Friday, November 14, 2008

Buying Back Illusions

Akron is having a gun "buyback," at least that's what they're calling it. But how you can buy back something you never owned in the first place is the least of things that don't make sense.

Here's today's Gun Rights Examiner column, and the final one for the week.

Tell a friend.

Excellent Job, Meleanie!

You did great.

Somebody ought to ask Lynne Doyle if she were being attacked, of the four people on her panel, where Bryan Miller would rate in terms of who she'd want by her side.

Who Does This Guy Think He Is?

A JerseyCity councilman?

[Via Brian F]

They Deserve it for Being Young and Ugly

I would never frequent a restaurant if I knew their employees were packing heat. The employees at these places are much scarier than the clientele. Do you really want the pimply-faced teenager serving your burger to be carrying a magnum? No thanks.
Yeah, I'm with you. I'd rather they were dead. They disgust me. And that makes them less than human.

And if they're not teenagers, they're slack-jawed rednecks compensating for inadequate manhood. They should die, too.

Just so we know the mindset of those who don't trust us...

[Via Firedbrass]

Vanderboegh: Saving Lives, Two Uncomprehending Texas Twits at a Time.

I address this missive principally to Dr. Agger, but it also impacts Bro. Witt as well in his role as a representative of the Fourth Estate. You are no doubt surprised and shocked by the reaction that Dr, Agger's comments aroused amongst the firearms-owning hoi polloi when repeated in Mr. Witt's story. Both your responses to David Codrea, et al, demonstrate that you equally fail to realize that the election of Barack Obama and the total empowerment of his collectivist Democrat party has carried us all -- you, me, and everyone in this country -- through Barack Obama's looking glass into a wonderland where many of the old verities no longer apply.

The GOP pols, who we first put in power in 1994 with their false promise that they would shield us from more gun control, are gone, swept away. Talk radio is about to muzzled by the Orwellian-named "Fairness Doctrine." Next will be Hate Speech Codes on the Internet (three guesses who that will be aimed at). And then there's this wacky Obama "civilian defense corps" which is supposed to be as large as the military and with as big a budget. What's that going to look like? The Hitler Jugend? The Young Communist League? The Ton-Ton Macoute? And, no, Dr. Agger, you are wrong. This has nothing to do with race.

What you neglected to mention in your story, Mr. Witt, is this snippet of Obama transition policy which popped up on his website, http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/

"Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn’t have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."
Now, the fact that this contradiction of the smooth lies told by the Lightworker during the campaign was taken down shortly thereafter did not keep it from being noticed. It is, in fact, simply a retelling of Obama's well-established anti-firearms positions.

This is not about race, Dr. Agger. Indeed, if you wish to hear a contradictory anecdote, you have only to ask the counterman at Academy Sports in Trussville, Alabama, who told me yesterday that many of the customers buying semi-automatic rifles of military utility were black and some, dare I say it, were even white liberals. Are THEY buying out of racial guilt or fear of Nat Turner's ghost, Doctor?

Academy Sports, it should be noted, does not stock cheap SKS's or semi-auto Kalashnikovs but does sell very pricey Smith & Wesson and Remington 5.56mm and 7.62 NATO semi-auto copies of full-auto military rifles. Despite the cost (between $900 and $1500 each) they are flying off the shelves. And Trussville is hardly an inner city ghetto. It is, in fact, an up-scale bedroom community suburb of Birmingham.

White folks are buying guns for the same reason that folks of other races are buying guns: because Obama and his ofay statist pals don't want guns in ANYBODY'S hands. Have you never heard of the Deacons for Defense and Justice, Dr. Agger? The veterans of the civil rights struggle here in Alabama sure have, and it is their sons and grandsons, now successful members of an integrated community that is at peace with itself, who are down at Academy buying Smith & Wesson M4 carbines and cases of ammo to go with them. They remember that a government can easily get out of hand, unrestrained by any law other than the threat of military force in the hands of the people.

And why are many, many people of all races buying semi-automatic rifles of military utility? Oprah Winfrey once said that if someone shows you who they really are, you should believe them. OK, so we believe Obama and his white socialist friends in Congress have shown us who they are -- they are gun-grabbers. You may recall Dianne Feinstein's infamous quote on CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."

So when we see notorious anti-firearms politicos like Rahm Emmanuel, Charles Schumer, et al, ad nauseum, embracing Obama and then we read his campaign's anti-gun words above, we're going to take Oprah's advice. We believe this is who they really are. We do not trust them -- we will NEVER trust them -- and hence, the rush to buy.

The vehement reaction that your words caused is perfectly understandable. The anger reflects the new Wonderland world we find ourselves in. Because we believe that Obama's intentions are to further restrict our traditional liberties and to proscribe and seize our heretofore legal property, we have been making, well, adjustments, both in our thinking and in our day-to-day lives. Here are some facts you probably haven't internalized yet.

First, it is a fact that there is a segment of the firearm-owning population in this country who will refuse to comply with any further infringement of their God-given, inalienable rights. Nor, I must tell you, will they surrender their property simply because someone thinks it's a good idea. These people have been known by many names. A few years back they were known as "cold, dead hands types." More recently, they have been described as "Three percenters." In 1775, they were called Minutemen. It does not matter how many million of us there are. Whatever our number, it is enough to prove an indigestible lump in any would-be American tyrant's throat.

Ask yourself this question: Do you believe that the millions of Americans who are currently voting with their wallets by buying semi-automatic rifles of military utility are doing so simply in order to turn them in when Obama and Company pass their "reasonable regulations"? And if not, then what do you suppose they might be thinking about doing with them?

We find these proposed "reasonable regulations" to be, well, unreasonable. To disarm us as the Obamanoids wish, they will have to seek us out in our homes. And when they do, the most important fact about us that you must remember is that if we are willing to die in defense of our homes, our property and our liberty, we are also willing to kill in defense of those things as well. How many of us are they willing to kill to achieve their "reasonable" objective? And after the first few times some of us are killed in our homes resisting their "reasonable regulations," isn't it truly unreasonable to expect that the rest of us will sit idly by, awaiting our turn?

When democracy turns to tyranny, we still get to vote with our rifles. Folks may sneer at us, call us names ("racists" for just one, Dr. Agger), try to marginalize us if they wish, but, as the Founders intended, they deny our existence at their peril. And the second fact should tell you why.

It is this. In 1999, then-President Bill Clinton declared that the political leadership and news media of his enemies, the Serbs, were legitimate targets of war. He announced this after (not before) he ordered precision guided bombs and missiles into the homes of Serbian politicians and the broadcast facilities of Serbian TV and radio. Now this was roundly condemned at the time by journalists and news organizations all over the world, and rightly so. However, the Clinton Rules of Engagement still stand. Indeed, there are some who regard the academicians who support such regimes with ideas as legitimate targets under Clinton's scheme. (You may recall Martin Heidegger who, after Hitler's seizure of power in 1933 morphed from Heidegger the world-renowned philosopher to Heidegger the Nazi, holding membership card number 312589.)

Which brings us back to you fellows. Let's do the bloody math. You have the unreasonable Three-percenters on one hand who will resist -- with force of arms -- when gun control comes to their doors. On the other hand, there is the Obama administration which seems destined to move the line of "legality" beyond where we unreasonable Three-percenters now stand. Throw in Bill Clinton's Rules of Engagement for journalists and regime stooges and you've just found yourself to be legitimate targets in a civil war. Unfair? You bet. Unjust? Perhaps. But hey, that's the Law of Unintended Consequences. So please, for your own sakes as well as ours, choose your future words carefully. We're through the Looking Glass, the Red Queen is quite unreasonable and she'll be after all our heads if this goes too far.

And, if it comes to that, you each will have exactly two people to blame. The guy in your bathroom mirror who failed to comprehend the true nature of the "change" Barack Obama portended and Bill Clinton. After all, it was Bill's idea.

Bro. Mike Vanderboegh

Gun Rights Evangelist to the Heathen Press, Sipsey Street Mission
Our Motto: "Saving Lives, One Ignorant Editorialist at a Time"

PO Box 926
Pinson, AL 35126
III

----------------

NOTE: Mike received responses from both Mr. Witt and Dr. Agger. I'll consult with him and some of the other Sipsey Street denizens to see about posting those exchanges, either here or at one of their places, and will advise.

The Train Draws Nigh

Another aspect of the hearing that was disappointing (and this is the 2nd time it has occurred at a hearing in NJ) was one firearms owner who spoke was concerned only about his own guns. He railed about them trying to take away the guns he had a right to own and pass on to his children and grandchildren, but he ended his statement by saying, "you can take those big 50 bmg’s, but leave my guns alone". Nothing like being thrown in front of the train.
I'll say.

[Via Skip]

Crazy About Guns

This year's uptick in buyers must reflect some new gun owners, but if past surveys are a good guide, surely most of these buyers are repeat buyers. This means that the well-armed are probably getting better-armed—a point none of the recent news stories makes.
That's one of the points Bryan Miller tried to make so unskillfully and deceptively a few days back.

Here's the thing: So what?

The hard core, the committed, the trained just got better armed and resupplied.

Ponder that.

[Via "remarks"]

When Seconds Count

Every minute the officer waits for back-up, another three or more people could die.

In other words, while it was once considered suicide for a lone officer to take on an active killer, it is now considered statistical homicide for him not to do so...

Many malls and workplaces also place signs at their entrances prohibiting firearms on the premises.

Now tacticians believe the signs themselves may be an invitation to the active killers.

It's nothing short of amazing to see this coming from ABC/Scripps, of all places. On the one hand, it's about damn time, but I don't want to take anything away from reporter Brendan Keefe for getting this information into the mainstream. I also appreciate the comparison between precautions taken for fires vs for active defense--that's a point that could be explored a lot further.

This is what we need to hammer home:

As soon as they're confronted by any armed resistance, the shooters typically turn the gun on themselves.
Any armed resistance.

[Via Fat White Man and David Hamel]

We're the Only Ones Reflecting on Ourselves Enough

Pittsburgh police said a detective shot at his own reflection in a mirror while chasing a drug suspect in a dimly lit house in Pittsburgh's North Side.
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the "Onliest One" of all?

[Via CTone]

This Day in History: November 14

November 14, 1775 at Kemps Landing, Virginia - Learning that about 150 American militiamen were marching to join forces with other militia under Col. William Woodford, Lord Dunmore led some 350 British (regulars, Loyalists, sailors, and runaway slaves) from Norfolk to cut off the American militia. On November 14, Dunmore's larger force caught up with and dispersed the Americans, who suffered a few dead and wounded. An account in the New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury declared that the public would be incensed "on finding Lord Dunmore had taken into his service the very scum of the country, to assist him in his diabolical schemes." Conclusion: British Victory.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

We're the Only Ones Flying the Friendly Skies Enough

Since 9/11, more than three dozen federal air marshals have been charged with crimes, and hundreds more have been accused of misconduct, an investigation by ProPublica, a non-profit journalism organization, has found. Cases range from drunken driving and domestic violence to aiding a human-trafficking ring and trying to smuggle explosives from Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, the rest of us get strip-searched and have bottles of lotion confiscated, and they are the "Only Ones" who can be trusted with guns.

Right.
"We can reassure the public that these dedicated professionals go out there every day and put their lives on the line to make sure that everyone is safe," Bray says. "I don't want them to be tarred by … a few allegations from a few years ago."
Keep braying, weasel-worder.
"We're getting the cream of the crop," then-TSA spokesman David Steigman told reporters. "The people who are going into the air marshal program are the best of the best."
Let's see, 3-4,000 air marshals, "753 documented cases of misconduct by air marshals over 20 months..."

Yeah, just a few "bad apples" there.

I've never abused a position to smuggle drugs into the country. I've never lured young boys to my room and abused them. I've never tried to hire a hit on my wife.

I don't drink and drive, I don't beat my family, I don't take bribes, commit bank fraud, hire escorts, pad expense accounts, pull guns in parking disputes, leave guns in lavatories, discharge guns negligently, get into bar fights and fire guns, deal in stolen property...

And the government says these thugs are more trustworthy than you and I are.

And their solution, of course, is to throw more money at the problem, form Quality Assurance teams...as if those of us who live our lives responsibly and with respect for not infringing on our fellow man require any oversight or special training beyond our own sense of "do unto others," which is all any human being really needs--any human being who's not a sociopath...

I'm getting sick and damned tired of these ethically retarded amoral parasites treating responsible adults like they're the children. And that these abuses all happened on a republican administration's watch angers me even more.

[Via Les K]

Another Child Shooting

Let's see, the guy's only 19 and already has a criminal record including aggravated robbery and menacing? And he still roams among us free to engage in such...uh... youthful indiscretions? Might we ask why our wonderful leaders continue to advance citizen disarmament, that is, putting the rest of us who don't menace, don't rob, don't pull guns on people for gain, at the mercy of the young Mr. Brown's of the world?

Today's Gun Rights Examiner column is up.

Black, White and Red

A few say they are preparing to protect themselves in the event of a race war....

One expert sees a darker motive driving some post-election gun purchasers.

"Why are white people buying assault weapons?" said Ben Agger, a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Arlington who wrote a book about the Virginia Tech slayings. "I almost hate to say it, but there is a deep-seated fear of the armed black man, because Obama now commands the military and other instruments of the justice system. They are afraid Obama will exact retribution for the very deep-seated legacy of slavery."
45superman noticed this and wrote about it. And he wrote about it again.

I correspond with him regularly, and after he sent me the Trib link, it took just a few minutes of checking around to confirm a few things. Here's the email I sent to reporter Howard Witt, including a copy to his "expert," a guy with an interesting background:

Obama win triggers run on guns‏

From: David Codrea (dcodrea@hotmail.com)
Sent: Wed 11/12/08 2:13 PM
To: hwitt@tribune.com
Cc: agger@uta.edu

Great job, there, Howard, selecting a Marxist academic to call patriotic Americans racist for buying guns. The nice touch was not disclosing his sympathies to your readers!

I mean, I don't need to send you Agger's CV or writings ("This is not to suggest that socialism is, or should be, dropped as a political aim, to be hoped for and fought for"), or reading list for his classes focusing on Karl Marx ad nauseum... Heck, as an "authorized journalist," I'd expect you to not only know all that--but to approve!

Funny thing about commies who employ citizen disarmament--and what commies don't? It generally is only a matter of time until their Worker's Paradise bears predictable fruit. Of course, by that time, the useful idiot academics and writers were long-ago dispatched as useless eaters...

We'll keep buying guns, if you don't mind, or even (especially) if you and Comrade Agger do.

Racists. That's pretty funny right there. You and Ben are funny guys.

Dosvedanya,

David Codrea
--------------

Here is Howard Witt's reply:
Thanks for your comments. Actually I was unaware of Prof. Agger's academic research into socialism, although other readers of the story have since pointed it out to me. I don't see, however, how that has any bearing on the truth or falsity of his observations about the gun-buying phenomenon. Or do you also think I should have "exposed" the countervailing right-wing ideologies of the pro-gun folks I quoted in the story?

Spasibo,

Howard Witt
Southwest Bureau Chief
Chicago Tribune
Houston, TX
--------------

The good professor weighed in as well:
David,

You are just engaging in name calling. You don't know the first thing about my interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, which might genuinely surprise you. The telling thing is that people of my political and social orientation don't typically write nasty emails to those with whom we disagree. We engage in reasoned and civil discourse--of the the kind typified by Obama's measured and respectful style. The fact remains that social scientists are called on to interpret the run on guns and ammo since Obama's election. The Chicago Trib journalist is doing his job by sampling a wide range of opinion. he is not endorsing my views.

Don't respond, please. Just think deeply about what I am saying about the norms of civility.
--------------

If I may:

Gee Howard, you think belief in the Constitution and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is somehow morally equivalent to being a communist? That to you is a "right wing ideology"? You are in the right profession!

And yes, ideology is a much more relevant concept to explore than leveling unfounded charges of racism. It's not like prominent non-white Obama supporters in the media haven't broached the subject of "race war." Along with others from the left.

You let a Marxist race fluffer play that card as his only argument, and now say you didn't know what his qualifications and motivations were. I repeat my initial salutation: Great job there, Howard!

It's almost laughable for you to bring up the "truth or falsity of his observations." But you haven't determined that, have you, Howard? All you've done is allow a clearly agenda-driven creature to utter an opinion--and in the process disparage the character of every gun owner who opened up to you and gave you information for your story.

Political activist gun owners vote ideologically, Howard. I know Obama supporters (let me guess--you're one, right?) get traction from you in the media by claiming its a melanin thang, but it just ain't so, and it's actually quite insulting, presumptuous and irresponsible to imply otherwise to your many thousands of readers.

And now for you, Ben, or may I call you "Tovarisch?"

Your only comment is to cast aspersions on the character and motivation of gun owners and you're the one who's been called names? Are those names accurate, Ben? What else are we to make of your fighting for socialism advocacy?

As for where you stand on the Second Amendment, go ahead, genuinely surprise me.

Now it's funny you should bring up "reasoned discourse." Gun owners have run into that from the left before. But you misunderstand me if you think I wanted to engage in that with you.

Nope. I'm telling you I know what you are, what you represent and what you enable, and frankly, I view you and all promulgators of your brand of subversion with the contempt you deserve.

And "Obama's measured and respectful style" when it comes to political speech? Good one!

Don't worry, Ben, I won't email you again. What was it you told KABA commentator "Theaton"?
Has it occurred to you that I don't want to open up my professional email and read utter nonsense like this? Do not write me again.
I have nothing further to say to you, either. But if someone wants to send you and Howard links to this, I won't mind. You can even add comments if you like--unlike The Chicago Tribune, which disabled theirs for some reason...

Unpublished Opinions

But the justice was not impressed; he was instead, appalled. He noticed that a good number of the decisions I pulled up with my searching were unpublished...
We ran into that here, and a number of you weighed in with comments.

I'm just an ignorant non-lawyer, but it seems to me this is yet another way to deprive us of our rights. Face it--the courts don't rule us by the Constitution, hell, they don't even let you mention it--they rely on stare decisis, whether the earlier decisions were transparently tyrannical BS or not. So then they reach an opinion but don't want others to know about it for their defense? Is that what's going on?

Somehow, I don't think things should be this convoluted. But what do I know?

Apparently not that much, because I actually viewed the Kwan development as news that should interest the gun community. I scanned the Internet before I posted, looking to see if anyone else had weighed in on it so I could learn more, and there was nothing. So I sent my link to several prominent legal bloggers as well as conservative news sites and...well, you tell me...

It's not like the feds didn't do their utmost to put this guy down. I guess their being set back in court just doesn't merit notice...*

[Via lawhobbit]

* One notable exception

Mixed Feelings

"We all have little kids and they're riding their bikes in the street and running around and we all get in a big hurry to get out kids here and there and not be late for appointments or whatever,” said Cheryl Coupens, one of the first people to sign up for the program.

When civilians clock someone speeding, they jot down the vehicle information and pass it along to authorities. There is no fine because the radar is not being operated by commissioned officers, but owners of the speeding vehicles do get a warning letter.
Snitches or citizen militia?

What should they do?

[Via Brian F]

A Peaceful Resolution

Standoff with armed man ends peacefully
Compare this to the abuse of "No Knock" procedures we read about so often.

I guess Wyoming still has some "peace officers"...?

[Via Mama Liberty]

Giving Him Whatever He Wants

Elizabeth Pittenger knew that if a mugger points a gun at you, you should give him whatever he wants.
Really? What if what he wants is to shoot you? Which , apparently, is what he wanted, because he did.

Fortunately, Ms. Pittenger resisted, proving a moving target is harder to hit.

Hopefully, she will come away from this realizing a person aware of their surroundings is harder to target in the first place. It would also be nice to think the lesson will sink in that having the means of defense and the training and will to use it is...

Oh, wait a minute--we're talking MTSU here.

Evidently, alleged assailant Orlando Edmiston is reading impaired.

This Day in History: November 13

General Richard Montgomery led American troops in the capture of Montreal on November 13, 1775. The American presence in Canada proved short-lived. Just weeks later, British victory at Quebec forced a hasty retreat to New York.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

An Open Letter that Never Closed

I wonder what these constituents would say if they were provided the truth about the racist origins and continued discriminatory application of the gun control measures you promulgate? Have you told them about the Slave Codes, that would allow a black man to be whipped (or worse) for possession of any kind of weapon? Or the post-Civil War Black Codes, designed to keep the newly emancipated from obtaining the means of defense during the heyday of Klan terror?

Today's Gun Rights Examiner column focuses on respectful race relations.

A Compelling Argument

Note, I say "compelled service," not "military draft." Some people object to militarism, but drop all objections to mandated service if the compelled labor is put to use in a soup kitchen or a clinic.

To me, though, the primary evil is not militarism, it's compulsion. It's to treat an individual not as a free person who owns his or her own life, but as the property of the state to be drawn upon as a resource at the whim of bureaucrats and politicians.

A-yup.