The New York Times opinion piece, “The Concealed Carry Fantasy,” cast all gun owners as literal murders roaming the streets of America, in search of innocents to kill. According to the New York Times Editorial Board, they have the statistics to prove it, too.
I mentioned a couple of articles ago that I neither trust nor rely on statistics to prove my points. Not so much because I can’t count, but because I spent so many years in the belly of the beast manipulating numbers to prove whatever the boss wanted to show.
Statistics are the refuge of those unable to take a principled stand and unwilling to hang their enemies from the nearest light pole.
The foundation of the piece, drawn from the Concealed Carry Killers website, “a resource maintained by the Violence Policy Center that includes hundreds of examples of non-self defense (sic) killings by private citizens with permits to carry concealed, loaded handguns in public,” and their fifteen page “Analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Crime Victimization Survey Data” titled Firearm Justifiable Homicides and Non-Fatal Self-Defense Gun Use, shows the sharp critical thinking, intense intellectual rigor, and deep statistical acumen of a seventh grader banging out a Social Studies paper the night before it is due.
According to the report (and I use that term in the most generous meaning), the United States experienced 763 homicides by concealed carriers since 2008 that were not ruled self-defense. Fine. We’ll play their game with their numbers.
Here’s the problem: All murders are homicides, but not all homicides are murders. Not only can the unnamed writers at the New York Times, with their fancy educations and urbane understanding of nuance, not grasp this nuance, but neither do they understand most shootings do not end in death. As a matter of fact, most don’t, so to focus solely on deaths in the attempt to discredit concealed carriers is disingenuous in its sloppiness.
These are the same assholes who make their Sunday crossword puzzle virtually unsolvable just for the sake of being elitist showoffs. Y’all can go fuck yourselves.
In the South, we have the phrase, “He needed killing.” It’s a concept that is more widespread than Liberals and Yankees want to admit.
Every jurisdiction in the United States has the concept of justifiable homicide, called excusable homicide in some places. For the uninitiated and purposely deceptive, “homicide” is the killing of a human being. It comes in several different flavors; intentional, unintentional, justifiable, negligent, and accidental. Even murder comes has different categories, depending on the amount of premeditation and malice involved. The exact wording may vary from place to place, but the basic idea is that not all killings are equally bad or equally deserving of punishment.
I’d go so far as to say the act of killing another human being is morally neutral.
It’s neither good nor bad until assessment of the circumstances. The robber who kills a little old lady in a home invasion is by every measure the scum of the Earth. However, the little old lady who shoots the home invader dead will find herself being apologized to by the responding police officers for tracking mud across her carpet. Depending on the town, the cops might not even take her gun as evidence.
And if you live in a place where you don’t think what I just described would happen, I feel sorry you. My suggestion would be to move away from there as soon as possible. Just don’t come down South, unless you plan to conform to our ways. We’re busy enough driving out the carpetbaggers we already have.
Liberals, the group of people who love nuance and shades of gray when explaining why a fetus is not a human being prior to severing the umbilical cord, suddenly love all life when it comes to gun confiscation.
In the blatant lie pushed by the New York Times Editorial Board, the 763 killings committed by concealed carriers were wonton acts of murder perpetrated by hardened criminals possessed of an insatiable blood-lust. I call what the New York Times is doing a lie because they present their number as some sort of hard statistic. A click of the mouse and six minutes of plain old reading show the basis of the article, the report from the completely unbiased Concealed Carry Killers website, to be a manipulation of FBI statistics to fit their anti-gun agenda.
It’s magnificently clear the Violence Policy Center is simply another organization formed with the ultimate goal of complete firearm prohibition by dividing gun owners into smaller, more easily defeated groups.
I’d link to the study and the organization’s website, but I refuse to send petty tyrants the traffic. Neither do I want their stink on my web stats.
Quite honestly, the Concealed Carry Killers website is nothing more than a collection of anecdotes collected from news reports masquerading as research. The numbers, which are the furthest thing possible from statistics, are intentionally worded to double-count incidents and inflate the results to support their agenda. They disclose on the site that the data set is incomplete, but then whine about “the gun lobby” keeping the data under wraps. What a bunch of cry-babies.
Isn’t that just like a Liberal to completely discount millions of occurrences where nothing bad happened to focus of the minuscule number sensational enough to make the papers? Commercial air travel (especially in the Western world, and double especially in the United States) is safer than it’s ever been, but if the anti-gunners magically became “anti-air travel,” the website would be called “Death in an Aeroplane” and completely omit mention that your odds of being struck by lightning next Tuesday are better than the chances of you ever dying in a commercial airplane crash.
I have neither the space nor the desire to numb my readers’ minds pointing out each instance of obfuscation and cherry picking these retards engage in. Let me just say that considering there are 11.1 million currently valid concealed carry permits, 763 deaths spread over eight years is minuscule to the point of absurdity. And once you consider that, by the website’s own admission, half of those deaths were suicides, concealed carriers come out as far less dangerous to the lives of others than choking to death on a chicken bone or passing out drunk in a hot tub.
I tried to calculate a percentage, but the calculator on my computer can’t handle a result with so many zeros between the decimal point and the first whole number.
By the way, that 11.1 million number isn’t even counting people carrying concealed in the last of the free states, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Montana, Puerto Rico (surprisingly enough), Vermont, and Wyoming, that don’t require any licensing at all.
And more are coming. All of this drives the gun grabbers bat-shit crazy.
“But Carlos, isn’t every life precious and worth saving?” No, not really. I can think of half a dozen people I know who aren’t worth shouting “look out,” if a runaway taxi was headed toward them. However, I’m willing to agree to that statement as soon as Liberals agree that life begins at conception.
I’ve always said that personalization is the last resort of a losing argument. Beat a Liberal down with facts and well-reasoned, articulate logic that appeals to any concept higher than personal avarice, and you will immediately be met with, “Well, what if it happened to you?”
This tactic reveals the Liberal mindset. At the end of the day, every policy decision is reduced to personal feelings and individual gain. It matters not what builds a self-reliant society with a strong economy. All that matters to Liberals is how they feel about themselves and what they stand to gain.
The Liberal world-view is based on three basic factors:
Mistrust of their neighbors
All Liberals are brilliant, compassionate, and sophisticated; just ask one, and he’ll tell you. They possess the answer to all of life’s questions, and a few more that could only be formulated by someone with a lot of free time on his hands.
I once worked with a Liberal jackass, a distasteful little wretch of a man who nearly got me killed on two separate occasions in two different ways, whose view on gun control was that of complete, forcible confiscation.
His reasoning? He neither trusted anyone to handle firearms without a negligent discharge that would pierce every obstacle between him and the muzzle nor be able to control the impulse to begin blasting away in a moment of anger.
Let that sink in for a minute.
According to this logic, every human being on Earth is utterly incapable of controlling his emotions. I didn’t bother to ask what he proposed be done about knives, hatchets, claw hammers, baseball bats, large rocks, or people’s fists, since the response would have been equally condescending and asinine as the first assertion.
His concern had more to do with his own lack of self-control than anything else. It was demonstrably wrong because the other seven guys who worked with him managed every day to control their own urges to throw him off a Hetco and let Hajji have at him.
There isn’t a Liberal alive who doesn’t believe he’s Albert Einstein, King Solomon, and Johnny Appleseed all rolled into one and tied with an environmentally friendly, forty percent post-consumer, recycled green bow. It’s a good thing they reject Christianity. Otherwise, they’d all claim to be Jesus Christ.
Actually, I can think of a few Liberals who already think they are Christ.
Yankee Liberals are particularly obnoxious in this regard, but West Coast Liberals aren’t much better.
I read an article about the prolonged drought in California and the unexpected side effects from the gubernatorial fiat to reduce water consumption from his Executive Highness Jerry Brown, the man who should have called his life’s work complete boinking Linda Ronstadt and was re-elected Governor after a twenty-eight year break by an electorate largely too young to remember that his first stint wearing the black top-coat with “GOV” across the back was about as enjoyable as watching a live sex show staring your grandparents and a Mexican donkey.
To the state’s credit, they have reduced their water consumption by nearly a third (assuming their numbers can be trusted, which is a suspect proposition from the start). Water is an important resource, but California is going to pay for it. An unintended consequence is there is not enough water flowing through the sewer systems to operate properly. All the nastiness is building up in the sewer pipes, corroding them prematurely, and causing sewage backups in low-lying areas.
I shit you not, if you’ll pardon the pun. California is constipated and in desperate need of an enema.
The various damage, plus reduced water bills from less use, has left the state with over a billion dollar shortfall in their budget. Not only are water-desperate trees and plants sending out roots that block and damage pipes carrying any sort of moisture that then have to be augured out by hand, but the sewers have to be flushed out in a process I will be just fine never knowing the details of. But on the bright side, there will be plenty of work for the illegal Mexicans looking to do jobs Americans don’t want to do.
Lust for Power
The biggest fear of a Liberal is the prospect of someone, somewhere doing something that the Liberal does not approve of.
Bonfires on the beach, off-roading in the desert, and hunting from the back porch, while not explicitly protected by the Constitution, are freedoms that have been hemmed in and picked away at over the years, largely by left-leaning busybodies.
It’s not that Liberals don’t like to have fun. They just don’t always know how to do it right.
My idea of fun generally involves activities that are hazardous, bad for my health, or annoying to anyone within three leagues; that’s a smidge over ten miles, if you were wondering. Hence, one of the reasons I live out in the boondocks.
Liberals hate that about me. When I lived in California, Liberal neighbors were always the first ones to call the cops because I was butchering a deer in the front yard (it was the only tree strong enough to hold it up) or skinning and fleshing a coon in the garage.
Not content to bury entrepreneurs in regulation, impose speech codes in universities, ban guns, and generally suck the fun out of everybody else’s life in their own communities, they descend like Liberal locusts on new, free areas of the country, populated by independent souls, to impose the guiding Liberal philosophy of “If I don’t like it, you can’t do it.”
Arizona and Texas, in particular, have experienced this. Waves of Liberals, after destroying the economies of their own states, look for greener economic pastures, generally in the South, where strangers wave at each other, most doors are unlocked, and “Had a deer tag to fill” is counted as an excused absence on school attendance sheets.
In the interest of full disclosure, I’m one of those California transplants. The difference being that like any proper immigrant, I came to assimilate. I, like many other Adopted Sons of the South, escaped social oppression and economic despair for somewhere we fit in. None of us asks the South to change. Quite the contrary, we hope she doesn’t change. Unfortunately, there are precious few of us.
What these insidious carpetbaggers do is infiltrate positions of authority, usually starting with school boards and city councils. Then they wait. They bide their time voting on the colors for homecoming, while secretly steeling their knives, as like-minded friends are surreptitiously added around them. It’s a similar tactic as is being used by Muslims all across the Western world. And in both cases, they are winning.
Back to gun confiscation and what to do about it.
The price of our freedoms is not fighting Nazis or Russians or ISIS. The threat is internal. It comes from family, neighbors, co-workers, and people who pretend to be your friends. These well-meaning people, who are bemused at your old fashioned adherence to concepts such as honor, American exceptionalism, and that the Founding Fathers really did mean rocket launchers, hand grenades, and machine guns when they wrote “arms,” are the same ones who are trying to disarm all of us in a slow process of weakening in preparation for slaughter by our eventual invaders, while the Liberals collaborate their way into survival.
Don’t associate with people who would see you a slave in the name of their feelings. Do not socialize with them. Do not patronize their businesses. Do not go out of your way in the slightest for them. Shun them at every opportunity. Heap scorn upon them, if you feel the urge. Consider moving out of Liberal infested areas and leaving them to rot. They will eventually collapse under their own weight like Detroit, Chicago, or the entire state of California.
It’s time to stop being the polite, friendly, welcoming group of firearms enthusiasts the NRA wants us to be. The NRA hasn’t represented gun culture since Neal Knox was forced out, anyway. They are firmly a gun control organization. Join Gun Owners of America, The Firearms Coalition, or Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, if you want to support a group that actually believes in the Second Amendment as it was written.