Archive for the ‘Guns’ Category
Barack Obama is calling everyone’s bluff and is set to announce on Wednesday 19 executive orders on guns while surrounded by human political shields. Expected in the mix is another “assault”-weapons ban and prohibition of high-capacity magazine clips…which is very interesting. Much like trying to get global warming cultists to tell us the exact right temperature the earth should be, I’m very curious to find out the exact right amount of bullets in a mag that is just enough, but not too much, for the benefit of society.
If nothing else, this will keep the courts busy. Some are saying, “Ah ha, now this will REALLY get the people fired up!” After this past election, I am highly dubious. Granted, people are buying guns (and don’t forget to pick up plenty of bullets) like hotcakes, but this feels very cold war to me. Does Obama really have the stones for confiscation? Are Texas and Wyoming really ready to jail federal officials?
But no matter how you slice it, this is our best example yet of Post-Constitutional America. This “little book” as Piers Morgan calls it is being eliminated little by little, EO by EO and before long it’ll all be over and the only way to get freedom back will require blood.
Thanks to David Gregory and Jeffrey Goldberg, the debate over gun-control has turned into an embarrassing display of journalistic snobbery. David Gregory was reportedly told by the D.C. police he could not brandish a high-capacity magazine on Meet The (De)Press(ed), but he did it anyway, which is a crime. He was in possession of the magazine…doesn’t matter if he was using it in a gun or not. Calls for an investigation have naturally been shouted down by the utterly worthless Howard Kurtz and Jeffrey Goldberg:
Excellent use of DC police resources, investigating Meet the Press for committing an act of journalism: washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-sc…—
Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) December 26, 2012
So commit those crimes folks. When you get pinched, just tell the nice policemen you were practicing journalism. Fool proof.
Now three days after the shooting massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, the country is steeped in moral superiority. Heard on the radio this morning Syracuse Basketball Coach Jim Boeheim using the event of his 900th win to speak out against “assault” weapons:
“If we cannot get the people who represent us to do something about firearms, we are a sad, sad society,” Boeheim said Monday night. “If one person in this world, the NRA president, anybody, can tell me why we need assault weapons with 30 shots – this is our fault if we don’t go out there and do something about this. If we can’t get this thing done, I don’t know what kind of country we have.”
As usual in our country, we ask all the wrong questions. Whenever you hear the word “need,” uttered by any public figure, be on your guard. This word is their “assault” weapon, for when it comes down to it, there’s very little in life we actually “need.” We need food, shelter and clothing…that’s about it, the rest is a matter of lifestyle, so this argument is weak. However, they counter with “If he had clips with fewer rounds or a gun you had to cock for each shot, that would mean fewer people killed.” Maybe so, but we have to take the argument above a third-grade reading level if we’re really serious about stopping this kind of tragedy.
Remember back in the 1980s there was a famous moment on the Phil Donahue Show with actress Laura Dern, the daughter of radical leftist actors Bruce Dern and Diane Ladd, crying out about having to live every day knowing she could be annihilated in a nuclear holocaust. Well, what’s changed since then? Sure sure, Reagan and Gorby signed some papers and we cut back on our respective arsenals, but now nuclear arms are everywhere. Israel has them, India, Pakistan, the UK, France and worst of all, China, North Korea and maybe Iran. Funny how this isn’t the issue it once was. I guess crying about nuclear war isn’t as fashionable anymore now that Reagan is in the ground. And isn’t it funny how world leaders signing papers hasn’t kept the world’s bad guys from amassing nuclear weapons?
Atomic bombs were invented and they can’t be uninvented…no more than guns can be uninvented, and no laws or treaties are going to eliminate what’s already been produced. We can go over the hypotheticals of an unarmed society and the consequences, but frankly it bores me at this point. On November 6th of this year, the majority of the American public (that voted) decided no matter how bad things were, they just weren’t bad enough to risk being called racist, so how am I going to convince any of these people that banning guns puts us in danger?
Many scoff at the idea of teachers or principles being armed or even having armed guards at schools. Okay, if that’s off the table, then the only intellectual argument you have is that the government must disarm our society. And how would the government have to do that? You know the answer…and even I think that’s a bridge too far for even the most radical members of our government. So, Coach Boeheim and company, you’re never going purge “assault” weapons from this earth…what now? Any new solutions given these facts?
No, they will wrap themselves in the flag of the SS Moral Superior and look down on us from on high, solving nothing, judging everything.
On a final note, concerning these schools that proudly display signs telling everyone they are a “gun free zone,” I did an internet search looking for signs for sale that say “This is a gun-free home” or some such. Couldn’t find any that weren’t ironic in nature.
Thus Spat Zarathustra
When we have a tragedy like that in Newtown, Connecticut people always ask “how could this happen?” yet they never ask the more pertinent question “why doesn’t it happen more often?” Man is a raging beast that is able to calm his baser instincts by living in a civil society. But even the best civilization can’t prevent an occasional breakdown whether it be via a group of men or one individual. The simple solution to most is to ban instruments of violence, casting the blame for human error on inanimate objects for allowing the weak-minded an easy avenue to act on their evil thoughts. Well, maybe, but can you eliminate all tools? Can you also get rid of knives, baseball bats…anything hard enough to crush a skull? Obviously not, but that’s taking us into a realm of advanced thought with which most people don’t wish to bother. Simple answers are always best. Be damned the what-ifs of an unarmed society.
Jason Whitlock doubled-down on his anti-gun comments in a podcast with CNN’s Roland Martin:
“You know, I did not go as far as I’d like to go because my thoughts on the NRA and America’s gun culture — I believe the NRA is the new KKK. And that the arming of so many black youths, uh, and loading up our community with drugs, and then just having an open shooting gallery, is the work of people who obviously don’t have our best interests [at heart].”
Now what do you see in that statement? Yeah, race-baiting, but what else? You know what I see? I see black-on-black racism.
The NRA fights for gun rights and to protect the Second Amendment. That’s what they do. You can disagree with their mission, you can disagree with their tactics (even I disagree with a few), but that’s what they do. Thus, the NRA is very much responsible for the fact that I (and America’s black population) can still go to a gun store, buy a gun (after a waiting period) and use that gun in accordance with local statutes. But what Whitlock is arguing here is that because of this, there is “an open shooting gallery” amongst black youths. In other words, what Whitlock is saying is that African-Americans as a people, as a group, are completely helpless. They cannot make sound decisions on their own and the only thing to stop them from committing heinous acts is a more authoritarian society. Sound good? How’d you like to hear that about whatever racial or ethnic group you consider yourself a part?
No one will bring up this point. Whitlock will be applauded for his concern over the plight of black youths, but what about personal responsibility? Oh that’s right…that was outlawed on November 6th. My bad.
Thus Spat Zarathustra
The big dust-up this morning is over the halftime monologue of Bob Costas last night on NBC’s Sunday Night Football. Quoting sports columnist Jason Whitlock, Costas blasted our “gun culture” saying if Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher didn’t have a gun, he and his girlfriend would still be alive.
This issue at hand in this instance is whether Costas should be making political statements during a football game. When Rush Limbaugh made a somewhat political statement about the Philly sports media, ESPN fired him and then threw up all over themselves apologizing to the viewers for having to endure a political element to the great game of football. I particularly remember Chris Berman saying how bad her felt “for all of you.” Yet, in this instance, Costas is on the liberal side of the issue so he has defenders in the media.
I’m a free-speech absolutists. Costas and NBC can say what they want on the air…it’s up to us to decide if we want to patronize them. I say go ahead, do a political monologue every week…see what the shareholders think after a while.
All these years later Eric Clapton is not only still with us, he has done what a lot of successful chaps have done in the past, he has taken up shooting. Now, 13 of his shotguns are to go under the hammer, so to speak, at Holt’s Auctioneers in the UK. A raft of Purdeys and pairs by E. J. Churchill, Watson Brothers, and William Evans will be auctioned off December 11th and could fetch as much as £500,000.
Clapton has claimed that his passion has gotten out of hand in much the same way his guitar collection did. “It’s following the same pattern as when I collected guitars, cars and watches. I start out with a fairly broad spectrum, get obsessed and engulfed and finally narrow the collection down. I built a gunroom that can house a certain amount of guns and now I have to clear the decks for the new guns I have on order.”
If only I had some extra scratch. (Hat tip: Johnny Sac)
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment allows for individual gun ownership. Justice Scalia wrote the opinion of the court. While there are plenty shades of grey in the opinion, it’s an overall victory for lovers of Liberty. However, I find it hard to rejoice due to the scary nature of the high court. 5-4. We were one vote away from the court wiping away over 200 years of history and George Washington rolling over in his grave. It’s really scary how much power this single body of the Federal Government has.
MORE: Adding to the scariness of it all, this line from the Reuters story written by James Vicini:
Although an individual now has a constitutional right to own guns, that new right is not unlimited, wrote Scalia, a hunter.
No idiot, we’ve always had the constitutional right to own guns! It wasn’t just bestowed on the people today, it’s always been there.
STILL MORE: Rick Moran poses this interesting point:
Now that the Court has identified gun rights as a personal right, the ACLU ought to begin defending individual rights. If they were honestly devoted to protecting the Bill of Rights.
Don Surber: “Make Heller the litmus test.”
Good news! New figures show that the U.S. has 90 guns for every 100 people! Thus, per-capita, we are the most heavily armed nation in the world. Funny how we’re also the freest nation in the world, isn’t it? Wonder if there’s a correlation?