Tag: gun control

Musings on the never-gonna-pass mandatory firearm liability insurance bill.

Stuff like this always makes me contemplate the proper uses of agitprop in modern society:

On Tuesday, I came across the following at the Daily Caller: “A contingent of liberal Democrats in Congress is proposing a new federal gun control idea: mandatory liability insurance for gun owners.”

Gun purchasers without such insurance would face a fine of “as much as $10,000″ if the “Firearm Risk Protection Act” introduced in March by New York’s Carolyn Maloney and seven other Democratic congressmen were ever to become law.

It’s a complex situation.  You see, I know that the odds of actual Speaker John Boehner ever letting this legislation hit the floor is only slightly higher than the odds of hypothetical Speaker Nancy Pelosi doing that.  I know, I know: never underestimate how likely it is that bad (or wicked) legislation can get passed.  But this is like trying to mandate a federal ban on anteaters; the probability levels are simply too low to realistically worry about. Continue reading Musings on the never-gonna-pass mandatory firearm liability insurance bill.

Nine words to explain gun control enthusiasts?

Arrogant much, Moe?

I think that the sentence below explains it all: the reason why gun control enthusiasts tend to be remarkably ignorant of the thing that they’re trying to ban, the reason why gun control opponents typically come off as the sensible people in any given setting, the reason why all gun control disputes follow the Tragedy -> Hysteria -> Demagoguery -> Nothing Changes narrative arc, the whole shmeer.  Here you go:

Gun control arguments are based on emotion, not reason.

Nine words that will probably infuriate the average gun control enthusiast.  Which is kind of the point.

Moe Lane

QotD, The Denver Post Mocks Diana DeGette For Her Gun Ignorance edition.

Bless her heart.

You never, ever, want to be a Colorado Democratic politician and have the Denver Post write this about you:

As lead sponsor in House on gun legislation, Rep. Diana DeGette appears to not understand how they work

…Asked how a ban on magazines holding more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing gun violence, [Rep Diana] DeGette [D] said:

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

What she didn’t appear to understand is that a magazine can be reloaded with more bullets.

Well, to be fair: I have in the past had the devil of the time myself with a situation where I was using up magazines, and then not being able to reload them.  Then again, that was while I was playing DOOM II.

Moe Lane

[UPDATE]: Oh dear God she doubled down on the stupidity.  And the Denver Post doubled down on the mockery.  Quit while you’re behind, madam (Via Twitchy).

[FURTHER UPDATE]  Annnnnd here’s the video.

*Alas, the joke does not quite work with BioShock Infinite.

Jim Carrey would like to take back that check that his ego wrote last week, please.

It would appear that Jim Carrey’s agent has finally tracked his client down and dangled him over the top of a building for a while*:

 

I’ll spare you too much of Carrey’s response, which I frankly am reading in short, controlled bursts (if I read for too long, my eyes start rolling up and to the right and I can’t stay focused on the middle of the screen), but this leaps out at me:

How shallow do they think I am?

…Is this a trick question?

Moe Lane

PS: This is, by the way, about one-third through the process.  The begging and pleading in earnest will start if and when Kick-Ass 2 tanks.  And, honestly, right now I’m not all that pumped to go see it.

 

*Yes, Batman WOULD make an awesome agent. Especially for writers who have decided that they no longer need to edit for length.

QotD, This Is Not Understatement… Edition.

What you are about to read is not understatement.  It is what understatement will become after the Singularity.

Marsha McCartney, president of the Texas Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, conceded that Texas was “a few election cycles away from passing laws like they did in Colorado.”

…You have to wonder if the New York Times writer lost it when s/he* heard that for the first time.  I mean, some tests of one’s professionalism and ability to keep a straight face are going to be harder to surmount than others…

Via

Moe Lane

*It’s not yet 8 AM and I haven’t had my coffee.  I neither know, nor really care, whether ‘Reeve’ is a guy’s or a girl’s name.

Top Democratic donors promise to flip Senate to Republicans in 2014.

Much obliged, guys.

Kenneth Lerer, a New York businessman who is chairman of Buzzfeed.com, and David Bohnett, a technology entrepreneur and philanthopist [sic] based in Los Angeles, are both major financial supporters of Democratic candidates, having each given scores of large contributions over the years. They are both key players in the political fundraising world and wield influence among other donors and fundraisers.

Neither will give another dime to any Senate Democrat who does not support expanded background checks, I’m told — and both will suggest to other donors that they do the same.

Continue reading Top Democratic donors promise to flip Senate to Republicans in 2014.

I’m shocked at this Cracked.com article on guns.

To wit: 5 Mind-Blowing Facts Nobody Told You About Guns. It… doesn’t suck. It is, in fact, a reasonably fair look at the situation that readily admits – in fact, highlights – that gun crime is down and has been down for some time.  I’m not even upset about the “bunch of grown men collecting firearms like little girls collect Barbie dolls” bit because, well, it’s true: in my experience, many of them do*.  And there’s nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, some useful stuff in there.  I should also note, more seriously, that one thing that should be addressed far more often in the gun control debate is the problem of handgun suicide.  It often gets ignored, largely because one side can’t use it as a scourge with which to flog the other one and the other side doesn’t want to give the one side free ammo.  But we really should do something about that… and as soon as I figure out something, I’ll let you know.

Moe Lane

*Sayeth the grown man who spent cash money to give all his dolls action figures Mass Effect 2 squad members new outfits that had no effect on the game whatsoever but did make them look pretty, oh so pretty and nice.

Let me explain why Henry Repeating Rifles advertises on MSNBC.

Background:

Don’t tell us that Al Sharpton and MSNBC are hypocrites?  Noooo!!  The Reverend Al opened his show by praising President Obama’s efforts to promote tougher gun control laws.  But 28 minutes into the show, a commercial appeared for, of all things  . . . Henry Repeating Rifles.

Go to Henry Rifle’s website and you’ll find one rifle described as “big, brutal and beautiful” and noting that it fires ammunition “said to have killed more game, big and small, and more men, good and bad, than any other in existence.”  Another model offered for sale, the AR-7, is based on a military rifle, Henry emphasizing that given its lightweight design “you can carry a large quantity of ammunition.” 

The bolding is from Newsbusters, but I left it in because it’s entertainingly direct in its appeal to the MSNBC set.  Anyway, Ed Morrissey asks the question:

Mark Finklestein skewers Sharpton and MSNBC for hypocrisy, but a better question might be why Henry is buying advertising on MSNBC at all.

Continue reading Let me explain why Henry Repeating Rifles advertises on MSNBC.

James Taranto: universal background firearms checks means that anybody can request one.

An-y-bo-dy.

James Taranto makes an excellent point about the major problem with proposals to expanding who can request a background check on firearms:

Currently access to the FBI’s background check system is limited to licensed firearms dealers, who have an incentive not to abuse it lest they lose their license. If it’s opened up to all prospective sellers of guns–that is, to everybody–what’s to prevent someone from abusing it, say by requesting a background check on Greg Sargent, who presumably has no interest in acquiring a gun?

The system only gives a yes-or-no answer as to whether the putative buyer is eligible to own firearms under federal law. But if you’re looking to dig up dirt on someone, a “no” answer on a firearms background check would give you a nice clump of it.

Continue reading James Taranto: universal background firearms checks means that anybody can request one.

Andrew Cuomo will now quietly kill the seven bullet limit.

I’d like to think that the NY GOP got something out of their act of corporeal mercy… but probably not.

Governor Andrew Cuomo’s seven-round limit on magazines sold in New York will be suspended “indefinitely” by a measure in his $136.5 billion budget set to be passed this week, Dean Skelos, a Senate majority leader said.

For those who don’t remember: the ban was called into question when it came out that nobody actually made seven round magazines. The NY state government REALLY didn’t want that brought up in front of a court, given that the courts tend to frown on legislatures trying to get overly cute with the federal Constitution; and it’s pretty clear at this point that the Supreme Court feels inclined to spank gun-grabbers.  Particularly the ones that insist on wasting the Supreme Court’s valuable time. So… let the legislation be ‘suspended’ for a while; which probably translates to ‘never.’  Maybe they’ll revisit it when the shouting dies down.  And maybe they won’t, either.

Via Instapundit.

Moe Lane

PS: The New York state government is generally populated by blithering idiots who could not find their own rear ends in a dark room at night with a flashlight and a sex worker to help.  I just wish to note this for the (somewhat bowdlerized) record.