"Democrats in Missouri introduced startling anti-gun legislation that would require gun owners to hand over their legally purchased so-called “assault weapons” to “the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction” within 90 days.
Under the proposed bill, “Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution.”
Much like the idiots in CT, "We have now decided that you peasants can't be trusted with those things you've owned for years, so hand them in!"
Saturday, March 01, 2014
The newest branch of the BATFEIEIO:
the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
But now the RCMP has changed its mind. They now say these rifles ought to be reclassified as prohibited — essentially banned. And Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney has signed off. Owners who do not hold the rare prohibited-class licence must surrender their rifles for destruction, without compensation. If they don’t, they could be imprisoned for possessing a prohibited firearm without a licence. For years.
All for owning something that they bought legally after the RCMP said that they could.
And now changed their little minds about; sound familiar?
Gets even better:
Sources close to this matter have told me that Minister Blaney essentially goofed, and didn’t realize the full implications of what he’d approved. Some have even suggested that the RCMP misled the minister in order to get rid of guns they’re not comfortable with the public owning. (For those who doubt the RCMP would have such an anti-gun agenda, talk to the residents of High River, Alta.)
Yeah, does sound like ATF, doesn't it?
Of course, it's possible that Blaney is such a idiot that he didn't bother to actually READ this before signing it. But after some of the other stuff the RCMP has done the past while, I'm betting they're taking pointers from our clowns.
But now the RCMP has changed its mind. They now say these rifles ought to be reclassified as prohibited — essentially banned. And Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney has signed off. Owners who do not hold the rare prohibited-class licence must surrender their rifles for destruction, without compensation. If they don’t, they could be imprisoned for possessing a prohibited firearm without a licence. For years.
All for owning something that they bought legally after the RCMP said that they could.
And now changed their little minds about; sound familiar?
Gets even better:
Sources close to this matter have told me that Minister Blaney essentially goofed, and didn’t realize the full implications of what he’d approved. Some have even suggested that the RCMP misled the minister in order to get rid of guns they’re not comfortable with the public owning. (For those who doubt the RCMP would have such an anti-gun agenda, talk to the residents of High River, Alta.)
Yeah, does sound like ATF, doesn't it?
Of course, it's possible that Blaney is such a idiot that he didn't bother to actually READ this before signing it. But after some of the other stuff the RCMP has done the past while, I'm betting they're taking pointers from our clowns.
No, Lt. Vance, you are NOT the master of the citizens,
and that you think you are means you should have that badge taken away from you.
Later, after Ashley said Lt. Vance works for the people of the state, he informed her that he, in fact, is her master.
"You're the servant, we're the master," she said.
"I'm the master, ma'am. I'm the master," he said in response.
Put this bluntly: Fuck you, Vance, you sorry tyrant wannabe. Or do you just want to be head officer of the CT Stasi when they rename it?
Later, after Ashley said Lt. Vance works for the people of the state, he informed her that he, in fact, is her master.
"You're the servant, we're the master," she said.
"I'm the master, ma'am. I'm the master," he said in response.
Put this bluntly: Fuck you, Vance, you sorry tyrant wannabe. Or do you just want to be head officer of the CT Stasi when they rename it?
"If we get rid of guns, no mass murders!"
Not so fast, Sparky.
27 people are dead and another 109 are wounded following an attack by “a group of knife-wielding men” at a southwestern China train station, the Associated Press reported Saturday, referencing “the official Xinhua News Agency.”
The attack, “one of the deadliest ... in China in recent years,” resulted in several attackers, reportedly wearing uniforms, being shot by police, but not until after they’d managed to kill and injure so many defenseless people at the station.
When you've got a population that's both unarmed and trained to depend on the State for everything, it doesn't require guns to pile up a body count.
27 people are dead and another 109 are wounded following an attack by “a group of knife-wielding men” at a southwestern China train station, the Associated Press reported Saturday, referencing “the official Xinhua News Agency.”
The attack, “one of the deadliest ... in China in recent years,” resulted in several attackers, reportedly wearing uniforms, being shot by police, but not until after they’d managed to kill and injure so many defenseless people at the station.
When you've got a population that's both unarmed and trained to depend on the State for everything, it doesn't require guns to pile up a body count.
For Illinois it's not Dark and Fascist, it's the Corrupt and Fascist
state of Illinois.
Not only is this heinous bill directed only at law-abiding citizens, it goes beyond “simple” registration of firearms to include a provision that says Illinois residents cannot buy ammunition unless they can prove that they have registered a gun capable of firing that ammunition! Here is a direct quote from the bill: “Provides that a person shall not purchase or possess ammunition within this State without having first obtained a registration certificate identifying a firearm that is suitable for use with that ammunition…”
They don't seem to give a rats ass about actually DOING something about the gangbangers killing people on a whole-lot basis, but they really want to screw honest people worried about protecting themselves and their families.
Of course, 'gun control' IS what politicians do, instead of something(very good phrase from Uncle).
On the subject of all the cops wearing masks while in their ninja suits, an old quote from Jeff Cooper:
...I have been criticized by referring to our federal masked men as 'ninja' ... Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic. It has long been my conviction that a masked man with a gun is a target. I see no reason to change that view."
A bit of history noting a habit of the Clintons, and to remind us that it's not just ATF that screws over agents:
Court papers reveal the FBI had an informant right next to Osama bin Laden in 1993 sending reports up the chain of command. Yet then-President Clinton did nothing — a pattern with both him and his wife.
It came to light during a 2010 employment discrimination case filed by FBI agent Bassem Youssef, a Coptic Christian who contended he'd been passed over for promotion after directing an agent he recruited after the 1993 terror attack on the World Trade Center.
The still-unnamed agent provided valuable intelligence to the bureau on that 1993 case, and went on to reveal the terror ring's ties to an even more malevolent terrorist by the name of Osama bin Laden, the Washington Times reported.
...
After Clinton ignored this information — and the FBI he led ignored the agent's contributions and denied him a promotion, in addition to "forgetting" to mention it all to the 9/11 commission — Clinton went on to ignore even clearer opportunities to take bin Laden out as a threat, focusing instead on domestic politics and the great health care battle in the era of "irrational exuberance."
In 1996, the Sudanese government offered to arrest and execute bin Laden, rather than let him escape to Afghanistan, a failed state where he could set up a base.
Clinton told them no.
20 of the most obnoxious quotes from college professors. Including these two:
4) There are some circumstances, for example, where the newborn baby is severely disabled and where the parents think that it’s better that child should not live, when killing the newborn baby is not at all wrong … not like killing the chimpanzee would be. — Peter Singer, Princeton
2) Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents. — Bill Ayers, University of Illinois at Chicago
Coming from a rich family, depending on said family and pull to keep him out of prison, etc....
Not only is this heinous bill directed only at law-abiding citizens, it goes beyond “simple” registration of firearms to include a provision that says Illinois residents cannot buy ammunition unless they can prove that they have registered a gun capable of firing that ammunition! Here is a direct quote from the bill: “Provides that a person shall not purchase or possess ammunition within this State without having first obtained a registration certificate identifying a firearm that is suitable for use with that ammunition…”
They don't seem to give a rats ass about actually DOING something about the gangbangers killing people on a whole-lot basis, but they really want to screw honest people worried about protecting themselves and their families.
Of course, 'gun control' IS what politicians do, instead of something(very good phrase from Uncle).
On the subject of all the cops wearing masks while in their ninja suits, an old quote from Jeff Cooper:
...I have been criticized by referring to our federal masked men as 'ninja' ... Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic. It has long been my conviction that a masked man with a gun is a target. I see no reason to change that view."
A bit of history noting a habit of the Clintons, and to remind us that it's not just ATF that screws over agents:
Court papers reveal the FBI had an informant right next to Osama bin Laden in 1993 sending reports up the chain of command. Yet then-President Clinton did nothing — a pattern with both him and his wife.
It came to light during a 2010 employment discrimination case filed by FBI agent Bassem Youssef, a Coptic Christian who contended he'd been passed over for promotion after directing an agent he recruited after the 1993 terror attack on the World Trade Center.
The still-unnamed agent provided valuable intelligence to the bureau on that 1993 case, and went on to reveal the terror ring's ties to an even more malevolent terrorist by the name of Osama bin Laden, the Washington Times reported.
...
After Clinton ignored this information — and the FBI he led ignored the agent's contributions and denied him a promotion, in addition to "forgetting" to mention it all to the 9/11 commission — Clinton went on to ignore even clearer opportunities to take bin Laden out as a threat, focusing instead on domestic politics and the great health care battle in the era of "irrational exuberance."
In 1996, the Sudanese government offered to arrest and execute bin Laden, rather than let him escape to Afghanistan, a failed state where he could set up a base.
Clinton told them no.
20 of the most obnoxious quotes from college professors. Including these two:
4) There are some circumstances, for example, where the newborn baby is severely disabled and where the parents think that it’s better that child should not live, when killing the newborn baby is not at all wrong … not like killing the chimpanzee would be. — Peter Singer, Princeton
2) Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents. — Bill Ayers, University of Illinois at Chicago
Coming from a rich family, depending on said family and pull to keep him out of prison, etc....
Friday, February 28, 2014
I'd say "This is what passes for a reporter nowadays" except he's NOT a reporter;
he's a 'journalist'.
Everyone is being looking to hit him and everyone is looking to punch him, and I understand that, and as a journalist you weigh how much you should criticize the president, because he's black, what have you, but then you have to do it because ultimately you're a journalist. Journalists have to, black people have to, white people, Hispanic. We all must hold him to this because, as he said, it is an issue for the country, not just for one demographic.
You're a miserable bigoted asshole, Lemon.
Everyone is being looking to hit him and everyone is looking to punch him, and I understand that, and as a journalist you weigh how much you should criticize the president, because he's black, what have you, but then you have to do it because ultimately you're a journalist. Journalists have to, black people have to, white people, Hispanic. We all must hold him to this because, as he said, it is an issue for the country, not just for one demographic.
You're a miserable bigoted asshole, Lemon.
Just some general stuff
'No scandal or anything illegal at the IRS' my ass
As of last week, Ms. Martin's group had been waiting three years and three months for its 501(c)(4) letter. (Before Mr. Obama was president, the average time was three weeks.) The targeting has had its intended effect: Ms. Martin notes that supporters of her group have asked to be dissociated, for fear of their own IRS audit.
Now comes the fitting end to this spectacle. Late last week Ms. Martin's name appeared among those scheduled to testify before the House Oversight Committee this Thursday. On Wednesday, she got a call from the supposedly apolitical IRS. Her group's application for 501(c)(4) status? Suddenly, miraculously approved.
Politics is also guiding the Justice Department's alleged investigation of IRS abuses. The Oversight Committee held a separate hearing on Wednesday, at which legal experts laid out the ludicrously partisan nature of Justice's probe—including the choice of Barbara Bosserman, an Obama donor in the liberal civil-rights division, to handle it.
Ms. Mitchell, the attorney, was due to testify before the Oversight Committee Feb. 6. On Feb. 4, she filed her written testimony, which explained that nine months after this scandal broke, neither she nor her clients had yet to receive a phone call from the FBI or Justice. Three hours after filing, she told me, a Justice representative called, wanting to check on this targeting thing.
And from our noble The Lightbringer leader and his party?
Democrats are instead fully vested now in using the IRS to shut down criticism by outside groups of ObamaCare, overspending or (ironically) the IRS targeting. Even liberal groups are howling about the White House's use of the IRS to silence political speech, and the House on Wednesday passed a bill to delay the regulations. The White House's response? A veto threat.
At a Senate Judiciary Committee markup Thursday morning, Texas's Ted Cruz offered an amendment to prohibit IRS employees from deliberately targeting individuals or groups based on political views. It was unanimously rejected by every member of the Democratic majority.
Blatant, open corruption. Bastards.
Now comes the fitting end to this spectacle. Late last week Ms. Martin's name appeared among those scheduled to testify before the House Oversight Committee this Thursday. On Wednesday, she got a call from the supposedly apolitical IRS. Her group's application for 501(c)(4) status? Suddenly, miraculously approved.
Politics is also guiding the Justice Department's alleged investigation of IRS abuses. The Oversight Committee held a separate hearing on Wednesday, at which legal experts laid out the ludicrously partisan nature of Justice's probe—including the choice of Barbara Bosserman, an Obama donor in the liberal civil-rights division, to handle it.
Ms. Mitchell, the attorney, was due to testify before the Oversight Committee Feb. 6. On Feb. 4, she filed her written testimony, which explained that nine months after this scandal broke, neither she nor her clients had yet to receive a phone call from the FBI or Justice. Three hours after filing, she told me, a Justice representative called, wanting to check on this targeting thing.
And from our noble The Lightbringer leader and his party?
Democrats are instead fully vested now in using the IRS to shut down criticism by outside groups of ObamaCare, overspending or (ironically) the IRS targeting. Even liberal groups are howling about the White House's use of the IRS to silence political speech, and the House on Wednesday passed a bill to delay the regulations. The White House's response? A veto threat.
At a Senate Judiciary Committee markup Thursday morning, Texas's Ted Cruz offered an amendment to prohibit IRS employees from deliberately targeting individuals or groups based on political views. It was unanimously rejected by every member of the Democratic majority.
Blatant, open corruption. Bastards.
I think a bunch of politicians are now feeling some version of this:
I’ve sincerely wondered about this. We know that the gun grabbers (at least the government sponsored ones) are making a list. Should we make a list as well? What are the ramifications of making that sort of list? Who would go on it if that list was made?
Seems the Dutchman made a list. And the people on it, and some others, are very unhappy. Yeah, shit just got real.
"He only committed eight felonies, whatta you mean
you want to expel him?"
Democrats insist that Wright does not need to resign until after sentencing, because the judge could overturn the verdict. That’s a possibility, but it’s rare. Judges almost always abide by the verdicts of juries in criminal cases, especially because they have the opportunity themselves to dismiss charges if they determine that the state has not met its burden of substantiating the charges for a jury to find a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the past, a jury verdict of corruption has been enough to press for resignations from the California legislature. Democrats insisted yesterday that a resignation wasn’t necessary because Wright has been stripped of his committee assignments, and — I’m not making this up — he’s on paid leave, and apparently only since Tuesday. Democrats want taxpayers to pay his salary after a jury convicted him of corruption in the office he now refuses to leave.
Such ethical people, aren't they?
Democrats insist that Wright does not need to resign until after sentencing, because the judge could overturn the verdict. That’s a possibility, but it’s rare. Judges almost always abide by the verdicts of juries in criminal cases, especially because they have the opportunity themselves to dismiss charges if they determine that the state has not met its burden of substantiating the charges for a jury to find a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the past, a jury verdict of corruption has been enough to press for resignations from the California legislature. Democrats insisted yesterday that a resignation wasn’t necessary because Wright has been stripped of his committee assignments, and — I’m not making this up — he’s on paid leave, and apparently only since Tuesday. Democrats want taxpayers to pay his salary after a jury convicted him of corruption in the office he now refuses to leave.
Such ethical people, aren't they?
We're supposed to trust ANY federal agency why, again?
A significant problem with the now-suspended Federal Communications Commission
plan to have government contractors question journalists about
editorial decisions and practices was that it was a partisan exercise.
The plan originated among Democrats on the FCC; the commission's two Republican members didn't even learn about it until it was well under way.
There was also a one-sidedness in the research behind the project. The FCC enlisted scholars from two big journalism schools, the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Communication and Democracy, to determine the "critical information needs" about which journalists would be questioned. The study, delivered in July 2012, listed five authors: Ernest J. Wilson III, Carola Weil, and Katya Ognyanova from USC, Lewis Friedland from Wisconsin, and Philip Napoli from Fordham University. (Weil is now with American University.) Four of the five, it turns out, contributed to President Obama's campaigns.
And we already knew the IRS wiped its ass with the Constitution and its credibility, and flushed both. NOBODY trusts them; a bunch of the Democrats just figure they can use it to keep crapping on opposition(further degrading any trust in the IRS, but they don't care about that).
Why does the TSA target women? Because they can, and they can get away with it. And they enjoy it.
"Never mind that the checkpoint's been there for years, it's just temporary. Now shut up and stop causing us problems."
Hey, Ms. Burke, the Occupy crowd trashed parks, threatened lives and otherwise acted like socialist jerk 'this generation'; what makes you think they'd have a problem vandalizing your property? Bet you believe Obama wouldn't lie to you, too.
I sense a theme this morning: corrupt, uncaring(or too caring in a bad way) feds and socialist jerks. I think I need a break.
There was also a one-sidedness in the research behind the project. The FCC enlisted scholars from two big journalism schools, the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Communication and Democracy, to determine the "critical information needs" about which journalists would be questioned. The study, delivered in July 2012, listed five authors: Ernest J. Wilson III, Carola Weil, and Katya Ognyanova from USC, Lewis Friedland from Wisconsin, and Philip Napoli from Fordham University. (Weil is now with American University.) Four of the five, it turns out, contributed to President Obama's campaigns.
And we already knew the IRS wiped its ass with the Constitution and its credibility, and flushed both. NOBODY trusts them; a bunch of the Democrats just figure they can use it to keep crapping on opposition(further degrading any trust in the IRS, but they don't care about that).
Why does the TSA target women? Because they can, and they can get away with it. And they enjoy it.
"Never mind that the checkpoint's been there for years, it's just temporary. Now shut up and stop causing us problems."
Hey, Ms. Burke, the Occupy crowd trashed parks, threatened lives and otherwise acted like socialist jerk 'this generation'; what makes you think they'd have a problem vandalizing your property? Bet you believe Obama wouldn't lie to you, too.
I sense a theme this morning: corrupt, uncaring(or too caring in a bad way) feds and socialist jerks. I think I need a break.
Thursday, February 27, 2014
I have a couple of things to say about this Reason post
on the subjects of firearms and violence, and violent crime in general(ignore the Piers Morgan stuff; he's just an annoying bastard for now).
His post is a general "America has ALWAYS been more violent" along with "I don't like guns either." On the subject of 'more violent', I have to wonder; Kevin has dug up a LOT on the subject of actual crime rates(so far as known); rather than take bits & pieces from his work, I'll suggest you go here and just start working down. And, we also have this observation on the numbers from the UK, as noted by Mr. Goddard:
According to the FBI, there were 1.2 million violent crimes committed in the US during 2011. FBI — Violent Crime
According to the UK government, there were 1.94 million violent crimes in the UK during 2011. www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_296191.pdf
There are almost exactly five times as many people in the US as in the UK – 314 million vs. 63 million. The violent crime rate in the UK is 3,100 per 100,000, and in the US it is 380 per 100,000 population.
Brits are eight times more likely to be victims of violent crime than Americans. For some reason, Piers Morgan doesn’t talk about this.
Lots of people don't. They also don't talk about this on comparing murder rates:
...As Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood points out here, the Home Office believes it unfair to brand a man a murderer until he has been tried, convicted, and exhausted his appeals.
As a result, murders that have not been solved are not included. If indications in the Telegraph are correct, that would substantially reduce the homicide rate in itself. Murders that have resulted in an arrest but no conviction are not counted. Convictions that have not been appealed are apparently not counted. And the number of minorities reported as murder victims is far below either the demographics or of reason.
If the media reports of a total of 4,760 “violent fatalities of interest to the police” from 1 January 2011 to 30 November 2012 are correct, the murder rate is 4.7 per 100,000 population, the same as our much more inclusive homicide rate, and substantially higher than the United States murder rate.
Of course, the British murder rate is likely to be much higher than 4.7. British police are notorious for “fiddling” with the crime data. Including murder data. It takes less effort to fail to report a crime to the media than it does to consistently report crimes.
If everything is taken into account, England most probably has a murder rate close to 6 per 100,000. Or more.*
The violent crime rate in Britain is a LOT higher than we generally hear about over here. Including the murder rate. Except for people concerned about keeping the 2nd Amendment; people dig into this stuff and pass it around. Sometimes causing great squawks of outrage from people who don't want to believe it.
One more thing on this: as I heard someone say years back, "America doesn't have a violence problem: some particular groups do." The highest rates of violent crime, including murder, are committed by young inner-city minority-group males. And usually in places with the kind of gun laws people like Morgan and Feinstein consider wonderful.
On we go, to this quote that caught my attention:
Pinker also summarizes a theory put forward by historian Pieter Spierenburg, who has suggested that America's high murder rate could be explained by the fact that “democracy came too early” to the U.S.:
In Europe, first the state disarmed the people and claimed a monopoly on violence, then the people took over the apparatus of the state. In America, the people took over the state before it had forced them to lay down their arms — which, as the Second Amendment famously affirms, they reserve the right to keep and bear.
See what bastards we are? We gained independence before the Crown could force our disarmament! THAT might be where the trouble lies!
Every time I hear or read something like that, I'm reminded of this scene(good part starts at 1:00)
Yeah, that monopoly on violence over there's worked out real well, hasn't it? Just like in Venezuela, and Ukraine now and in the past...
What I think is not counted in that 'monopoly on violence' crap is that the founders of this country did not trust the government- ANY government- with such; they set this country up to PREVENT that happening. I'm damn glad they did. Someone can bitch about 'all those nasty peasants having arms!', but considering the rest of the world, overall my opinion is that they can kiss our Hoppe's #9-scented ass.
On that line, borrowing from Mr. Huffman,
Mr. Morgan’s approach to gun regulation was more akin to King George III, peering down his nose at the unruly colonies and wondering how to bring the savages to heel. He might have wanted to recall that part of the reason the right to bear arms is codified in the Constitution is that Britain was trying to disarm the citizenry at the time.
David Carr
Last, this bit:
As stated above, I don’t understand the American relationship with guns. I don’t think guns are somehow testosterone-boosting or particularly fun to shoot. The ability to kill something at a great distance doesn’t impress me very much.
Interesting how many people who don't like guns(or don't like non-government minions having them) go to comments about testosterone-boosting, or the usual comments about other peoples' genitals, isn't it? On the reasons so many like firearms- the history, the mechanics, the skills of using, the use for self-defense- don't bother mentioning them to someone like Mr. Feeney; they won't mean anything to him. Really, the big difference between people like Morgan and us? We say "You don't like firearms? Don't buy one." They say "I don't like guns, they should be banned!"
*Which reminds me of the way infant mortality rates are counted: here, if a kid is born alive and then dies that day, he's counted; in a lot of countries he's not. It skews the numbers when that's not taken into account.
His post is a general "America has ALWAYS been more violent" along with "I don't like guns either." On the subject of 'more violent', I have to wonder; Kevin has dug up a LOT on the subject of actual crime rates(so far as known); rather than take bits & pieces from his work, I'll suggest you go here and just start working down. And, we also have this observation on the numbers from the UK, as noted by Mr. Goddard:
According to the FBI, there were 1.2 million violent crimes committed in the US during 2011. FBI — Violent Crime
According to the UK government, there were 1.94 million violent crimes in the UK during 2011. www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_296191.pdf
There are almost exactly five times as many people in the US as in the UK – 314 million vs. 63 million. The violent crime rate in the UK is 3,100 per 100,000, and in the US it is 380 per 100,000 population.
Brits are eight times more likely to be victims of violent crime than Americans. For some reason, Piers Morgan doesn’t talk about this.
Lots of people don't. They also don't talk about this on comparing murder rates:
...As Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood points out here, the Home Office believes it unfair to brand a man a murderer until he has been tried, convicted, and exhausted his appeals.
As a result, murders that have not been solved are not included. If indications in the Telegraph are correct, that would substantially reduce the homicide rate in itself. Murders that have resulted in an arrest but no conviction are not counted. Convictions that have not been appealed are apparently not counted. And the number of minorities reported as murder victims is far below either the demographics or of reason.
If the media reports of a total of 4,760 “violent fatalities of interest to the police” from 1 January 2011 to 30 November 2012 are correct, the murder rate is 4.7 per 100,000 population, the same as our much more inclusive homicide rate, and substantially higher than the United States murder rate.
Of course, the British murder rate is likely to be much higher than 4.7. British police are notorious for “fiddling” with the crime data. Including murder data. It takes less effort to fail to report a crime to the media than it does to consistently report crimes.
If everything is taken into account, England most probably has a murder rate close to 6 per 100,000. Or more.*
The violent crime rate in Britain is a LOT higher than we generally hear about over here. Including the murder rate. Except for people concerned about keeping the 2nd Amendment; people dig into this stuff and pass it around. Sometimes causing great squawks of outrage from people who don't want to believe it.
One more thing on this: as I heard someone say years back, "America doesn't have a violence problem: some particular groups do." The highest rates of violent crime, including murder, are committed by young inner-city minority-group males. And usually in places with the kind of gun laws people like Morgan and Feinstein consider wonderful.
On we go, to this quote that caught my attention:
Pinker also summarizes a theory put forward by historian Pieter Spierenburg, who has suggested that America's high murder rate could be explained by the fact that “democracy came too early” to the U.S.:
In Europe, first the state disarmed the people and claimed a monopoly on violence, then the people took over the apparatus of the state. In America, the people took over the state before it had forced them to lay down their arms — which, as the Second Amendment famously affirms, they reserve the right to keep and bear.
See what bastards we are? We gained independence before the Crown could force our disarmament! THAT might be where the trouble lies!
Every time I hear or read something like that, I'm reminded of this scene(good part starts at 1:00)
Yeah, that monopoly on violence over there's worked out real well, hasn't it? Just like in Venezuela, and Ukraine now and in the past...
What I think is not counted in that 'monopoly on violence' crap is that the founders of this country did not trust the government- ANY government- with such; they set this country up to PREVENT that happening. I'm damn glad they did. Someone can bitch about 'all those nasty peasants having arms!', but considering the rest of the world, overall my opinion is that they can kiss our Hoppe's #9-scented ass.
On that line, borrowing from Mr. Huffman,
Mr. Morgan’s approach to gun regulation was more akin to King George III, peering down his nose at the unruly colonies and wondering how to bring the savages to heel. He might have wanted to recall that part of the reason the right to bear arms is codified in the Constitution is that Britain was trying to disarm the citizenry at the time.
David Carr
Last, this bit:
As stated above, I don’t understand the American relationship with guns. I don’t think guns are somehow testosterone-boosting or particularly fun to shoot. The ability to kill something at a great distance doesn’t impress me very much.
Interesting how many people who don't like guns(or don't like non-government minions having them) go to comments about testosterone-boosting, or the usual comments about other peoples' genitals, isn't it? On the reasons so many like firearms- the history, the mechanics, the skills of using, the use for self-defense- don't bother mentioning them to someone like Mr. Feeney; they won't mean anything to him. Really, the big difference between people like Morgan and us? We say "You don't like firearms? Don't buy one." They say "I don't like guns, they should be banned!"
*Which reminds me of the way infant mortality rates are counted: here, if a kid is born alive and then dies that day, he's counted; in a lot of countries he's not. It skews the numbers when that's not taken into account.
When the four-legged predators lose their fear,
or get really hungry, you'd better have a weapon handy.
Note this comment from idiot Shazz T in (surprise!) Seattle: Why couldn't they just GO INSIDE? Shoot it dead, huh? She will make a great republican senator someday.
Yeah, because it'll never come back later, oh no! And Democrats would rather endanger their kids by inaction than shoot the big toothy cat stalking them, apparently. Farging idiot.
Note this comment from idiot Shazz T in (surprise!) Seattle: Why couldn't they just GO INSIDE? Shoot it dead, huh? She will make a great republican senator someday.
Yeah, because it'll never come back later, oh no! And Democrats would rather endanger their kids by inaction than shoot the big toothy cat stalking them, apparently. Farging idiot.
We're told to believe that 'All cultures are equal';
I call bullshit.
Also, because we also get to play Guess The Party:
Go to prison for bribery, get out, get special praise. Guess The Party:
The event honored 18 “women of color changing our world,” but one recipient was singled out for special praise.
Mayor Martin J. Walsh went off script at last Thursday’s event, recognizing his “dear friend” at Table 2. State Representative Gloria Fox described her as a sister in politics and said they had been an “unbeatable team.” And former state representative Willie Mae Allen, just before handing this guest her plaque, said, “We’re depending on you.”
Gunmen from Islamist group Boko Haram shot or burned to death 59 pupils in a boarding school in northeast Nigeria overnight, a hospital official and security forces said on Tuesday. …The terrorists spared the girls at the school. They gathered the girls together and told them to “go away and get married and to abandon their education.”
Rafai, who had given an earlier estimate of 29 killed, said all those killed were boys. He said the school’s 24 buildings, including staff quarters, were completely burned to the ground.
Also, because we also get to play Guess The Party:
Go to prison for bribery, get out, get special praise. Guess The Party:
The event honored 18 “women of color changing our world,” but one recipient was singled out for special praise.
Mayor Martin J. Walsh went off script at last Thursday’s event, recognizing his “dear friend” at Table 2. State Representative Gloria Fox described her as a sister in politics and said they had been an “unbeatable team.” And former state representative Willie Mae Allen, just before handing this guest her plaque, said, “We’re depending on you.”
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
To borrow from Lawdog, Sweet jumping Shiva on a pogo stick,
this is... Just watch:
Sent this to son; his comments started with That is the worst room clearing I have ever seen. And went from there.
Sent this to son; his comments started with That is the worst room clearing I have ever seen. And went from there.
A response to the TSA agent:
But our best bet is to take the frustration toward the TSA agent
confiscating our over-sized liquids, and re-direct it to the people at
TSA headquarters who are being paid the big bucks to make the rules —
the ones who make the call as to whether our toothpaste is verboten and
whether our shoes will need extra screening.
A: We ARE pissed at the headquarters assholes who ignore good sense, intelligence, and the Constitution, and your asshole Director who's decided that 'flying is a privilege'; what the hell makes you think we're not?
B: YOU are the butthead molesting people and screwing with medical devices and abusing people who don't kiss your ass enough(not to mention the ones stealing our shit); so yeah, we're going to stay pissed at you, too.
A guy who co-founded Greenpeace says AGW is unproven. You might remember that he left the organization because “After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective,” he said. “Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.”
Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism
They do indeed.
The Left has to change the subject to vigilantism because the case for self-defense is so manifestly obvious. Is the state respecting the fundamental rights of citizens — including their right to life — if it mandates passivity in the face of violent attack? Of course not. It does, however, respect the right to life when it empowers self-defense while also prosecuting those rare few who seek to mask murderous intent behind a self-defense pretext.
Protecting the right of self-defense is just. Mandatory disarmament is not.
A: We ARE pissed at the headquarters assholes who ignore good sense, intelligence, and the Constitution, and your asshole Director who's decided that 'flying is a privilege'; what the hell makes you think we're not?
B: YOU are the butthead molesting people and screwing with medical devices and abusing people who don't kiss your ass enough(not to mention the ones stealing our shit); so yeah, we're going to stay pissed at you, too.
A guy who co-founded Greenpeace says AGW is unproven. You might remember that he left the organization because “After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective,” he said. “Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.”
Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism
They do indeed.
The Left has to change the subject to vigilantism because the case for self-defense is so manifestly obvious. Is the state respecting the fundamental rights of citizens — including their right to life — if it mandates passivity in the face of violent attack? Of course not. It does, however, respect the right to life when it empowers self-defense while also prosecuting those rare few who seek to mask murderous intent behind a self-defense pretext.
Protecting the right of self-defense is just. Mandatory disarmament is not.
Never forget, THESE are the Only Ones who can be trusted with guns
ATF agents have lost track of dozens of government-issued guns, after stashing them under the front seats in their cars, in glove compartments or simply leaving them on top of their vehicles and driving away, according to internal reports from the past five years obtained by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Agents left their guns behind in bathroom stalls, at a hospital, outside a movie theater and on a plane, according to the records, obtained Tuesday by the news organization under the federal Freedom of Information Act.
In December 2009, two 6-year-old boys spotted an agent's loaded ATF Smith & Wesson .357 on a storm sewer grate in Bettendorf, Iowa. The agent lived nearby and later said he couldn't find his gun for days but didn't bother reporting it — until it hit the local newspaper.
In Los Angeles in 2011, an agent went out to a bar drinking with other agents and friends, reportedly consuming four alcoholic beverages. The next morning he woke up and realized his ATF-issued Glock was gone. It was not found.
If a plain-old citizen did something like this, ATF would want them hanged, but
All of the agents' names are blacked out on the reports, which do not say if the agents were disciplined.
Of course not, you think they're commoners or something?
Agents left their guns behind in bathroom stalls, at a hospital, outside a movie theater and on a plane, according to the records, obtained Tuesday by the news organization under the federal Freedom of Information Act.
In December 2009, two 6-year-old boys spotted an agent's loaded ATF Smith & Wesson .357 on a storm sewer grate in Bettendorf, Iowa. The agent lived nearby and later said he couldn't find his gun for days but didn't bother reporting it — until it hit the local newspaper.
In Los Angeles in 2011, an agent went out to a bar drinking with other agents and friends, reportedly consuming four alcoholic beverages. The next morning he woke up and realized his ATF-issued Glock was gone. It was not found.
If a plain-old citizen did something like this, ATF would want them hanged, but
All of the agents' names are blacked out on the reports, which do not say if the agents were disciplined.
Of course not, you think they're commoners or something?
The kind of wonders to expect from Obamacare:
"Employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) destroyed veterans’ medical files in a systematic attempt to eliminate backlogged veteran medical exam requests, a former VA employee told The Daily Caller.
Audio of an internal VA meeting obtained by TheDC confirms that VA officials in Los Angeles intentionally canceled backlogged patient exam requests."
Selective prosecution. Because this kind of crap is what passes for 'justice' under AG Irvin Nathan in Sodom on the Potomac.
Remember, this is the asshole who wouldn't prosecute a journalist for openly having a illegal magazine in SotP; who has repeatedly ignored the law so favored politicians could wave around firearms illegal there; but has repeatedly shown no problems with screwing over plain old citizens on bullshit charges. And note this: the bastard changed the charge against the victim so as to deny him a jury trial.
Miserable, corrupt, vile bastard.
Ah, the tolerance of other views of the 'progressives':
Former "Dirty Jobs" host Mike Rowe says he's become the target of death threats after narrating a Wal-Mart commercial about investing in American manufacturing.
Apparently Mr. Douglas wasn't enlightened enough to go for non-violence when dealing with slave raiders. Or something.
Why you're not Officer Friendly anymore, Reason #473:
You're a abusive oathbreaking lawbreaker who likes to assault people. Because you figure you can get away with it.
A couple of super-sized keepers of the peace came over to verbally abuse the videographer for "diverting my attention," to physically abuse the videographer (you can see the camera shake and blur as a police sergeant grabs him), and to threaten arrest if he doesn't leave.
"You don't," says the sergeant. You just lost it."
Ah, Rubio, if only we could trust you on illegal aliens...
The U.S. Senator from Florida had listened patiently to Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa speak favorably about his recent trip to Cuba, all the while omitting any real references to the oppression of the totalitarian government there.
To Rubio, like many Cuban exiles and their descendants, it was too much to bear.
“Let me tell you what the Cubans are really good at,” Rubio said Monday when he took to the Senate floor. “What they are really good at is repression…They have exported repression in real time, in our hemisphere, right now.”
More on that gas-station shooting where the victim turned the tables.
In the last few days video footage has surfaced of violent criminal attacks successfully repelled by armed good guys, and I think there are some important lessons all of us can take away from these bits of footage.
Some of the people to thank for supporting the mess in Venezuela. Note that most are idiot celebrities.
Audio of an internal VA meeting obtained by TheDC confirms that VA officials in Los Angeles intentionally canceled backlogged patient exam requests."
Selective prosecution. Because this kind of crap is what passes for 'justice' under AG Irvin Nathan in Sodom on the Potomac.
Remember, this is the asshole who wouldn't prosecute a journalist for openly having a illegal magazine in SotP; who has repeatedly ignored the law so favored politicians could wave around firearms illegal there; but has repeatedly shown no problems with screwing over plain old citizens on bullshit charges. And note this: the bastard changed the charge against the victim so as to deny him a jury trial.
Miserable, corrupt, vile bastard.
Ah, the tolerance of other views of the 'progressives':
Former "Dirty Jobs" host Mike Rowe says he's become the target of death threats after narrating a Wal-Mart commercial about investing in American manufacturing.
Apparently Mr. Douglas wasn't enlightened enough to go for non-violence when dealing with slave raiders. Or something.
Why you're not Officer Friendly anymore, Reason #473:
You're a abusive oathbreaking lawbreaker who likes to assault people. Because you figure you can get away with it.
A couple of super-sized keepers of the peace came over to verbally abuse the videographer for "diverting my attention," to physically abuse the videographer (you can see the camera shake and blur as a police sergeant grabs him), and to threaten arrest if he doesn't leave.
We're not fucking around. Do you understand? Do not, do not disrespect us. And do not not listen to us. Now walk away and shut your fucking mouth or you're going to jail.Replies the videographer, "I thought I had freedom of speech."
"You don't," says the sergeant. You just lost it."
Ah, Rubio, if only we could trust you on illegal aliens...
The U.S. Senator from Florida had listened patiently to Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa speak favorably about his recent trip to Cuba, all the while omitting any real references to the oppression of the totalitarian government there.
To Rubio, like many Cuban exiles and their descendants, it was too much to bear.
“Let me tell you what the Cubans are really good at,” Rubio said Monday when he took to the Senate floor. “What they are really good at is repression…They have exported repression in real time, in our hemisphere, right now.”
More on that gas-station shooting where the victim turned the tables.
In the last few days video footage has surfaced of violent criminal attacks successfully repelled by armed good guys, and I think there are some important lessons all of us can take away from these bits of footage.
Some of the people to thank for supporting the mess in Venezuela. Note that most are idiot celebrities.
Ah, but it won't be the POLITICIANS' precious ass at risk
so it's all good. After all, aren't the actual troops pawns to be trashed without concern?
"In shrinking the United States Army to its smallest size since 1940, Pentagon officials said Monday that they were willing to assume more risk the next time troops are called to war.
But assuming more risk, they acknowledged, meant that more of those troops would probably die.
“You have fewer troops, fewer ships, fewer planes,” Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said at a Pentagon news conference on Monday as he formally unveiled the department’s $496 billion budget for the 2015 fiscal year. “Readiness is not the same standard. Of course there’s going to be risk.”
Yeah, the only risk YOU'LL face is saying "Oopsy, we guessed wrong; guess we'll have to attend a few extra funerals and express our concern."
I have no words to express my contempt for this bastards.
"In shrinking the United States Army to its smallest size since 1940, Pentagon officials said Monday that they were willing to assume more risk the next time troops are called to war.
But assuming more risk, they acknowledged, meant that more of those troops would probably die.
“You have fewer troops, fewer ships, fewer planes,” Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said at a Pentagon news conference on Monday as he formally unveiled the department’s $496 billion budget for the 2015 fiscal year. “Readiness is not the same standard. Of course there’s going to be risk.”
Yeah, the only risk YOU'LL face is saying "Oopsy, we guessed wrong; guess we'll have to attend a few extra funerals and express our concern."
I have no words to express my contempt for this bastards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)