Tag: Logic an Anti-Gunner’s Worst Nightmare

When Health Care Meets Firearm Registration

Britain has yet another trick up it’s sleeves to use against those few remaining gun owners in Britain. The British Medical Association wants to tag the health records of those few who have firearms in Britain. For those of you unaware there are means of owning a long gun or shotgun in Britain if you are willing to jump through enough hoops and the police OK you.

This latest pile of bullshit strives from the following:

Last August Bank Holiday Mr Foster killed his wife and 15-year-old daughter before setting fire to their home at Maesbrook, near Oswestry, and killing himself.

It emerged at the inquest into the deaths that Christopher Foster had been suffering from depression and had mentioned suicidal thoughts to his GP.

The British government wants it’s citizens completely disarmed, that’s apparent. They have abolished handguns and most long guns. The problem is there are some means of getting certain long guns. An easy way to do that is to link a gun registry system with a health care system.

See since Foster was suicidal this opens the door to say all gun owners are potential sufferers of depression and suicidal tendencies. After all anybody can become depressed at some point in their life. Likewise a suicidal person can decided to take some people with them. Guns are a method of doing it but so is blowing up your car, burning down your home after dousing it in kerosene, stabbing people to death, and even suffocating sleeping people with pillows. The point is there is no way you can take away all the potential weapons a murdering asshole can use.

The scariest part of this though is it puts doctors in a position to determine if you can continue owning your firearms. Think about it for a second. You have an anti-gun doctor and he sees you own firearms when he looks at your medical record. He knows all that needs to be done to take away your firearms is a call to the police saying you are suffering from depression. Instantly your firearm licenses are revoked. Similarly it’s not hard to say somebody is suffering from depression, anybody can be considered depressed.

Of course the anti-gun pricks in Britain love this idea. Just ask Chrissie Hall the spokesperson from Infer Trust a group that says to offer support for people affected by gun violence (which should be impossible in Britain since they have such strict gun laws and a complete ban on handguns and an almost complete ban on everything else):

Anything that makes life safer for individuals who live in a house where there is a weapon, Infer Trust would be keen to support.

Anything? ANYTHING? A-n-y-t-h-i-n-g? Well fuck they must be all for cutting off the hands and feet of everybody in Britain since punching and kicking is often used as a weapon, many times to kill. Knives are weapons so we should probably tag the medical records of anybody with a knife in the house. Large sticks can be used as weapons to, better tag the medical records of those who have trees in their lawn of any size. Cars to are used as weapons thats another tag to add to medical records.

Of course somebody has some common sense there yet. The mental health charity Mind doesn’t agree with this (not for all the right reasons but at least they aren’t agreeing):

Spokeswoman Katie Prior said: “The link between violence and mental health problems is often grossly exaggerated. Any tragedies that do occur are terrible, but it’s important to recognise that such cases are rare.”

She said people with mental health problems were extremely unlikely to be dangerous: “In fact, research shows that they are are more likely to be the victims of crime than the perpetrators.”

Wait what’s that most people with mental problems aren’t violent? They are more often the victims of crimes? No shit Sherlock. Most people who suffer from depression never commit suicide and of those who do very few of them try to take others with them.

Another problem is trying to link gun owners with mental illnesses. Claiming that medical records of gun owners need to be tagged because they could be depressed is akin to saying gun owners are a special breed of people who are more likely to be mentally fucked up.

Then you just have to love this statistic:

After the inquest into the deaths, Christopher Foster’s estranged brother, Andrew, spoke publicly about his relationship with his brother and the need for greater control over the issuing of gun licences.

He said he had done some research into the subject: “There are 27,000 licensed gun holders in West Mercia alone and 25% will be treated for depression.

“That means 6,500 gun holders are suffering from depression and yet there is no communication between doctors and the police for people who are feeling suicidal.”

I wonder what qualifies as research in his mind. Maybe he did some Google searches like the Violence Police Center is known to do. Either way without a source these numbers are beyond useless. But rest assured they will be cited.

Fuck the British government. Why the Hell the citizens didn’t revolt when the government started taking their arms is beyond me. The first step of a fascist government is to disarm the populace.

Media Bias, I Don’t Believe It

Man I find a treasure trove of great articles on Says Uncle. For instance apparently the media only feel those who oppose them and carry guns are worth shitting bricks over. Take a look at this article on MSNBC. From the article:

Holding anti-health care reform signs, soliciting car honks; the tenor of the shallow sea of signs the same.

Except for one counterprotester, apparently the only one within shouting distance. The man would only give his first name as he stood alone, wearing a Yankee baseball team shirt, a handgun on his hip, holding a contrary sign.

Oh shit he’s got a gun, PANIC! Well not so much:

“Part of my passion as a Democrat is the right to bear arms,” Josh said.

A veteran, and from a long family history of veterans, the man who was very much alone in the small crowd of protesters said he believed in fighting for the less fortunate.

“I am a firm supporter of health care for every American,” he said.

Wasn’t there panic and hysteria because people opposing government health care control brought guns to a protest? Shouldn’t there be equal panic and hysteria over a man for government health care control carrying a gun? I mean I thought the reason people were carrying guns to these protests was to intimidate the other side, that’s what the media said. Funny how they are outraged when people don’t agree with them and completely meh when people do agree with them.

The Badge Doesn’t Give +1 to Accuracy

People who are against citizens carrying firearms always like to point that the police will protect us. They said only law enforcement should have guns because they are the only ones trained properly. Well thanks to Says Uncle I can point at another story where the police don’t seem to be very good shots.

Police in London shot at a robbery suspect 19 times without hitting him even once. That’s a lot of rounds flying around. In fact that’s very irresponsible in my opinion. Each one of those bullets could have hit an innocent bystander which the police are supposed to be trained not to do (that’s what the anti-gunners say). And how far away was he? Well:

O’Connell estimated he was less than 10 metres and possibly as few as six metres away when the officer opened fire.

That’s somewhere between roughly 20 and 33 feet. If you can’t hit a man at that range you probably shouldn’t be carrying a gun on your person. Just remember police officers aren’t better shots than other civilians, that badge does not give +1 to accuracy.

Wait Laws Don’t Change Around the Obamessiah

Sweet, the White House actually stated that laws don’t changed just because the Obamessiah is in town. This in relation to citizens legally carrying guns to the health care events. Straight from the horses mouth:

Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said people are entitled to carry weapons outside such events if local laws allow it. “There are laws that govern firearms that are done state or locally,” he said. “Those laws don’t change when the president comes to your state or locality.”

We all knew this was true but it’s nice to hear a White House official come out and state it. Of course the anti-gun crowd aren’t amused:

“What Gibbs said is wrong,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “Individuals carrying loaded weapons at these events require constant attention from police and Secret Service officers. It’s crazy to bring a gun to these events. It endangers everybody.”

Such hysteria. You know it’s almost adorable when Paul’s mouth starts frothing and he begins screaming gibberish whilst swinging his head back and forth getting froth on anybody within a few feet. I would like him to state how people legally carrying guns endangers anybody with the exception of criminals who may show up to do something nefarious.

In fact due to the large number of people there and the possibility there could be criminals meaning to bring harm upon unarmed civilians I believe it’s dangerous and irresponsible for legally able people not to carry their guns to these events. And because I like to correct people when they’re wrong:

Monday, a man with an AR-15 semiautomatic assault rifle strapped to his shoulder was outside a veterans’ event in Phoenix.

There is no such thing as a semi-automatic assault rifle. And assault rifle by definition is able to switch from semi-automatic to full-automatic or burst fire mode. If it can do either of the last two on that short list it’s not an assault rifle.

Remember a Disarmed Society is a Safer Society

At least that’s what Wisconsin’s governor keeps saying. Well Mayor of Milwaukee, Tom Barrett, may be changing his tune. Well he probably won’t be but either way he got his ass beaten with a pipe. From the story:

“The mayor stopped and said something (to the man) like, ‘Let’s all cool down here, I’m going to call 911,'” the mayor’s spokesman Patrick Curley said. “He said it one or two times according to him. When he took out his phone, that’s when the suspect attacked him.”

The suspect hit Barrett in the head and torso with a metal pipe. Barrett apparently fought back, fracturing his hand when he punched the suspect.

You know what may have helped prevent Mr. Barrett from getting hit by that pipe, a gun. Shocking I know but a gun versus a pipe is a pretty easy fight to guess the outcome of. Of course being a member of Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns horde I doubt he’ll change his tune. And he’ll probably continue spouting anti-gun propaganda on top of it all.

Hey Britain How’s the Gun Ban Working

I’m once again asking Britain how it’s almost total ban on guns is turning out. Apparently not so hot as there are about four stories involving guns in Britain.

The first article tells a story that should be impossible in Britain. A man was shot in the head in Rotherhithe. The man was taken to the hospital where he apparently is receiving treatment. I’m still baffled that a man was shot in Britain. Didn’t the shooter know they don’t allow people to have guns there?

Next up the police are looking for a 16 year old kid who is suspected of shooting somebody. There is a £15,000 reward for information leading to his arrest. How he could have helped murder somebody with a gun is still a complete mystery.

For our third story a man was apparently gunned down by police after shooting at them. The police were unaware of the fact that the gun only fire blanks (Not their fault.). Yet the gun looked real and that makes it an imitation of a firearm which is illegal there. Remember it’s not just a gun ban but a anything that looks like a gun ban. Somehow this one made it through the gun ban barrier though.

Finally two people are being charged for attempted murder. Their preferred instrument for the attempted murder was nothing less then a evil shotgun. Of course there are means of acquiring a shotgun in Britain but it involves a ton of paper work and licensing. Well either this 55 year old grandmother and 17 year old kid did that or they had the gun illegally which should be impossible as there are laws against possession of a gun illegally. I mean that’s exactly what makes it illegal!

So Britain how is the gun ban working out for you?

Recession Hits Chicago’s Annual Gun Buy Back Program

Man the anti-gunners are losing again and again. It’s almost as if people believe in the right to bear arms. Every year Chicago, the safest place on Earth thanks to their draconian gun laws, holds a gun buy back program. Too bad for them people aren’t donating money like they used to:

Last year, about $130,000 was collected. This year, only $50,000 has come in. An assault weapon will still be worth $100. And BB guns and replicas once again will bring $10.

Because of the funding issue surrendering a handgun only nets you $50.00 of dirty money instead of $100.00. Maybe it’s the hard economy, maybe it’s the fact more and more people are waking up and realizing disarming our populace isn’t a good thing, or maybe it’s a little bit of both. Either way it’s nice to see this program floundering as it only gets honest citizens to turn in guns while the criminals keep theirs.

Sheriff Says Civilians Better Shots than Police

Here is an interesting story from Sharp as a Marble. There is a debate going in Columbia, Missouri to determine if people with permits to carry pistols should be allowed to be armed at the local high school. The debate is raging because the smart people realize having armed faculty could stop a mass murdered before he killed enough people to be considered a mass murder.

The local police showed up to comment. The first comment that was made by a law enforcement officer was the stereotypical, but true, cop line on the subject:

Other officers say arming everybody makes it harder for them to tell the good guys from the bad guys.

“And when you have multiple people potential pulling out guns, that’s gonna totally go against our training and potentially create a chaos that we may not be prepared to handle,” said a police officer in the audience.

That is a concern but in most cases it won’t be an issue. If the shooter has been stopped then the armed citizen will have holstered his weapon. Remember most mass shooters are cowards and end up offing themselves the second they are presented with armed resistance. And if the mass murder was still going at it when police arrived and the armed citizen was in a firefight with the said murderer I’m sure they would be good enough to not point the gun at the police or even holster the weapon when the cops arrived. Like I said it’s a valid concern but probably not one that is going to be an issue. The next commend was made by the Sheriff:

Sheriff White argued that armed civilians on campus have the potential to end the threat quickly. And he stunned the room with this assertion.

“In actual shootings, citizens do far better than law enforcement on hit potential,” said White. “They hit their targets and they don’t hit other people. I wish I could say the same for cops. We train more, they do better.”

I like this Sheriff, he’s smart and honest. On average armed citizens do have a better hit ratio. This may be due to the fact most civilians with carry licenses that carry practice shooting. Many police officers only shoot when they do their qualifying and as many times as their department requires. But this is entirely theory.

Either way it’s good to see an honest Sheriff talking about arming citizens in schools.

Somebody Needs a Truck Load of Fresh Knickers

Because Lois Romano just shit hers. I found yet another interesting story via Snowflakes in Hell that amounts to normal pants shitting hysteria by an anti-gunner. I don’t know where to begin with this one so I’ll do the logical thing and start with the top. She starts of talking about Governor Corzine signing New Jersey’s one gun a month strangling bill. That’s probably the only fact in the entire article, the rest is emotional nonsense. Let us being:

f the New Jersey government was thinking of the good of the citizens of New Jersey and our federal lawmakers were thinking of the good of the citizens of our entire nation, they would be working day and night to see how to get rid of the guns in our country instead of allowing more to be on our streets.

So she is stating we should get rid of all guns in this country. Of course the Constitution doesn’t allow for that and cities such as Chicago and Washington D.C. that have strict gun bans aren’t free of shootings or even remotely close to it. In fact ask England how their gun ban is working out (Hint, if you read this blog you know it’s not). Next up:

The Second Amendment to our Constitution was signed into law on Dec. 15, 1791. I’m sure those signers are turning over in their graves as to how our government has allowed this amendment to be interpreted.

The Second Amendment was written as follows: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

I’m sighing and shaking my head again. Yet another dumb ass that is trying to use the militia argument. I’m not going into this again, as I’ve explained it a couple of times. Are your pants full of shit yet? Well if not she has more scare tactics:

I cannot see how these words mean that there should be “gun shows” where anyone can buy an Uzi, a missile launcher or any other weapon that our military uses. Why has our government allowed so many guns to be in our country? There were over 9,000 murders by shootings in our country last year. In England and other countries in Europe the number of murders by shooting in all these countries totaled less than 50.

OK stop the boat, where the Hell can I find a gun show that has missile launchers for sale? I’ve seen expended missile tubes before but those are from fire once and throw away weapon systems. Hence the tubes are useless beyond a collector’s item. Hell I want to see any gun show that offers any weapon our military uses beyond the M9 pistol. You can’t buy modern machine guns even if you go through the ATF bull shit and I don’t think our military uses anything that was produced before 1986 anymore. And possession of such a weapon without the tax stamp is a felony and hence illegal already.

And yes according to England’s own study the number of murder involving firearms was 38:

Firearm offences can be broken down by injury and this shows there were 38 firearm offences
recorded by the police that resulted in a fatal injury (i.e. homicides) in 2008/09, 15 offences
fewer than in 2007/08.

That does look good on paper. In fact it makes it appear as though gun control works as England has an almost complete ban on guns. Oh wait let us look at the overall violent crime rate in England. What’s that it’s two times that of the United State’s? In addition to that the study that was just linked to shows there is absolutely no correlation between less guns and less violent crime, in fact the opposite appears be to true:

It turns out that in nations where guns are less available, criminals manage to get them anyway. After decades of ever-stricter gun controls, England banned handguns and confiscated them from all permit holders in 1997. Yet by 2000, England had the industrialized world’s highest violent crime rate — twice that of the U.S. Despite the confiscation of law-abiding Englishmen’s handguns, a 2002 report of England’s National Crime Intelligence Service lamented that while “Britain has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, [i]t appears that anyone who wishes to obtain a firearm [illegally] will have little difficulty in doing so.”

So although the number of murders involving guns has went down in England after their gun ban violent crime as a whole increase. This may have something to do with the fact criminals feel safer going after prey that is unarmed. Let’s continue with the pants shitting hysteria:

We are not living in the days of lawlessness. We have police departments in every town and city in our country. We have federal law enforcement officers. We have the National Guard in case of civil riots. We do not need to have every citizen carrying a gun. Some states even allow people to walk around with their loaded guns.

When seconds count the police are minutes away. It takes much less time for a thug to murder you then it does for the police to figure out where you are and get to your location. Maybe if the police had personal teleportation devices that wouldn’t be the case but sad to say they don’t. Hence for those minutes it takes them to get there you are on your own. If I’m my own against a criminal I want something to at least equalize the struggle, that’s exactly what a gun does.

I like her mention that some states allow citizens to carry around loaded guns. In fact 48 states do with Wisconsin and Illinois being the only two hold outs (Although Wisconsin legally allows open carry). If gun crime had increased after passing carry laws I promise you the laws would have been repealed, but that’s not the case. In fact most states notice a drop in crime rate after passing carry laws. And so it continues:

There are about 35 adults living on my street. If we each purchase a gun a month, in one year there will be at least 420 guns on my street. This will never happen because we are all law-abiding, sane people and trust our police department to maintain law and order in our little town. On the other hand, there are those who will be happy to be able to gather this number of guns by legal means or not.

I’m glad you trust your police department. I trust mine as well. I trust them to show up after the crime has been committed and try to figure out who did it and where they went. That is their job after all, to dispense justice after a crime has been committed. Also what does it matter if you own 10, 20, or even 1,000 guns? You can use at most two (A pistol in each hand, which is dreadfully useless) at one time and there is a limit to the number you can carry on your person.

And she mentions people will gather these guns by legal means or not. Well I have to say I’ve got bad news for you, if somebody is currently willing to get guns illegally making guns illegal won’t stop them. Ask England. Since England has an almost complete ban on guns there should be no crimes involving guns correct? Too bad that’s not the case. Luckily we’re almost at the end, because the smell of shit is really starting to stink here:

It doesn’t matter if these stores check out the credentials of the prospective buyer. We all know that the number of forged credentials probably outnumber the legitimate number of credentials in our country.

I’d like to know where you came up with that. According to the FBI in 2008 12,709,023 background checks were performed. In order for what Lois said to be true at least 6,354,512 of those credentials would have to be forged. She is saying that the most likely event is over 6 million credentials were forged in 2008 by gun buyers. If there were the case you would think the FBI would stumble upon that and investigate. Having over 50% of their NICS checks end up being done through forged identities would indicate a MASSIVE organized crime effort. I’d really like her to produce a source that gave her the opinion she has. Anyways we have one last paragraph that she wrote:

So now I probably will be getting calls from NRA members telling me that guns don’t kill people. My answer to them is, “People kill people using guns!”

Oh my God, people kill people using guns! Guess what people kill people using knives, cars, poison, lamps, sticks, stones, weed whackers, water, stairs, and almost anything else that exists. Her implication with that saying is since people kill people with guns then we must ban guns. Likewise that means she wants to ban everything people can use to kill other people. Well she better cut off her arms and legs then sew her mouth shut (Actually it would be nice if she did) since all of those can be used to kill people as well.

Yet another emotional anti-gun debate that doesn’t hold up once facts are injected into the claims. Too bad and so sad, thank you for play.