ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Five lessons of the Newton shootings

Glenn Reynolds lays them out in USA Today.  The first one is particularly important.
1. When Twenty Minutes Is Forever.

According to the CNN timeline for the Sandy Hook tragedy, "Police and other first responders arrived on scene about 20 minutes after the first calls." Twenty minutes. Five minutes is forever when violence is underway, but 20 minutes -- a third of an hour -- means that the "first responders" aren't likely to do much more than clean up the mess. 
When seconds count, the police are minutes away.  Lots of minutes away.  That's the primary lesson one should take away from the Newtown massacre.  Self-defense is no different than nearly everything else, if you want it done right - or at all - then you have to do it yourself.

Labels:

160 Comments:

Anonymous Cryan Ryan December 26, 2012 1:20 PM  

It is a miracle there were not 100 or 150 deaths.

It probably took him no more than 5 minutes to commit the crime, and had he not busied himself with shooting each victim 10 or more times, he might have gone on to other classrooms.

Imagine if a large(r) tally were his goal, rather than a 100% mortality rate by turning each victim into swiss cheese.

The NRA position is asinine. Expecting the government to put government employed guards in each school is exactly the opposite of what we need.

We just need to dispense with the "gun-free" mentality.

If people (citizens, teachers, janitors, etc) can keep a gun in the glovebox or trunk, a lot of this nonsense will be nipped in the bud.

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 1:26 PM  

Connecticut ranks fifth in per capita taxes.

But don't be surprised when the ruling elite explains that the slow response was due to inadequate funding.

Anonymous onejohn512 December 26, 2012 1:27 PM  

People are so irrational. More guns in the hands of responsible capable adults would put a quick stop to such insanity, and quickly. Yet pointing this out meets with comments like "that will never happen".

Anonymous mikep December 26, 2012 1:27 PM  

6. Ffs, next time use better actors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKWgCRBR5qE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1jg0H-MfVY

Anonymous Orion December 26, 2012 1:31 PM  

A point I keep pointing out to others. The police aren't there to protect you, they are there to clean up and maybe track down the perpetrators. Of course, considering there are cities like New Orleans where murders can expect to spend just two months before being back on the street (before Katrina hit)what difference does that make. One friend of mine was against "untrained individuals wielding guns like lunatics". Of course, that begs the question. How much training should you be required to have before attempting to stop one of these idiots? If you accidentally wound or kill a child but keep his count to ten others... your still doing more than all the police in the state of Connecticut with all their training were able to do.

Blogger ajw308 December 26, 2012 1:33 PM  

When the cops hide in the parking lot till it's over it's a moot point that they show up late.

They aren't soldiers. They can't be forced into dangerous situations and it seems they won't voluntarily enter one. They do file a report after the crime has been commited and that is all they are required to do.

In the war on crime the police are the REMF's.

Anonymous Mina December 26, 2012 1:36 PM  

We, the victims of the crime, are by definition the ones most able to respond first. Respond with a gun, or several guns or a rifle or shotgun. Then let the 2nd responders clean up the mess, cordon off the area, write their reports, etc. That was all they ever had the opportunity to do anyway.

The romantic vision of the police showing up to a situation "in progress" was only ever for TV or Clint Eastwood movies. In Detroit I hear they give a 2-3 hour window to respond to burglaries, domestic disputes and even murders.

Anonymous AlteredFate December 26, 2012 1:37 PM  

Well of course they took twenty minutes. They had to give the mossad plenty of time to get out of there. It would have been pretty awkward if witnesses saw the local police escorting a bunch of blood covered Israelis away without explanation.

Blogger Amy Haines December 26, 2012 1:56 PM  

The police are janitors. Firefighters, first responders, EMT's, too. They can only react. And while I recognize that they provide valuable services, and necessary services at times, they are not the heroes who provide the "first line of defense" that they are often trumpeted as being.

Anonymous RC December 26, 2012 1:56 PM  

"Well of course they took twenty minutes. They had to give the mossad plenty of time to get out of there." AlteredFate

One can only speculate to what degree the government will lie. The list is so long now that it takes a better memory than mine to list them all.

Setting the conspiracy theories aside for a moment, they didn't show up for twenty minutes because it takes time for them to get on their super-duper military-style scary-type uniforms. The FBI girl was especially fierce looking, barely being able to walk while carrying her deadly assault rifle with the really big, scary, heavy clip. She probably had two. Keystone Kops on steroids. It made for some good pictures though.

Anonymous Credo in Unum Deum December 26, 2012 2:31 PM  

It took the police 20 minutes to travel 1.8 miles according to google maps.

That's an average of about 475 feet per minute.

And to contrast, the .45 ACP ammo in the gun on my hip will be on target at a speed of 950 feet per second.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this whole incident stinks to High Heaven...

Anonymous bw December 26, 2012 2:31 PM  

they are not the heroes who provide the "first line of defense" that they are often trumpeted as being. Amy Haines

Indeed. Very understated, actually, but it's a start, and is certainly Truth as far as it goes.

The Predators, guarded and protected constantly by the labor of the prey, actually manage to convince some of said prey to make themselves easier prey, all for the further benefit and security of the Predators - and ultimately for the TruestofPredators behind them. Devolution. Or is it Devilution?

Anonymous DennisP2112 December 26, 2012 2:47 PM  

I do some computer work at two different police stations (northern IL, USA) and there are two phrases I hear often, when I inquire about using a gun for self defense as an individual.

When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

Would you rather have six of your friends carry you to your grave site or face twelve of your peers in a court room.

Anonymous re allow anonymous comments December 26, 2012 2:48 PM  

Let's say you had definitive, inarguable proof that this was a psyop, mossad or otherwise. Would it matter? The ruling class would deny deny deny and the people (in general) would simply not believe you because they do not want to believe you.

Anonymous ThirdMonkey December 26, 2012 3:08 PM  

It takes time to get all that tactical gear on and load up the urban assault vehicle, yo. First respondin' ain't easy.

Anonymous Gerd December 26, 2012 3:08 PM  

Ya,

We must take responsibility for our own self defense. Twenty minute response time is an eternity in an intense situation.

I have never understood why the majority of American women have not embraced firearms training.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 3:10 PM  

@vox day

but 20 minutes -- a third of an hour -- means that the "first responders" aren't likely to do much more than clean up the mess.

One more reason to take steps to make sure the mess isn't as big as it is when massive killing machines are available to anyone with a pulse.

Anonymous Noah B. December 26, 2012 3:13 PM  

"It took the police 20 minutes to travel 1.8 miles according to google maps."

In other words, while those children were being murdered, the cops were cowering in fear.

Anonymous Noah B. December 26, 2012 3:15 PM  

Tad, you're not going to like this, but it looks like you're going to have to convert to Christianity for the good of the nation.

Anonymous Mina December 26, 2012 3:16 PM  

"massive killing machines are available to anyone with a pulse" - and who should they be available to, then?

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 3:16 PM  

Tad: "One more reason to take steps..."

Be specific, boy.

Anonymous Susan December 26, 2012 3:21 PM  

What's even worse, is that there are 45 members of the PD in Newtown. 45 cowering cowards dragging their feet while innocents are getting shot.

As to keeping guns in the glove box, I used to work in an autoglass replacement shop. Due to the high volume of doorglass broken some weeks, we had to turn away work. Not a good idea to leave anything valuable in your car.

Anonymous scoobius dubious December 26, 2012 3:22 PM  

"They had to give the mossad plenty of time to get out of there."

I find it rather hard to believe that this was some sort of black ops thing by the Mossad or anybody else, instead of just another straightforward rampage by a nut, but even if it were, I'd find it even harder to believe that the police were in the loop, somehow deliberately giving the "real shooters" time to escape.

Police are not paid well enough, and are by and large not smart enough, to keep notorious secrets; police culture is just barely capable of keeping its own ugly secrets but not ones of this nature, and police in general are drawn from the ranks of people who are not well-educated enough, and not well-paid enough, to be relied on for this kind of airtight secrecy. Keep in mind that the event is absolutely notorious. Before the operation was underway, the plotters would have to have 100% confidence that every hole would stay plugged, reliably, with certainty, forever. And they would need 100% certainty, not 99%, not 85%, which from a probability point of view is already unusual odds. 100% is off the charts, it's virtually undoable unless every single player involved is part of the same org with an unshakeable code of omerta and the means to back that up. You don't cut a bunch of mediocre civil servants, many with drinking problems, in on that type of plan. You can't afford to.

I've read a few lists (posted here, possibly) of suspicious questions about the whole thing, but the fact is you can examine virtually any event from a suspicious perspective and come up with strange coincidences and nagging doubts. I could make what I had for breakfast this morning look like part of a sinister plot.

I don't know that there's a news outlet or a site that I would trust to lay out all the facts on this in detail and be confident that they were a) competently gathered, b) checked to a level of reliable veracity anc c) not lying or spinning or obfuscating to sell a point of view. If there is such an outlet, I'd be grateful if somebody could tell me what it is.

Anonymous ThirdMonkey December 26, 2012 3:24 PM  

According to FBI statistics, 200,000 sexual assaults are prevented each year. Tad, why do you hate women and want them to be raped? Is it the same reason you want children to be defenseless at school? You really should convert to Christianity. Jesus can take away the hate you have for those made in His image.

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 3:27 PM  

Right on cue:

http://news.yahoo.com/police-union-seeks-more-help-newtown-officers-184614407.html

Newtown firefighters and cops are suffering from "anguish and frustration" so they need more of your tax dollars.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 3:33 PM  

@thirdmonkey

You really should convert to Christianity. Jesus can take away the hate you have for those made in His image.

I fail to understand how converting to Christianity or any other religion or staring up at the stars in the hope that unicorns will fall from the sky or believing in Santa Claus will impact my disposition?

Regarding this "hate" thing you are talking about....you aren't making any sense.

Anonymous Daniel December 26, 2012 3:35 PM  

One more reason to take steps to make sure the mess isn't as big as it is when massive killing machines are available to anyone with a pulse.

I can name that tune!

Step one, we can ban lots of guns
Step two, self-defense is a screw
Step three, ban guns to please me
Step four, you need to ban more
Step five, don't let the kids out alive.

Step by Step...
Repeat step by step...

New Tads on the Block

Anonymous Noah B. December 26, 2012 3:37 PM  

"I fail to understand how converting to Christianity or any other religion or staring up at the stars in the hope that unicorns will fall from the sky or believing in Santa Claus will impact my disposition?"

But that really doesn't matter. We don't understand why you want children to be left unprotected so they can die in schools, and we'd feel better if you convert to Christianity so that you don't want children to die anymore. And we've decided that if someone has to give up rights for the sake of society, we'd rather it was you.

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 3:41 PM  

Tad: "I fail to understand how converting to Christianity or any other religion or staring up at the stars in the hope that unicorns will fall from the sky or believing in Santa Claus will impact my disposition?"

Christians live longer, healthier, happier, require less medical care, and are far less suicidal than atheists.

Anonymous ThirdMonkey December 26, 2012 3:51 PM  

@Tad
My apologies, as I intended to type 200,000 sexual assaults were prevented by women having firearms. Anyone against the weakest in our society having the same type of protection an elected tyrant has must really hate them. Do you hate puppies, too, or is this just a jihad on women and children?

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 4:02 PM  

@Noah
But that really doesn't matter. We don't understand why you want children to be left unprotected so they can die in schools, and we'd feel better if you convert to Christianity so that you don't want children to die anymore. And we've decided that if someone has to give up rights for the sake of society, we'd rather it was you.

Ah...Ok Noah. You go ahead and throw that suggestion out into the public sphere. I'll toss out the idea of a ban on high capacity magazines and we'll see where the chips land. Good luck with that.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 4:05 PM  

Christians live longer, healthier, happier, require less medical care, and are far less suicidal than atheists.

Interesting. Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based life. So, they have that going for them over Christians.

Anonymous Noah B. December 26, 2012 4:10 PM  

Sounds good Tad. Let's do it now. On the one hand we have Tad, who has some level of mass murder he is content with. What number is that, Tad? How many people need to be killed before you are willing to do something meaningful to stop mass murderers?

Anonymous Noah B. December 26, 2012 4:11 PM  

"Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based life."

Even if true -- so what? You still want children to die, most Christians do not.

Anonymous ThirdMonkey December 26, 2012 4:12 PM  

Advocating a ban on high-cap magazines under the assumption that it will be effective has no bearing on reality. If I'm wrong, please provide the data. Otherwise, you reality is built on a foundation of hobbit orgasms.

Blogger ray December 26, 2012 4:13 PM  

building cop shops next to your skools wont stop anything; i wont bother to go read the other (non)solutions

amerika has been a feminist police state for 40 loooong years now, and adding more Police and more Feminism is gas on the fire

your males are tearing up your society because it persecutes, demeans, bullies, and disenfranchises them, from cradle to grave

then it maintains vast government, media, and "education" institutions to pour out denials of these facts, lest anyone actually want to change this madness

the only way to keep public places safe is to STOP PERSECUTING YOUR OWN BOYS AND MEN

(you might wanna think about allowing fathers to exist again, too)

but of course NOBODY wants to do that, rather, everybody wants to keep the (profitable!) ma-sheen moovin' -- denying the problem, and continuing to do the same thing (i.e., nothing, except pass more "laws" and hire more paramilitary/cops and build more prisons)

all the Gun Blather is just another dodge of reality, the same dish of red herring the left/right lockstep always trots out . . . and it always f-a-i-l-s

all that will get you is more dead kindergartners, and if you think all their blood is on the shooters' hands o amerika, you are fooling yourselves about that too

Anonymous Retrenched December 26, 2012 4:22 PM  

Good column on leftists losing control of the narrative:

http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2012/12/26/liberals-panic-as-they-lose-the-gun-narrative-n1473885

Anonymous kh123 December 26, 2012 4:22 PM  

"Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based..."

I'm pretty sure Dawkins has a community board somewhere where fellow fetishists wank over their having a superior view of reality.

Blogger Magson December 26, 2012 4:27 PM  

As Larry Correia points out (http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/):

"Cops can’t be everywhere. There are at best only a couple hundred thousand on duty at any given time patrolling the entire country. Excellent response time is in the three-five minute range. We’ve seen what bad guys can do in three minutes, but sometimes it is far worse. They simply can’t teleport. So in some cases that means the bad guys can have ten, fifteen, even twenty minutes to do horrible things with nobody effectively fighting back.

So if we can’t have cops there, what can we do?

The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started."

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 4:28 PM  

Tad: "Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based life. So, they have that going for them over Christians."

The question you should be asking is why does "living a more reality-based life" lead to shorter life spans, higher incidence of suicide, depression, poor mental health etc.

Then after you refuse to ask yourself this question, the next question that you should ask yourself is why you ignore this reality, since you boast about living a "reality based life".

Anonymous Mina December 26, 2012 5:13 PM  

"As you'll see in the video below, through Soledad O'Brien, CNN is desperate to set the table for policies that will make us less safe by ensuring only bad guys have guns. This is what I call Narrative Setting, where the media decides what The Narrative (our national conversation) will be surrounding a particular story - in this case a heinous school shooting in Connecticut. And how this Narrative Setting is done, is exactly what CNN did to Rep. Mary Bono Mack this morning, every time she attempted to bring up any solution to mass shootings outside of unconstitutional gun-grabbing.

Not only are CNN and Soledad making sure Rep. Bono Mack pays a heavy price every time she brings up a solution inconvenient to their agenda (mental health, air marshals); they're also sending a not-too-subtle message to others that this is not what we are going to talk about. In other words, anyone who dares talk about anything other than gun control is going to get publicly whack-a-moled."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/12/15/Media-Sets-Gun-control-narrative

Anonymous Vermont Guy December 26, 2012 5:18 PM  

I am less concerned about the police showing up late then I am about the medics showing up whenever. Basicly they just frittered away one third of the golden hour.

Blogger Elusive Wapiti December 26, 2012 5:20 PM  

"Christians live longer, healthier, happier, require less medical care, and are far less suicidal than atheists."

Let's not forget more homicidal, in the sense of "kill a man, you're a murderer; kill a million, you're a conqueror".

Anonymous Anonymous December 26, 2012 5:40 PM  

Good God.

I've been a Christian my entire life an I would have shot any of these murdering nuts without a seconds hesitation and slept perfectly well that same evening.

Anonymous jack December 26, 2012 6:01 PM  

I think it was the Snit show, Snit himself, or his substitute, this afternoon talking about LaPiere interview with David Gregory this last Sunday.

Gregory was heavily dismissive of putting armed guards in schools as a deterrent. This talk show did some research and it seems that Gregory's children go to a certain school in Conn. On this schools website, and I have not been there yet, they talk about having 11 armed security guards that work there. And, wait for it, this is apparently where the Obama kids go. That means secret service on top of a large security presence that is there full time.

Could someone, again, quote the definition of hypocrisy?

And, Mr. Gregory may find himself talking to the D.C. police about that 30 round magazine he was waving about in the studio; in the District of Columbia, where such is highly illegal.

The talk show host also mentioned that the network had tried to clear use of the magazine with the DC police and were turned down. They apparently went ahead and used it anyway.

Me and you. For similar crimes, years in jail.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 6:45 PM  

@third monkey

Advocating a ban on high-cap magazines under the assumption that it will be effective has no bearing on reality. If I'm wrong, please provide the data

Higher capacity magazines hold more bullets that lower capacity magazines. Bullets are the killing mechanism. You can check my math if you like.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 6:46 PM  

@Noah

"Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based life."

Even if true -- so what


Just saying. That's all.

Anonymous Matt December 26, 2012 7:12 PM  

Soldiers, whose job is to kill people efficiently, don't fight with belt-fed machine guns though they hold the most bullets possible. More bullets = more death is too facile to work in reality.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 26, 2012 7:13 PM  

Fuck the police. Newtown has all of 2K people in it. You could circumscribe it twice in twenty minutes.

It's a seven-minute drive from the police station to the elementary school.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 26, 2012 7:16 PM  

And that's if you were driving at the speed limit with your pretty lights off, obeying red lights and everything.

Should have told them there would be donuts.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 7:20 PM  

Tad: "Just saying. That's all."

Because it's not true. Tad has chosen some very unhealthy lifestyles for himself which can only be justified by ignoring reality.

Such is sin.



Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 7:22 PM  

@matt

Soldiers, whose job is to kill people efficiently, don't fight with belt-fed machine guns though they hold the most bullets possible. More bullets = more death is too facile to work in reality.

Some do, depending on their mission and objectives. Of course there is no objective or mission among civilians that is so critical that it overrides the interest in keeping these killing machines off the streets.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 7:28 PM  

@George

Tad has chosen some very unhealthy lifestyles for himself which can only be justified by ignoring reality.

Such is sin.


Ha! "Sin"....A concept of such little use the only thing that could justify the idea is an equally imaginary concept of judgement upon death.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 7:44 PM  

Tad: "Ha! "Sin"....A concept of such little use...."

Actually, it could rescue you from your chosen lifestyles which are known to lead to lower life expectancy, poorer health, poorer mental health, higher suicide rates, depression, and deadly disease.

It could be very useful for you, if only you would stop ignoring reality.

You only live a "reality based life" when it suits your lifestyle. Any reality that goes contra your carnal desires is simply ignored while you and your kind goes on infecting each other with disease and committing suicide at alarming rates.

You need a savior, Tad.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 7:52 PM  

@George

Oh, please George, be my savior!

I'm not here to defend a lifestyle that might result in depression or suicide, be it a christian, jewish, gay, straight, atheist or otherwise.

All I'm here for, George, is to learn from your wisdom.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 7:55 PM  

Tad... I have seen you are very much for banning guns, or at least limiting someone to be able to shoot more then 10 shots before re-loading.

lets say you get your way and the guns are banned.
Then what?

I am guessing you will think people will be more safe?
Do you really think that?

Do you not understand that if there is a draconian law banning guns, this will be a full out declaration of war against the american people?
Do you not understand this?
If our right to bear arms is taken from us, then we are slabves of the government. You will not be allowed to exercise your rights.
These latest massacres will be insignificant compared to the bloodbath that will happen when the government goes to confiscate these guns.

The people that bought them aren'tm planning on giving them up.

Lets take mexico for example. The regular citizen isn't allowed to own a gun at all. Their rate of gun deaths is higher. How come their gun death rates aren't zero? Could it be that guns won't go away? That people will get guns illegaly?

Well... Are you going to take guns away from people? Do you have the guts? Because I am guessing the police won't be very successful. There will be a lot of dead cops. Do you understand what turned the americans in the revolutionary war to begin shooting at the british? The british were marching to take the guns from americans.

Tad, did you also know that you are NO DIFFERENT THEN THE KKK?
The KKK got laws passed that made it illegal for blacks to own guns, so that they could go and hang one of them with very little resistance.

So you want to limit my access to any gun I choose to purchase? I tell you right now. Fuck off! You have no right. God gave me those rights, you cannot take them away. pass any law you want. I will personally get into the war and become a sniper. Any liberal/leftist dickweed that gets in my sights will quickly be missing to brain matter. Yes, I know how to shoot a sniper rifle. I know ballistics (bullet drop) and windage. if you want to live, don't go outside and stand around for more then 3 seconds where someone like me or others on here might spot you and enjoy the pinkish/redish spray that will emerge from your head.

Think about what you are supporting. Are you willing to go to war over this shit? because I know a lot of people that will and an even larger number of people who have been actually itching to kill people like you, government, cops and yes military.

I don't think you understand the gravity of the present situation.
We are on the verge of war, and you have no idea.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis December 26, 2012 8:04 PM  

Higher capacity magazines hold more bullets that lower capacity magazines. Bullets are the killing mechanism. You can check my math if you like.

Fertilizer and gasoline are far more effective killers than a machine gun. You confuse the tool for the agent. Banning assault weapons may have stopped the school shooting, though that itself is not a given. But there is no indication that it would have stopped the Auroa shooter. Unless you have forgotten he had rigged his apartment with enough explosives to level the entire complex. Even assuming the highly unlikely reality of no assault weapons, there would have been nothing stopping him from committing a murderous atrocity. For someone who claims to operate in a reality based frame of mind it is very irritating to see you repeatedly make that mistake.

Anonymous DonReynolds December 26, 2012 8:07 PM  

One fact that seems to be wasted on many people in this country is that law enforcement does not prevent crime. The purpose of the police is to react to crime AFTER it has occurred by investigating and apprehending those they believe to be responsible. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, but every police officer I have ever talked to understands that police work starts after the crime begins and usually the criminal is done and gone long before the police even arrive.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:09 PM  

@starbuck

Do you not understand that if there is a draconian law banning guns, this will be a full out declaration of war against the american people?
Do you not understand this?


Yes, I do understand this. Thankfully, no draconian law is being considered here.

If our right to bear arms is taken from us, then we are slabves of the government. You will not be allowed to exercise your rights.

Indeed. Thankfully, no one is arguing that the right to bear arms be taken away.

Tad, did you also know that you are NO DIFFERENT THEN THE KKK?
The KKK got laws passed that made it illegal for blacks to own guns, so that they could go and hang one of them with very little resistance.


Except, no one is suggesting that it be illegal for anyone to own guns.

So you want to limit my access to any gun I choose to purchase? I tell you right now. Fuck off! You have no right. God gave me those rights, you cannot take them away. pass any law you want.

Is there any weapon at all that God does not desire you possess? Also, I have a bible on the shelf here alongside my Douglas Adams books. Can you tell me where in the bible I can find the passage on God's view on Guns?

if you want to live, don't go outside and stand around for more then 3 seconds where someone like me or others on here might spot you and enjoy the pinkish/redish spray that will emerge from your head.

Nice!!! Very nice.

Think about what you are supporting. Are you willing to go to war over this shit? because I know a lot of people that will and an even larger number of people who have been actually itching to kill people like you, government, cops and yes military.

Really? War? You're willing to go to war if a ban on high capacity magazines is passed? That's all it takes. Tell me, what will this war look like and what kind of folks will start the shooting? You. Pussies like you who can't bare the idea of not possessing a high capacity magazine meant merely to kill people? You're a fool.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 8:10 PM  

Tad: I'm not here to defend a lifestyle that might result in depression or suicide...

Oh. Then stop telling people how atheists are better than Christians because they "live more reality-based lives". People might think you are defending a lifestyle that results in depression and suicide.

All I'm here for, George, is to learn from your wisdom.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline."

Prov 1:7

Let me know when you are ready, Tad.

Anonymous DonReynolds December 26, 2012 8:11 PM  

The shooter in the Aurora theater was frustrated by the high capacity magazine jamming (which is a common problem) on the assault rifle. The vast majority of those killed and wounded were hit by shotgun blasts. Still the assault rifle nonsense persists.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:13 PM  

@George


Oh. Then stop telling people how atheists are better than Christians because they "live more reality-based lives".


I'm not suggesting atheists are better than christians, George. Just more reality based.

And, re: Prov 1:7....read it. Dismissed it as poppycock. Bring me something else.

Anonymous Mina December 26, 2012 8:15 PM  

"One fact that seems to be wasted on many people in this country is that law enforcement does not prevent crime. The purpose of the police is to react to crime AFTER it has occurred by investigating and apprehending those they believe to be responsible. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, but every police officer I have ever talked to understands that police work starts after the crime begins and usually the criminal is done and gone long before the police even arrive."

CORRECT.

"THE LAW: THE POLICE ARE NOT THERE FOR YOU

State and city governments -- rather than the Federal authorities -- are responsible for local law enforcement. So, only occasionally have Federal Courts ruled on the matter of police protection. However, in 1856 the U.S. Supreme Court declared that local law enforcement had no duty to protect a particular person, but only a general duty to enforce the laws. [South v. Maryland, 59 U.S. (How.) 396, 15 L.Ed., 433 (856)]. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives you no right to police protection. In 1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, held that:.. there is no Constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."

http://www.stentorian.com/2ndamend/strategy.html#jury

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 8:19 PM  

Yes, I do understand this. Thankfully, no draconian law is being considered here.-Tad

Really, what ARE they considering?
Because i keep hearing they want to ban assualt rifles and 30 round clips.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 8:25 PM  

Really? War? You're willing to go to war if a ban on high capacity magazines is passed? That's all it takes. Tell me, what will this war look like and what kind of folks will start the shooting? You. Pussies like you who can't bare the idea of not possessing a high capacity magazine meant merely to kill people? You're a fool.-Tad

Really? I am a fool? The whole 2nd amendment is ALL about killing people. Killing people supporting a government that has turned into a tyranny.

What does it matter how many bullets a clip holds? Doesn't take that long to change clips during a slaughter. you could carry one 30 round clip or 3 10 round clips. Really, how is that going to slowdown a murderer? Tell me Tad. How is that going to stop a nut? Please explain to me, because I don't get it.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:36 PM  

@starbuck

Really, what ARE they considering?
Because i keep hearing they want to ban assualt rifles and 30 round clips.


Exactly! No draconian. No one talking about banning gun ownership. It's all good.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 8:36 PM  

Tad: "I'm not suggesting atheists are better than christians, George. Just more reality based."

And you said reality-based is better which means you think atheists are better. Oh well. Ho hum. Another game of atheist hide and seek.

And, re: Prov 1:7....read it. Dismissed it as poppycock. Bring me something else.

Like an alcoholic who dismisses step 1 of the path to sobriety, an atheist who dismisses step 1 of the path to wisdom is not yet ready. They will both continue in their destructive pursuits, harming themselves and those around them in blind, arrogant impudence fraught with disease and depression.

Let me know when you are ready, Tad. I will be happy to help you should you ever decide you've had enough of your sad, destructive lifestyle.




Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:39 PM  

@starbuck

Tell me Tad. How is that going to stop a nut? Please explain to me, because I don't get it.

If I'm standing in front of you when you have to change one 10 round clip for another, I'll have a chance to get to you. If you've instead got 20 more rounds, I won't.

There you go...Now you get it.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:41 PM  

@george

Like an alcoholic who dismisses step 1 of the path to sobriety, an atheist who dismisses step 1 of the path to wisdom is not yet ready. They will both continue in their destructive pursuits, harming themselves and those around them

Explain to me again who I'm harming and how by not believing in your god.

Anonymous Anonymous December 26, 2012 8:49 PM  

Agreeing with Cornell West is like agreeing with the devil . . .

But he is right.

Almost 450 citizens of Chicago have been shot and killed this past (almost) 12 months, but 5% of that amount, and lily-white to boot, get gunned down (horrible as it was), and everybody gets excited.

450 folks have been shot an killed in Chicago, a city in a state with one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, Rahm as Mayor . . .

And Newtown and legal weapons are an issue?

Ridiculous? Sublime? Who can tell anymore?

jb

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 8:52 PM  

Exactly! No draconian. No one talking about banning gun ownership. It's all good.-Tad

Then you are not listening to what the liberals are saying...

If I'm standing in front of you when you have to change one 10 round clip for another, I'll have a chance to get to you. If you've instead got 20 more rounds, I won't.

There you go...Now you get it.


You standing in front of me? really? Did you just manage to jump out of the way of all my bullets that I shot at you? An unarmed fool standing in front of me is already dead. Besides, I am a criminal. I have a much larger magazine... What's that? They are illegal?!?!?! Well, what about the fact that I am shooting people for no good reason. Isn't that illegal? Funny how that didn't stop a criminal as myself. You see, I didn't care about any law about killing people. Why on earth would I care about sticking to a 10 round clip? I could find a 30+ round clip illegally really easily. The world is awash in large clips. They won't disappear.
Do you understand that? Criminals don't care about the laws they are breaking. Do you understand that?!


Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 8:54 PM  

By endorsing a lifestyle which has been clinically shown to have higher rates of suicide, depression and mental health problems, you contribute directly and indirectly to the problem.

You may be oblivious to your destructive patterns, as surely as the alcoholic is oblivious to the scars left on his family.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 8:57 PM  

@starbuck

You standing in front of me? really? Did you just manage to jump out of the way of all my bullets that I shot at you?

No, I was the one you missed and was lucky when you then went after others. I was the lucky one and really lucky that you couldn't buy a high capacity magazine.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 8:57 PM  

Hey Tad... How about we make Christianity the state religion? Then you will be forced under penalty of law to go to Church, pray and achknowledge Jesus in public. Woudln't that be great?


Or is that against the constitution? Isn't that against one of your God given rights? Isn't that wrong?

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:00 PM  

No, I was the one you missed and was lucky when you then went after others. I was the lucky one and really lucky that you couldn't buy a high capacity magazine.-Tad

Just because selling them is against the law doesn't mean you can't buy them. After all, buying meth isn't too hard. Buying smuggled full on machine guns isn't that hard to buy - even illegally. Making something illegal doesn't make it hard to get, fact is, sometimes it becomes easier to get.

btw, I don't miss.

Anonymous Porky? December 26, 2012 9:01 PM  

Tad: "If I'm standing in front of you when you have to change one 10 round clip for another, I'll have a chance to get to you. If you've instead got 20 more rounds, I won't."

Yup. That's why criminals use illegal gun clips. Sounds like Tad is finally beginning to understand how criminals think.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:02 PM  

@George

By endorsing a lifestyle which has been clinically shown to have higher rates of suicide, depression and mental health problems, you contribute directly and indirectly to the problem.

Ah...Indirectly! There we go. In other words, I'm not hurting anyone and you can't show how I'm hurting myself or anyone by not believing in your god.

Thanks, better luck next time.

Here I am, an atheist, who has made a fine living, who cares for others, who contributes far more to the general welfare than I take, who is incredibly happy with my life and my family, and who has time explore a variety of pursuits from sports to cultural to philanthropic. Boy, how could this possibly be given that I don't believe in your god. How could it be?

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:08 PM  

Here I am, an atheist, who has made a fine living, who cares for others, who contributes far more to the general welfare than I take, who is incredibly happy with my life and my family, and who has time explore a variety of pursuits from sports to cultural to philanthropic. Boy, how could this possibly be given that I don't believe in your god. How could it be?-Tad

Don't believe in my God? I don't own him. He owns me. He is my master.
You can believe it or not. Don't really care because to me you are just words on a screen and vice versa.

I can't answer your question. I have no way of knowing why God would allow you to be wealthy and me not as wealthy. Don't know, don't think I even care. Maybe you are a better person? And when judgement comes for you, you will be so good that God will say you are without sin and do not deserve eternal judgement. Or perhaps you have a flawless defense.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:09 PM  

Good luck on that though

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:12 PM  

@starbuck

And when judgement comes for you, you will be so good that God will say you are without sin and do not deserve eternal judgement. Or perhaps you have a flawless defense.

See there is your mistake. My judgement comes during my life, not after. And not by a character in a book, but my fellow man.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:17 PM  

See there is your mistake. My judgement comes during my life, not after. And not by a character in a book, but my fellow man.-Tad

Maybe it is my mistake. Perhaps you are right and I am wrong about God.

But I would never accept being judged by my fellow man. Because everyone refuses to let anyone judge them but instead demands to judge others. That is a serious human flaw. How do you have imperfect humans judging imperfect humans. It is akin to criminals judging criminals. It doesn't work.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:20 PM  

Come on Tad... How you going to stop criminals from using 30 round clips? Hmmm?

Well, if they overturn the 2nd amendment somehow and yes there are many trying to force that. Either through treaty with the UN or the President wring an executive order. This will not change anything except this country will be at war with itself again. It has been 160 years since the civil war. But it can happen real quick.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:24 PM  

@starbuck


But I would never accept being judged by my fellow man.


You have no choice. Your actions will be judged by others. Period. Nothing less nothing more. More often than not, that judgement will occur silently. The consequences might be profitable for you. They may not be. But you have no choice in the matter.

Sometimes that judgement results merely in the smile of a child. Sometimes it results in a handshake. Sometimes it results in a friendship. Sometimes it results in punishment imposed by the community.

But rest assured, judgement does indeed occur.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:27 PM  

@starbuck

This will not change anything except this country will be at war with itself again. It has been 160 years since the civil war. But it can happen real quick.

YOu think a reauthorization of an assault weapons ban or a ban on high capacity clips will result in some sort of a "war"? Are you using the term war in some unfamiliar way? Exactly how will this war play out? What will be the rallying cry? "Give me my killing machines or give me death!"?

Anonymous Daniel December 26, 2012 9:32 PM  

No. I'm pretty sure it would be...

"Shut up, Tad!"

And P.S. your fellow man is judging you to be retarded and of disappointing quality. You may want to try your hand at the Lamb's Book of Life. His evaluation could be a lot more favorable.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 9:33 PM  

Here I am, an atheist, who has made a fine living, who cares for others, who contributes far more to the general welfare than I take, who is incredibly happy with my life and my family, and who has time explore a variety of pursuits from sports to cultural to philanthropic. Boy, how could this possibly be given that I don't believe in your god. How could it be?

Reminds me of an alcoholic I once knew. Successful in business, charitable, well liked, made lots of money, fun at parties. "How could my drinking be harmful to my family?" He was drunk by about 5pm every single day. His son hung himself in his closet. Dad, being buzzed or drunk right about the time his son came home from school every day was not in a state of mind to see the warning signs. He never did come to see the detachment and emotional isolation fostered by his continual drunkenness in the presence of his family.

I'm glad you are not depressed, Tad. That doesn't mean you should glorify a lifestyle which is a deadly mental health danger for so many.



Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:33 PM  

You have no choice. Your actions will be judged by others. Period. Nothing less nothing more. More often than not, that judgement will occur silently. The consequences might be profitable for you. They may not be. But you have no choice in the matter.-Tad

In this I do agree with you.

As you will have no choice in the judgement of God over you. Even if you don't believe.

A wise fellow I have argued with from time to time (Nate) once said "The problem is NOT unbelief of God, the problem is rebellion against God"
Those words are very true. You see If it is all true even Satan believes in the existence of God. he is in rebellion.

Belief is not the issue. You don't want to come face to face with an angry God. His wrath will be upon you. Not because he hates you, but because you broke the Law. That plain and simple. He won't send you to hell, you will send yourself for breaking the law. Just like the criminal sends himself to jail for breaking the law. The judge doesn't send him there, he sends himself. He did it to himself. The judge didn't make him break the law.

The criminal can say he doesn't believe in the judge, that is not the problem. The problem is he broke the law, now justice must be served.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:34 PM  

@Daniel



Some may. Others may not. I'll live.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 9:38 PM  

@starbuck

The really ugly thing is this notion that God is displeased because one disobeys him, not because he treats his fellow man badly. Kill and repent, and God's on your side. Save your fellow man, but don't worship god, and you are punished.

I'll be just fine without the help of this kind of childish, egomaniac on my side.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:38 PM  

YOu think a reauthorization of an assault weapons ban or a ban on high capacity clips will result in some sort of a "war"? Are you using the term war in some unfamiliar way? Exactly how will this war play out? What will be the rallying cry? "Give me my killing machines or give me death!"?-Tad

It is about freedom. Americans who purchased these weapons will not give them up. If you can't see we no longer have a republic, but instead we have a corprate fascism then you aren't paying attention.

Perhaps the rallying cry will be "Stop the Global Elite"
I don't know. Our government is NOT working for the people. They are working for the global elite who are trying to bring about a one world government.

If we could destroy the corporations that the global elite project thier power through, we could stop the global takeover of the usa..

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:42 PM  

The really ugly thing is this notion that God is displeased because one disobeys him, not because he treats his fellow man badly. Kill and repent, and God's on your side. Save your fellow man, but don't worship god, and you are punished.

I'll be just fine without the help of this kind of childish, egomaniac on my side.-Tad


Tad, that's not how it works. Seriously. When you accept Jesus, you aren't given liscense to run around sinning without consequence. While true that the Christian doesn't suffer the loss of salvation, it is NOT with out consequence. Plus, Jesus removes any pleasure you had in sin and takes that away.

Please Tad, don't refer to God in such a disrespectful way. It is offensive.

Anonymous Starbuck December 26, 2012 9:48 PM  

Actually Daniel... Tad is not retarded. I would have to say he is rather intelligent. He however does love to play the heckler... gets lots of attention. Perhaps he practices to debate. For all I know, Tad is a Christian who is playing devils advocate and searching for the best arguement against atheists... by playing the typical internet atheist. It would be brilliant. Tad seems to use the same old atheist talking points. This is one reason I suspect such a thing could be possible. Heh.. Smile Tad! I am on your side! Umm.. Well... Maybe you won't smile because you probably loathe my guts huh?

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 10:15 PM  

@Starbuck

Perhaps the rallying cry will be "Stop the Global Elite"
I don't know. Our government is NOT working for the people.


Maybe it isn't. But where this issue of assault rifles and high capacity clips are concerned, it's not crazy to believe that banning these items is working against the people. Polls show significant support for banning assault rifles and high capacity clips.

Now, once this happens, we may see a backlash against politicians that voted for the ban (or against it) and we may have a better idea of what the people want.

But trying to suggest that it's some sort of corporate conspiracy that is leading to an ban on high capacity clips starts to sound a lot like LoonyToon Land.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 10:22 PM  

@Starbuck

Tad, that's not how it works. Seriously. When you accept Jesus, you aren't given liscense to run around sinning without consequence. While true that the Christian doesn't suffer the loss of salvation, it is NOT with out consequence. Plus, Jesus removes any pleasure you had in sin and takes that away.

You'd be mistaken if you think I give myself or anyone else gives me license to "sin", as you call it (I think what you might mean is take advantage of my fellow many without care). And as you recall, I'm an atheist. So, I don't need no Jesus to be convinced not to hurt others. More importantly, the notion that a god would concern them self with who I lie with in a consensual relationship is simply bizarre and a very good reason to believe that this "god" is either a figment of the imagination of ancient cultures or simply not worthy of my time no matter what the consequences (I'm guessing the former).

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 10:23 PM  

@Starbuck

Tad seems to use the same old atheist talking points

This is kinda funny when you consider the existence of the "same old" christian talking points that have been around for centuries.

Anonymous outlaw x December 26, 2012 10:24 PM  

I tried Vox, I really did. To see if it was liberal to have disparate views? I, for a year, as I said before got along fine with a "Liberal" columnist. But when I interjected your thoughts, he became hostile.

I think now I can define the modern "Liberal" since I spent a year studying them. I used my little frog and poked him in every way and found it is not disparate views they are interested in. It is disparate people with the same views they are interested in.

Anonymous Sawtooth December 26, 2012 10:25 PM  

If'n and when 3-D printers are refined and bug proofed, all of this gun control yakety-yak will become moot anyway.
Don't-cha think?

Anonymous Mr. Pea December 26, 2012 10:26 PM  

Oh sure, it took them 20 minutes to arrive, but how long did it take them to get their pants on when they got there and start sweeping rooms?

Who is on first...

Taddy my boy. May you be one to don your Blue Shirt and do the Knock-knock. I would suggest that all Law Enforcement Officers tell their wives and children goodbye as they go do the deed.

Anonymous outlaw x December 26, 2012 10:27 PM  

Batteries getting low and electricity far, If I don't respond. Tore down my office today for a late Christmas party and am too lazy to set up some where else.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 26, 2012 10:39 PM  

Tad: "the notion that a god would concern them self with who I lie with in a consensual relationship is simply bizarre"

And yet the notion of placing ones reproductive organ in a man's smelly, hairy, bacteria-and-virus-ridden rectum is not "bizarre"?

This is what I mean by saying that atheists only care about reality when it does not conflict with their bizarre carnal desires.

Anonymous Outlaw X December 26, 2012 10:40 PM  

Buy the way Vox you got some good commenter's on your blog, about a dozen or more not to name names of my favorites. But this is the highest UQ blog I have ever visited. I'll tell you something fun to do. Go to the science channel and see just how dumb people are on that blog/board. I had to explain simple Newtonian concepts to people who did not believe them. It was like LSD. Don't try it it is bad medicine.

Anonymous Outlaw X December 26, 2012 10:41 PM  

IQ

Anonymous scoobius dubious December 26, 2012 10:42 PM  

"Polls show significant support for banning assault rifles and high capacity clips."

B-b-but, I thought you said you understood constitutional law. The Bill of Rights is precisely a firewall against doing whatever "polls support." This is civics 101. Tyranny of the majority and all that old rattle and hum, remember? It's high school stuff, and so you're either wilfully maliciously misrepresenting it or else you haven't actually understood something very simple. Scoundrel or buffoon: those are your choices. As you're fond of saying, there's no way around this.

So, what if "polls support" a 100% Jew tax? After all, they cost us an awful lot of money defending a foreign country that's set up for the benefit of them alone. One could almost call it an establishment of religion. Why should I pay to support a place that benefits only them? We should make them pay their "fair share," which of course is all of it. Let's tax the living shit out of them, and them alone! What's to stop us? Oh, yeah, right, that pesky Constitution.

But, as you've demonstrated, it bothers you not a whit to violate the Constitution, so long as it's violated in a way that you agree with. Of course, worms have a habit of turning. You never know what sort of crazy things polls are going to support next year, next decade.

Question: who has killed more children in cold blood in the past five years, lone psychos with a rifle or two, or the IDF?

Clearly it's time to defund the IDF. Something must be done. It's for the children.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 10:58 PM  

@George

And yet the notion of placing ones reproductive organ in a man's smelly, hairy, bacteria-and-virus-ridden rectum is not "bizarre"?

It might be all that. But is this really the province over which a God would be so concerned he had to hold forth? God has the chance to condemn slavery. He has the chance to condemn racism. He has the chance to come out for equal protection for all....But instead, he goes for gay sex?

Not exactly a high minded God. However, it sounds suspiciously like a fearful, grossed out set of humans.

Blogger ajw308 December 26, 2012 10:58 PM  

"I have never understood why the vast majority of American women have not embraced firearms training."

I'm guessing it's the same reason the vast majority of blacks have not embraced the Republican party.

Anonymous Tad December 26, 2012 11:00 PM  

@Scoobius

B-b-but, I thought you said you understood constitutional law. The Bill of Rights is precisely a firewall against doing whatever "polls support." This is civics 101. Tyranny of the majority and all that old rattle and hum, remember? It's high school stuff, and so you're either wilfully maliciously misrepresenting it or else you haven't actually understood something very simple. Scoundrel or buffoon: those are your choices. As you're fond of saying, there's no way around this.

YOu'd have a good point if anyone were suggesting citizens ought to have all arms taken away and banned.

But of course you have no point. I refer you to the many common sense limits on things such as speech, press, and, yes, the 2nd amendment.

Anonymous Andrew Sullivan December 26, 2012 11:01 PM  

Shutup, Tad

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother December 26, 2012 11:06 PM  

You'd have a good point if anyone were suggesting citizens ought to have all arms taken away and banned.

But of course you have no point. I refer you to the many common sense limits on things such as speech, press, and, yes, the 2nd amendment.


Tad,

This is exactly what is being considered. The proposals to outlaw "assault rifles" will try to take millions upon millions of guns away from law abiding citizens. Assault rifles these days probably make up almost half of all privately owned firearms.

What happens when someone shoots someone else with a hunting rifle? Will they turn into "high power sniper rifles" and become subject to being banned and confiscated? Sooner or later, you will have taken all of our guns, something you deny is happening. It is incrementalism, Fabian at its best.

Anonymous zen0 December 26, 2012 11:16 PM  

More importantly, the notion that a god would concern them self with who I lie with in a consensual relationship is simply bizarre and a very good reason to believe that this "god" is either a figment of the imagination of ancient cultures or simply not worthy of my time no matter what the consequences (I'm guessing the former).

I am of the opinion that God does not concern himself with how you choose to spend your time before your expiration date. That's up to you. Prohibitions are for those who choose to do better. You don't. We get that.

So why don't you just shutup and go about your business? Why do you chatter incessantly about your path to perdition like it is your favorite sex toy?

Maybe because it is?

Anonymous The New Schoolmarm December 26, 2012 11:34 PM  

I refer you to the many common sense limits on things such as speech, press, and, yes, the 2nd amendment.

Name them, and demonstrate their common-sensicalness.

Or

Shutup, Tad.

Anonymous scoobius dubious December 26, 2012 11:35 PM  

"You'd have a good point if anyone were suggesting citizens ought to have all arms taken away and banned."

The stated purpose of the Second Amendment is not for hunting, and it's not even (really) for personal self-defense; although considering the historic culture of the American people, both purposes were understood. The actual stated purpose of the Second Amendment is to enable the people to secure the freedom of their state against threats to liberty, both from without and within. ("The security of a free State" does not refer in its primary meaning to the "safety" of a free State; it means the ongoing process of securing the freedom of the State, as in "to secure these Rights" (Jefferson) and "[in order to] secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.")

In other words, an armed populace is a hedge against tyranny. The Amendment is basically a promise that the government will not, and cannot, disarm the people by conducting a gun hunt. At least one governor of a major state has apparently declared that "confiscation is on the table". That is a gun hunt. That is what is expressly forbidden.

An armed citizen who has only a single-shot bolt-action rifle, or a six-shot low caliber revolver, trying to resist the tyranny of a malevolent organized super-state armed with fully automatic high-powered killing machines, is basically no realistic threat to tyranny at all. He is effectively disarmed.

Tyranny is not impossible in this country. Many rational people already believe we're on the royal road in that direction. Leftists like to keep pointing to Europe for their stats, but let me ask you: throughout the entire twentieth century taken as a whole, who had the higher rate of total gun deaths in both absolute and per capita terms: North America, or Europe and Russia? A plurality of the "civilized industrialized world" as the left loves to group it together, in fact succumbed for decades to the most gruesome forms of tyranny ever devised by man. So saying "But we're civilized now, we know better!" doesn't avoid the point. We've already seen it all, played out in laboratory experiments.

Do you remember the famous words of the Imperial Japanese High Command's advisory council, warning against an attempt to invade North America? They said that, even if the US Army were defeated, the Japanese would find "a rifle behind every blade of grass." And thus was a possible bloodbath averted on American soil, by... gun ownership.

Gun ownership is already well-regulated, through a variety of sensible measures. The guns used in the Newtown massacre were not the property of the shooter, they were stolen from their legal owner, after the shooter tried to purchase a gun of his own and was denied, because of... gun regulation.






Anonymous zen0 December 26, 2012 11:41 PM  

The really ugly thing is this notion that God is displeased because one disobeys him, not because he treats his fellow man badly.

Yes, that would be an ugly notion. Too bad for you that it is your notion, and has no relationship to reality.

What was Jesus' summation of the 10 commandments Tad? (hint: 2 parts, interrelated)

Ok...go!

Anonymous Tad's Council December 26, 2012 11:43 PM  

Don't answer that Tad. You'll have to shutup.

Anonymous Anonymous December 26, 2012 11:45 PM  

"Question: who has killed more children in cold blood in the past five years, lone psychos with a rifle or two, or the IDF?"

Dead muslims are worth every penny. Nits make lice...

Anonymous dh December 26, 2012 11:48 PM  

> Indeed. Thankfully, no one is arguing that the right to bear arms be taken away.

Actually, I am. Repeal the 2nd amendment, replace it with an amendment granting Congress authority to regulate weapons.

Anonymous dh December 26, 2012 11:54 PM  

> An armed citizen who has only a single-shot bolt-action rifle, or a six-shot low caliber revolver,
> trying to resist the tyranny of a malevolent organized super-state armed with fully automatic
> high-powered killing machines, is basically no realistic threat to tyranny at all. He is effectively
> disarmed.

But the truth is that the spirit of the 2nd amendment is long gone. It has been for many, many decades. Government is unafraid.

For all the online bluster about tryanny et all there hasn't been any serious push back. Look at it this way, there are 300 million guns in this country, and millions of people who *supposedly* think that the re-election of Obama, or the ACA/Obamacare, or SCOTUS, or whatever is tryanny that cannot be tolerated. Yet, we know it's not true, because there has no revolt, and there isn't likely to be one.

And at the same time, the Government keeps passing new laws, and there is no fear of blowback from the armed populace.

The 2nd amendment was to provide a hedge or check against tryanny - it has failed.

And of course it makes sense. What's your defense against a Predator taking you out in the middle of night with a 20lb explosive tipped missle? Or while in your car, or at your church? There is no answer. There is no weapon that you can arm yourself with. In another 10 years there will be tens of thousands of armed drones in the air. In another 10 years after that full automatic solider drones are a real possibility.

The intent of the 2nd amendment is over. There is no personal one-to-one armed resistance option against the Federal government. Any act of rebellion will be swiftly dealt with by deadly force, and swept up and tidied up. It's over, dead for life.

And so all that leaves is firearms for personal defense, and for sport. And that's not too hard of a nut to crack. Both of those can be dealt with readily. Once you admit that the 2nd amendment has failed in it's goal to check the power Government, the rest becomes much more doable.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 12:38 AM  

@stg58

What happens when someone shoots someone else with a hunting rifle? Will they turn into "high power sniper rifles" and become subject to being banned and confiscated?

No

Anonymous Mr. Pea December 27, 2012 12:44 AM  

Stop worrying about the goobermint taking yer guns away. Rather, make them believe that every man and woman who walks out the door to enforce such a ban will have good reason to tell their wives and children goodbye.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 27, 2012 12:50 AM  

Tad: "It might be all that. But is this really the province over which a God would be so concerned he had to hold forth?"

Yes. Reproduction is very important for a population to survive. Why would a loving God encourage destructive and dangerous behavior like fudgepacking? Why on earth would you encourage such behavior with your supposed loved ones? How self-centered can you be to place your own personal gratification above the health and survival of society?

...it sounds suspiciously like a fearful, grossed out set of humans.

Sounds to me like God loved His people and wanted His people to thrive and to refrain from embracing dangerous perversions.

The fact that you wantonly encourage dangerous, destructive perversions and damaging lifestyles speaks to your selfishness. Science tells us that atheists are more selfish than theists so this of course is no surprise.












Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 12:50 AM  

@schoolmarm

I refer you to the many common sense limits on things such as speech, press, and, yes, the 2nd amendment.

Name them, and demonstrate their common-sensicalness.


-Slander laws-speech
-Libel laws-press
-copyright laws-press
-The ineitement/Clear and present danger standard-speech
-Obscenity laws-speech and press
-Child pornography laws-press
-Death threats-speech and press
-fire arm registration-2nd Amendment
-Restrictions on automatic weapons-2nd Amend.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 1:02 AM  

@George

Yes. Reproduction is very important for a population to survive. Why would a loving God encourage destructive and dangerous behavior like fudgepacking?

I rather doubt that people needed to be told to reproduce. This god could have spent is time better by condemning slavery, condemning racism, condemning sexism and actually providing proper scientific metrics.

There has always been somewhere between 2 and 5 percent of a the population that practiced homosexuality or bisexuality. And it ain't going away. But neither does it appear that it is growing. So, fear not. Your god will sill have many to punish.

But what am i saying? We are moving quickly to a post-Christian era...thank God. We can clearly look forward to a time when tradition, rather than superstition is embraced.

Anonymous cheddarman December 27, 2012 1:29 AM  

Tad,

Given the historical persecution of your people, you should be the strongest advocate here for a person's right to self defense...even if that means they have assault rifles with high capacity magazines.

If the victims of the Holocaust were to rise from the dead, they would bitch slap you for your foolishness.

Do you wish to repeat history?

Anonymous Ramon D'Unyon December 27, 2012 1:58 AM  

"We are moving quickly to a post-Christian era"

Wrong again. We are in an anti-Christian era, not a post-Christian one.

Christ is eternal; there is not going to be a post-Christ anything, or a post-Christian anything.

But anti-Christ? Oh yes, plenty of that.

Don't worry though, we already know how it turns out.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 2:22 AM  

@Cheddarman


Given the historical persecution of your people, you should be the strongest advocate here for a person's right to self defense...even if that means they have assault rifles with high capacity magazines.


Members of my family and tribe were gassed and placed underfoot not because there were too few arms to defend against attack, but because there too many cowardly christians across Europe and the West who didn't care enough to look beyond inherited ignorance.

Anonymous kh123 December 27, 2012 3:10 AM  

"I refer you to the many common sense limits on things such as..."

-Voting rights
-Immigration and naturalization
-Taxation
-Minting
-Executive power of the president

Please continue.

Anonymous Bear December 27, 2012 4:15 AM  

Tad, actually there were many Christian people who risked their lives and died for your tribe. It was death penalty for the entire household to help a Jew. Secondly, very few American Jews did anything for European Jews. Thirdly,
I wonder how many Jews would do the same for Christians.

"but because there too many cowardly christians across Europe and the West who didn't care enough to look beyond inherited ignorance."

This is a hate filled ignorant and irrational statement. It's not as if much of the world was not at war, you know. Maybe you should remove your blinders.

Anonymous Bear December 27, 2012 4:23 AM  

Tad, you can't derive OUGHT from IS. That God should provide "scientific metrics" etc. is your own personal view, but you're not God and Christianity you don't understand, not that you care to understand it either. I think you're a closed minded, ideologue. But you could change that by admitting that you don't know, that morality under your worldview can't be objective and that all the nice freedoms you praise right now developed in a Christian world.

Why do you hate Christian people, Tad?

Anonymous Bear December 27, 2012 4:37 AM  

Tad:

"I'm an atheist. So, I don't need no Jesus to be convinced not to hurt others."

Are you saying that because you're atheist you know by default what is good and bad and always try to act in a morally good way? But good and bad don't exist in your worldview. There is no morality, only an illusion of morality. Reason is slave to the passions, as Hume said.

"More importantly, the notion that a god would concern them self with who I lie with in a consensual relationship is simply bizarre and a very good reason to believe that this "god" is either a figment of the imagination of ancient cultures or simply not worthy of my time no matter what the consequences (I'm guessing the former)."

You mean a god who cares about you on an individual level makes no sense? And just because something is consensual it is morally, OK? And life on earth in the present state, say an average of 60-70 years of ups and downs is all there is, in the Christian worldview?

Anonymous daddynichol December 27, 2012 7:27 AM  

Tad-"If I'm standing in front of you when you have to change one 10 round clip for another, I'll have a chance to get to you. If you've instead got 20 more rounds, I won't. "

It takes 2 seconds to swap magazines (not "clips" you moron). So you really think untrained, unarmed teachers and 5-6 year old children cowering under desks and huddled in corners would charge a shooter within 2 seconds? Even most adults won't do that. You're an idiot.

Tad-The Fred Phelps of the Anesthetist church.

Anonymous daddynichol December 27, 2012 7:56 AM  

Correction:
Tad-The Fred Phelps of the atheist church.

Fat fingers on a small key pad.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 9:47 AM  

@bear

But you could change that by admitting that you don't know, that morality under your worldview can't be objective

Not only do I admit that morality is subjective under my world view, but that it is subjective in every instance.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 9:58 AM  

"Not only do I admit that morality is subjective under my world view, but that it is subjective in every instance."

Then your opposition to child murder in some cases is entirely subjective.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 10:10 AM  

'What will be the rallying cry? "Give me my killing machines or give me death!"?'

Probably more along the lines of, "If you try to take our guns, we'll kill you."

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 10:22 AM  

@Noah

Then your opposition to child murder in some cases is entirely subjective.

The conclusion that child murder is wrong is ultimately a subjective statement of morality, not matter who makes it. However, we can say that this opinion is rendered after considering certain facts.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 10:34 AM  

"However, we can say that this opinion is rendered after considering certain facts."

Irrelevant. Consideration of facts can just as easily be used to argue for child murder as to argue against it.

Anonymous George of the Hole December 27, 2012 10:43 AM  

Tad: I rather doubt that people needed to be told to reproduce. This god could have spent is time better by condemning slavery, condemning racism, condemning sexism and actually providing proper scientific metrics.

That is the answer expected 100% of the time from an arrogant, self-centered atheist. How could it be otherwise?

God must not exist because he does not endorse my socio-political worldview. As if God would be more credible if only he were more like an MSNBC commentator.

(What were you saying about atheists being grounded in reality? Lol!)

There has always been somewhere between 2 and 5 percent of a the population that practiced homosexuality or bisexuality. And it ain't going away. But neither does it appear that it is growing.

There will always be alcoholics too. That doesn't mean we say it's ok to be an alcoholic.

The reason your population can never grow to be a majority is that it is dangerous and deadly. Your lifestyle is fraught with disease, promiscuity, and selfishness, along with a built in mechanism for self-destruction. Why would anyone be proud of such a lifestyle much less promote it openly? You sound like a drunk bellowing, belching and vomiting about the joys of alcohol.






Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 10:46 AM  

@Noah

Irrelevant. Consideration of facts can just as easily be used to argue for child murder as to argue against it.

They certainly can be. Yet, certain facts are taken into consideration nonetheless. That is to say, no one makes a judgement in a vacuum.

Example: "This Pie is outstanding". A Judgement. However, certain facts such as the pie is made with apples or that it has been baked, are in evidence and help form the basis for the judgement.

The person that judges Child Killing to be morally wrong would first have to note a variety of facts about the nature Child Killing before determining it is morally wrong.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 10:58 AM  

@George

God must not exist because he does not endorse my socio-political worldview. As if God would be more credible if only he were more like an MSNBC commentator.

When we are talking about what's good and bad, right and wrong, moral and immoral in the context of "god", we've already moved into a nebulous Fantasyland. So don't be surprised when the discussion strikes you as incredible or odd.

Your lifestyle is fraught with disease, promiscuity, and selfishness, along with a built in mechanism for self-destruction. Why would anyone be proud of such a lifestyle much less promote it openly? You sound like a drunk bellowing, belching and vomiting about the joys of alcohol.

You mistake me for someone promoting anything where sexual attraction is concerned. However, I would note that personally I am without disease, have been manogamous for 21 years and fail to see how this marks me as selfish. As it turns out, I recommend heterosexuality, Bisexuality and homosexuality. In the end it's just sex. What has the lasting impact is the relationship we are able to form and sustain.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 11:05 AM  

"The person that judges Child Killing to be morally wrong would first have to note a variety of facts about the nature Child Killing before determining it is morally wrong."

Thanks for proving my point. This is a determination that could easily be made either way.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 11:15 AM  

@Noah

I didn't prove your point. I agreed with it, as you would have noted when I wrote, "They certainly can be".

You sure are concerned with obtaining approval.

Blogger Longstreet December 27, 2012 11:20 AM  

"Interesting. Well, at least atheists live a more reality-based life."

Yes, well, so they say. After reading your blather just on this thread (not to mention others) it was a hoot to see you assert it.

Anonymous raggededge December 27, 2012 11:22 AM  

@dh:

And of course it makes sense. What's your defense against a Predator taking you out in the middle of night with a 20lb explosive tipped missle? Or while in your car, or at your church? There is no answer. There is no weapon that you can arm yourself with. In another 10 years there will be tens of thousands of armed drones in the air. In another 10 years after that full automatic solider drones are a real possibility.

Right, so we should win the war in Afghanistan any day now...

Blogger Longstreet December 27, 2012 11:30 AM  

"Members of my family and tribe were gassed and placed underfoot not because there were too few arms to defend against attack, but because there too many cowardly christians across Europe and the West who didn't care enough to look beyond inherited ignorance."
Okay. So? They subjectively decided to do so. No harm no foul right?

"Thanks for proving my point."!="concerned with obtaining approval."

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 11:32 AM  

"You sure are concerned with obtaining approval."

No, my intent is to identify a point of mutual agreement from which those of us who do not share your outlook can extend discussion. We now agree that you have no objective measure from which to oppose child murder.

The discussion then returns to a question I asked you previously but that you did not answer: how many children do you find it acceptable for a mass murderer to be able to kill before you are willing to take meaningful action to prevent it? It's not a trick question.

Blogger Longstreet December 27, 2012 11:38 AM  

"We now agree that you have no objective measure from which to oppose child murder."

Or for that matter, to condemn the fact that members of his family and tribe were gassed and trampled underfoot.

Apple pie! I'm still laughing at it.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 11:42 AM  

Apple pie, a few broken eggs... what's the difference?

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 11:53 AM  

@noah

No, my intent is to identify a point of mutual agreement from which those of us who do not share your outlook can extend discussion. We now agree that you have no objective measure from which to oppose child murder.

OK...sounds good. But you should, then, at least acknowledge the totality of my point that not only do I have no objective measure of morality, but that no one does. That would be the better and more interesting and fairer basis for continuing the discussion.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 11:55 AM  

"No harm no foul right?"

Just an expression of a somewhat different Weltanschauung.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 12:07 PM  

"But you should, then, at least acknowledge the totality of my point that not only do I have no objective measure of morality, but that no one does."

Why would I acknowledge something that is demonstrably false? The foundation for most of Western morality is the Bible. Now, you're certainly welcome to rant about it being fictitious, but in this context, that hardly matters. In one form or another its teachings are accepted by the majority of the Western world.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 12:21 PM  

Now your turn, Tad: answer the question. I'm looking for a non-negative integer.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 12:49 PM  

@Noah
Are you a believer in the bible and its morality? If so, what convinced you to be a believer?

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2012 12:56 PM  

@Noah
how many children do you find it acceptable for a mass murderer to be able to kill before you are willing to take meaningful action to prevent it?

Not sure I understand the question. Do you mean how many children am I willing to see die in any mass murders going forward? Or how many children total must die in a mass murder before taking action?

Anonymous Arming!! December 27, 2012 12:57 PM  

Tad and anyone else that would support gun control and or confiscation.

Piss off. Whomever you send to come get our guns will be shot. Period.

Even if you wish to come and get my 30 round magazines and replace them with 10 round - even with a smile. The will be shot at. Even if I know I will be killed, they will be shot.

I don't care if you ridicule me or insult me or marginalize me. They will be shot. Will I die alone? Maybe and I will if that is what it comes to.

Also, if a civil war or a rebellion surfaces, I will go after your heros in politics. I do know how to move stealthy - electronically as well as visibily and I will put a bullet through their heads. One by one, they will go down.

I won't be the only one either. I think there might be many that will approach the uprising in a similiar fashion.

I detest and loathe politics in this country. They put on a smile and then stab you in the back. And you defend them.. Tad, hide yourself if the shooting starts. I suspect a precious one as yourself might get hurt and we can't have that.

Anonymous Noah B. December 27, 2012 1:58 PM  

Tad, "a mass murderer" means exactly that: one.

Anonymous tinlaw December 27, 2012 9:41 PM  

I noticed that Feinstein's bill to ban "assault weapons" includes all firearms that can "accept a detachable magazine". This is not about banning assault rifles, but about banning all nearly all modern firearms. Even our hunting rifles accept detachable magazines. The pistol that I carry for self defense accepts a detachable magazine, and no person in their right mind would look at it and say, "assault weapon". Like all bills, the name on it is intended to conceal the actual contents. (Think "Patriot Act") After all, who is favor of assaults? We should all be in favor of banning assault, right? And the instruments used for assault? In Newtown, such a weapon in the hand of a teacher would have been an "anti-assault weapon."

Anonymous Ole Pete December 27, 2012 10:45 PM  

@tinlaw

You are onto the word games. Think 1984.
No inanimate object is capable of any kind of intent.
An assault spoon or piano wire or automobile is just as legitimate as an "assault rifle". No one or thing used in Defense against predators - those intitiating the violation of the natural rights of another - is classified as "assault" anything. These are simply the emotional trigger words for the pychologically deranged Statist fundamentalist.
The psychologically damaged utopian, godless tyrants are the agents and enablers of victimhood at the hands of predators.
And they feel good about it. They delight in setting you and themselves up. It is their only Identity and sense of worth. At least they have their way with something - and the State in history is all too happy to oblige.
It is the only way they have any meaning and purpose - as enablers of the murderous State. Deep down in their Soul, they wish to die.
It would end their self-imposed misery. And finding meaning only in a "Collective" they will take you with them.
It will be either the State they worship as god, or the decent, moral people who wipe them from the face of the earth. No matter.



Anonymous dh December 27, 2012 11:29 PM  

> Right, so we should win the war in Afghanistan any day now...

Would you rather be a US airman sitting in Colorado, or a Taliban, trying not to be blown up by Predator?

About 100,000 NATO troops, plus drones, have subdued 35million people. Ratio wise, that puts the number of troops to subdue the US at about a million, which is conveniently about what we have for a military. And all that assumes we have enough citizens to mount the same resistance as the Taliban, which assumes fact not in evidence.

Anonymous Noah B. December 28, 2012 2:49 PM  

"About 100,000 NATO troops, plus drones, have subdued 35million people."

You're ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the 300+ million people working to support those troops.

Anonymous Noah B. December 28, 2012 2:56 PM  

Correction: it's no more than 150 million people in the US who are actually working to support the government.

What if 25% of those people stop supporting the government and the status quo?

Anonymous E. PERLINE December 28, 2012 4:14 PM  

That was an excellent subject to read through! As in Dodge City, I see everybody wearng a pistol. And the pistols will become more decorative than ever.

The ladies can have a curly pistol holster sewed to their pocketbooks. The children can play with toy guns until they reach the "age of deadly force."
No one needs a permit to carry because gun carrying is a fashion statement.

As you can imagine, everyone will be polite to one another!

If this scenario is not acceptable let's go the other way. No one should be allowed to own a gun--not even the police--in the first place. Everyone will now need to be a good physical specimen and wll have learned some
martial arts. Not a bad alternative to meeting the unexpected carrier of the old days.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts