“If Guns cause Crime, then Matches cause Arson.”
I think that’s self explanatory.
Thomas Sowell is an economist and excellent writer who frequently writes articles that are aligned with my view of the world. He recently wrote an excellent article on self-defense and the media repose. What really caught my attention was the following:
“People who are full of excuses for criminals– bad childhood, unemployment, unfair world– sit in the safety and comfort of their editorial offices and presume policemen to be guilty until proved innocent. And they concoct clever headlines about killing an “unarmed” person, as if someone trying to run you over with a car poses no danger.”
In a previous article I wrote about someone who charged the police with a pellet gun. In that case the media statement was to point out that it was a pellet gun in the title, but ignore the fact is was manufactured to look real. There was a response from the community based on 20/20 hindsight. Again something Mr. Sowell points out strikes me:
“Such people seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition, that there are times when decisions have to be made and acted upon immediately, whether or not we know as much as we would like to know or can carry out our decisions as perfectly as we wish we could.”
There is a reason it is called 20/20 hindsight. Often you learn and discover things after the fact that would have altered your actions and resulted in a different outcome. My problem is the same as Mr. Sowell’s; these people often speak without any knowledge of the subject, and refuse to be educated even though they realize they have no understanding. Often we have to act upon assumptions based on the data available. Often however you gain more data that charges the assumptions, however when this happens after the decision is made, only the information leading to it should matter.
For instance if someone breaks into my house in-the middle of the night I assume him to be armed. Here’s why: small cramped space with a single entry/exit. This makes the assumption he is armed because I have no way to retreat, and due to the cramped space I will have little reaction time. If he does what I tell him when I tell him, I will have no reason to shoot; if however I cannot see his hands and he doesn’t cooperate I must shoot because I have no other option to ensure my wife’s safety and my own. Because of the situation, a 20/20 scenario is likely, however if I don’t react I could easily end up dead. To those that think dead is an option, it is not, he came in my house and I am the one guaranteed to leave under my own power.
I used the above merely as an aid in illustrating how decisions must often be made by assumptions and not just pure data.
I was having some issues with different services reading my blog. I discovered that there were some issues internally in the site. I have since spent my evening redoing the site and porting over all my old data. This is more of a test blog to make sure everything is back up and running correctly.
Should this work you’ll see more up tomorrow.
So I woke up this morning to the news that Washington State University is now providing classes on what to do if an armed gunman comes on campus. It is to “educate students when to hide and when to flee.”
For those who don’t know me or the way my brain functions, this is what I heard; “when to be shot cowering in the corner, and when to be shot in the back.” My immediate response was to yell at the radio, “what about how and when to shoot back!?” The school has now all but blatantly admitted that they cannot prevent an armed person with criminal intent from coming on campus. Yet they still insist on disarming law abiding citizens with permits that carry every day. There is no magic line one crosses that makes a gun act on its own, much less makes the owner a crazed maniac. A firearm is a tool, and just like any other it by itself presents absolutely no threat. In this case it presents an equalizer that scares many who do not have the will or want to protect themselves. There is no negotiating with someone who wants you dead. I know many who carry every day, I have been to numerous events where people carry, and I have never seen an incident of violence.
My response to those who say you’re increasing your chances of something happening, I believe a buddy of mine said it best, “Well if you own a toaster you’re much more likely to be attacked by said toaster.” The possibility of being injured by accidental discharge is less than you dying by a heart attack or being struck by lightning. Stop forcing people to be victims for the sake of people’s dissolutions in security. Allow licensed permit holders the right to carry on campus.
I would like to thank and point out both of those images are by Oleg Volk.
Evidently when that douche failed at getting his lawsuit against gun manufactures to succeed; he instead decided to attack gun stores.
“Bloomberg’s suits said Adventure Outdoors and the others did little to ensure they were making only legal sales and, as a result, those weapons were used in crimes 900 miles away.”
So, let me get this strait, Bloomberg didn’t think that the sales were legal so he initiated the lawsuit. The ATF, with the way they conduct business, would have steam roll this guy already if he was doing things incorrectly. Not to mention the fact that previously Mayor Bloomberg had said this in a deposition:
NSSF noted that perhaps the mayor’s insults stems from his self-professed ignorance of our nation’s firearms laws and regulations, business practices of firearms retailers and the duties of the ATF. “I don’t know what the law is and what procedures are,” responded the mayor to a deposition question on illegally purchased firearms, NSSF quoted him. “I have no knowledge of what appropriate safeguards are for a dealer to comply with the law or what standard practices are in the arms business,” they quoted him.
In the same deposition Mr. Bloomberg admitted he did not know that ATF conducted inspections of firearms retailers. “I didn’t even know they had inspections,” the bewildered mayor offered and Bloomberg also noted that he did not know what a Federal Firearms Transaction Record, commonly known as a Form 4473 was or a NICS background check.
Looking at the lawsuits themselves, they are insane. In order to buy a firearm and then immediately transfer it is a felony, that’s like buying for someone else. To sell knowingly to a felon, is a felony in and of itself, again fail to see how this is the stores fault. This is nothing more than an attempt to find another way to prevent law abiding citizens from their right of self defense. These firearms could have just as easily been stolen from someone’s house and then taken to New York and sold. Seriously who tries to sell stolen guns in the same town where you got them.
As an FYI you will get caught, I have seen it happen. Guns have gone into shops on consignment and the owner sees it up on the shelf and says, “That’s my gun.” A quick records check by the owner indicates it is, the weapon goes to the police and the person that brought it in is contacted. Then they follow the trail back who stole it.
With all this focus on the “bad” what about the “good” of firearms and firearms ownership Mr. Bloomberg. Or might he have forgotten an Oath and Law that he became a part of a long time ago and that the trail didn’t end. He by no means is acting in a manner to uphold that first tenant of the law. The proof is in that he is discussing and attacking based on presumptions he knows nothing about. He is willingly operating blind at the misfortune of others.
I usually find it just and fitting when someone fights to create more strict legislation however in this case I’m annoyed by the fact that his friends in power are trying to get him out of it.
I initially heard rumors about Richard Mell getting nailed by legislation he pushed forward, but now instead of facing the punishment as he has forced so many others to endure; his friends with power are trying to save him. From what I remember the whole point of our system of government is that everyone gets equally treated. Now Mayor Daley who is such a Douche I can’t stand it, is pushing to give him a break saying it’s for all gun owners. Do I look like I just fell off of a turnip truck!? This man has pushed and pushed for stricter legislation and has prevented law abiding citizens from concealed carry. Give me a break from the bullshit Mayor Daley. You caused severe disruption and endangered people’s lives with your antics at Meigs Field. To claim that you’re doing this as a kindness towards gun owners is a bold faced lie and to think any of us would see it as anything but just shows how much of a douche and a moron you are.
I believe the statement from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms covers it more considerably. !End Rant!
Update: Just discovered the following in Chicago… gun control works so well!
View Larger Map
I know many may see this as the end of the world but I believe Jefferson said it best, “Laws against the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither disposed nor inclined toward violence.”
All this law is doing is allowing those who already carry concealed firearms to continue to do so in spaces where they would otherwise be prohibited. The man who gets his permit is not the person you should fear. A person can violate the law and carry anyway. The person who scares me is the one who carries in violation of the law. I know many who carry every day, and nothing happens. Some people don’t like the idea of firearms for self defense and I believe this stems from a lack of personal responsibility. Often they argue you can call the police to save you. They cannot seem to fathom why someone would take the responsibility to defend themselves.
Limiting the carrying of licensed permit holders does nothing but disarm people who want nothing more than to not be cattle. My views of college campuses currently is that they are giant fields of cattle ripe for the picking. Interesting tidbit though, from talking to many students, some are carrying any way. The reason behind it is, until they need it, no one has a clue. I don’t as I am a law abiding citizen but this just shows how dumb and futile ban’s are.
A man loaned his AR-15 rifle to a friend to take it to the gun range for some target practice. Nothing strange or unusual here, a good friend wants to use a rifle, ok just make sure to clean it before you give it back. Evidently however the firearm malfunctioned and fired a burst before jamming.
The owner of the firearm was convicted of illegally transferring a machinegun.
His home was searched without a warrant, with standard “Jack-Booted Thug” tactics. Testing of the firearm even indicated that it was not a “machinegun” by definition. Unsatisfied with their tests they repeated them and discovered that there was a malfunction, a hammer follow, which caused it to fire multiple rounds.
The whole case stinks to high heaven and from experience I know what it’s like to be prosecuted for a felony that is complete and utter B.S. Luckily mine wasn’t firearm related and was eventually dropped, however my case was another incident of someone not having much to do and wanting to make a name for himself.
The BATFE even realized the futility of their argument by the way they prosecuted the case. Instead of charging the owner with possession of an unregistered machine gun, or any of the other crimes pertaining to machine guns they went with transferring. Why? Because proving that a transfer occurred is a very easy task, and the BATFE is the group responsible for determining if it’s a machine gun, it backs the owner into a corner, and allows the BATFE to do whatever they please.
“At the request of the local ATF agent, the FTB tested the gun a second time using a brand of .223 ammunition known for having sensitive primers. Those tests resulted in intermittent, unregulated, automatic fire and jamming due to hammer-follow, but this time the FTB concluded that, under strict interpretation of the law, the gun´s malfunction did make it a machinegun.”
I find this more of engineering for a failure as opposed to an actual failure. Spend enough time you can always come up with a method to make something fail without modification. If you put in the incorrect ammunition and the weapon explodes throwing shrapnel doe it qualifies as a pipe bomb? I only ask because the barrel acts as a pipe, and the powder causes the explosion, and the pipe eventually fragments causing injury. Seriously the Jack Booted Thugs need to be done away with, along with the FBI. Instead of actually going after people who intend to do harm to normal, productive, law-abiding citizens they instead feel it necessary to attack and imprison those who are productive for society. That failure is exactly that, failure and nothing more. Why are they so obsessed with attacking non-violent otherwise law abiding member of society, maybe it’s because we don’t refer to them as our more holy than thou saviors.