Shall Not Be Questioned » Anti-Gun Folks

Allergic to Diversity?

Sebastian — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:53:47 +0000

Joan Peterson mistakes a zombie for a “black man,” and then proceeds to be horrified that zombies are an largely just fun and games, and became an internet meme, just like lolcats. I can’t recall when the zombie internet meme actually started, but it started as a joke. The earliest stuff I can remember being this:

It doesn’t have to be your humor, but this stuff was all over the Internet several years ago, and started, if I recall, largely outside the shooting community. Then some clubs started doing zombie shoots. A club near me had one each halloween and it was very popular, and a lot of fun. You get that Joan? Fun! Some people think shooting is fun, and shooting at zombie targets on halloween? Double fun!

Why is this so hard to deal with and understand? If shooting wasn’t fun, many of us wouldn’t be so energized by this issue. Imagine how it feels for us. It would be like being a golfer, and having petulant busybodies constantly trying to limit access to golf courses, country clubs, and golf clubs, all the while talking about what scary, horrible people golfers were. This is exactly what you people are doing applied to another pastime. Is it so difficult to understand that in a free society, different people have different ideas of fun and humor? Shouldn’t those who value a free and tolerant society embrace such diversity of thought and pastimes? The only answer I can come up with is that Joan and her ilk value neither freedom, tolerance, or diversity, if it people happen to enjoy things they don’t understand or approve of. We have a word for people like that.

Personally, I think the whole zombie thing has jumped the shark. It’s gotten old, and at this point even I’ll agree the joke isn’t funny anymore. But I get how it started, and kept going. Even the Puritans had more of a sense of humor than the anti-gun folks, geez. It reminds me of an old saying about people who wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat, terrified at the prospect that there might be people out there having fun. It would seem for many of the leaders of the anti-gun movement, this is an accurate description!

No related posts.

In Detroit, Self-Defense on the Rise

Sebastian — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:59:15 +0000

Interesting development in Detroit:

Justifiable homicide in the city shot up 79 percent in 2011 from the previous year, as citizens in the long-suffering city armed themselves and took matters into their own hands. The local rate of self-defense killings now stands 2,200 percent above the national average. Residents, unable to rely on a dwindling police force to keep them safe, are fighting back against the criminal scourge on their own. And they’re offering no apologies.

Police have been cut back so much that the average response time is 24 minutes now, compared to ten minutes in most of the rest of the country.

One high-ranking official in the county legal system, speaking to The Daily, said the rise in justifiable homicides mirrors a local court system that’s increasingly lenient of the practice.

“It’s a lot more acceptable now to get your own retribution,” the official said. “And the justice system in the city is a lot more understanding if people do that. It‘s becoming a part of the culture.”

This is the danger in the break down of law and order. To form governments, people surrender their natural right of retribution to the state. In return, the state administers fair and impartial justice. When the state fails to live up to its end of the bargain, people take matters into their own hands. Since juries are going to be composed of the same people mentioned in this article, prosecutors will have a hell of a time earning convictions on legitimate cases of vigilantism, and can forget about earning convictions on borderline self-defense cases, or cases such as shooting a burglar in the back after he dropped your stereo and is on his way out your front door.

And yet our opponents would rather have these people disarmed for their own good. Needless to say I strongly disagree with that statement. The residents of Detroit are doing what they can to keep some semblance of order. This is a failure of the state, and when the state fails, the people have a right to replace the administration of the state’s justice. That street justice is ugly, is why we have government to begin with. Our opponents view this as a failure of the individuals, whereas I believe we view it as a failure of the state.

It kind of makes me wonder in situations like this, if city budget cuts are the root problem here, why government doesn’t move in and do something particularly radical? Why not set up, dare I say it, the old concept of militia. Take the most responsible among the city residents, train them, and get them on the streets administering the state’s justice, rather than street justice.

But heavens no… we have to leave that to the “professionals” in modern society. You have to wonder, in polite society, which is the more abhorrent idea? Street justice, or the state organizing ordinary citizens to take care of their own? I think I know the answer for most of the elite, and probably our political opponents in the gun control movement.

No related posts.

Google Still Anti-Gun

Sebastian — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:30:14 +0000

From a former San Jose Mercury News Reporter, now turned freelancer, we learn that it’s hard for even hunting bloggers. Apparently Google’s policies “doesn’t allow the promotion of … violent concepts” including “the promotion of self-harm and violence against people or animals.” with an exception that it’s just fine for ”self-defense, hunting and sporting events.” To me that still says guns, knives, and weapons are a no no, but Google is OK with events related to lawful activities with these items.

Not that remarkably surprising for a company that has it’s two big US sites being in Mountain View and New York. There used to be a time when tech people were almost universally “leave me the hell alone” types, but with the Gen Y and beyond, it seems to have taken a turn for the left. I’m thinking that might have to do with computers becoming less about ones and zeros (the realm of engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists) into a creative industry, not all that remarkably different from arts and philosophy.

That Mean Pro-Anti-Gun Jerk Being Mean to Victims

Bitter — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:05:01 +0000

According to CSGV, anyone who questions the strategy of gun control groups lighting candles in order to achieve a political change is just a big old mean person. And a jerk. Well, I look forward to their condemnation of Michael Bloomberg.

In what is otherwise a fawning piece over Bloomberg’s financial and political sacrifices for gun control, there’s an entire section called “NO MORE CANDLES.”

In the past, advocates for stricter gun controls held marches, rallies and candlelight vigils. MAIG has taken a far more activist approach, conducting undercover investigations and sting operations that are then dramatically revealed to the press.

So, now that Bloomberg is publicly throwing CSGV & Brady tactics under the bus, will they condemn him?

Count the Lies

Bitter — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:16:04 +0000

There are a few notes from this USA Today web piece on the new Brady president, and I decided to turn it into a game.

Youth anti-violence advocate Daniel Gross has been elected to head the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Brady Center, the Washington-based organization promoting gun control plans to announce Monday.

In the opening sentence, we have two already. He was hired, not elected. There may have technically been a vote by the Board on whether to extend an offer, but he was hired. We know this because the Board hired a recruiting firm (multiple times, it seems) to find someone for the job. When a recruiter finds a candidate for a job and that applicant then interviews with multiple people who mutually come to a decision on extending an offer, we don’t say they were elected to do their job. They were hired.

Also, we know they announced last week. Although, to be fair to Dan Gross, it would seem that they didn’t plan to do so, so maybe it doesn’t count as an outright lie. I’ll count it for half.

Gross is cofounder and executive director of the Center to Prevent Youth Violence and was elected to the Brady post by the organization’s board of trustees. He replaces former Brady president Paul Helmke, former mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., who announced in June he would step down on July 10. Helmke’s resignation followed a five-year commitment he’d made to serve the organization starting in 2006.

This bring our tally to 4 1/2 lies. First, we have the elected crap again. The Board came to agreement to extend a job offer, not hold an election of Brady Campaign members. Second, Paul Helmke & the Brady Campaign were all quite vocal that he wasn’t stepping down, they weren’t welcoming him back. Along those same lines, the third sentence is an outright fabrication that he resigned since it has been reported by mainstream media outlets when Helmke was giving interviews left and right last year that he didn’t want to leave the Brady Campaign, the Board refused to renew his contract.

After this paragraph, the rest of the story is the standard gun control manipulation counting suicides as the same as crime, and talking about how many children (many of whom do not meet any definition that a regular person defines as a child) die by guns. Following that, it’s all about feelings. I’m not exaggerating when I describe his quotes as sounding like Bette Midler in Beaches.

“Policy is a big part of the solution but people have to realize that this isn’t a political issue, this is an issue that’s claiming the lives of 30,000 people every year and eight kids every day and we need to approach it with that kind of urgency,” Gross said.

“The bottom line is making people care about this issue and care about it personally and deeply,” he added.

“Now, tell us the truth. I want you to pull out all the stops. We know the performer. Who is the person? Who is C.C. Bloom?”

“Oh, Marla. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve asked myself that very same question. Well, first and foremost, I would have to say that C.C. feels things – deeply. C.C. is a deeply feeling person. And, because of this, is deeply emotional. Do you understand?”

I would like to thank Dan Gross for inspiring me to pull out my copy of Beaches which I haven’t watched in far too long. I admit that I teared up even fast forwarding to get to the interview scene.

Back to more serious issues, his comments definitely highlight that the Brady Campaign is likely to make themselves even more scarce on Capitol Hill. It looks like we need to focus on MAIG’s efforts in DC since they are the new and upcoming gun control group looking to pass actual policy instead of just trying to make you feel deeply like C.C. Bloom.

Also of note, he had a random foundation director from Beverly Hills email the reporter about himself. I guess he is trying to highlight that he’s bringing a fundraising network to the table, but those funds are going to be pretty well restricted to the (c)3 that can’t lobby much.

More on the New Likely Brady Campaign Goals

Bitter — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:10:26 +0000

John Richardson did some digging into the organization that Dan Gross founded to get an idea of what he bringing to the table. It definitely seems to be money.

…they use entertainment and New York sports figures as their draw. I think Brady is seeking an in to deep pockets and Gross will provide that. I’m sure he has a great Rolodex.

He also knows how to get taxpayer dollars according to what Jacob found.

I don’t believe he’s been on the receiving end of pork from Albany. He did get $50,000 (through PAX) from the NYC Council in ’10

Jacob also did some digging through NY state political donation records and it seems to indicate that he is not the same Dan Gross who has given modestly to Democrats the last few years. Instead, the new Brady president has only given to one candidate. He was backing a Democrat though, so he is likely on that side of the political spectrum.

More and more, it looks like the involvement of Dan Gross indicates that the Brady Center will be the big focus and they are likely quietly handing off the political work to Bloomberg. I noticed that the Brady accounts have been promoting Bloomberg’s MAIG Super Bowl commercial in social media, so that could be read as another sign that they are leaving that work up to the billionaire while the Brady Center staffers just try to fundraise to save their jobs. (This also wouldn’t be unheard of since we know that the partnership started a few years ago when both MAIG & Brady were using the same lobbyist who now heads CeaseFirePA.)

The Bloomberg/Menino Gun Control Ad

Sebastian — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:27:18 +0000

Notice they don’t let Mumbles talk a whole lot. But I do have to say I’m relatively relieved. This could have been a lot worse for us, especially if they had been willing to spend money on a one minute spot. They spent so much time in their initial comical banter, they were only able to make a laughable statement about supporting the Second Amendment, and then imploring people to visit their web site (which no one will). Given that we now know they only bought spots in the DC market, my opinion in that this ad is meant to get MAIG exposure in front of politicians. After all, if they have the money to buy a Super Bowl ad, they must be big players in this issue. And imagine what they could do if they pumped money into issue ads during a race?

Of course, they already tried that in a media market primed for their message and failed spectacularly. But they surely want DC to know who the big dog is in this issue.

Bloomberg’s Super Bowl Commercial

Bitter — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:00:54 +0000

One of the things I’ve been wondering ever since the news broke about Bloomberg’s big spend on a gun control ad during the Super Bowl is where exactly the ad would air. I saw many reporters simply repeating the line that it would be regional. Since Bloomberg has spent so much money on Pennsylvania, I wondered if this area would be a target. One reporter made a mention of asking about the regions, but did not publish and answer.

Yesterday, the NYT finally answered the question. Bloomberg only funded his gun control ad to run in DC. Yup, that’s right. He won’t take the fight to the states, only to other politicians. I think it represents an important trend with the Mayor to consistently try to overrule the voters by keeping up his relationships with and only target other elites. He doesn’t want to be bothered by us little people who might dare disagree with him and his nanny-state tendencies.

What Does the New Brady President Mean for the Future of the Organization?

Bitter — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:00:53 +0000

The Brady Campaign board decided to hire a president whose entire background is in advertising and non-profit work. He has no political background that I’ve seen, and what little does exist is entirely focused on New York. In other words, they hired someone who seemingly has no real network to get started on the DC political scene.

Now, assuming he’s a Democrat*, that will be an automatic in to gun control political circles that Paul Helmke never had. Unlike Helmke, he should have a background that the gun control caucus from highly urban areas can rally behind. But, since he doesn’t seem to have any direct experience playing the political game, it will be interesting to see how far this kind “in” can really take him politically.

In my mind, this type of hire gives a little more credit to the idea we’ve been talking about for a couple of years now that maybe the Brady Campaign is taking a backseat to the Brady Center. It’s probably easier to raise the (c)3 funds, and this would be a step in the direction of really focusing on the (c)3 work that isn’t just centered around Dennis Hennigan’s legal attempts to re-write the Second Amendment. Dan Gross can focus on happy, feel-good things that will look better to donors who might otherwise be tired of the losses they have faced politically and in the courts for the last three-and-a-half years.

*According to Open Secrets, there is a Daniel Gross from New York who has rather modestly donated to exclusively Democrats since 2007.

The New Brady Campaign President

Bitter — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 04:08:34 +0000

UPDATE: It looks like the Brady Campaign’s new president is trying to play a game of Down the Rabbit Hole. Silly Dan! Screenshots save evidence of your fumble. (See, I can use the Super Bowl theme, too!)

***
I don’t even know what to say. They hired an advertising guy, and yet this is the mess that the Brady Campaign has been pushing lately. Racism, drug use, child neglect, embrace of the “thug” lifestyle, these are all things they have been promoting with the people they have been recently retweeting. I don’t know if I should feel sorry for the guy or if this is the kind of work he finds acceptable.

The Brady Campaign president, Dan Gross, lives in New York and pushed the ASK program at his previous job. In other words, he’s a big believer in the Bloomberg nannyism to get other people to dig into your personal lives at home. Perhaps the Brady board looked to Bloomberg’s work with MAIG and assumed that if they could just get someone like him, they could come back to the top of the gun control world.

This is rather funny since his first PR-related move as a leader of the Brady Campaign is a stumble. Or, rather, should I call it a fumble?

Um, no.

The first announcement is on their website. On Saturday. (Maybe even Friday since I didn’t look at it yesterday.)

The more cynical may point to this as another Brady lie. I just find it amusing and very much in line of their strategy for not actually reviewing anything before it goes out the door.

Also, I find it interesting that he has opted to make his announcement on a day where no one will care. Things people will talk about on Monday include the Nevada caucuses, the Super Bowl, the inevitable Boston riots, and Newt Gingrich’s lack of a plan. It won’t be the guy no one in DC has heard of taking over an organization that can’t even get their bills through a committee. I have to wonder if this was intentional on the part of the Brady Campaign.