Tag: Logic an Anti-Gunner’s Worst Nightmare

Targeting Glock

The blame game is go and Glock is the target. Slate did a write up of Glock as a company and basically tries to make underhanded jibes that demonstrate how “evil” Glock is. They make several negative statements but never really mention anything good. In addition to that they also omit quite a bit of information that would make the article less ominous:

Second, and more important, Glocks held more ammunition than the standard-issue guns usually did at the time. With gang-driven gun violence rising, police departments decided to give the guns with the extra rounds a try. They caught on and then gained popularity in the consumer markets. (They also developed a particular cache among criminals, then broader cultural recognition, including numerous citations in rap lyrics.) By 1996, Sweeney writes, Glock had sold more than 1 million guns in America.

Yes police wanted more ammunition. What this story doesn’t tell you is the police departments weren’t upgrading from some 10 shot pistol but from six shot revolvers. Not only did Glock’s pistols hold more than six shots they were much faster to reload. But the biggest hurdle for Glock’s adoption was reliability, police were still using revolvers because they didn’t have much trouble in the way of jamming up. Glock was chosen not only because of additional ammunition capacity but also because of the reliability of their pistols.

Slate then continues to bring up other accusations made against Glock which have no bearing on the shooting in Arizona whatsoever. Of course they also have to point out how well armed we Americans are:

Several other states showed a significant sales bump. And national sales increased about 5 percent. All in all, Americans—not military or police, mind you, but private citizens—own more than 270 million firearms, about 85 guns per 100 people. No other country has such high rates of gun ownership, or absolute numbers of guns in the general population.

The insinuation is America has a high rate of gun related crimes because of how high our gun ownership is. Of course anybody who has looked into the matter knows this is bullshit as countries such as Switzerland and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and pretty low rates of violent crimes. Gun ownership rates have no correlation to levels of violent crimes in a country no matter how much anti-gunners want to believe it.

They also try to make Glock sound like a bad company because they make money:

So how profitable are companies like Glock? Again, we don’t know, because it keeps such information private. But the BusinessWeek story says Glock estimated its “profit margin per pistol” at 68 percent. And consider a major Glock competitor: Massachusetts-based Smith & Wesson, established back in the 1850s. The company’s last annual report cites a gross margin of 32 percent.

Isn’t making money the whole point of running a company? That’s like accusing a vehicle of somehow being bad because it gets you from point A to point B. You really can’t make something sound evil/bad/wrong when it’s doing the exact thing it’s supposed to. Of course to many out there making a profit is a bad thing that only evil capitalists would dare imagine doing (ironically many of the people making such accusations are rich from profits from capitalism).

Glock Sales Surge

In case you couldn’t predict the bloody obvious Glock’s sales have surged have the shooting in Arizona. The anti-gunners are spouting bullshit about this being some kind of sick desire to own the gun that killed so many people when in fact it’s not.

The reason Glock pistol sales have surged all of the sudden is most likely due to the gun control legislation ideas being pumped out by Washington. One of their own was shot and they’re out for blood meaning they’re going to go after anybody they can. A target in the cross hairs of Washington right now is Glock because they made the tools which was used by the shooter. It’s just like how Washington goes after the manufacturers of getaway vehicles when one is used to commit a crime against… never mind I forgot gun are somehow responsible for crimes while other tools are not.

Either way people want to get Glock pistols before any legislation that may make them illegal (maybe a ban on polymer framed pistols or other such nonsense) starts moving. Why would somebody want one of these pistols? Because they’re fucking amazing tools. Frankly this kind of thing happens whenever a gun is used in a high profile crime so it’s not surprising in any regard. But it’s not due to some desire to have a memento of the shooting.

Better Than Us

Our “representatives” have been positively frothing at the mouth with gun control legislation ideas. A New York “representative” appropriately named King is going to introduce legislation that makes it illegal to carry a gun within 1,000 feet of a federal official.

Of course the crazy ass Arizona shooter wouldn’t have shot Gabrielle Giffords if this law was in effect because it would be illegal to carry said gun that close to her. You know they really should just it illegal to shoot somebody as that would be kind of a catch all for these types of situations… wait it already is. I guess we just have to find that one magical law that will make murdering psychopaths reconsider their desires because that makes sense.

The other interesting thing to wonder is what will be the definition of federal official. The federal government employs a great number of people and chances are you have be closer than 1,000 feet to one without even realizing it. How will we know who are federal officials and thus who we have to keep an arbitrary distance from when carrying? Will federal officials be forced to wear some kind of indicator, maybe a “I ban guns within an arbitrary distance of me” sign, as they walk around? I doubt dip shit King put any such thought into these questions as they are concerns only of the peasants of which he rules over.

I Don’t Think the News Reads the News

Notice something wrong with this article?

They have bemoaned the state of America’s political discourse, called for leadership in toning down heated rhetoric, speculated over whether this is a turning point for Barack Obama or Sarah Palin and puzzled over the shooter’s mental state.

But one thing that has scarcely been raised is gun control.

Riiiiiight. It’s not like Feinstein and McCarthy are dancing in the blood happy that they may have a tragedy needed to push through a restriction on arbitrary capacity magazines or anything… oh wait that’s exactly what they’re doing. Wait a minutes, the article contradict itself:

But here in the US, the only regulatory response so far has been to call for a ban on the sale of high capacity magazines like the sort that Jared Loughner allegedly used in Arizona, enabling him to shoot 31 bullets from a semi-automatic handgun without having to reload.

So gun control is scarcely being raised but gun control is being raised. This makes no sense whatsoever until you realize it’s just one long anti-gun article. Those anti-gunners never were too strong on brains nor the ability to write something that doesn’t contradict itself. Hell even I can write an entire article that doesn’t forget earlier parts of itself exist.

Information on Multiple Victim Shootings

After the event in Arizona is seems people are making claims that the number of multiple victim shootings has been on the rise. Well that’s not really true:

While Thomas didn’t refer to trends over a longer period than just three years, the numbers for the longer term are murky as well. To more easily analyze Fox’s data — which goes back to 1976 — we averaged the number of incidents for each five-year period (or, in the case of 2006 to 2009, a four-year period). Here are the results:

• 1976-1980: 20.6 incidents annually
• 1981-1985: 16.8
• 1986-1990: 18.2
• 1991-1995: 23.0
• 1996-2000: 20.0
• 2001-2005: 21.0
• 2006-2009: 25.5

More to the point it seems the number of incidents has been rather inconsistent. Of course somebody will point out that the period involving the lift of the “assault weapon” also followed by an increase in these incidents I’ll point out that the period involving the implementation and enforcement of the “assault weapon” ban was followed by an increase in these incidents as well and thus we can pretty much factor out that piece of legislation as having any effect on the number of these incidents.

The article is a good read.

A Bunch of Vultures

No sooner does the news of the Arizona shooting break does New York “Representative” Carolyn McCarthy talke about introducing new gun control regulations:

Many said that people with a history of mental instability, like the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, should not be able to buy a gun — and no one should be able to buy stockpiles of ammunition used by the 22-year-old assailant.

Hold the bus. At least when you talk about magazines with an arbitrarily sized capacity you can claim it has some kind of relevance to the shooting maybe. But talking about stockpiles of ammunition? Really? How much ammunition did the man have on him? Sure he may have owned 100,000 rounds of ammunition but that doesn’t mean shit if he’s only to carry a small percentage of that. In case that dumb bitch McCarthy didn’t realize ammunition has weight and size meaning you can only carry a finite amount. So how does having a stockpile change anything? The answer is it does and McCarthy is just a fucking tool. Oh and she isn’t the only dipshit:

Pennsylvania Rep. Robert Brady, a Democrat from Philadelphia, told CNN that he also plans to take legislative action. He will introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.

Wait isn’t threatening violence against a federal official already illegal? Yes, yes it is. Don’t believe me? Well you could always try it and see where it lands you (here’s a hint, in prison). I do love how they law will only involved federal officials and not threats against lowly little peasants like you and me. After all they’re not our representatives but our rulers. We also have a fuck face from Illinois:

Another vocal supporter for gun control, Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley, told POLITICO that he hopes “something good” can come from the Arizona tragedy – perhaps discussion on a new assault weapon ban, sales at gun shows and tracing measures.

Yes because banning arbitrarily sized magazines helped reduce violence last time it was in effect… wait no it didn’t. We also have this golden quote:

“The ability to buy a weapon that fires hundreds of bullets in less than a minute,” said Quigley. “He had an additional magazine capability. That’s not what a hunter needs. That’s not what someone needs to defend their home. That’s what you use to hunt people.”

What the fuck do hunters have to do with the second amendment? Exactly nothing, the second amendment wasn’t put into place to allow hunting it was put into place to allow the citizenry to overthrow a tyrannical government. We also have a quote from another gun control nutcase:

“I’ve seen no evidence that he falls into those categories. It’s the same thing as this guy at Virginia Tech,” said Horwitz. “We can do a much better job checking people’s mental health background.”

No we really can’t “do better.” Crazy often doesn’t manifest until the person decides to, well, be crazy. No expansion of background checks will allow for every person with bad intentions to be caught. You can’t detect evil plain and simple.

You have to be appalled at these people who waste not time to swoop in on a tragedy and use the death of six people to forward their political campaign by pretending they’re looking out for your safety when in fact they’re doing the exact opposite.

The Impossible is Back

The Armed Citizen blog is back online with all those impossible stories of people defensively using firearms. It looks like those fuckers over a Righthaven (who are also suing our local Minnesota gun forum) didn’t end up getting the domain name which is good news for us and bad news for the anti-gunners who claim firearms are seldom ever used for defensive purposes.

Blood in the Streets

Now that the Heller case has been concluded and firearms are no longer all but banned in Washington D.C. the homicide rate must be through the roof. Blood must be flowing through the streets with the increased number of firearms. People must be cowering in fear with all the violence that has occurred because of the Heller case.

Wait… what’s that? Oh homicide rates in Washington D.C. fell by 9% in 2010? I guess the anti-gunners were wrong yet again. It’s almost as though this is no correlation between gun control laws and homicide rates.

Canadian Gun Confiscation

Sadly Canada never managed to abolish its long gun registry and thus any firearm you own in that country is known the the government. Many people often ask what’s the harm in the government knowing what you have unless you have something to hide? The problem with gun registration is that it leads to confiscation every single time.

Take for instance the current kerfuffle in Canada. The Canadian government has reclassified the Norinco Type 97A and are trying to confiscate them (at least they’re willing to pay $1,400 per rifle but you don’t have a choice in whether or not you’re willing to sell the gun):

Several gun owners are refusing to surrender a semi-automatic rifle that was imported from China and bought legally before the RCMP retroactively declared it a prohibited weapon.

15 97A owners are taking the government to court over the reclassification. Of course Canada isn’t the only country that reclassifies firearms on a whim, recently our own ATF decided to reclassify pistol grip equipped shotguns without a stock. Thankfully we don’t have a long gun registry so the ATF’s only method of confiscation is to visit every gun store in the country, dig through all the stores’ 4473 forms, and try to classify whether or not each shotgun sold had a pistol grip without a stock. That’s still too easy for my comfort but at least it requires some semblance of work.

The Mexican Gun Canard… The Revenge 2

Between the anti-gunners whining and the ATF’s attempt to nab even more power this whole Mexican gun canard is getting out of hand. Anybody with half of a brain knows that Mexico’s drug cartels are obtaining their automatic rifles and grenades from somebody else as us lowly civilians can’t own such devices in this country.

Likewise all the laws the anti-gunners are clamoring for will only make life difficult on us regular citizens. What can be done when law enforcement personnel are the ones smuggling the guns?

Jesus A. Longoria, 31, of Brownsville, Texas, has been a Cameron County sheriff’s deputy since March 2006. On Dec. 17, before U.S. District Court Hilda G. Tagle, he pleaded guilty to the federal felony charge. He admitted that on May 5, 2010, while assigned to the Veterans’ and Gateway Ports of Entry to prevent stolen vehicles from leaving the United States, he attempted to send and export 13 semi-automatic firearms from the U.S. into Mexico.

Answer me this anti-gunners, how are all these laws making it more difficult for regular citizens to purchase firearms going to prevent government employees from smuggling firearms? In case you have problems with reading comprehension I’ll answer the question for you, they won’t.