Thursday, July 29, 2010

Even if the police are outside of your front door, they still can't protect you.

'Deadly delay': Police wait while mother, sons slain

The District police department policy on forcible entry caused a "deadly delay" as officers waited for a supervisor outside an apartment while a mother and her two young sons were being stabbed to death inside, according to a lawsuit filed by the woman's family.

Typical anti-gun refrain: "We don't need the Second Amendment. We have police to protect us now!" Then I say, "What's the point of limiting guns to those who lack the will to use them for your protection?"

The reality is police carry guns for one reason only: To protect themselves. Not to protect you. Police presence does not negate the need for you to protect yourself. In fact, police have no legal obligation to protect you. If you want protection, you must provide it for yourself.

Monday, July 26, 2010

One more gun free zone and why I am now a Walmart shopper.

Anyone who lives in Oklahoma City should be familiar with the Buy For Less chain of grocery stores. They've been around for quite a while and they're one of the few locally owned businesses to survive the onslaught of Walmart.

On my latest trip, I discovered a new policy of theirs:
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

To their credit, they have provided armed security inside of the store. However, once you're outside the store, no security is provided. You're on your own between their door and your car door.

So rather than break the rules and continue carrying my weapons into the store or inconvenience myself by disarming in the parking lot, I will shop at my local Walmart where such a sign is not posted. And i will encourage my gun carrying friends to do the same.

Why the shooting won't stop in Chicago.

The story of why they won't stop shooting in Chicago.

This is the story of why they won’t stop shooting in Chicago.

It’s told by the wounded, the accused and the officers who were on the street during a weekend in April 2008 when 40 people were shot, seven fatally.

Two years later, the grim reality is this: Nearly all of the shooters from that weekend have escaped charges.

Of course, this bit of information will be ignored by the gun controllers when years later post-McDonald Chicago still looks like a war zone on warm weekends. They'll say that arming law abiding citizens did nothing to prevent the loss of life, when the real fault lies within a broken criminal justice system that fails to keep dangerous people off the streets.

So while mayor Daley is coming up with new and exciting ways to harass law-abiding gun owners, perhaps he should invest some of that effort into properly imprisoning those who have broken the law.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Safe storage laws save lives... Except when they don't.

Sweden has some very strict gun laws. Regarding storage, guns must be locked up and your home is open to police inspection at any time. Guns not properly stored are seized and the owner is not compensated.

A 12-year-old boy in a community in the Alingsås region in western Sweden accidentally shot his grandmother on Tuesday morning, killing her.

The boy had been looking for the keys to his father's weapons cabinet and took out two small-bore rifles and a shotgun during the night, hiding them under his bed, according to Svenska Dagbladet.

In the morning, the boy's paternal grandmother came to take care of the boy and his three siblings while their father went out fishing. After his father had left, the boy took one of the small-bore rifles to go out and shoot birds in the backyard, the report said.

While on the lawn, the boy tripped and an accidental shot went off. The shot flew into the house through an open patio door, hitting his 65-year-old paternal grandmother, who was in the kitchen. The woman died on the spot.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

A different type of Reasoned Discourse®.

Something different from the usual Reasoned Discourse®.

  1. Post some hysterical bullcrap.
  2. Get called on it.
  3. Instead of the usual step 3 (Huffpo doesn't allow writers to close or delete comments), come back with an equally hysterical, ad-hominem filled "update".

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Chicago anti-gunner finally admits it's their culture that makes Chicago dangerous.

From Snuffy Pfleger's Facebook page:

@Mr Susnjara, you didn't say where you live but there are some Stepford Wife communities which have a different "culture" and may not "need" it. Our community and it's culture, Chicago, is on among others which clearly does need to prevent such "easy access. " Since this is, and there is no issue in your own community, why try to block or prevent it's establishment given the need in our community (among others)?

If only we could get that level of honesty from all of them... I've known all along that it was a culture problem.

If they put as much effort into changing their culture as they do into eroding people's 2nd Amendment rights, Chicago could probably solve their violence problem.

"The NRA is an arm of the Republican party."

A very persistent lie that isn't addressed nearly as much as it should be. This lie is easily debunked by looking at where the money goes. As you can see, a third of gun rights contributions go to Democrats.

For comparison no gun control contributions go to Republicans.

You can't trust the Brady Camp with your e-mail address or money, apparently.

We know the Brady Campaign has been pimping out their membership list for extra pocket change. Now there is this.

From the BBB:

Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (Brady Center) does not meet the following 6 Standards for Charity Accountability:

Standard 1: Oversight of Operations and Staff - Organizations shall have a board of directors that provides adequate oversight of the charity's operations and its staff. Indication of adequate oversight includes, but is not limited to, regularly scheduled appraisals of the CEO's performance, evidence of disbursement controls such as board approval of the budget, fund raising practices, establishment of a conflict of interest policy, and establishment of accounting procedures sufficient to safeguard charity finances.
Brady Center does not meet this Standard because its board of directors does not:
Have a voting member of the board who is assigned the responsibility of serving as the treasurer. In general, the board’s treasurer helps provide independent oversight of the organization’s finances.

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Marc Lamont Hill gets so close, but falls short.

Marc Lamont Hill, being a protege of Bill O'Reilly, is the last person you'd ever expect to support the right to keep arms.

In other words, American democracy is underwritten by the possibility that everyday citizens can fight back if the government no longer acts in the interest of freedom and justice. For Blacks, who have never received the full protection of the State, such a right must be viewed as an indispensable nonnegotiable component of complete citizenship.


Although today’s gun control laws are facially neutral, they continue to disempower and literally disarm poor communities of color. Over the past 20 years, many states have imposed gun permit laws that allow police and other state agencies to determine which individuals are “worthy” of gun ownership. Gun bans against public housing residents, expressly designed to prevent violent crime, have served to disarm poor Blacks almost exclusively. While rural white communities have done little to encroach upon the gun possession rights of citizens, majority-Black urban centers like Washington, D.C. and Chicago have imposed draconian anti-gun laws on the community. Regardless of intent, these laws have a clear and disproportionate impact on poor people of color. 

Very well put, but sadly he goes completely off the rails in the next few paragraphs:

Friday, July 2, 2010

"It's about white males in America feeling threatened..."

From Buzzflash:

It's about white males in America feeling threatened by becoming a minority and the gun is their last psychological reassurance of entitlement power against an encroaching demographic change in our democracy. After all, the City of Chicago allows citizens to own rifles, so there never was a ban on guns in Chicago; there was a ban on a certain type of gun, which didn't even exist at the time the Constitution was written.

But it is the handgun that makes so many white males feel impregnable, as if they were riding around with a turret gun in a Hummer.

Race baiting has always been one of last-ditch tools in the gun controller toolbox. MSspinBC has done it. The VPC does it once a year like clockwork. And scores of assorted talking heads, commentators, and bloggers do it. They try to paint any effort to protect the 2nd Amendment from further encroachment as some christian, right-wing, white-male movement when reality is to the contrary.

Otis McDonald (the plaintiff in McDonald vs Chicago)is a black man. Being that the majority of Chicago's population is comprised of black people, the Chicago gun ban disproportionately affected black people. And as a result many black people applaud the Supreme Court's decision:

For far too long the gun controllers and their sympathizers have been exploiting the black community's legitimate concerns of racism by painting 2nd Amendment advocates as racists, neo-nazis, klansmen, etc. As a result many black people become reluctant to speak up for and exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, achieving the gun controllers goal of scaring more people out of exercising their rights.

So the real story is not about "white males in America feeling threatened". It's about the gun controllers feeling threatened as they lose the stranglehold of fear they have had over the black community for so many years.

And it begins.

Chicago's new gun laws:

  1. Limit the number of handguns residents can register to one per month and prohibit residents from having more than one handgun in operating order at any given time.
  2. Require residents in homes with children to keep them in lock boxes or equipped with trigger locks.
  3. Require prospective gun owners to take a four-hour class and one-hour training at a gun range. 
  4. Prohibit people from owning a gun if they were convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or two or more convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Residents convicted of a gun offense would have to register with the police department.
  5. Calls for the police department to maintain a registry of every handgun owner in the city, with the names and addresses to be made available to police officers, firefighters and other emergency responders.

  1. Nothing more than rights rationing. Why should I only be limited to having one functional firearm at a time? Many gun owners routinely keep a handgun and long gun in "operating order".
  2. Of what use is a gun that's locked up? Is a home invader going to wait for you to unlock your firearm? Is he going to give you advanced notice? A better law would be to require those with children to wear their gun at all times. That way you're ready to defend yourself and you can keep it out of the hands of children.
  3. That wouldn't be so bad if civilian gun ranges weren't banned in Chicago.
  4. Agreeable.
  5. Pointless. Any well trained first responder should assume there is a gun in the home until proven otherwise, because every gun won't be in the registry, especially if the gun is in the possession of a criminal. 

Those who already have handguns in the city — which has been illegal since the city's ban was approved 28 years ago — would have 90 days to register those weapons, according to the proposed ordinance.

Out of the estimated 100,000 handguns in Chicago, I wonder what the compliance rate will be? Will it be any better than the 50% compliance rate of Canada's long gun registry? Or will it be more like California's 2-5% compliance rate?