The Guardian has gone totally ape over this Pentagon, uh, Panama, uh, Paradise Papers thing…
Some possibilities:
- Texas gunman who killed 26 ‘sent threatening texts to mother-in-law’ — This angle is many hours old, but this shooting story remains the big one, and we haven’t talked about it yet.
- Paradise Papers — I don’t have anything to say about this yet, for two reasons: First, it’s about money, so, ya know. Second, I can’t concentrate on it for Bernie Sanders yelling, “I tolja so! I tolja so! I tolja so! I tolja so!” Meanwhile, The Guardian‘s gone absolutely ape over it — you have to scroll down a screen and a half to read about anything else.
- Which Columbia-area hospital is the safest? Not one got an A. — Yikes.
- Amazon’s Roy Price Left Alleged Trail of Sexual Harassment — I’m just sharing this to note that The Wall Street Journal is leading with it, when everybody else (except The Guardian) is leading with the Texas shooting… Interesting… Maybe the WSJ is just trying to distract The Guardian from its shiny new toy: Look! Business executives! Sexual harassment!
- Steve Benjamin won’t be on the ballot tomorrow — No, he’s running, and I assure you he will be re-elected. But he’s not on the ballot, which Cindi is pointing out because it’s such a dramatic example of one of her pet electoral peeves…
Related Posts
1. Thank God there was someone near with a rifle who knew how to shoot. Shot and bleeding out, crying to his dad on the phone before he put a bullet through his head. I hope his miserable life passed before his eyes as he sat there dying.
3. I’m more concerned that Lexington Medical is the #1 hospital in Columbia. I know people who would rather risk dying going anywhere else than Lex Med. Because they know their odds at Lex Med are 50-50 anyway.
5. No surprise nobody ran against him, who’d want to takeover his mess.
1. Republican solution to mass gun shooting incidents:
. Pray
. Hug children
. Pray some more
. Admonish Democrats for allegedly politicizing latest incident
. Politicize incident
. Suggest mental health is the real problem
. Talk about the second amendment
. Pray again
. Suggest people take some worthless NRA gun safety course
. Suggest liberals should pray more
Another mass shooting occurs so it’s time to –
. pray
……..
We have so many laws and regulations regulating gun ownership that our bureaucrats routinely fail to keep up with the restricted list. Therefore, the conclusion is….golly, we need more gun laws.
So basically we have to choices here:
1. We can actually come down hard on the clerks and bureaucrats we’re paying to do their jobs, to get this, actually do their jobs or be shown the door; or,
2. We can strip law-abiding citizens of their rights so it’s just easier for the clerks and bureaucrats to continue to not really do their jobs.
Now, I’ve looked all through the Constitution, and there’s absolutely nothing in there about guns, but I did find this whole section protecting the sacred right of government clerks and bureaucrats to continue to be sort of “meh” at their jobs without any consequences. So, clearly we need to go with the second choice.
Seriously, though: Where’s the outrage here? What’s the point of setting up a NICS if people aren’t going to put information into it? I mean, why have any gun laws at all if we aren’t going to enforce them or have any consequences for the people entrusted to run the system who muck it all up? This shooter fractured a baby’s skull, pleaded guilty to it, got a BCD from the Air Force, and some clerk can’t even get around to putting that information in the computer? Personally, I’d like to see the clerk responsible for this pilloried, but I’ll settle for him being fired.
Oh, and keep up with the disdain for prayer. It’s a really good look that will help rally people to your cause.
Now, I’ve looked all through the Constitution, and there’s absolutely nothing in there about guns,
-Bryan
That’s something we can agree on 🙂
I come from the highway safety world and that taught me a valuable lesson. Nothing is going to matter unless attitudes reflect reality. In 1972 more than 50,000 people lost their lives in vehicle crashes. That dropped to the low 30k range by 2014. It has since gone up a bit. The reason for the change was people started to take highway safety seriously. Unfortunately the reverse seems to be happening with gun safety. Responsible gun owners like Bryan continue to have this inordinate concern than effective gun laws will infringe on his right to own guns. This “strip law-abiding citizens of their rights” is a common theme among many gun owners. But it’s misguided. Effective highway safety laws didn’t infringe on the rights of responsible drivers. Sure I have to buckle up and can’t drink a can of beer in the car now. (For those of you too young to remember it actually was legal to drink a can of beer while driving not very long ago) These changes were fought over at one time just as we fight over background checks at gun shows now. I think we can agree in one small way, more gun laws are not really the answer. The answer is a recognition that mental illness, incompetent clerks, too little gun training, or other side issues are not the culprit. Sadly I don’t see this recognition coming to pass any time soon. In the meantime we’ll continue to experience gun deaths increasing after declining for many years. But at least our constitutional right to buy bump stocks will not be infringed.
“Now, I’ve looked all through the Constitution, and there’s absolutely nothing in there about gun”
Article [II] (Amendment 2 – Bearing Arms)
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.
Bryan was being sarcastic…
Bryan,
There are so many impediments to good governance on the issue of guns that it is laughable to attack the process which has been deliberately neutered by the pro-gun lobby.
There is no national research, no willingness to even legislate away dangerous firearm accessories which are not even covered in the Constitution, no willingness to create a coherent set of policy goals related to firearm safety, and strangled funding at both the national and state levels. And that’s not even getting started on the long list of NRA-promoted legislative lobbying across the country.
It’s a national disgrace. I don’t want to take your guns, but at some point you are going to need to see that your attitude gives support and cover to those you know ought not to have access to firearms and to those kinds of weapons you know ought not to be in wide distribution in our society. That is just the hard facts.
So what’s the Democrats solution?
How many mass shooting happened under the Obama administration?
2. Democratic solution to mass shooting incidents:
-Check race of shooter:
–If non-white remind Republicans that the real terrorists are white people and this is only getting traction because the shooter isn’t white. Caution that it will inevitably be followed by violence against Muslims, African-Americans, LGBT, etc.
–If white remind Republicans that the real terrorists are white people and they are simply too hypocritical to call the shooter a terrorist instead of a “lone wolf”. Caution that it will inevitably be followed by violence against Muslims, African-Americans, LGBT, etc.
-Post the newest variation of The Onion’s “‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens”.
-Remind Republicans that their god is dead (optional) and their “sympathy” is hollow, meaningless, hypocritical, and dangerous (required).
-Post latest Rachel Maddow monologue filled with gotchas that were likely already refuted by the far right, fascist PBS NewsHour.
-Be willing to discus solutions to gun violence, but beyond repealing the 2nd Amendment only entertain solutions that will likely be ruled as unconstitutional by the courts or viewed as prohibition by attrition by gun owners (like maybe a “totally reasonable” $20K a year insurance for each gun with a 5,000 year prison sentence for each non-insured firearm with random household firearm checks at 3AM).
-Remind gun owners that they aren’t just culpable for this, but for all gun related violence. THEY. ARE. MURDERERS. STOP.
Dems are happy to include poison pills in their gun violence solutions while Republicans are totally unwilling to act even when the gun industry and NRA support such legislation. The political right needs to grow a backbone. The political left needs to give up on one-size-fits all solutions. The cultural right needs to give up on the fantasy that gun violence is a “South Side of Chicago” problem. The cultural left needs to give up on the dream of some day legally abolishing rednecks.
Some good points there…
South Side of Chicago you say… http://heyjackass.com/
Before Brad goes off the deep end, it’s a legitimate website.
1) A few weeks ago, the SOB-in-Chief said the world was making fun of us.
He’s right – for example, the Canadians: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCtD3OJ-_Es
155,000 views in 11 years.
Bernie did “tolja so.” Where your treasure is, there is your heart, also. We have long known that a lot of rich and powerful people’s heart is with their money. Just more confirmation.
What the liberal media is reporting is that the shooter used an AR-15 rifle… what they’re not reporting is that guy who shot the shooter also used an AR-15. The media just can’t help themselves to display the AR-15 as and evil weapon.
You know why? Because it’s a wicked-looking weapon, in both senses of “wicked” — “evil,” and “cool.”
Which is why people buy them.
Which to me is very UNcool. I mean, really…
If I had money to spend on guns, which I don’t, I’d be embarrassed to buy an AR-15. I’d be sure that everyone in the gun shop was looking at me and thinking: Look at that loser who wants to go out and play soldier. Obviously, he never served, and he thinks carrying a soldier’s weapon (or rather, what looks like a soldier’s weapon) will make him a man…
I think I need to do a post on Top Five Guns I Would Buy If I Had Money to Buy Guns. Anyway, an M-16 wannabe would definitely not make the list.
I’d write it right now, but I’m having trouble thinking of more than a couple…
“I think I need to do a post on Top Five Guns I Would Buy If I Had Money to Buy Guns. Anyway, an M-16 wannabe would definitely not make the list.
I’d write it right now, but I’m having trouble thinking of more than a couple…”
Dear Sir:
I happen to be somewhat learned on this topic. Please forgive me the presumption of imposing upon you, but I hope to be of assistance to you. Just imagine you’ve mentioned the top five beetles to collect in the company of Sir Joseph Blaine.
1. An actual, WWII era M-1 Garand with all matching parts. Yeah, it will run you a pretty penny, but for an authentic historical rifle that is the “greatest battle implement ever devised” according to George S. Patton, Jr. you’ll want this at the top of your “Money is No Object” list.
2. Since you’ve gotten your historical WWII piece out of the way at #1, now it’s time to go for a 1911 pistol. No, not an old, beat up GI .45 from a bygone era. I’m talking about an Ed Brown 1911. These things are works of art that are functional sidearms. I’d lean towards the Executive Carry, but you really can’t go wrong with any of these fine sidearms. By the way, it’s $2,700 dollars, so it’s probably more expensive than the M-1.
3. Now that you have a rifle and a sidearm, you need a gentleman’s shotgun. I mean something nice. Nice, as in you could take it shooting with the Prince of Wales and not have anyone look down on it. I’m talking about a shotgun made by a company in England that has a royal warrant from the Crown. I’m talking about the company that made Ernest Hemingway’s preferred guns and rifles. I’m talking about Westley Richards…or maybe Holland & Holland.
I actually went to the Holland & Holland gun room in NYC some years back. It was amazing. They had a couple hundred guns that averaged…again averaged about $175k per gun. They knew I was just a young pup who couldn’t afford any gun in the room, but they were wonderfully nice, and I talked shooting with them for about an hour. They were perfect gentlemen who respected someone who appreciated their wares and liked to shoot. I bought a H&H ball cap. 🙂
4. Now that you’ve got your historical piece, a great 1911, and a shotgun that costs more than an average house in Florence, now it’s time to get something exotic. With any of the above, you could take them out and shoot them on a daily basis. Maybe something purely collectible like set of this set of Purdey (another English maker) dueling pistols. (Does this count as two guns? Probably, but whatever.) 🙂
5. Something else old and beautiful. For me, it would be a Henry Rifle from the 1860’s. This one was made in March of 1863, just a few months before a certain engagement in Pennsylvania broke the back of the Confederate army. I’m a sucker for old guns.
There. Much like Barry from Hi-Fidelity, I defy anyone to make a better list.
HANDGUNS
Colt 1873 Single Action Army
RIFLES
Winchester 1873
SHOTGUNS
Remington Model 32
FULL AUTOS
M1928A1 Thompson
Bren gun
For full auto, I’d go with the German MP-40, which the Allies mistakenly called the “Schmeisser.”
If you’re Clint Eastwood, you can fire one in each hand at the same time. But ONLY if you’re Clint Eastwood…
You know what? I tried to find a still of Eastwood firing the two machine pistols, but couldn’t. However, I found this photo of a MODEL someone built of that scene, which to someone who was a kid at the time is one of the all-time coolest war-movie scenes…
I wanted to pick guns I would like to have in a theoretical safe at home.
I’d have to pass on a Nazi weapon. I had that on my list at first but changed to the Bren. Both were instantly identifiable WWII weapons, but the Bren has the association with the Allies – and not the SS. I’d also want an Australian slouch hat, if I were going to take out the Bren to fire it.
Good thoughts, but I was trying to be non-judgmental on the gun. The Bren’s cool. The Sten is even cooler, with its stylish sideways magazine.
But as a kid watching war movies, the MP-40 made more of an impression on me…
Also… and I’m a little sheepish about admitting this… I’ve “used” it a lot playing Call of Duty, World At War. In the scenario in which I’m a Red Army soldier, I usually ditch my single-shot Russian rifle ASAP and pick up an MP-40 from a dead German. A lot more effective when moving quickly through a virtual battle scenario with the enemy everywhere.
I do the same in the U.S. Marine scenario — I grab a Japanese Nambu Type 100 as soon as I can….
And at least in that fake world, the Russian PPSh-41 isn’t bad, either…
That’s not a bad list. I like the 1873 single action army and the Winchester 1873 on the same list since you can load ’em both with the same .44-40 cartridge.
The Remington Model 32 is a serviceable shotgun, but it’s nothing that really fires me up.
For full auto, hmmmm…I don’t know. Never really thought about it. Assuming in our “money is no object” hypothetical, I can also bypass all the red tape for a full-auto NFA weapon, then I’m going big. Give me an M-2. I’ll take a big o’l .50 cal machine gun. I mean, if you’re going full auto, might as well get something big, right? 🙂 Oh, and since it’s super heavy, I’ll take a small vehicle to mount it on as well. 🙂
My list wouldn’t differ much from Bryan’s, partly because it’s influenced by Bryan’s.
I’d always wanted a Garand, complete with the brass clips that fly out with a CHING! when you get to the end of the 8 rounds. That I came up with on my own.
But when Bryan started talking about getting a Henry .22 awhile back, he put that thought in my head. That would be something fun for plinking that would also remind me of my Daisy Model 1894 I had when I was a kid — a side-loading saddle gun.
And I’d prefer the .22 because my limited experience with higher-caliber rifles has taught me I’m more accurate with something that doesn’t kick as much. And all I’d want to do is hit tin cans and such; I’m not out to kill anything. If I were, I’d want more knock-down power…
“But when Bryan started talking about getting a Henry .22 awhile back…”
I did end up getting a Henry rifle last Christmas. It was one of those things I wanted but didn’t really need, so I never bought it for myself. However, my wife bought it for me for Christmas knowing that it was what I wanted. It’s really nice. Heavy, too, which makes the recoil super-light.
I doubt anyone would give you a second look buying an AR-15 in a gun shop. Most gun shops probably sell 2-3 per week if not daily… there are an estimated 8,000,000 out there. There are more AR-15’s out there than M-16’s ever produced. It’s not like you’re buying something rare or attention grabbing. If you ever shot one you’d likely change your mind about wanting one. If you want one, buy the parts and assemble it yourself… it’s not that difficult and you can get exactly what you want
Maybe you should buy a Walther PPK, then people in the store would think you’re trying to be James Bond.
Maybe you should buy an pearl handled Colt 1911, then people in the store would think you’re trying to be George Patton.
Maybe you should buy a lever action Winchester Model 94, then everyone in the store would think you’re trying to play cowboy.
As someone who has spent more money than he should have in gun shops, the others in the store really don’t care what you’re buying.
No, I’d rather buy me a Buntline Special, so everybody will think I’m Wyatt Earp.
Actually, I confess I WAS thinking of the Walther for my Top Five list, but now I’m too embarrassed…
That’s a good plan, the Walther PPK will bite you. If you don’t want the webbing between your thumb and forefinger cut up pass or get the PPK/S.
Let’s call them what they are: weenie weapons.
Yeah, Claus, it is. The killer (see what I did there?) left behind 15 empty magazines inside the church. We both know that’s 450 rounds. In less than 5 minutes. Nobody needs that kind of firepower. They just don’t.
A Dodge Hellcat can do 180 mph, should we outlaw those cars because nobody needs to go that kind of speed? Or do we enforce speed limits? Does everyone with a Dodge Hellcat go 180 mph or just a select few idiots? Ban the Dodge Hellcat!!!
Um… why IS there a car that goes that fast, that isn’t a race car?
The Dodge Challenger Hellcat isn’t even the fast model, that’d be the Dodge Demon… where passenger seat and rear seat are optional.
“Let’s call them what they are: weenie weapons.”
Call them what you want, I’d rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it.
If the occasion arises where you’re needing one, I’m sure dialing 911 will be just as effective, the police will be there in 10-20 minutes.
What’s the hypothetical situation where you “need” one? Robbers are attacking your house in platoon strength?…
Robber come into your house with an AR-15, that’d be more realistic. Two robbers come into your house… would you rather have a 5 round bolt action or a 30 round semi-automatic? There’s no such thing as too much gun when your or your family’s life is at stake. Doesn’t matter, because it’s people like you who think a baseball bat or golf club will be plenty.
From, at best, 3 rounds in one minute in the 18th century to upwards of 450 rounds in five by our own time. Yep, the Framers definitely saw that coming when they wrote the Second Amendment!
I don’t think they could fire three rounds in one minute… Two at the most, I think…
It’s likely that 3 per minute was up from 1 every 3 minutes not too many years prior to the amendment being written.