“In the hands of civilians, they are not protection from crime. Unless you wear a uniform with a badge or a service patch on it, the gun you carry is more likely to kill you or someone you know or love than it is to kill anyone who threatens you or your loved ones . . .
“The ‘good guy with a gun’ who will protect us, rather than threaten us, is the man or woman who has been screened, trained, authorized and empowered by us to do the job. Anyone else, no matter how well-intentioned, is an amateur at best and a hazard to the rest of us at worst.
“The past 40 years in the United States has been a massive experiment in the theory that a highly armed citizenry will make us safer, and the experiment has been an abysmal failure.” – Todd Hubbard in The awesome, life-shattering power of guns [via seattletimes.com]
Facts be damned!
A quick search revealed that Mr. Hubbard is nothing more than a ‘legal aid’ (poverty) lawyer outside Seattle. As such I suspect his politics are decidedly left of center. And I doubt that his tender little hands have ever held a firearm. Just another useful idiot in the war against civil rights.
^^This…
Passing the bar isn’t terribly hard, and that he ended up in legal-aid, tells that he was either not anywhere near the top of his class, or that he is eyeing a career in politics. As he is putting nonsense such as this out, I’m going to say both.
Either that, or he is so completely looney that he believes the tall tales his clients spin for him, and if only they hadn’t had easy access to guns, they never would have been pistol whipping that liquor store clerk. They instead would have been studying hard, and on a plane to CERN in a few more years.
I took the exam three times without the benefit of an exam prep class. Went 0 for 3. Signed up for BarBri and passed with flying colors. Who knew?
Yeah, what he said!
“Tender little hands” LOL
The high murder rate in this country is directly attributed to the major cites. These are “gun free” cesspools that were created by, and run by democrats.
Removing the cities from the calculations, the part of the country that is left has lots of guns, and has the lowest murder rate in the world.
When it comes to crime, guns are not the problem, its democrats.
Actually, it isn’t democrats, it is diversity. You can’t have a 3rd world population and expect 1st world behavior. The more diversity you have, the more violence you have, period.
But what party do you think these diverse people vote for? Some writer had a quote recently, I can’t remember who or where, to the effect that “Democrats want gun control to keep themselves from being shot by other Democrats. Republicans want gun rights so they defend themselves against Democrats.”
It was Scott Adams, author of the Dilbert cartoon.
According to FBI stats, 50% of murders in America are black-on-black, with blacks 13% of the population. And according to HuffPo, the murder rate for Hispanics is twice that of non-black/Hispanic, with Hispanics 17% of the population.
The math is simple. With an overall homicide rate of 4.7 per 100K that works out to the following rates: Black 18; Hispanic 4.5; Non-black/Hispanic 2.2; Homicide rate in the UK? 1.2!
So it is clear from the demographics data that the vast majority of murderers, if they vote at all, vote Democrat.
Makes you wonder if the company DIlbert works for is a Gun Free Zone. Does Dilbert concealed carry at work? Around that bunch of loons it would seem like an awful temptation to just go postal.
Drill down on the FBI numbers, with a bit more granularity.
Those who commit 50% of all murders, are almost exclusively males between 14-45 or so. Which means it’s more like 8% of the population responsible for 50% of all murders. Predominantly of their own race. Just like whites who murder.
If you want to drill down even further, it isn’t 15% or even 8% of the population responsible for most murders, it’s a few per hundred thousand, if you look after the fact. That’s not particularly helpful, of course, but even before the fact we can narrow it down to a few per ten thousand, as Chicago does with its “Strategic Subject List”.
We largely know who is responsible for homicides, the question is what to do about it. This is something to bring up with the “how many lives are you willing to sacrifice for your constitutional rights” crowd. We could cut down crime* significantly if we didn’t care about due process, or probable cause, or any number of other constitutional rights that were supposed to protect the individual from arbitrary state force.
*Note I didn’t say “violence”. State violence counts as violence.
I call BS. Are you a leftist troll?
I live in Arizona, which has probably the most diverse population I have lived in my life. Arizona is a pro-2-amendment state. My friends are the most die hard 2nd amendment supporters on this planet. My friends consist of Christians, Jews, Catholics, blacks, Hispanics, native-Americans, women, and nearly every religion and genetic marker I can imagine. I am 25% native-American myself, served in the military, and I have committed myself to preserving our Constitutional Republic as founded by our forefathers.
So, take that diversity is a problem BS elsewhere.
You may not have a “diversity” problem where you are at, but I can assure you that there IS, indeed a “diversity” problem in this country…
At one time, immigrants to the USA insisted on becoming true AMERICANS. They demanded that their children learn the English language and become a part of the American landscape (dream).
Such ideals have fallen by the wayside. Today’s immigrants are only here for the benefits and money. They could care less about how this country is supposed to operate and themselves, in fact, DEMAND that us native-born Americans kowtow to them (with welfare and other benefits) and defer to their “old country ways”, (gun control and restrictions on free speech), bringing their “bad habits” with them. Most of today’s immigrants could care less about our Constitution, and actually support those who are against it…
I blame the tax-exempt church and social welfare groups for inundating us with third-world types that cannot and will not make it in their home countries. I blame BOTH major political parties that are actually “two sides of the same coin”–democrats who want votes and republicans who want cheap labor…
I, for one, REFUSE to accede to immigrants’ demands. In fact, when I hear an immigrant make complaints about the USA, I ask them, “why did you come here?? If life was so “good” in your home country, why don’t you go back there? The blank, bewildered looks on their faces is priceless…
Regards,
Amen Brother! Thanks for speaking up against these trolls trying to make gun owners look like a bunch of racists. I’m currently at a shooting competition where there are all types of people from a five state region and everyone gets along and things couldn’t be better. As matter of fact, people can leave bags, coolers, etc laying around for hours and nothing bad happens to it. Know why? It’s not cause people are armed, because we’re not (rules). It’s cause shooters are good, decent people who don’t steal, are law abiding, and polite people.
If I were a racist and against diversity, which I’m not either one, I would be a rightist troll, so get your ends straight. I am a member and contributor to the NRA, the SAF and the VCDL and I help edit the VCDL newsletter. I am a lifetime gun owner, EDC’er and a veteran, so you can take your ad hominem attacks and stick ’em where the sun don’t shine.
I wasn’t talking about you or your special circle of friends, so you don’t need to get all sanctimonious. I was pointing out a simple, provable fact: there are a few demographics that commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime in this country. Those same demographics overwhelmingly vote Democratic. Those facts are not disputable. That’s all I was saying and nothing more.
The rest of your interpretation is your overreaction.
Diversity? Third world? May I suggest the welfare state. No accountability, Not giving back to the community. Getting paid to sit there and breed. We have created this sub culture of entitled thugs. We have literally reversed natural selection. The slow, weak and undisciplined are out breeding the strong and disciplined. The democratic ideal is still not getting it as they are trying to disarm the strong because ( How dare us) we want to protect ourselves from the slime that aren’t strong enough to adapt to society and earn a decent living.
HEAR! HEAR!
That’s what I call calling a spade a spade. Facts are so racist.
I think that the contrast between the peaceful streets of Chicago and the horrific gang violence and street criminality in Zurich says you’re wrong.
It still is the Dumbcrats fault because they let millions, actually welcoming, 3rd world scrum into this country–all the Dumbcrats along with the scum they have left in need deported to Iran or some other shit hole
Which is why No Irish Need Apply, Mr. Mallory.
The “good guy with a gun” has better aim, trains much more, has greater fire control discipline, and in general is more responsible with firearms that almost all cops. This result is the case, despite civilians being held to much more restrictive behavior, when it comes to self-defense or the defense of others. Most cops train and qualify once a year, while most civilians continuously train.
What cops get away with would have the average civilian charged, convicted and incarcerated for a long time.
in my experience the only cops and military personnel who are worth a damn shooting are those who do so on they’re own time, and those guys would be doing that whatever their job is.
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=40960936&nid=148
I didn’t make it through all the comments so I wouldn’t be surprised if this wasn’t mentioned, but regarding anybody not in the military or Leo being an “armature at best”, how would he explain some law enforcement and military trainers being mere peasants with guns, and hobby competition shooters able to outshoot “highly trained” cops? You know, if he had any knowledge about the topic.
Profoundly stupid. I believe that there was a time where a person like Todd Hubbard would be ashamed of his ignorance. It isn’t even funny anymore when there are people that ignorant and proud of it.
In his mind, the critical words are “authorized and empowered by us.” Paying someone to do a job doesn’t make him competent. There are civilians with better judgement and better skills than a lot of police.
Police are civilians.
…not any more. With their militarization and the “us vs them” attitude that is reinforced by their training in Israeli war-footing tactics, they do not consider themselves “civilians”.
The days of the “cop on the corner” looking out for the welfare of the citizens has been absent for a long time.
Regards,
Nevertheless they are indeed civilians. That is what distinguishes America where we have the right of the people.
Indeed, the relationship between “the standing army” vs. “the People” has practically reversed itself from the founding era. The Founder’s concept of a standing army was what they were acquainted with from Britain; i.e. thugs and mercenaries in a life-time career (alternative to prison). Our military is mainly in for a hitch or two and then return to civilian life.
Conversely, our police are in for a 20+ year career after which they pension out at around 100% of pay. Our police are beholding to government during their work and retirement years.
Ummmmm. Im gonna have to disagree with you there todd. Not a failure of any kind. But lets not argue over facts. When did people in seattle get this dumb?
When people from California moved there because weather and coffee! and then reproduced.
And no state income tax and better firearms laws and on and on.
California is a beautiful state, but it’s been wrecked by Californians. And they’re working on Oregon and Washington.
And Colorado. It’s pathetic.
Just as the Massachusetts people swarmed over the border into new Hampshire and wrecked the politics and ethos of New Hampshire. No wonder the poor Old Man of the Mountains, the state symbol, gave up, broke off and fell down into the abyssal valley below.
A blatant example of “virtue signaling” to his fellow leftists. Really, a demonstration of ego and a need for recognition.
Expect to see his name soon on the ballot for some city, county or state office (D).
Here’s how it works, Todd. As soon as you say, “In the hands of civilians, they are not protection from crime” you show your true colors. You refuse to accept that firearms, every day, enable those not wearing badges to protect themselves from crime. This is not based upon fact – there are literally thousands of such events that make the news (at least locally) each year. You willfully blind yourself to all the facts of gun ownership. That is your choice as a free individual. Do not, however, delude yourself that your “opinion”, which is based exclusively on emotion, is a sufficient argument to abridge my rights.
He also ignores, or is willfully ignorant of, the fact that there are more firearms in the hands of civilians in America than at any time in history and that violent crimes rates are at their lowest since the 60s.
Who was it coined the term, “An Inconvenient Truth”?
Who exactly is he? Because his opinion on guns, no matter how well-intention is lacking facts at best and a hazard to the rest of us at worst.
He has to have seen the chart with FBI crime statistics, right? The giant down slope we’ve been riding since the 80’s? So he’s a liar.
Amateurs?
Henry Knox who never would have passed a PT test!
Nathaniel Green who couldn’t march or do close order drill
Benedict Arnold -the most brilliant soldier of the early years of the revolution before jealousy and greed consumed him
Joshua Chamberlain – the scholar who learned to lead tough infantrymen
The old definition of amateur is one who engages in a pursuit for love, dedication, or interest. Many amateurs are more skilled and more competent than the so called professionals.
I was just reading a history book making the same point. In fact, the lack of professionalism in the first American army was a feature, not a bug.
The British forces were hide-bound by internal politics, institutionalized incompetence and an inability to delegate or innovate.
That sounds pretty damned familiar….
I would say early war years the lack of a professional army was its greatest strength. It accomplished missions for the time was remarkable. Washington understood he could not match British regulars and adopted guerilla warfare modeled of Indians he fought in the French and Indian wars. It was the lack of a professional army the reason the war lasted 8 years. Once troops were trained, logistics solved, and the French naval forces contained British sea movement was the war won. Only the transition to a professional army allowed the birth of a Nation.
And the French Navy defeating the Royal Navy at a fleet-level battle, and then cutting off the British retreat from Yorktown, that was just a one-time, Providential Miracle of God thing. Both sides were just exhausted.
I’m glad you brought that fact up. Some of our best leaders are not always the traditional or perfect soldiers or fighters, but they have some attribute that enables them to be highly successful.
Like Washington, and like the Colonial militias, not quitting. They kept showing up, adding to Washington’s Regulars, time after time after time. As long as it took.
I’ve read that Washington had a Plan B in case he was defeated in the field and lost most of his army. He was going to gather his hard core survivors like Greene, Knox, Morgan and Lee and retreat across the Allegheny mountains into what’s now Kentucky and Tennessee. With the support of the Scots Irish over mountain men who were already settling the area and hated the Brits with a passion , they would make life extremely unpleasant for the red coats who went rebel hunting. Washington admitted that it might take a generation to recover and gather strength again, but the rebels could still win because the Brits were at the end of 3000 mile supply line. In the worst case the King would hold the coast but the rebellion would live inland where all of the resources were located. The great inland empire would use the Mississippi River and trade through the port of New Orleans. Sounds like a great plot for an alternate history novel.
So, if I put on a uniform with a badge I am magically less likely to shoot myself or my mom? I see an easy fix to “gun violence” now.
No but you might get away with it.
Hubbard is just another one of the rear end up in the air do me too crowd.
I think what anarchyst stated should be obvious by now.
It’s kinda cute how his historical “knowledge” stops at 40 years ago. Pay no attention to the 200 before that.
Right after LBJ and the great society kicked in.
What a lying $&$$ traitor! What sucks is many people believe these lies, and we have to correct them. Yesterday,I spent an hour with a liberal presenting fact after fact discrediting every single political talking point she could muster that she got from her anti-2nd amendment political handlers. It is exhausting fighting against this propaganda.
I had this same conversation with my representative michelle mussman…. after making her look foolish multiple times, she simply told me i was wrong.
Guess the old adage about arguing with an idiot was in full effect.
Considering she squeaked by last time by about the margin of fraud, is there a chance she’s vulnerable in the fall?
If I may…
The problem is you are not speaking her language. They speak only “rhetoric.” You need to speak that to be “heard” and “understood” by them.
They are incapable of speaking dialectic (using facts and logic in pursuit of objective truth). If you speak dialectic to them, you might as well be talking to your dog. Actually, the dog might fair better than your typical rhetoric minded Progressive.
I highly recommend Vox Day’s book “SJW’s Always Lie” as a good primer for how to talk to, and defeat, people like this.
This is why, if needed, I will only protect myself and family. Blueforce can wait for the police.
I’m pretty sure that Blue Force either finds and provides the quote for RF to post, or they just pay to have their name included with the post. The quotes each morning are not necessarily, or even often, indicative of the opinions of Blue Force Gear.
Gosh, for a group of people who smugly claim to appreciate “science,” liberals are remarkable fact-averse.
That doesn’t just apply to the 2A. Just about everything they believe in requires a complete disbelief in science. However they love to project their own faults on to others with terms like ‘anti-science’ and ‘racist’.
What he really means is he wants those firearms working for his kind of people and doing the bidding of the elites. He doesn’t give a shit about you or your family.
Late Saturday night, I was awake when I heard multiple sirens in the distance. I felt that frisson of fear
Oh panty wetting theatrical BS. In the urban hive, no one pays the slightest attention to a siren heard from a distance of more than a 3 or 4 blocks.
In the urban hive people don’t pay attention to sirens period. While driving, they treat them as an inconvenience and do their best to ignore them, and hardly even try to make way anymore. I have a feeling this guy never really steps foot outside his gated community with private security.
My apartment building is literally between the fire station and the emergency room. If sirens got to me, I’d have to be sedated.
Abysmal failure as says the man who looks like he is dressed and made-up for a bit part on the “Walking Dead.”
How’s that for snark and mean?
I think you can do better.
Really? I thought that guns have been around longer than 40 years.
Perhaps something else has happened in those 40 years?
So this is Seattle and “Unless you wear a uniform with a badge . . .”
Seattle police are a good example of who sets a bad example with a history of bad shoots, excessive force incidents and overall ineptitude.
In 2015, in their 3rd year of federal Department of Justice oversight, 11 officers were fired including 6 who resigned in lieu of termination.
They were recently rated 2 out of 8 on their implementation of bodycams.
Most importantly their Office of Professional Accountability gives “civilian” oversight which means they still consider themselves a military operation out to kill an enemy.
I think Mr Hubbard deserves the Seattle police.
I wasn’t able to read this whole quote of the day. He went way past full retard and I can’t handle that this early.
Expanding gun rights have been such a failure that firearm ownership, and permit applications, are at record highs. In spite of the blood dancers predictions the streets are not running red with blood, instead crime has been falling steadily for years – even during the recession when crime typically rises. Campus carry has expanded in multiple states with no discernible ill effects, bar adults who should know better throwing temper tantrums.
Gun control is a failure. It is practically, philosophically, and morally busted.To further the agenda all those seeking to undermine the rights of the law abiding can do is repeat the same old lies.
Todd Hubbard worships the state and all the tools of state power, like cops — and yet he would be the first one to throw a cop to the wolves for shooting one of his clients, even if the shooting was perfectly justified.
This is why we think leftists are insane.
Todd Hubbard worships the state and all the tools of state power, like cops.
Todd Hubbard is a tool of the state.
That is one pure, shitlib, cuck face if I ever saw one.
Stupid (D).
I was at a shooting range in Texas with my 10 year old daughter. We witnessed a uniformed police officer shooting at the six yard pistol targets (six inch steel plates). After firing over 30 rounds he finally dropped the last of the FIVE targets. My 10 year old daughter fired 6 rounds at 5 targets and dropped all five. Please tell me again how much better the “trained” are. She then asked me why it took him so many rounds to hit the five targets.
“The past 40 years in the United States has been a massive experiment in the theory that a highly armed citizenry will make us safer, and the experiment has been an abysmal failure.” – Todd Hubbard
Why is it anti’s only see guns in terms of being in the last few decades?
Oh right, wouldn’t want to go back any further and discuss the Gov’t sponsored genocides of the early 20th century. But, maybe things are different now. We have iPhones, WiFi, and heated and cooled leather seats.
So, things must be different right.
I wonder if this guy is “concernedamerican” and/or “2asux” and/or…
Reading the comments on the linked website, you can see that most of them are telling the original writer that he doesn’t know what he’s writing about. Nice to see that pushback, even though this was in a Seattle newspaper.
Yup. He’s getting trashed quite nicely in the comments.
I liked the analogy that only licensed reporters should be able to write and only politicians should be allowed to vote. I may have to steal that one.
We are not a nation that revokes the rights of the many because of the abuses of the few. If we did, then all motor vehicles would be illegal because they kill upwards of 30,000 Americans annually. This illustrates the narrow minded hypocrisy of the “gun control” crowd like this idiot.
They wouldn’t ban cars because they own one, they use one, and they feel they need one.
Firearms on the other hand, they have entrusted to individuals who will show up 15 minutes after they are needed. They are not self reliant, and have entrusted this to their government, who they think can keep them safe. They don’t have any firearms, or a moral delema, and thus have no problems taking them, prohibiting their future purchase, or prohibiting the transference of them from individuals that do have them.
This guy is just a libtard parrot, mindlessly repeating what he has heard from other libtard parrots. It’s a disease they have and they’d be better off with just fleas and ticks. And, yeah, as far as I can tell exported Kaliforniah libtards are screwing-up the State of Washington. Sorry, but there’s enough here to run Kaliforniah into the ground, so they are being sent to Oregon, Washington and Colorado to screw those States up, too. God help you!
So what this post does is reaffirm my theory of “F#ck the West Coast and any c@ck sucking liberal that has the audacity to crawl out from their crime ridden sh!t hole of a city and tell the people in Fly over country that their guns and religion are the real problem.”? Good deal.
Is he related to L Ron Hubbard ?
Pretentious pompus and wrong.
This op-ed piece follows closely on the heels of a couple of other ones in the last few days in response to the shooting death of 3 young people at a party in an upscale-ish suburb of Seattle.
The 19 year old suspect in custody used a Ruger AR556 that he had just purchased a week before, shooting people there out of jealousy regarding a girlfriend (whom he killed). Happened JUST after a big supportive piece in the Times about a renewed “assault weapons ban” push in Washington State.
But regarding the young suspect, even the Times has to mention that police report “recent social-media posts suggest he was considering the murders … he later committed.” As well as a “witness from Kentucky, who said that two or three days earlier, (the suspect) had sent him text messages “regarding committing a mass shooting.” Friends of the suspect say at times he “seemed to have an explosive temper” and displayed “illogical anger.”
So once again we have a person known to have anger and rage issues, who posted on social media and in personal communications that he was considering a mass murder. And no one did a damn thing.
But thank goodness we have a Ruger to blame.
“Unless you wear a uniform with a badge or a service patch on it, the gun you carry is more likely to kill you or someone you know or love than it is to kill anyone who threatens you or your loved ones . . .”
Then my solution is to have no one you love. Works for me and saves me money.
Or… Give everyone who buys a gun a badge! No more problems eh? We may also get free Starbucks!
The notion that a government paycheck somehow will imbue it’s recipients with skill and wisdom is nonsense. I’ve been in training classes and firearms competitions with local police and federal agents, some are scary competent, others are terrifically incompetent.
Even if gun rights were a failure, the law says they cannot be infringed. So GFY Todd.
I see this comment a lot. While it SHOULD be a valid point and I’m not saying you’re wrong to believe this, it is not enough anymore. Laws change all the time. They come and they go. The constitution is under attack by almost 50% of this nation’s voting populace. “Shall not be infringed” only applies when this amendment applies. Take it away and well… Infringe away. That’s what we are dealing with.
Eliminate big cities run by dumbocrats(and the rabble that run the streets) and presto! it’s pretty cool in this country. Just saw a blurb for the Science channel thing with Morgan Freeman. The title of a coming show is “Is gun violence a VIRUS?” Seriously…
Maybe a wall around every major city? And make the cities pay for it. 😉
“Just saw a blurb for the Science channel thing with Morgan Freeman. The title of a coming show is ‘Is gun violence a VIRUS?’ Seriously…”
I saw that the other night. Almost threw a glass at the TV. Scared the crap out of the cat when I starter yelling at the set.
What a silly dangerous man. Statists gonna state.
One need only use the Google box in your pocket to see the numerous incidences in which those same, “screened, trained, authorized and empowered” LEO’s have been thrust into situations with such speed that their conditioned training has kicked in and STILL errors of judgement, flubs, screw ups, and the cases of clear violations of procedure have occurred. This occurs because they are human, and humans can, will, and do, make mistakes, once you add in the fact that, like in the O’Neal shooting, lapses in procedure occurred because of the danger of the situation, the speed of the encounter, and you get one officer shooting at a suspect directly in line with his brother officer, and the Hubbard defense of only “screened, trained, authorized and empowered” state law enforcement should have guns, falls flat on it’s face.
You keep spouting your balderdash, Hubbard, and I’ll keep my guns, thanks.
The most offensive quote I could find from as much of his screed I could stomach is this:
“Dallas is what Second Amendment remedies look like in practice: dead police officers, a dead president.”
While that’s demonstrably false, I could nevertheless provide a lengthy list of world cities whose horrific histories represent what the absence of the Second Amendment looks like.
““The past 40 years”
Every source shows violent crime has halved the last two decades and the remaining is centered on gun free areas so…
“…In the hands of civilians,”
So you aren’t against guns because you want the Uniforms and Service Patch wearers to have them, You just seem to be against ME having guns. Why is that?
So the elite Einsatzgruppen will be more efficient..
“the gun you carry is more likely to kill you or someone you know or love than it is to kill anyone who threatens you or your loved ones…”
So, you advocate shooting to kill a threat, rather than merely displaying a willingness to defend yourself and hopefully frightening the bad guy away, no injuries to anyone? If everyone did THAT, Counselor, you’d have no client base.
I made mention above of other op-eds in the Seattle Times in the last few weeks. Here’s a sample of the titles just from this summer. There are more but I’m trying to keep my breakfast, and blood pressure, down.
“In a craven society, here are some solutions to stemming gun violence”
“Some extremists fire guns; other extremists promote guns”
“If Congress can’t act on gun control, local communities must”
“Gun violence is ongoing cost of false freedom”
“Why Congress should lift ban on gun-violence research”
The Seattle Times has gone full-bat$hi+ in its editorial policy regarding firearms. The Editorial Board appears to be made up folks with previous professional time at Microsoft, AOL, California and Washington DC newspapers…given the major demographic shift in the greater Seattle area, with northern California transplants – or those from overseas where their countries of birth have no private firearms ownership rights – arriving at breakneck speed for tech jobs, it’s no surprise that the largest newspaper in the state has lost any measure of objectivity. The Mayor of Seattle, Ed Murray, sponsored a failed attempt at an assault weapons ban with warrantless police searches when he was a state senator. The city council approved a gun and ammo tax which has driven business owners out of Seattle. And the greatest fear is that since the Seattle population generally overwhelms the rest of the state when it comes to elections – and because Washington allows direct citizen initiatives to go onto the ballot, like the Bloomberg-sponsored background check law 594 – Washington State stands a good chance of full Californication in the next few years.
Makes the federal elections and the choices for Supreme Court justices all the more critical.
This, 100% this. Most of Washington is made up of normal folks, but Seattle/ King County just steams rolls them with liberal stupidity.
“In a craven society, here are some solutions to stemming gun violence”
“Some extremists fire guns; other extremists promote guns”
“If Congress can’t act on gun control, local communities must”
“Gun violence is ongoing cost of false freedom”
“Why Congress should lift ban on gun-violence research”
Some extremists print are in the MSM….during the next revolution some extremists need to neckties made of hemp.
“The ‘good guy with a gun’ who will protect us, rather than threaten us, is the man or woman who has been screened, trained, authorized and empowered by us to do the job.
This is why only elite Einsatzgruppen should be allowed to have guns.
“the gun you carry is more likely to kill you or someone you know or love than it is to kill anyone who threatens you or your loved ones” A common misconception due to a simple error in data interpretation, as well as the steady drumbeat of anti-gun agitprop.
http://peopleofarms.com/does-having-a-gun-make-you-less-safe/
From the look of this guy he’s well acquainted with the bottle.
From the way he talks I surmise that he spends a lot of time with said bottle, probably crying into it about his feelz.
Is that because Republicans (acting as surrogates for gun manufacturers and the NRA) have refused to provide funding on gun violence research. It would be illegal for the CDC to use funds appropriated for other purposes to do gun research.
Perhaps you should learn to read…
Oh I forgot…Facts don’t matter that these extremist on here promote.
Stick to your pamphlets and keep your heads in the sand. In reality, research against gun violence the CDC has proven been blocked since 1996 by the NRA and the gun lobby and those of us in the land of reality understand this.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientists to know that gun violence is a result of bad people with no moral guidance or scruples…nothing else.
What you want is “gun violence research” that fits with your notion that the “gun” is somehow responsible for the violence–which it is not. A gun is a tool that can be use for good or evil–just that.
And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know your method of “more guns, less” crime does not work and it’s never worked in the first place.
Please show me citations that actually worked.
You can’t because they’re never work any that prove your claim.
Australia after a tragedy in 1996 passed a law by PM Howard and eliminated gun violence. The country has had no mass shootings ever since and Australians pretty much support the laws. Before you counter how this “doesn’t” work.
It works.
Suggesting self defense in Australia would have you laughed off.
And despite the minor incidents in Europe. It continues to see constant drops in crime and murders.
OK I will respond to sanderling, not in the hopes of changing his feelings about guns, but instead to provide info to open minded people who are willing to think about there positions some facts.
First – Good guys with guns do stop crimes. Some of these good people are Include Police officers, Sheriffs, even Federal agents. Some are citizens just defending themselves.
The CDC released a study in 2013 that had the following items in it
– Four different studies should that crime victims who defended themselves with guns had LOWER rates of injuries.
– Direct qoute – “Defensive uses of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996, Kleck 2001a).”
– The Lowest number of Defensive Gun Uses is around 100,000 per year. The Highest is as much as 3.5 Million. This descrepany is causd by the fact that these are estimates beause Denfensive Gun uses are not tracked by Law Enforcment Agencies.
Here is a story in the Daliy Kos. If you like you can try to tell me its a media outlet for the right wing. I have not had a good laugh today.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/9/17/1238623/-Defensive-Gun-Use-The-CDC-Report-on-Gun-Violence
So here is the takeaway –
– Good guys with guns do stop crimes.
– The CDC study acknologes that Defensive Gun Uses do occur.
– Citizens with guns get hurt less when they use the gun to protect themself.
– If you support taking guns away from the good guys you are supporting increasing violent crimes against peacful citizens.
There are many issues that lead to people commiting violent crimes. Guns are not the cause. They are a tool used by the person commiting the crime.
And thats all I have to say about that.
Fatality! Higgs wins!
…dare you to read John Lott’s book, “More gun less crime”
Gee, thanks for the invitation to become your uncompensated volunteer research assistant, but since you apparently know your way around a keyboard, why not look up the desired statistics and citations yourself? Like Mulder says, the truth is out there.
CDC at the time contained some very biased individuals set upon fulfilling an agenda. Congress at the time wasn’t interested in their bogus research.
I envision that gun-owners won’t sit still for Alinskyite demonization and guilt-tripping the way tobacco-users have, absent an explicit constitutional right to smoke and all.
Hey Concerned is back with a new name, and the same old shit.
Take your lame trolling back to New Vermont, loser. If you can’t bring game, you shouldn’t play. You’ll just get hurt.
The FBI has been doing gun violence research for decades.
When has funding for the FBI gone down?
Supreme Court ruled police have no duty to protect and has been demonstrated recently when it took them three to four hours to address the ISIS terrorist at pulse in Orlando, where 49 were killed, many bleeding to death while waiting for the cops.
Also, these days, police are the mop up crew. If someone is assaulting you, penetrating you, or shooting at you, the 10 or 15 minutes waiting for the police is a long time, usually too long. You are your own first responder and none of them can “protect you” with a 15 minute response time or more.
Todd Hubbard is delusional and not addressing reality with the statements he has put forth.
He is addressing the reality of the situation.
The “good guy with the gun” DOESN’T WORK and it’s been PROVEN it does not work.
Still waiting for your “stats”. Please provide your “factual information”. Because in all honest they’re isn’t any research that proves your method work.
You are conflating two things: Fighting tyranny with killing your ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend.
People should be able to have guns, and the Second Amendment guarantees that right.
But wouldn’t you agree that we need to find a way to keep innocent people from being killed?
Here, I’ll prove it really quick for you.
I am my own “good guy with gun.” In the event a Hillary social justice warrior like “sanderling” enters my house for the purpose of enacting social justice because I’m not agreeing with his opionions about good guys with guns, I can defend myself, with a gun, instead of waiting the 15 minutes for the police to arrive to examine sanderlings bullet holes in my house from a gun he 3D printed or purchased from the back of a sedan down some dark alley from guys who laugh at background checks.
Hope this wrapped it up for you.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/default.asp
Look at the right column.
How does it feel to have your foot in your mouth?
Nevermind, scratch that link.
This one is better:
Scroll down to Operation Self Defense and the links below it.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
“The “good guy with the gun” DOESN’T WORK and it’s been PROVEN it does not work.
Still waiting for your “stats”. Please provide your “factual information”.”
Interesting. You make a claim that you say has been proven while demanding evidence to the contrary yet providing none that backs up your “proven” position. If your position is so unassailable I assume you’ll be happy to provide the evidence that supports it, and since you’re obviously a spectacularly intelligent and gracious individual, you’ll back up your claims before demanding that others do the same. (You know that whole “forming an argument by presenting facts and evidence rather than making claims you can back up” thing? The shit they teach you in debate class in middle school or in a high school writing class?)
I mean, clearly you’re not an internet troll. Such behavior would be beneath a brilliant mind such as yours and you therefore would never consciously make an unsubstantiated statement while demanding facts and evidence from others. Obviously, the fact that you’ve done so here is an oversight on your part. Hey, we all make mistakes and this is probably your one mistake of the decade, so, please martial some facts and evidence to back up your claim(s) like the intellectual gentleman we all know you to be and return.
We’ll wait patiently and prepare ourselves to be overcome by the vapours when you return with your Earth and argument shattering data.
[Hopefully the obvious sarcasm here doesn’t draw the wrath of TTAG and reduce most of this post to “FLAME DELETED”.]
“Only cops should have guns!”
“Cops are racist murderers!”
-every anti-gunner
As I’m so fond of saying, “Pick ONE.”
Which one do they pick?
Or do they pick BOTH?
I’ve wanted to go to an anti gun rally with a sign that says both at the same time, just to see what’d happen.
“The past 40 years in the United States has been a massive experiment in the theory that a highly armed citizenry will make us safer, and the experiment has been an abysmal failure.”
Actually, most of the past 40 years has been a massive experiment in demonizing guns and gun owners socially and legislatively and that experiment has been an abysmal failure.
The recent reductions in crime & accidental gun deaths are coincidental with rising gun ownership and laws freeing up the citizenry to carry guns and protect themselves. Having a highly armed citizenry may or may not make us safer but it is clear that it is not making us less safe.
1. Police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
2. Police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
3. 1 and 2 are moot, since in most cases, police not assigned as personal bodyguards have no physical ability to protect individuals.
Police don’t protect individuals. They draw chalk outlines around individuals who are not willing or able to protect THEMSELVES.
If you’re not willing and able to protect YOURSELF, you’re just not going to get protected AT ALL. Anybody who tells you different is a LIAR.
“In the hands of civilians, they are not protection from crime. Unless you wear a uniform with a badge or a service patch on it … The ‘good guy with a gun’ who will protect us, rather than threaten us, is the man or woman who has been screened, trained, authorized and empowered by us to do the job. Anyone else, no matter how well-intentioned, is … a hazard to the rest of us …”
There it is again, inch by inch, ever more direct, more explicit, more condemning, more strident. Slowly, over time they settle on realizing what they really thing, then can’t help but say it.
– You are too dumb, incompetent, distracted and reactive to do any good with a gun.
– This isn’t how we do things. Authorized, selected, overseen, directed, folded, spindled, and mutilated is the way. Give us a little more time, and we’ll have that whole going where you want, when you want thing under control, too.
– You aren’t worth it. Some of us have the big men with guns, the trained, authorized, managed, and directed. (They’re OK because they are there on our initiative, to protect us, not making their own choices to perhaps protect themselves, or others. Can’t have that.) Because we’re worth it. You, you’re on your own, and we’re OK with that.
– Really, the individual agency to wield the power of violence isn’t something we want to allow you. Indeed, you shouldn’t really have the agency to wield any power yourself, for your own sake, on your own. No telling what you might get up to.
Of course, it all falls apart looking at violence statistics over the last few decades. It gets worse if our otherwise demographically-obsessed politi-critter would break down where, when, why and by whom this declining violence is still done. Peaceful, responsible gun owners don’t do this stuff. They very occasionally protect themselves, often by the mere display of the ability to use force. Otherwise, nothing violent happens with them, guns or no guns.
PR-wise I think their eroded self-delusion hands us, in the end, more convincing fodder. Just point out what they’ve said: you can’t be trusted, it’s administrative action or nothing, you aren’t worth protecting, and who are you to own your own life, anyhow?
Really, they can’t utter a sentence of the anti-cant without unequivocally hitting one of these four. Pointing out what they said is a great persuader for the audience in the cheap seats.
I wonder if Black Lies Matter agrees.
Comments are closed.