent of all murders nationwide – 323 times out of 12,665 murders in 2011. Hell, hammers and other blunt objects were used in more murders that year!

Nonetheless, Blake (whose opinion has nothing to do with her political views, nothing at all, move along, citizen, nothing to see here) opined from the bench that she doubts these rifles “are commonly possessed for lawful purposes” – even as store owners in Ferguson used AR-15s to defend their property from looting hordes of savages.

MDA’s latest blood dance shows absolute stupidity

3 Comments

If you live outside Virginia, you probably haven’t heard about a murder-suicide that took place in Culpeper last week. According to reports, the bodies of Clarence and Shauna Washington, both 35, and their three daughters — 4-year-old Olivia, 6-year-old Onya and 13-year-old Omesha — were found in their house. All dead of gunshot wounds.

Family and friends told authorities the couple had been having an ongoing domestic dispute that apparently grew more heated Saturday night. Authorities did not receive any calls for help from the home.

Culpeper Sheriff Scott Jenkins said the death investigation has been preliminarily classified as a murder-suicide.

And if you didn’t think Moms Demand Action Attention would be on this story like Oprah on a baked ham, using it to promote their latest ineffective disarmament efforts, you’d be sadly mistaken.

Some hysterical Virginia mommy named Gena Reeder penned an editorial, which ran in today’s Richmond Times Dispatch, whining that if ONLY Virginia had stricter gun control laws…

Well, we’ve heard this all before, haven’t we? So let’s examine Reeder’s claims a bit more closely.

More than half of mass shootings committed in the United States are incidents of domestic violence. Every month, 48 American women are shot and killed by current or former intimate partners. A recent report from Everytown for Gun Safety found that American women are 11 times more likely to be killed by guns than women in any other developed nation. Armed stalkers also put women at risk: Nine out of 10 attempted murders of women involved at least one incident of stalking in the year before the murder attempt, according to a study in 10 major U.S. cities.

How does one define “mass shootings?” We’ve already seen Everytown’s claim about 74 school shootings having taken place since Sandy Hook debunked so thoroughly, that even PolitiFact kicked Bloomberg’s hoplophobic hordes in the nuts. But mass shootings? Generally, unless you have a political agenda, when you think of a mass shooting, you think of random shootings in public places, not just any slaying involving multiple bodies and a gun. This would, in any sane circle, be considered an intimate partner homicide that tragically involved the couple’s children. Clarence Washington, who apparently shot his wife and his daughters, wasn’t out to murder as many people as he could before taking his own life. He wanted to end whatever demons he had in his head, and in the process took the lives of his family.

Tragic? Yes. Mass shooting? Only if you have a political agenda.

But let’s look a little further into the statistics cited by the sniveling Momtard.

“48 American women are shot and killed by current or former intimate partners.” 

I tend to take any statistic Everytown and its hoplophobic spawn feed me with a grain of salt, so I did my own bit of digging.

National data on intimate partner violence reveals a few things:

1,818 women in the US were killed by men in single victim/single offender incidents, as reported to the FBI’s 2009 Supplementary Homicide Reports.  Where the victim/offender relationship was known, 63% were killed by an intimate partner (likely an underestimate, as ex-girlfriends were not included) – 550 of them with a firearm – most often a handgun.

Out of the 1,818 women in the United States who were murdered, 63 percent, or 1145, were killed by an intimate partner, and 550 of them -48 percent – were killed with a firearm, and if we go by the numbers provided by New York’s Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, the number of women shot by current or former intimate partners per month is closer to 46. Regardless of the gun grabbers’ usual inflation of numbers (a single violent death is a tragedy, no matter what the implement used to commit said murder) one has to wonder why the Mommies and Bloomberg are more concerned with the 48 percent of intimate partner homicides that are committed with firearms, than the 52 percent committed via other violent means!

Apparently only “gun violence” is bad. Screw the rest of you ladies victimized by abusive shitbags!

Despite these statistics, which Reeder helpfully manipulates to support her cause, Virginia’s lax laws apparently are somehow responsible for the murder suicide. But are they? According to the Virginia State Police, the following people are prohibited from purchasing or owning firearms.

  1. You are under indictment for a felony offense.
  2. The subject of an active misdemeanor or felony arrest warrant from any state.
  3. You have been convicted, as an adult, in any court of a felony offense?
  4. You are 28 years old or younger, have ever been adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile 14 years of age or older at the time of offense of a delinquent act, which would be a felony if committed by an adult.
  5. You were adjudicated as a juvenile 14 years of age or older at the time of the offense of murder in violation of § 18.2-31 or 18.2-32, kidnapping in violation of § 18.2-47, robbery by the threat or presentation of firearms in violation of § 18.2-58, or rape in violation of § 18.2-61? (If adjudicated as a delinquent for these offenses, you must answer yes. You are ineligible regardless of your current age and prohibited for life unless allowed by restoration of rights by the Governor of Virginia and order of the circuit court in the jurisdiction in which you reside.)
  6. You have been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime punishable by more than 2 years even if the maximum punishment was not received.
  7. There is an outstanding protective or restraining order against you from any court that involves your spouse, a former spouse, an individual with whom you share a child in common, or someone you cohabited with as an intimate partner. (emphasis mine)
  8. There is an outstanding protective or restraining order against you from any court that involves stalking, sexual battery, alleged abuse or acts of violence against a family or household member?
  9. You are an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any controlled substance? The Federal Gun Control Act defines an addicted person, or unlawful user, as a person who has a conviction for use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year or persons found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided that the test was administered within the past year.
  10. You have been acquitted by reason of insanity?
  11. You have been adjudicated legally incompetent or mentally incapacitated, or adjudicated an incapacitated person?
  12. You have been involuntarily admitted to a facility or involuntarily ordered to outpatient mental health treatment?
  13. You have been the subject of a temporary detention order and subsequently agreed to voluntarily admission for mental health treatment?
  14. You have been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable discharge?
  15. You are an alien illegally in the United States?
  16. You are a nonimmigrant alien? A nonimmigrant alien is prohibited from receiving a firearm unless he or she falls within an exception to the nonimmigrant alien prohibition (e.g., hunting license/permit; waiver).
  17. You are a person who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced your citizenship?
  18. You have been convicted for the misdemeanor crime of domestic violence? This includes all misdemeanors that involve the use, threat of, or attempted use of physical force (e.g., simple assault, assault and battery) if the offense is committed by one of the following parties: a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim. (emphasis mine)
  19. You are person who, within a 36 month period, within the last 5 years, has been convicted under Virginia law of 2 misdemeanor offenses for Possession of Controlled Substance, Possession of Marijuana, and/or any offense involving synthetic marijuana? (Handgun Purchases Only)

Apparently that’s not enough for Reeder, who snivels about being a Virginia mommy, who is just not “certain about our future in a state that does so little to protect women and children from perpetrators of domestic violence.”

Lady (and I use that term very loosely), you’re either a paranoid loon, a liar or some nefarious combination of both!

There is nothing lax about Virginia’s firearm laws! All manner of violent scum is covered, but you and your Mommy friends won’t rest until everyone is disarmed or inconvenienced to such a point when exercising their rights, that the cost/benefit analysis reveals it’s no longer worth bothering.

But Reeder goes on, and the absolute total bullshit that spills over from her poisonous keyboard is appalling and easy to fact check.

Just a week ago in Emporia, Va., Lamont George shot and killed his ex-girlfriend, Michelle Roper, while her teenage son watched. According to reports, a restraining order had been issued in the past, yet George had no problem obtaining the gun he used to kill Roper.

This is the type of incident that the February legislation could have prevented. This is exactly why Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America will be fighting this fall to get the legislature to protect all Virginia families.

 The U.S. Marshals apprehended Lamont George a few days ago, and guess what! No February law (in February, Virginia’s General Assembly rejected legislation that would have prevented anyone convicted of stalking, sexual battery or physical assault of a family member from having a gun for a period of five years.) would have prevented this tragedy. Know why? Here’s why:

The man faces charges of murder; the attempted murder of Wakki Roper; breaking and entering of a residence with the intent to commit a felony; possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a violent felony; larceny of a motor vehicle; two counts of using a firearm while committing or attempting to commit murder.

Lamont George was already a felon in possession of a firearm. By law, he was not allowed to have one! He already violated the law by merely possessing said gun. In addition to that, he was also already prohibited by law from owning a pistol, because according to reporting, he was under a restraining order.

So how would an additional law have stopped him from obtaining said gun and shooting his girlfriend, Gena?

It would not have. And had you done a shred of research, you would have known that. But maybe you did know that, eh? Maybe you just decided to spout lies in your froth-flecked zeal to push your gun control agenda, you lying, hysterical sow!

Let’s now take a look at the Culpeper murder-suicide, which Reeder uses to emphasize her claim that Virginia’s gun laws are weak, and that the February proposal would have prevented this crime.

Clarence Washington had a clean record. He was not a convicted criminal in any way, shape or form. He was not subject to a restraining order, and police had never been called to the home, even after the last fight, which was loud enough for the neighbors to hear. There was nothing legally preventing Washington from owning one or several firearms. No amount of maneuvering, twitching or spinning by Gena Reeder or her MomTard team of statist snotwads would have prevented Washington’s legal purchase.

Perhaps if guns were banned altogether… But that’s exactly what these shrews want! They don’t want “common sense” laws. We already have them and more.

And considering that the vast majority of criminals don’t purchase their firearms via any kind of legal manner anyway, and I suspect Reeder and the Shrews Demanding Attention know that, their ultimate goal seems pretty clear.

And one final thing, because this woman is so completely ridiculous and ignorant that she claims that a woman who gets a restraining order against a former intimate partner is clearly making every effort to “get away from him”  – a restraining order is a piece of paper. A goon intent on doing a woman harm is already willing to violate several laws, like, say… ASSAULT and MURDER, will not be deterred by yet another legal document. But does Reeder want to give women a real chance at defending themselves? Of course not!

When a woman buys her own gun for protection against a possible domestic violence attack, her chances of dying by a gun go up drastically. Women involved in domestic disputes are almost 10 times more likely to have a gun used against them than to use a gun in self-defense.

Words cannot properly describe how despicable I find these self-righteous ignorami, who spread egregious lies and misinformation about armed self defense (remember, Reeder’s prevaricating hero Shannon Watts claims that defensive gun uses do not exist)! Virginia’s women don’t need disinformation, deception and deceit thrown at them by the likes of this screeching harpy. Fact of the matter is Tammy Duvall, Ltuanya BallardJessica Cothon, this unnamed ladyJoni Prater, Elsie Thomas,  Shawna Brush, and scores of others whose lives were saved by armed self defense after attacks by violent exes would tell Reeder to screw herself.

I know I would.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: