Anti-Rights Idiocy

Looks like a lot of people are talking about Carry Permit Holders

Robb Allen — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:22:26 GMT

Like Les is talking about Carry Permit Holders.

Must suck to be the Brady Campaign to Stomp on Your Rights. They have to beg for funding and a bunch of gun bloggers, on their own sweet time (and dime, mind you), blow the Brady's pissy pants efforts right out of the water.

The Brady Campaign doesn't get it

Robb Allen — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:51:59 GMT

This is a riot (from the Brady's blog. NO LINKY!)

Florida Airports Get It- No Guns Allowed

This story reports that an airport employee arrested for bringing a gun into the Miami International Airport doesn’t have a concealed carry permit.
Except that doesn’t matter in Florida, where even its lax permit system and its new guns-at-work law don’t allow permit-holders to take guns into airports.

Actually, that's not true. You simply cannot take guns into the sterile area. Going to pick up your family? Tote away! Walking around the shops? Wear your good IWB holster! Getting on a plane? Not gonna happen

From the story

An American Eagle operations employee was arrested Wednesday at Miami International Airport after he brought a gun into a secure area, police said.

It's pretty pathetic when you have to blatantly lie in order to try to get your point across. If I ever finding myself stretching the truth to try to validate my point, I at least am mature enough to examine my premise to make sure I'm correct. Truths tend to be self-evident and if you have to lie, then you should automatically accept that you're pretty much wrong.

Doubt the anti-gunners out there have that kind of ability.

There's lies, damned lies

Robb Allen — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:28:34 GMT

And, well, pretty much this entire article.

Did you notice there was already a round in the firing chamber when the magazine (ammunition supply) was inserted? Some people don’t; if they live, you see them limping around or at the graves of friends and relatives.
See how the magazine holds seven rounds, and empty ones can quickly be replaced? People who do not practice markmanship think this will compensate for their bad aim, and end up spraying their houses and neighborhoods with wild shots and bodies, if they don’t maim or kill themselves first.

I posted a response which, of course, is awaiting approval

Great article!
Well, outside of the outright lies, misinformation, and general hysterics, which pretty much sums up the entire article.
Yes, I noticed the round in the chamber, it’s how I carry my pistol. It’s pretty safe too being that accidental deaths by firearm are rare (in fact, only accidental poisoning by gas and “All Other” rank below firearms). Do people accidentally shoot themselves from time to time? About the same number of people who cut themselves with kitchen knives or slam fingers in the door. A firearm comes with a risk of injury just like any tool in your garage. That’s no reason to ban table saws and claw hammers.
Now, magazines. You assert that people who use higher capacity magazines do so to ’spray’. You seem to consider 12 rounds as ‘too high’. If so, why do you allow the police to carry them? Because they have some magical training? You need to look up the hit percentage from ANY shootout involving cops. You’ll find they need the increased capacity because, wouldn’t you know it, shooting while moving and / or being shot at isn’t easy. Why should non-police be subjected to less?
Finally, for someone who wrote some pretty technical “here’s how a gun works”, you’re flat out lying when you say it’s simple to modify a gun to full auto, especially when you show a Glock 18 (a firearm that is MADE in full auto) as ‘proof’ that it can be done.
So, being that you have to lie and twist to get your point across, don’t you think maybe you’re on the wrong side of the argument. A 200 round drum magazine on a pistol in my hands poses no threat to the safety of the community. A .22 revolver with only 2 loaded chambers in the hands of a thug is a threat.
But it’s easier to attack the innocent, isn’t it?

Man. Progressives get ticked when you interrupt their echo chamber

Robb Allen — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:40:18 GMT

Thanks to Mike W. I've spent a little too much time here, trying to debate logic and reason with what amounts to monkeys with handfuls of runny feces and poor gross motor skills.

Granted, it's pretty low hanging fruit, but I try my damndest to argue with calmness and rationality even in the midst of some pretty welded shut minds. What I want to point out is the same thing that happened over at the Brady Campaign or the Huffington Posts and that is that the gun rights people are cool and calm and approach the argument rationally while the anti's do nothing more than spin insults.

I challenge ANYONE to answer Delaware's Toughest Liberal assertion that guns are designed only for killing. Please read my comments and point out the errors in my logic. I am willing to discuss it here, without name calling (although minimal snark keeps things somewhat entertaining ;) and with respect.

I won't get that there.

Reasoned discourse 2.0

Robb Allen — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:26:34 GMT

Ever look at the latest Brady Campaign's YouTube videos?

You can't comment there nor rate them, either.

Brady Campaign suicide watch

Robb Allen — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:57:34 GMT

As in, that's all they're going to be able to look for now. They've reduced themselves to admitting that over half the gun deaths they claim are suicides. Sebastian has a good article on what that means for the Brady Campaign.

So why are the anti-gun folks pushing this so hard? Are they desperate? Are they stupid? I think the answer to the former is a little, and to the latter, no. I couldn’t figure out why they might be latching on to an argument that’s clearly not going to get any traction in the sphere of public opinion. But thinking about it last night, it occurred to me. It’s likely a ploy to develop a new constituency for gun control.
Most of us have interacted with gun control advocates. The vast majority of the people I’ve come across who have become activists in the issue have been relatives of victims of gun violence. Hell, even The Brady Campaign’s namesake fits that profile. So does Bryan Miller. The gun control movement’s bread and butter is tragedy; it’s what makes anti-gunners, and it’s what keeps their organizations churning.

Can you imagine what their mail fliers look like?

The Brady Campaign staff is legally allowed to be around children

Robb Allen — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:35:25 GMT

Simply because they haven't molested any kids yet.

At least, that's what this asshat from the Brady Campaign is basically implying when he says that CCW holders are simply people who haven't committed a crime yet.

What a dick-weasel. I love how he equates law-abiding gun owners with terrorists by suggesting that someone like me, bringing a gun into a parking lot somehow means that I'm going to be able to leap into the sterile area and hijack a plane.

Can I sue the Brady Campaign for slander?

Hat Tip - David Hardy, who if rumor is correct, I will be honored to be training with at Blackwater.

A simpleton's complete guide to practically everything

Robb Allen — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:50:52 GMT

Clay Bennett, a cartoonist, has great advice on gun safety

Talk about straight to the point! Man, I can't believe it's that simple! We could apply that logic to everything and make the whole world safe as bubble-wrap!

The Complete Guide to Safe Sex - Don't have sex.
The Complete Guide to Vehicular Safety - Don't drive a car
The Complete Guide to Avoiding Accidents - Don't get out of bed. Ever.

I take it abstinence only education is bad, unless it's about guns, then it's good. In fact, if the school system treated firearm safety the same as sex-ed*, they'd be handing out free ammunition to the kids (I mean, they're gonna shoot guns anyway, shouldn't they be using Glaser safety ammo?)

*I do not support abstinence only education, by the way. I disagree with handing out condoms, but that's not the same as telling kids that avoiding the horizontal mambo is the only option.

When historians attack

Robb Allen — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:25:05 GMT

Or, I didn't like the outcome so I'll use ad hominem attacks instead

My favorite part is this, which should have been at the very beginning of the article so I wouldn't have bothered with the rest

Constitutional doctrine is properly ever-evolving, but that evolution ought not to be shaped by manufactured provenance masquerading as scholarship.

Ah, yes. The living constitution. Which is like a living contract between your mortgage company and you. I know we agreed on 6.5%, but the contract is living so now it's 19.4% and you're required to clean our local branch office.

The funny thing is that it is capable of evolving. The founders had a good first try, however not all their ideas have worked perfectly nor did they cover all the bases. They, being rather intelligent people, realized they couldn't be perfect so they came up with a pretty good system that allowed the people to modify the Constitution if the need arose. The modification wasn't to be done by a few judges, but by a vast majority of the people.

I don't know what I'm enjoying more. The fact that we actually moved a back a bit to the freedom this country was founded upon, or the fact that leftists' heads are a'splodin'.

In a move that would amaze David Copperfield

Robb Allen — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:42:09 GMT

Any references to a "collective right" on the Brady Campaign's web site are disappearing.

The Brady Campaign, including all of its employees, are sick people and compulsive liars. The problem is they'll continue to peddle their lies even when the whole world can see them for the charlatans they are.

I'm glad that us gun bloggers are there to shine the spotlight on them, though.