We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, September 10. 2016
Update on Shakespeare's portrait
You do not have to be crazy about it, but you do need water in warm weather
Thirst often mistaken for hunger. Strange. Have a Coke or a 'gansett.
The Inside Story of Why Arianna Huffington Left the Huffington Post
Outside of gang neighborhoods, an armed society is a polite society
How Our University Reacted to an Exposé of its Grade Inflation Problem
School got award for promoting diversity, which infuriated the SJWs.
Students oppressed by their college. So change colleges.
Civil rights chief: 'Religious freedom' code words for intolerance
Freedom is slavery to reality, and reality sucks
" …In the past sixteen years, 94 per cent of the net jobs created were in education, healthcare, social assistance, bars, restaurants, and retail, even though those sectors only employed 36 per cent of America’s workforce at the start of the millennium…"
Georgetown Slave Descendants Want A BILLION Dollar Reconciliation Fund
Black Voters Are So Loyal That Their Issues Get Ignored
What are black issues?
57M Hispanics now in U.S., 17% of population, 54% of total growth
Rich guys want cheap immigrant labor
Hillary Clinton Goes Off on Trump Supporters: ‘Basket of Deplorables’, ‘Irredeemable’, ‘Not America’
Hillary Clinton refuses to explain what she told the FBI about how a concussion impaired her memory
What Did Clinton’s Lawyers Say to Her Tech Guy a Few Days Before He Destroyed Her E-Mails?
Given that Donald Trump is the 'devil incarnate' if one listens to any of the Clinton surrogates, Democrats are growing more and more concerned as Hillary's 'insurmountable' lead has collapsed to its lowest since the conventions.
Deeply unpopular Hollande calls for France to 'embrace' Islam
How the Third World was Ruined, And why "colonialism" had nothing to do with it.
Abbas, the KGB and the world of Middle East espionage
Tracked: Sep 11, 09:33
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Georgetown Slave Descendants can be given money after they pay back the white man for inventing electricity, automobiles, radio, tv airplanes and everything else that white men did that benefits the blax
1950 to 2010: Not One Mass Public Shooting Where Citizens Could Be Armed
Here's one counterexample:
Sort of the same story as the non headline: Millions of people went about their daily lives with no incident.
If Joe had come around the corner and saw the man with the gun still firing, he would have been able to do something different than just watch, or run away, or try to subdue an armed person. The story doesn't explain how the first guy got the gun away, nor when Joe "concealed his gun so as not to be considered a second shooter".
I'd say that one worked as it should. He made right decisions. Maybe he was "lucky." Maybe there would be less dead or injured if the guy who disarmed him had had a gun and shot him in less time than it took to disarm him? We'll never know.
(The link for the item about 57M Hispanics is bad)
And of that 57 million Hispanics how many speak Spanish? Fewer and fewer fluently. As with their Italian, Greek, Russian, Japanese, and even Spanish predecessors, the language of the old country doesn't seem to last beyond (or well into) the third generation.
It's a real world out there. This situation was far from usual. It's very unusual that an unarmed person will stop an armed one bent on hurting people. What is much more likely is that the armed bad guy is pretty much free to do what he wants till an armed good guy comes on the scene. Are there dangers for the armed good guy? You bet.
The question is not is there a danger but what is that danger compared to allowing an armed bad guy to do what he wants till the police get there (and there's no guarantee that the policeman won't be a victim of the possible dangers that any armed protagonist might encounter or inflict).
When seconds count, the police are just minutes away (and now with the work of people like Black Lives Matter and our fearless leader, Obummer, they are likely more minutes away than they used to be).
"Rich guys want cheap immigrant labor". No. That is the excuse, not the reason. They can't pay immigrants less than minimum wage if they want to remain rich guys.
They can pay them anything the illegal immigrant will accept if they pay in cash.
"Professor Who Was Taped Ripping Down 9/11 Memorial Posters Is Chair Of Saddleback College’s History Department…"
Apparently the professor is a little light on the "regulation of the heart" portion of education.
Usage: Education, properly a drawing forth, implies not so much the communication of knowledge as the discipline of the intellect, the establishment of the principles, and the regulation of the heart.
Instruction is that part of education which furnishes the mind with knowledge. Teaching is the same, being simply more familiar. It is also applied to practice; as, teaching to speak a language; teaching a dog to do tricks.
Well, assuming the Hispanic immigrants aren't the descendants of the Spanish feudal lords, can you blame those coming to the US for abandoning the language of the colonial masters? In Continental European colonies, the non-European populations were enslaved and even if free were subjected to entirely different formal judicial codes from the elites, the clergy, the military, the guilds, etc.
I have to admit that your reply to the ZBot's handwaving is spot on. And needs to be said far more often.
1. Life is hard, painful, and not uncommonly, unfairly terminal.
2. Defense is therein an obvious, irrefutable right.
3. The firearm was developed not to rob old ladies but to prevent old ladies being robbed, ergo defense.
4. Since defense is not an exclusive practice of an exclusive service, the right of the people to protect old ladies and everybody else shall not be infringed. See #2 and then see #1.
The left has upset this axiomatic logic for decades on only one point, one the right routinely concedes to it: That defense is an exclusive State service bestowed as a privilege.
The philosophical corollary is obvious: You don't deserve to live unless permitted to live, which is a complete inversion not just of the rights of non-machine* humans, but of empirical reality.
Did I mention the handwaving?
*not in ZBot's handwaving program.
Seeing the picture of Narragansett Beer reminds me of what I like best about 'Gansett: the hilarious Nichols and May Narragansett Beer ads shown on televised Red Sox games. Back then, after Teddy Ballgame and before the year of the Impossible Dream, the Sox weren't very good. But Curt Gowdy and the 'Gansett beer ads made watching the Sox a bearable experience.
Unfortunately, my favorite Nichols and May 'Gansett ad doesn't appear to be on YouTube. But Nichols and May did the same ad for Jax Beer.
Nonetheless, there are examples of mass shootings in places where civilians have the legal right to be armed.
If I were to engage the ZBot on its diminished level I'd probably say something like there are examples of bulimia where surpluses exist, living on sidewalks where houses exist, dead pedestrians where cars exist, cancer where hospitals exist, and in all cases, none of it saved by careful central management using force, coercion, enticement, or even enticing outright manipulation of an actor's environment by purported or putative protectors, including by the very stringent laws against severe gun misuse, it being criminal.
There has never been a single instance of a mass shooting where guns did not exist in the world as an instrument of defense. There has never been a single instance of a mass shooting where guns broke the law. There has never been a single instance of a mass shooting where humans did not have the a priori right to defend themselves, but there likely are and still may be cases where at a mass shooting that right had been interrupted by other actors who, it must be said, then played or play some part in the deaths that follow by their preventing the use of reasonable, recognized, effective, and rightful defenses.
The entire defensive civilian posture at such an unlawful event where people possess the inalienable, a priori right to save their lives and others is based on the defensive instrument. The entire defensive civilian posture may only be interrupted, wrongly, by another force that violates the inalienable, a priori right and thus endangers those civilians as much as the event itself does, and may even induce the event's perpetrators to illegally act where they otherwise would not, civilians whose rights "shall not be infringed" pursuant that prior contract.
Which is to say, 1. Life is hard, painful, and not uncommonly, unfairly terminal, and 2. Defense is therein an obvious, irrefutable right. And 3. To violate the individual's right is to become as the illegal actor.
Handwaving about violent psychopaths acting illegally among the legal citizen's daily activities and against his life shall not and in fact does not factor. Handwaving that even tacitly attacks rightful citizen defenses against violent psychopaths does factor, however, and attacks that citizen and risks adding to the body count he is bound to seek to mitigate.
Evidently some bot-machinery-code-programs does not contain this simple logic. The reader is advised not to engage the bot, but to engage its programmers. That is all.
mudbug: It's a real world out there.
Yes, it is. The claim was that there were no mass shootings where citizens could be armed. A gangland shootout resulting in bystanders being killed, or a person who kills their family, in a state that allows people to carry guns, represents a counterexample.
With regard to mass murders between 1950-2010. You have forgotten one item: the mass murder in a Chinatown Restaurant/club in Seattle washington. 1983. It was in a city that is among the first to have curtailed gun rights. And, not to worry, one of the guys who was there when 13 people had their brains blown out, has since been released (good behavior in prison) and deported to China. Read here
If I were to engage the ZBot on its diminished level I'd probably say something like your hand-waving program is conflating the period of 1950-2010 with the period of 1950-2016, a distinction the author explicitly makes.
I'd further point out the vastly more important fact embedded in the evidence, that being that there is no evidence that even begins to prove the robotic assertion that such shootings are not lessened in places where citizens are granted their un-infringable, inalienable and therefore lawful right to protect themselves.
Lives being in the balance, this is kind of an important point. Fortunately the human mind can grasp the essential abstract distinction and engage accordingly.