In the real world of guns and gun ownership, this is how responsible gun owners and instructors actually think.
If we need fear anything gun-related in this country, leaving aside those wicked people who would presume to do us or our family and friends harm, it is the vocal, entitled, and demonstratively ignorant anti-gun zealot who seeks to substitute ostentatious indignation for knowledge and cartoonish scapegoating for reasoned discourse. They are experts at rousing emotions and fear mongering, but that tends to be where the “expertise” on gun issues ends.
And we should fear them because they aren’t just after our guns. They are after our liberties.
– Maybe Morgan can use one of his fellow limey’s as a character reference. After all, he was one of the Queens favorites.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260589/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-Report-reveals-raped-34-women-girls-sexually-assaulted-450.html
– Ok. That was HTML fail at its finest.
An additional peculiarity to pin on the experts (now appearing wherever we may care to look) is this: they uniformly seem to be incapable of distinguishing a regime (in the sense of political order) from the people whom the regime is presumed to govern.
That is, to be capable of distinguishing, in answer to the question “Who did it?” these two, 1) “The Nazis did it.”, and 2) “The Germans did it.”
Since for some reason known only to the spirits html-doo the linked page won’t post, I’ll just link the Larry Correia essay:
Not sure if that’s on point or on counter-point.
– Every decision in a Progressives life comes down to a chicken or the egg choice, which quandary they answer by going with the feel good “its something or someone elses fault”.
Ernst, from the innards of the post you can’t get to load, the writer [Guido Kimble] says:
** In that forum thread [this DU thread — sdferr], posters are really making Mr. Yeager out to be a fool and a poser. This got me thinking, “What actually makes a firearms training expert, or an expert of any kind?” I believe many of the commenters assume that there is some over-arching, agreed-upon, governing body that dictates the credentialing process for firearms instructors, which there is not. There are some national firearms instructor certification organizations, such as the NRA and state Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.), but they typically only cover very basic training. The entire “advanced gunfighter” training world is run by committed instructors, who are essentially self-proclaimed experts (including myself, to be fair). **
Kimble then goes on to describe the reasonable objectives and elements of training as he sees them, with a view to informing newcomers making the choice to seek instruction and the choice of what instructor to turn to in particular.
I care more about whether people know how to handle a gun before they need to use it, than anything else. The amount of time people need to use their guns is minuscule compared to the total amount of time a gun owner spends handling them for other purposes, such as practice or cleaning.
Safe gun handling is the only course I would consider supporting a requirement for.
What to hear some weird shit?
It seems in the movie Dark Knight Rises*, that was premiering in Aurora Co when the theater shooting happened, there is a map displayed featuring a place called Sandy Hook. There is also a building in the movie with “Aurora” in big red neon letters on it. The prop guy for the movie died in a hostpital last April after a car crash in which authorities say he sustained “non-life threatening injuries”. He is buried in Newton Conn.
There’s some suspect these shooters are programed killbots, and I can’t dismiss the idea out of hand.
*Movie title, or message to the world, you decide.
If ‘they’ have the tech to turn people into kill bots so seamlessly via the old ‘Catcher in the Rye’ trope then we’ve already lost and we have something probably more dangerous than a massive nuclear exchange to worry about. That’s infowars/coast to coast territory.
This is one possible explanation: it’s just a coincidence. The prop master was from the Newtown area and may have used the name Sandy Hook since Gotham is supposed to be an east coast city sort of like New York somewhere near connecticut and so some local names were used at his suggestion. That’s just a speculation though since as you noted he died in April after a truck wreck.
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/01/sandy-hook-on-gotham-city-map-plausible-explanation-2532040.html
OK, if you say so…
From the Wiki article:
“Conspiracy theories
MKUltra plays a part in many conspiracy theories given its nature and the destruction of most records.[79]
Lawrence Teeter, attorney for convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan, believed Sirhan was under the influence of hypnosis when he fired his weapon at Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Teeter linked the CIA’s MKUltra program to mind control techniques that he claimed were used to control Sirhan.[80][81]
Jonestown, the Guyana location of the Jim Jones cult and Peoples Temple mass suicide, was thought to be a test site for MKUltra medical and mind control experiments after the official end of the program. Congressman Leo Ryan, a known critic of the CIA, was murdered by Peoples Temple members after he personally visited Jonestown to investigate various reported irregularities.[82] “
MKUltra also ties into the story of Polybius.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-6799-polybius/
Lee, the step-father of the guy (I am following my rule to never name these pukes when talking about them) who shot up the theatre in Aurora was employed by the same financial institution as the father of the dude who shot up Sandy Hook.
Coincidence or no?
2 Mass Shootings Connected To Libor Scandal?
Polybius other, perhaps more conclusive, claim to our attention.
Doesn’t matter how well trained a gun owner is or aspires to be. Bottom line, those in power now, way-far-Left, want gun ownership curtailed. O’bama Unchained, the most divisive and relentless Republic-destroying president this nation has ever known. And he thinks he’s Lincoln.
Seems likee we are being pushed, doesn’t it? Life of Powderkeg….
Heh. Three movie references in one comment. I guess I should go see one of ’em.
Mr. Yeager’s big yap has gotten his ticket pulled.
CEO Who Threatened to ‘Start Killing People’ Over Gun Control Has Handgun Permit Suspended
don’t falsely shout “fire” in a movie theatre
Too bad he isn’t a famous reporter, he would have 1st amendment rights…
James Taranto today runs a segment entitled “In defense of Eric Holder”. He writes:
**** Our lead item yesterday prompts the following response from reader Chris Kenny:
There is a gun culture among inner city youth, where a gun is cool (and also maybe a necessity). I think his gist is that getting a gun is a badge of honor. And he wants to change that frame of mind to it not being cool, just like smoking is no longer cool. (Of course, smoking is cool, we all know it, I wish I still could, but I don’t want cancer.)
First, try cigars, which are much healthier than cigarettes. As for the defense of Holder, it seems to us a reasonable one. He did indeed seem to have in mind “gangstas” more than legitimate gun owners (though we tend to doubt he cares much about the latter).
Holder’s call for a cultural shift points to a bifurcation about attitudes toward guns in the media. While the news media (this column being an obvious exception) tend to demonize guns and engage in the vilest sort of propaganda against gun owners and the Second Amendment, the entertainment media, especially movies, TV and rap music, frequently glamorize and glorify guns. There’s not much the government can do about that without running into trouble with the First Amendment. ****
What strikes me as peculiar is this: it’s not guns as such that is at the root of the distinction being made, yet neither Taranto nor his correspondent bring the actual distinction forward explicitly.
If we grant the limitation to Holder’s intentions in that dated quote — that is if we limit the object of his aim to lawbreakers — then we ought to recognize the ‘thing’ being promoted [in the so-called “culture”] isn’t the gun per se, but wrongdoing, injustice, the glorification of criminality. This glorification isn’t dependent on the presence or absence of a gun at all.
What’s “cool” is being a badass who flaunts his badness and gets away with it. And Holder, intellectual coward that he is, couldn’t find it in himself to be “uncool”, to be straightforward with the juvenile morons whose respect he would instantly lose were he to take on the proper role of the goody-twoshoes moralist he wishes to conceal.
Except that it’s not reasonable.
Guns outlawed/Outlaws guns
as the bumber sticker used to say,
Except that it’s entirely reasonable: only listen to the statement.
Sdferr, that view would make sense if the resulting policies were not aimed squarely at law-abiding gun owners. It’s unreasonable because the policy is what will have effect, not the argument.
I differ McG. I don’t hear Holder’s 1995 statement saying anything at all about restricting gun ownership. It seems to me a straightforward promotion of a propaganda campaign aimed at something else — namely, the cool of the streets — and could actually be used to promote lawful gun ownership of the sort which is today becoming more or less a commonplace.
Believe what they do, not what they say.
I don’t have to insert matter which isn’t there in order to maintain that Taranto knows from reasonable when he sees it.
Taranto might know from reasonable, but perhaps there should be an effort to make drug dealing, extortion, prostitution, and robbery uncool to gang bangers first, just to see how that goes. If it works out, they would probably realize they don’t even need guns anymore…
Here’s the difference between gun culture and gangbanger/thug culture:
Gun culture knows better than to hold a semi-auto pistol sideways and get smacked in the face by its own brass.