Obstinate Ignorance by David Bock

196 thoughts on “Obstinate Ignorance by David Bock”

1. Good article. I’ve never had a productive conversation with a hoplophobe.

   Interesting that the Uniform Crime Reports latest data is 2019. They used to be updated annually.

   1. The Reader notes that we can’t have any unpleasant facts around.

   2. 2020 does not fit the narrative.

2. Virtually all mass shootings take place in gun free zones. The shooter’s intent is generally to rack up as high a body count as possible, and the lack of an effective response only aids in that.
   Every mass shooting ends when the shooter(s) are confronted with armed resistance; resulting in them fleeing, being captured, killed, or taking their own lives.
   When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
   In any altercation you are always your own first responder since by definition it’s you who is at the scene of the event. At the best of times response to a 911 call will take 10-15 minutes. In both rural and many metropolitan areas response can take hours. In any case responding personnel come into the scene with limited information and might either require considerable delay in order to correctly assess the situation, or charge in and cause harmful or fatal mistakes.
   There has never been a school shooting where there are multiple armed personnel on site while in cases with a single armed resource officer they are the ones taken out first.
   No one has ever advocated for arming all teachers. This is disinformation propagated by the anti gun factions. What has been proposed is allowing volunteer school personnel to take training and have access to appropriate weapons for the protection of themselves and the students under their care, probably with some qualified special deputy status to allow them to provide an appropriate response to an attack.
   To those who cry “but it’s for the children!!!” if they gave a rat’s tuchus about those tragic but rare cases where one child accidentally shoots themselves or another, they would join in calling for age appropriate training in firearm safety and handling in all grades in our public school systems. Such training already exists with the NRA’s Eddie Eagle programs and countless retired military and law enforcement persons have already volunteered to teach such material free of charge.

   1. Utah has allowed teachers and other school employees to carry guns for about 10 years. Guess how many school shootings there have been in Utah?

      “Oh, but that’s Utah! Where all those weird Mormons live! It’s not Chicago. It’s different!”

      “You’re right, it’s not Chicago, where a dozen random murders just means it’s Tuesday. Your point?”
      ———————————
      If you call 9-1-1 and tell them that somebody with a gun is breaking into your house, they will send two cops in 10 or 15 minutes. If you tell them that somebody is breaking into your house and YOU have a gun, they will send 10 or 15 cops in two minutes.

   2. CA’s stupid (and currently, amazingly, blocked by the 9th circuit) “Everything Is A Sensitive Place” law represents the magical thinking about this – “since schools and places of worship are all now designated as ‘sensitive places’, and carry permit holders can’t carry in sensitive places, nobody can have a gun there, so they’ll be safer!” which magically wishes away the basic truth that “criminals break laws”.
      Empirically, Israel’s strict gun control somehow did nothing to prevent Gazan team-baby-beheading from carrying their guns into the country.
      And the last several multiple-victim shooting events in CA all somehow were not prevented by the mass of laws written in Sacramento.
      Somehow, criminals are not prevented from criming by making their crime illegaler.

      It is a puzzlement.

      1. The 9th Circuit’s three judge panels are frequently 2nd Amendment friendly, so I’m not surprised that the court reinstated the injunction.

         However, I am surprised that the en banc panel – which is notoriously unfriendly to the 2nd Amendment – hasn’t stayed the injunction already.

         California used to allow local school districts to decide whether teachers could conceal carry at school, and a number of the rural districts allowed it. But the Coral Springs shooter caused people to become aware of this law, and the state legislatures promptly yanked the decision-making responsibility out of the hands of the locals.

         1. The injunction ruling stopping the sensitive places law going into effect on Jan 1 was initially administratively stayed, then that was amazingly un-stayed pending the appeal.

            As you note, the standard for the 9th circus is standing solidly athwart any relief on restrictions these particular icky civil rights, though I note the similar district court “you’ve got to be kidding me” injunction ruling on the State of Hawaii’s “sure you can have a CCW now, but you can’t use it anywhere” Bruen end-run did not get a stay from the 9th.

   3. My personal favorite “the Police will handle it” moment was Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

      Faced with that reality, of the cops standing around OUTSIDE for an -hour- before working up the nerve to go inside, we are this week seeing the Federal Government of Canada begin the long and arduous task of finding vendors for the big Gun Buyback Program where the government is going to “pay” people for all those guns they declared illegal a couple of years ago.

      At a time when guys are throwing red paint on Jewish businesses in Canada and firebombing Jewish schools (Montreal, of course), the age-old Blood Libel rearing it’s evil head once more.

      Proving, again, for the !@#%-th time, that gun control is not about public safety. It is about control.

      I think it is time for Conservatives to stop assuming Liberals are well-meaning. Clearly, they’re not. You can’t see Robb Elementary School and stay constant in the belief that the cops will handle it. Time to start calling them what they are: tyrants.

      1. if I recall correctly didn’t the Uvalde cops deny entry to armed parents wanting to charge in and confront the shooter?
         And in fact their actions (law enforcement) were in direct contravention with established policies nationwide which clearly state that in an active shooter scenario time is always of the essence and the longer they delay the more deaths will occur.

         1. They also denied entry to armed cops who wanted to charge in.

            As near as I can tell, the School Resource Officer went into action paralysis, and because he was the first one there, locked down all response.

            I’ve come to the conclusion that the School Resource Officer concept is an anti-pattern. They simply spent too much time not doing anything to naturally default to action when something really happens.

            I’ve argued the right solution is to remove the position and replace it with a higher density of beat officers. That way, when something does happen, the first officer in the scene will more likely be the type who run towards fires than the type who follows all the right paperwork.

            1. Even in the best managed department, if the top cop had to choose between officer friendly and officer SWAT to be assigned as a School Resource Officer, guess which one will get the job? Hopefully some officer friendly types will like the kids they are around all day so much they will run towards gunfire for them, but some obviously don’t, or lock up, or wait for higher.

               So yeah, maybe officer friendly should be patrolling a desk at HQ.

               Note the TN shooter was taken down by well trained patrol cops who on arrival gunned up with what they had in the trunk and ran towards the shots.

               1. Nashville was done right. The body cam footage is amazing. Clearing rooms and moving.
                  But even at that the squishes seem like they would have preferred a different outcome. Witness what happened to the officers that leaked parts of the manifest.

                  1. Violating The Narrative warrants discipline with extreme prejudice, don’t you know? /sarc

                  2. And what did we learn from those excerpts to all those journals? That the miserable creature who committed that attack and murders was a twisted soul unhappy with its transgender life and blaming whites and Christians for its utter failure as a human being. Had the shooter been a conservative male their entire life story would have been broadcast from every mainstream media outlet.

                     1. Don’t forget the part where she/he specifically picked the target school (abandoning the original target, iirc) because there was no one present who was carrying a gun.

         2. Chicken shits.

            Do what you’re sworn to do, dammit! Go in there and kill that MF’er! Do it right, do it smart, defend yourselves, but DO IT FAST!! Don’t stand around with your thumbs up your asses FOR A G-DAMN HOUR!!!

            Nobody should even have to tell them that!
            ———————————
            ‘In a Perfect World, no one would need guns to defend themselves; therefore, denying free citizens the right to own guns will make the world Perfect.’ That’s what passes for logic with those dipshits.

            1. The thing is, they were told – they’d been through the active shooter courses where the number one lesson from way back in 1999 at Columbine was “confront the shooter, go with what you have as soon as you get there.”

               Even The Grauniad got that story:

               https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/04/uvalde-police-training-school-shooter-response-time

               The officers on duty had received active shooter training just two months before the massacre…

               “A first responder unwilling to place the lives of the innocent above their own safety should consider another career field.” Those are the words, from an active shooter training manual used to train Uvalde’s school police on 21 March 2022…

               The training materials encourage officers to confront the attacker in an active shooter situation, driving them away from victims, isolating and distracting them, even when it means putting themselves in harm’s way: “If they are engaged with the officer(s) they will be less capable of hurting innocents,” the manual says.

               If officers are at the scene alone, they must go in alone, it says. “Time is the number one enemy during active shooter response … The best hope that innocent victims have is that officers immediately move into action to isolate, distract or neutralize the threat, even if that means one officer acting alone.”

               The manual makes clear that not doing so will cost lives. “The number of deaths in an active shooter event is primarily affected by two factors: How quickly the police or other armed response arrives and engages them; How quickly the shooter can find victims,” it states.

               It goes on.

               Damning.

               1. Damning, and the final answer to gun grabbers. “Oh, call the cops? You mean like they did in Uvalde?”

                  No one seems to get that Uvalde was not a special case. Incompetence, cowardice and just plain not giving a single f- are the NORM, not the exception. Because unionized public employees only move fast for break time, lunch time and end-of-shift time.

                  Lefties get extremely upset when you remind them that a cop is a DMV clerk with a gun. He’s there for clean-up duty and to fill out the paperwork. At best.

                  1. No, not a special case. Parkland was a massacre thanks to the same thing.

                     (If I had a time machine, but knew that some number were ordained to die that day – I would find a way to put a certain execrable Hogg in place of one of the real victims.)

            2. The supreme court already ruled that officers have no duty to put themselves in harms way to protect non-police.

               Or so I’ve heard.

               So why would they?

               Though it certainly does make one start to question why we are paying for the police if that’s the case.

               1. The actual SCOTUS rulings have established that law enforcement may not be held liable for damages from failing to protect citizens. Their duty is to catch criminals in the act or after the fact and punish them, not to proactively prevent criminal acts other than by offering the threat of retribution.
                  Does not mean that most cops won’t do their best to help, but in a very practical sense the ruling absolves LEOs from being sued every time they were not there to stop a crime before it happens.

                  1. Which a great many criminals desperately want, since you could utterly destroy folks that way AND get disarmed victims.

      2. You need to water that tree of liberty with a whole lot of tyrant’s blood.

         1. shrug

            So do we. Insert quote about motes, beams, and sequence of removal as appropriate.

3. Our parish does not have to purchase security. We do have security though. The Greeters outside Mass have “noisemakers” and the Ushers. Not really advertised but most of the male congregation knows. The more sensible wives do too.

   Be “wise as serpents and gentle as doves “.

   The best way to avoid trouble is to let it be known you are ready for trouble. We don’t belong to a group that is a known target of trouble in our little forest town in our little red state, but be do intend to protect our own should trouble come. It is an honorable thing to protect the innocent.

   When one is a known target well I would say it would be a matter of great dishonor to avoid protecting God’s chosen ones.

   1. We were going to a community church, nominally Quaker, but at that time the minister was Episcopal (retired), and a serious hoplophobe. (He had been kicked out of a few postings before he retired.)

      I was told that during one of the many wildfires, that minister would not let the sheriff in the building because He. Had. A. Handgun. This was brought up in a conversation in church, and the 4 or five of us who were CCW just smiled. The next minister (a piece of work, but not totally deranged) allowed that there were armed people in the pews, and he was quite all right with that. Nobody open carried, but it was a reasonably low threat environment. Not zero threat, but the toxic woman limited herself to running her ATV over the vegetable garden. She left town when her even-more-toxic husband died.

      That church eventually collapsed (attendance was down to 5-6 people when we left), and the building and land was sold to an independent congregation. No idea of their security setup, though I figure the CCW tradition continues.

   2. Be “wise as serpents and gentle as doves “.

      –
      …and mean as wolverines when necessary.

   3. I remember the case in Texas where a man came into a service, killed someone, and was shot to death by the head of the church’s security team.

      I saw someone literally ask why a church has a security team.

      1. “But— You…literally…JUST SAW the reason. What are you using in place of a brain? Whatever it is, it’s not doing the job. Go find a brain and put it where it belongs.”

         1. Typical zombie voter.

            1. Dead from the ears up.

   4. That is why you “Don’t Try That In a Small Town.”

4. The church my wife works for (and we attend) has had an armed officer (county or civic) for years now. I also have no doubt there are others in any given service that are armed – but as mentioned above, likely not advertised.

   As the saying goes, be kind to everyone but never sell your sword.

   Blessings upon Shlomo Ron. May his memory indeed be a blessing.

   1. It is not wise to advertise one is carrying. Just puts a target on ones back in a shooter situation. Not to mention being nagged at by idiots deniers. Everyone seems to be mentioning male CCL carriers. Um. Some of us females are also CCL carriers. Sure, given the purses designed for CCL, one should be able to spot them. Personally I’d avoid them because too easy to spot, if one is paying attention, which I do.

      1. Not always. I’ve found that most troublemakers are cowards who won’t engage if they KNOW someone inside is armed.

      2. Some females carry, this is true.

         I am a good shot, given the proper arm support, however, I am not steady enough to trust myself outside a gun range. Stupid MS.

         I do find that a large grandma style purse has room for extra ammo for whatever Grandpa happens to be carrying that day.

         Sometimes a support role is the more appropriate option.

         1. room for extra ammo for whatever Grandpa happens to be carrying that day. Sometimes a support role is the more appropriate option.
            …………….

            True.

            I’ve mentioned that currently down range, the paper target, is the safest place to be if I’m firing. (I’ve gotten better, I actually hit the target, after a clip or two, and the cause has been identified, working on it). This winter practice has been limited. Stupid ice. I didn’t get the CCL to carry. I got the CCL because there will be times I am in the vehicle, or getting into, with the CCL item, but the CCL carrier is not in the vehicle. Never mind that I can’t even load from the clip to the chamber on the handgun he carries. It is still not legal for me to be in the vehicle with a CCL item, and not have a CCL (don’t care if the odds are zip to none for getting caught). There is a reason we found me an EZ version. Now that we know it is arthritis, exercise should help, but still will be a problem.

            Bottom line. I’m best as backup. (First day hunting. My dad: “Your finger isn’t loaded!” as I pointed excitedly at the buck running down the opposite hillside. My logic? If dad couldn’t hit it with the scope, how was I going to hit it, with the 30-30?)

            1. Start with the target at about two yards. Get a group. Get comfortable. Move it to three, then five, then seven, then ten, etc.

               Whatever you can hit the key zone of an attacker reliably, that is your “engagement range”.

               The Army defines “maximum effective range” as the distance at which the average trained soldier can get 50% hits under normal conditions. As civilians we want a bit more certainty, so try for 95%.

               If that be two yards, then don’t shoot at ten. Work your way out to your best, and keep working.

               The key is a smooth, consistent trigger press, one that doesn’t deflect the muzzle up/down/left/right.

               -All- else is secondary to the good trigger press.

               1. Don’t have a range (that I know of) where that is possible. Does makes sense. That is how I train our dogs. Start them close, as that is solid, work in distance, then work in distractions. Some were easier than others. “Squirrel!”

                  1. There are dry fire systems (I believe Larry recommends Strikeman) that will actually help you work on that indoors.

                  2. Find a range that isn’t stupid in requiring folks to shoot outside their learned distance.

                     -stupid-

                     You can be the smart one and find better. Also, perhaps some competent local instructor.

      3. I’d think on-person carry for distaff carriers could be less obvious given how the Toxic Make Gaze has been so harshly frowned upon.
         “No, honey, I was staring at her for all that time to try and see if that’s a grip printing” would be perhaps not so effective an explanation as one might hope.

      4. Several years back, at one of the [looks it up] Field and Range Sports events, some idiot drove onto the active shotgun range with a buddy taking video and started creating a scene with the people running the range. He ended up punching an old guy in the face, on video, remember. He did get escorted off by local police, which of course took a while since the event is a fair clip away. (In the end, they declined to press charges, because the idea was the guy was trying to create a legal fuss and that would have been playing into his… uh… “strategy.”)

         What he never knew was that several of the folk in charge were CCW, which is usually not permitted during any such event (let’s just say that the youth organization involved has to be very careful with optics.) But in this case, they were literally loaded for bear, the bear that had broken into the lodge, torn open the walk-in freezer, and was still around. So they got to carry. But that guy never knew that, because him finding out would have been stupid…

      5. I knew of one woman in that church (irregular attendance; she was nominally Catholic) who carried an early generation Ruger pistol in 9mm. Considering the high take rate for CCW permits in the county, it’s safest to assume carry. Open carry in F-Falls is rare, but in the boondocks, it’s close to irrelevant.

      6. I dislike the concept of ccw in a purse because those are easier to lose control of. i.e. they get snatched before you can even draw. On the other hand, a lot of women also wear clothing that isn’t concealment friendly; so a purse carry is better than nothing as long as you maintain situational awareness.

5. An interesting read. As the next email in my morning read was from The Journal of Special Operations Medicine, it reminded me that prepping properly for violence and disaster includes not only being prepared to use violence to defeat those with violent intent, but to be prepared to deal with the effects of violence on those who you protect. While book learning does not replace hands on training, those who are interested might consider getting a small handbook like several published here:

   https://www.jsomonline.org/Publication.php

   And those already medically inclined might be interested in browsing the on-line edition of the magazine. Training to use tourniquets as well as choosing which to carry is likely to be more valuable than knowing CPR when dealing with battle injuries. Airway management comes inn a close second.

   1. Dear women, those tampons and sanitary napkins make great battle field dressings and bandages. They come in semi sterile packaging to begin with which will help with secondary infections. Soccer Moms and Dads that stretchy sports tape, a sanitary napkin and you have a decent bandage.

      1. Maybe Sarah can share the recipe for that Gascon magic ointment that D’Artagnan used.

         1. LOL. I’ll have you know that’s from Dumas’ books. I just carried it on.

            1. But, but, but, you had those diaries to help you, right 😜

               1. Editor made me put that in. (rolls eyes.)

                  1. Ed always is the villain- that’s what my father the editor told me all the writers whine…😛

                     1. In this case it was true. And very silly. Hey, son is an editor too….

                        1. I was an editor and I still have two favorite quotes.
                           “Editors are ghouls and cannibals.” – Dorothy Sayers
                           “…an editor’s got to pee in it, then he likes the flavor better.” – Jubal Harshaw, “Stranger In a Strange Lland.”

                           1. Having looked over the shoulder of my father who edited various professional journals over several decades, I could offer quite a list of examples of journalists (back when they weren’t just propagandists) and writers who were derisive of any attempt to transform their tripe into a more palatable dish of words and ideas. But I have too many things to do right now. Maybe later.

                           2. Oh, I never minded word edits. Unless you know, (I swear I’m not making this up) it was stuff like inserting Freudian theory into the three musketeers. You know “Porthos knew subconsciously” um…. no.
                              I didn’t even object to stuff like the very silly prologue, which I lose in subsequent books.
                              Now wanting me to rewrite the book to someone else’s vision like, oh, “The French Revolution was good. Your character should lead it.” THAT would get all four hooves firmly stuck on the ground.

                           3. Now that’s the work of a failed writer turned editor not willing to accept their fate, strength and weaknesses. The first offense could be punished by being staked over an ant hill. After that, more inventive punishments could be considered.

                           4. I’ve been an editor off and on. And yep.

      2. According to my Stop the Bleed training, it is unwise to use female sanitary supplies in a heavily bleeding wound. They materials they are made from are not designed to stop but actually facilitate continued bleeding. You are actually better off packing the wound with an undershirt or some such. Then using said sanitary supplies to sop up blood around the edges.

         https://www.stopthebleed.org/training/

         All our school staff has been encouraged to take this training and I highly recommend everyone try to do it. It is very informative. I have had first aid training before but this one that is designed to help people deal with only bleeding events was quite eye opening to me.

         1. Excellent Source, Highly recommended.

      3. aaack! No! Myth! Tampons are -not- gunshot plugs! Sanitary napkins are -not- bandages!

         You want the blood to stay -in the wound , and -clot in the wound-. Tampons -remove- blood trapping it -in the tampon- and -do not- enhance clotting. If they did, the military would use them for such purposes. (They DO NOT.) They are net-negative for -stopping the bleeding- which is job #1 with major wounds.

         Feminine Sanitary products -do not- work for -stopping- bleeding. They -prevent socially embarrassing messes-. Better to use your shirt and pressure. They can push antibiotics later. STOP the BLEEDING. (not “contain the mess”)

         Arrrrrgh!

         There are a host of clotting products, from powders to gauze to sponges, to the tourniquet. All for wound packing and -clotting enhancement-. Learn to bandage, including pressure bandage, pressure point, and tourniquet.

         Kill that dang myth, drive a stake through it, bury it in thrice secret places. Under tungsten carbide grave covers..

         No. Just no.

         1. Thank you. 11B-Mailclerk and SusanM beat me to this. First time I heard this, my response was. “Are you kidding me?” (Along with “did I say that out loud?” Crap. Yes.) With the full explanation you so well explained thoroughly.

         2. Absorbing blood isn’t controlling bleeding. It’s just keeping the floor clean.

            1. Ringo writes entertaining stuff but -shhhheeeeeeeesh- did “Paladin of Shadows” go sideways on wound treatment.

               Geeeeeezzzzzzz….

         3. I have QuikClot in my trauma bags, and found them at the Not-Cabelas (Sportsman’s) and the farm & ranch store in town. Not sure if I’ve bought any from the ‘zon.

            1. I got mine from a display box at the checkout counter at the local hardware store.

               Apparently saw injuries aren’t unusual.

            2. Many clot enhancers are painful, if you haven’t tried them on self.

               Then again, proper direct pressure on a big bleed usually hurts.

               1. If you are not in a hurry and not understaffed for dealing with injuries, direct pressure is great. If you have to move quickly for whatever reason, the clot enhancers are helpful. However for an large venous or arterial lesion, direct pressure or tourniquet your most effective choice.

                  1. Which is why the two (note to self, need another for the shop) trauma kits also include a SWAT-T and a CAT. I need to review the use videos; formal training is a challenge to find around here.

                     1. Buy an extra and try it out. You can use a duffel of laundry. Some classes require applying one to oneself until it clearly stops circulation. (do only with trained supervision.)

                        Generally, properly applying tourniquets takes more force than folks realize. But if the wound stops bleeding, either the torniquet worked or the victim is done-for.

         4. What I heard was that the best off-label use for tampons was not plugging gunshot wounds but plugging gun barrels—in an environment where sand got in everywhere. As in, you just cleaned your rifle and you’d like it to remain clean, so you put one of those in the end.

            1. I’ve heard condoms work quite well for that. I would imagine they’re also less of a potential issue if a sudden need arises to use your gun.

6. My guess on the statistics noted is that Christians would have the second most hate crimes registered against them except that the FBI just doesn’t want to bother to investigate or note those facts.

   1. yeah. I suspect so too.

   2. Christians would have the second most hate crimes registered against them
      ………………….

      Of coarse the FBI/PTB won’t count Christians, especially white, hate crimes. Can’t have hate crimes against privileged can we now? (JIC sarcasm)

      1. They got clocked over their MLK day post. Just ouch. Tone deaf as a stump, and half fast.

   3. 1 – The number of hate crimes against Christians would be interesting to track, followed by a sub-categorizing by denomination.

      2 – Vandalism of black churches is no doubt listed as a racial hate-crime, and not a religious one.

   4. We all expect voter fraud in Illinois, just because it’s Illinois. But even so, these are some pretty bad numbers if true.

      https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/illinois-citizens-group-files-formal-complaint-illinois-state/

   5. By the definition, a “hate crime” can only be committed against a member of a designated victim group. So, obviously, Christian victims are not eligible, unless they intersect with one or more of the designated victim groups – shoot up a white church in upper Vermont, not a hate crime. Shoot up a black church in Alabama, it’s a hate crime.

      Prosecutors also strive mightily to make any victim of the designated groups into a “hate crime” victim, even when the motivation had absolutely nothing to do with their membership. Ever since the events that started the entire “hate crime” industry – Matthew Shepard was not killed because he was a homosexual – he was killed because he stole from his confederates in their drug dealings.

7. Making Schools and the children in them the Judas Goat for your hatred of guns, should guarantee you a trip to the inner circles of hell. Guns are a tool, not a magic wand, not a magic shield. Just like any other tool they are only as good as the craftsman who wields them. But they do work quite well for the cowardly cravens who would commit mass murder for the sake of their own twisted hatreds and desires. Be aware and take time to always have a plan, even if it is to only get in the way of the attacker, you can still save someone.

   1. “Be polite. Be professional. And have a plan to kill everyone you meet.”

      General James “Mad Dog” Mattis’ only fault was his dislike for Trump; probably due to the “be polite” part of his admonition. 😉

      1. You can’t make flag rank, even in the USMC, without being a politician fully immersed in the DC political landscape, and DJT is anathema to the DC political landscape.

         1. To an extent you have a point (and it’s not just flag officers), but it’s not a “one size fits all”; there’s a world of difference between Mattis (or Chesty Puller, or Patton) and the current crop of “generals”. Such as Milley.

8. The comments, and the post too, are right on the money. The ‘guns are icky’ crowd are simply divorced from reality and I hope they are happy in their version of la-la land.

   In working with corrections – there are just some people out there who you can’t reason with and must be prepared to deal with on a physical and violent level if/when necessary. To deny such is foolish and will lead to tragedy.

9. As I like to say “you don’t break the laws of physics. The laws of physics break you.” It’s far more general than just “the laws of physics.”

   Reality is what it is and it will turn around and bite you if you try to ignore it.

10. Thanks for reminding us all of “Inbar Lieberman, who distributed firearms to a dozen members of kibbutz Nir Am.”

    Hoplophobes? They’re just doubling down on stupid.

11. I am reminded of the awful church massacre in Sutherland Springs, Texas, some years ago. We had often and since then driven through Sunderland Springs, on our way to and from Goliad for various events. There was no armed security among the congregants in that tiny community church out in the country, but unknown to them there was a very angry man with a grudge against some members of that church. And the killing only stopped when a very alert, determined and well-armed neighbor heard the shots, grabbed his own long weapon and went after the murderer.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutherland_Springs_church_shooting
    After that incident (and a couple of other church shootings in Texas and other places) there was a lot of discussion about serious security measures taken by church security teams – because a congregation on a Sunday morning, all sitting with their backs to the door, distracted by singing and ceremony – is terribly vulnerable to an attacker.

    1. iirc there was an attempted one not long after that in White Settlement, and the one in Colorado was around that time, both stopped by members of the congregation armed. CO was a volunteer on security duty, and W.S. was a regular that held a CCW permit

    2. Or the shooting at Luby’s Diner in Texas. Dr. Suzanna Gratia left her gun in her car, as required by law. The deranged wacko that walked in ten minutes later did not. She had to watch, helpless, as her father was gunned down right in front of her.

       She has become a rather outspoken opponent of such laws. Naturally, the Lame Stream Media pretends she does not exist.
       ———————————
       It takes two to make peace. It only takes one to make war.

       1. The only places where I do not carry are those where concealment is not possible. (Which are places with the ability to detect them even when concealed – and those places are typically swarming with armed police/security. Not as good as being responsible for my own safety, but better than nothing.)

          So far, 100% of the places that ban firearms have never known that I disobeyed their dictum. With luck, that will continue – but if it does not, well… “Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.”

          1. ‘NO GUNS’ signs in places of business are not in any way legally enforceable. All they can do is tell you to leave the premises. If you refuse to go, that can be considered trespassing.
             ———————————
             Pacifism will, at best, get you a nice peaceful trip to the slave pens. At worst — tell me, have you ever heard of the Aztecs?

             1. 100% wrong, at least in TX. From TX DPS website.

                Do private property owners have the right to exclude license holders from their property?
                Yes. Private property owners may exclude license holders from carrying concealed handguns on their property by giving the license holder effective notice as provided in Section 30.06, Texas Penal Code.

                Also, private property owners may exclude license holders from carrying openly on their property by giving the license holder effective notice as provided by Section 30.07, Texas Penal Code.

                For the purpose of these two statutory sections, the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner may provide effective notice.

                https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/handgun-licensing/faq/laws-relate-carrying-handgun-faqs#:~:text=9.%20Do%20private,provide%20effective%20notice.

                Section 10 describes exactly what the signs must look like and include to be effective. Check local laws, always.

                1. The Texas law is similar to those in many States, even Red ones.

                   However, in the event that 1) I am forced to remove my firearm from concealment, in order to defend myself and/or others, and 2) a zealous prosecutor and brain-dead jury convict me of (at the most) a Class A Misdemeanor, I will accept the penalty. While looking at ways to appeal it, of course.

                   1. Agreed. Besides, “concealed” means concealed; no one should be able to detect it unless the SHTF and you have no other option.

                2. You might want to re-read what he wrote; he didn’t say that owners or their reps can’t exclude weapons; he said that the sign has no legal meaning. IOW, as you said, the owner can tell the one carrying he/she must leave, and only upon refuseal to comply is there a legal issue. From what I read of the AZ laws they say the same thing, although it’s a bit ambiguous:

                   https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/arizona/az-laws/arizona_laws_4-229

                   Note regarding the referenced site: “On-line retailer” is someone who sells alcoholic beverages; it’s the only reference to CCW and signs I found in about 10 minutes of digging. I’d assume it’s the most restrictive (aside from places where carry is banned entirely).

                   1. “he said that the sign has no legal meaning. ”

                      Which is why I posted a specific example of where and how the sign DOES. If you want to go ahead and carry where it is, go ahead. Unless there are metal detectors and armed guards, if it’s concealed they probably won’t know. Just understand the risk and be aware that there IS one.

                      1. OK, I read the Texas laws (30.06 and 30.07), and for Texas you are correct; bypassing such a sign is defined as a punishable offense. I did find it interesting that two signs are needed if all carry is to be forbidden, one for open carry and one for concealed carry, since the language required on the sign(s) is specific to each. AZ has no such separation.

                         1. The reason it took two signs is rooted in a) history and b) two different modes.

                            30.06 for concealed carry was put in first, because open carry was widely illegal even with a permit. When that was removed, they added 30.07 for open carry. Functionally, some people are freaked by open carry, but have no problem with concealed; they can post a 30.07 sign but not a 30.06 sign to indicate which form they don’t like.

                            1. OK. All it really needs, though, is a bit of common sense. Our local WallyWorld doesn’t forbid concealed carry, but does have a sign posted requesting that open carry not be used. It doesn’t require a specific sign; as in any business in a rational state, if they ask you to leave for violating their stated rules, and you don’t, you can be arrested for trespass.

             2. If they ask me to leave, I will do so quite peacefully.

                If I have a companion with me, I will ask them to give me a swift kick in the rear just as soon as we get out the door.

                Because I did not have a concealed weapon. I obviously need more blood flow to where my brain was.

             3. Depends entirely on state.

                Part of why I was so glad to get out of Texas is that they have signs that ARE legally valid.

12. Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Obstinate Ignorance

13. On a side note and a call out to all to continue voicing the truth, and yes it may support this post as well, the lord knows the lies they tell about guns. In a monday night CNN entrance poll of caucus goers in Iowa found that 68% do not believe Joe Biden legitimately Won the last election. As Reported by Breibart and Citizens Free Press. 30% did believe he did. Only 30% to go, keep up the good work.

    1. Watching lefty dissonance on this is hella entertaining.
       “But he lost the last election, he can’t be so popular!”
       “He didn’t lose, you stole the election.”
       “That’s just a paranoid fantasy.”
       “Then why is he so popular?”

    2. The 30% might be unreachable. Against stupid the gods themselves strive in vain.

       1. I love that quote. Poor Friedrich Schiller. That was probably a throw-away line and it’s the only thing of his that’s remembered.

    3. Unfortunately, that poll was of Republicans only. The Democrats did not have a caucus this year after the embarrassment of four years ago (counting is hard). So 30% of Iowa Republicans do not believe the election was stolen.

       1. …or don’t want to say so publicly and be branded ‘MAGA Extremist Election Denier Right-Wing Conspiracy Theorists’.

          Day’s a-comin’ when that will be a badge of honor…

          1. And shortly too.

          2. “You’re a MAGA Extremist Election Denier Right-Wing Conspiracy Theorist!!!”
             “Thank you.”

       2. Ah. don’t bet they were republicans. A lot did republican for a day. For Halley. Also DeSantis supporters, including those who DEMONSTRABLY know better are now all in on “2020 was totally fair. People hate Trump that much.” How in heck I don’t know.

          1. You have a point, looking at two maps; county level https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/15/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html and precinct level https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/15/us/elections/iowa-republican-precinct-results.html most of Hayly’s support was in collage towns and some of the bigger cities. Less embarrassing to be a cheating liar if no one knows you.

             My precinct (town of 7,000) had Trump 20, Haley 16, and DeSantis 3. Not sure how many braved the weather to cross party lines, not zero.

             One precinct where Haley got 100% of the vote. One vote. Southeast of Iowa City, they were still digging out.

       3. The Democrats had a big operation going on to have voters re-register to get Haley the nod – note that the only county that did go for her had an unusual number of voters that were rock-solid Republicans – for all of the last five minutes.

          Hey, if your Party isn’t having a primary – why not mess up the other side?

          1. That one county is Johnson, home of the University of Iowa. A lot of first-time voters and four years from now you’re going to be elsewhere. No one need ever know that you had anything to do with the GOP.

14. Generally speaking your common garden variety hoplophobe is nothing more than a typical liberal progressive useful idiot ready to vomit forth whatever talking points being fed to them by their betters. But make no mistake, The Powers That Be behind them do not hate guns. After all their bodyguards and minions carry the most powerful military grade weapons known to man so as to properly protect the precious bodies of their masters and carry out whatever orders they’re given. What TPTB utterly loathe and detest is the thought of common ordinary citizens in possession of such firearms and other weaponry that will enable them to resist being forced to obey the orders of those same would be masters.
    Never forget, we in America have fought and bled and given precious lives in order to claim our rights as free citizens never subjects to royalty or those elites who lust to assume such a position over us.

    1. I’ll just note that the prior Sherrif here in the county that covers Silicon Valley was booted because she oversaw a corrupt scheme that leveraged giving carry permits to the security details for SV Execs, and coincidentally receiving free “donated” stuff as well as campaign contributions.

       As far as the “elite” are concerned, payola in return for the “rights” of their protection detail contractors to carry firearms so they can protect them is not in conflict with publicly campaigning against icky guns or limiting the enumerated (no penumbras!) rights of the hoi polloi – of course they are worth protecting, they are the “elite”!

       1. CCW for campaign contributions was pretty much understood in the urban counties in California. The Sheriff had the final say. So in gun control friendly counties, you could only get a CCW if you donated to the Sheriff (or were otherwise influential). What got the Silicon Valley sheriff in trouble was that she got too blatant – she was getting physical goodies, and not just campaign contributions.

          That changed after Bruen, when the rules changed to “shall issue”.

          1. The bottom line being if CCW issuance were not artificially restricted, it would not be a commodity for corrupt political commerce.

15. “In addition, she claimed she’d done the research and guns caused more harm than good, so we didn’t need them there. If there were any problems, we could just call the police.”

    Was her name Karen? Current on her Vaxx jabs, I expect?

    There is literally nothing to be said. I’ve seen this show so many times, I’m sick to death of it. Madame will continue to loudly voice her opinion no matter what you say. That is a catechism, not a reasoned position.

    Were it up to me, I would make HER stand guard, right in the middle of the front steps, with nothing. Not even a friggin’ nail file. And take away her phone, so she doesn’t call the cops every time the paperboy rides by on his bicycle.

    That -might- penetrate the brain fog and fire a synapse or two. But I doubt it.

    But then if it was me, I’d insist every member of the congregation show up armed, every single time, no exceptions and no excuses. Principled pacifists can stand outside and die first.

    1. That -might- penetrate the brain fog and fire a synapse or two. But I doubt it.
       …………………………..

       Oh. It will penetrate the brain fog when she is uttering her death rattle.

    2. “Done the resesrch: in her case means “ass pull”

16. I’ve dealt with folks, I call “Belligerently Ignorant” and it is never fun.

17. I don’t mind if someone doesn’t want to bear arms. I mind if they try to take away my right to bear arms. These types always try to do this. There’s something about freedom that horrifies them. They want the State to run their lives and tell them what to do, and they want to make sure everyone else is shackled too. I really don’t like these people.

    1. “There’s something about freedom that horrifies them.”

       Yes. One of my personal problems is I can’t stand them, and in Canada they’re everywhere. They run this place. You couldn’t go to the freaking store for two years without having one of them up in your face.

       That’s why my personal protest was the 3M respirator. Oh, you want a mask? Okay then. THIS is a mask. Oh, you think its too much? Please explain your reasoning, Karen. (They can’t. No thoughts, just feeeeeelings.)

       Post October 7th, a lot of these people have stopped pretending that “This is for your own good” and they’re literally backing the terrorists. At a time when the USA, France and England are literally bombing Yemen, and I’m talking your un-guided iron gravity bomb kinda World War Two style bombing, these people are A) demanding that Jews not defend themselves here in Canada and B) claiming HamAss propaganda is Real Truth and only Israel is bad. While Yemen gets bombed.

       And then there are those actively supporting Yemen. In Canada.

       🔴Shameful glorification of violence & terror on the streets of #Toronto.

       Houthis militants have been violently targeting commercial ships in the Red Sea & have launched drones & missiles targeting Israeli civilians.

       Today, the same activists calling for an unconditional… pic.twitter.com/D7ttp2rmE6

       — CIJA (@CIJAinfo) January 15, 2024

       Please note that they’re blocking the frigging street, and the cops are LETTING THEM. Also gotta love the Queers for Palestine flag, that’s a whole truckload of stupid.

       So yeah. The enemy of freedom, self-identifying. Make them stand outside on the lawn.

       1. Queers for Palestine flag
          ……………….

          Volunteer Dare, double dare (60+, reverting to childhood, I’ve earned it) them to go to Gaza and Yeman to protest in favor of show support.

          1. I can hear it now; echoes of WKRP:

             “As Allah is my witness, I thought protestors could fly!” 😈

          2. Been done on X. Don’t think anyone has taken the dare…

       2. If we had a president, the best thing he could do is a short speech reminding people that these Houthis are not Yemen, that their ships are not the ships of any recognized country, and therefore the indiscriminate attack on other nations ships renders them pirates and therefore enemies of all mankind, who are to be exterminated wherever they are found.

          Followed by a declaration that US Naval vessels are commanded to sink any of their ships engaged in piracy, and kill any surviving crew, offering them no quarter. And that if any ship from any other nation renders any assistance whatsoever to the pirates or the members of their crew, that ship too will be considered a pirate vessel and sunk and any surviving crew killed.

          And then immediately replace any part of the command structure that refuses to follow through.

          It would either quiet things down quickly or thoroughly start WWIII.

          1. “Load one Five-Inch Hotel Echo… Load powder canister… Lock breech… On target… Shoot!”

          2. Given this little piece of open treason, it will start Civil War 2:

             https://twitchy.com/brettt/2024/01/15/nbc-news-swamp-devising-plans-to-stop-trump-from-using-military-to-enforce-political-agenda-n2391777

             “Now, bracing for Trump’s potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.

             Those taking part in the effort told NBC News they are studying Trump’s past actions and 2024 policy positions so that they will be ready if he wins in November. That involves preparing to take legal action and send letters to Trump appointees spelling out consequences they’d face if they undermine constitutional norms.”

             Since we know Milley was doing that in 2020, even if it is the BBC reporting it, it’s plausible.

             1. I do wonder whether a memo, publicly released to all military personnel, stating: “The retirement of the following military personnel is accepted with the thanks of a grateful nation. There are hereby relieved of their commands and their security clearances” with a list of all the people he wants to clear out, would actually be obeyed.

             2. Yeah. I saw that. Political agenda …. like closing the border.

                1. Or to stop persecuting deplorables, Catholics, etc.

                2. Speaking of closing the border…

                   https://twitchy.com/brettt/2024/01/16/biden-administration-will-take-action-if-texas-does-not-stop-blocking-federal-agents-n2391820

                3. Someone predicted illegals as cops…. looks like CA, and maybe CO, IL found a loophole.

                   https://redstate.com/mdempsey/2024/01/16/the-lasd-daca-deputies-how-california-state-law-allows-illegal-immigrants-to-enforce-the-law-n2168750

                   1. So, California is not allowing criminals to be the ones enforcing their dictates.

                      1. Not or now?

                         1. Now
                            Damn fingers need oiling.

                   2. Next thing you know, they’ll be hiring the communist Chinese illegal alien infiltrators as cops.

                      1. Didn’t they already do that in New York City?

                         1. Not exactly. The PRC set up “police stations” that were essentially spy shops to track any dissidents here. They were actually PRC nationals.

                            1. Not just track. They were also involved in pressuring dissidents to return home.

                               “Your grandfather is doing well… right now. He’d really like you to visit.”

                               It’s also important to note that the stations have never had any official enforcement ability in the US. The cover explanation for them was that they existed to help Chinese diaspora with things like forms in English, and similar stuff.

                            2. They have kidnapped people. So they probably did that in NYC, also.

                4. Joke’s on the media, then. The .mil people I know are firmly convinced that using the army to repel invaders counts as using the military to enforce civilian law, which is, apparently, verboten.

                   So they’re already of the mindset that an order to close the border would be unlawful.

                   1. That would be because they’ve been indoctrinated that Posse Comitatus would prevent it. I doubt anyone has asked them why Eisenhower wasn’t impeached over sending the 101st to Little Rock.

                      1. Eisenhower was acting to “suppress insurrection”, which is not barred by Posse Comitatus.

                         The locals were outright defying federal authority (again) and said so. They mobilized their national guard to enforce their defiance. Eisenhower 1) federalized the guard and orderd them to disperse 2) recognized that some would defy him anyway, and sent the US Army to ensure proper preparedness for that. Also to e the public face of enforcing Federal authority.

                         It went deeper down the rabbit hole, but things didn’t openly come down to shooting, so the “clean” version gets remembered.

                   2. A) it’s not unconstitutional. B) We’ll see.

                      1. Well, it’s not as though there aren’t ways to get around it.

                         You could probably get the Army to defend the border if you declared a mile-deep strip of it to be a military base.

                         1. The Army (and other branches) can be used to protect the US border. It has done so numerous times in 2.5 centuries. “Suppress insurrection” and “repel invasion” are key missions.

             3. I think this is part of Larry Correia’s take. The “establishment,” learned during Trump’s first term how to manipulate him, and if he gets in they’ll just do it again, harder.

                1. Larry never seems to have an answer when he’s asked why they won’t screw any other conservative, specifically DeSantis, the same way.

                   I’ve given up arguing with terminal TDS.

                   1. Aye.

                2. I think Larry needs to learn to recognize lefty robots is what I think.
                   He’s repeating all their psyops.
                   I VERY MUCH DOUBT THAT. I think he will perhaps not do everything we want, but no. He won’t do that.

       3. Calling for an unconditional surrender to the terrorists.

          Tell ya what, bub, you go surrender to them first and we’ll see how that goes. Be sure to take your little pink-and-lavender flag along and tell them what it means.

       4. So, it’s okay to block the street if you’re supporting Islamic terrorism, but not okay for truckers to block the street to protest covid lock downs.

          Yep, definitely Heinlein’s Crazy Years.

          1. Yes. In fact, if you are supporting Islamic terrorism and calling for the murder of Jews, they will not only let you block the street, they will help you do it, and bring you coffee too.

             https://globalnews.ca/news/10213621/toronto-highway-401-avenue-road-protests-motion/

             It took that video of the cops delivering coffee to the terrorist supporters to get action from Metro Toronto Police. Since that happened, the bridge has been re-opened and several (White people!) were arrested.

             As yet no bank accounts of people sending money to terrorists have been frozen.

       5. The people who call us Nazis for any disagreement are enthusiastically supporting Islamic terrorists who think Nazis are awesome and want to continue their work.

          1. …while they themselves are running the Nazi playbook page for page. 😦

    2. Natural slaves. And they don’t even realize it. Not to mention they make terrible slaves too.

       1. “Willing Slaves” (spit)

          Nothing natural about it.

18. I find myself wondering, if someone did not reason themselves into a position, how did they get there, and what could actually talk them out of it?

    1. A better emotional appeal, usually.

       1. But what was the original emotional appeal, and what makes a new one better and more persuasive?

          1. The first question is best left for people who actually know anything first-hand about the obstinate ignoramus, and OI’s particular point of obstinacy, and OI’s particular personality.

             The answer to the second depends entirely on the answers to the first.

    2. A mugging will usually do it. “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” The Great Sage Mike Tyson.

       For some, it may take several muggings before the sad truth sinks in. Of course there are some whose contact with Reality is so tenuous that even repeated beatings have no impact, as it were, and they keep saying the same things.

       Those people we call “paid liars.”

19. We’ve had nearly three to five generations of some very capable propogandists in the world out there, with near-absolute control over most media outlets (outside of talk radio and podcasting, name one major conservative news outlet. Even at its height, FOX News was barely “right of center).

    And the American people, outside of the big city cores and Karen suburbs, are still mostly gun-owners. And won’t let anyone take that right away from them.

    It has to make the successors of Gobbels mad as hell.

20. This would probably be a good place to link Larry Correia’s (in)famous post, An Opinion On Gun Control:

    https://monsterhunternation.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

    …and mention his non-fiction book ‘In Defense Of The Second Amendment’ which is mostly an expanded and updated version of the post.

    [Two links would cause WPDE to get constipation]

    1. Barack Obama is personally responsible for more gun sales, and especially first time gun purchases, than anyone in history. When I owned my gun store, we had a picture of him on the wall and a caption beneath it which said SALESMAN OF THE YEAR.
       …………….

       Biden has replaced Obama as SALESMAN OF THE YEAR.

       1. ‘GUN SALESMAN OF THE YEAR’

          Be specific. Get them even more inflamed.

          Although in Biden’s case it should probably be:

          ‘GUN SALESZOMBIE OF THE YEAR’

          1. To be 100% truthful, locally it was “Kate Brown Oregon GUN SALESMAN OF THE YEAR”. The zombie was kind of ignored.

             1. You’re missing Brown’s first name; it’s Despicable Kate Brown. 😛

                1. Thank you for getting her name right. 🙂

                   Slightly off topic (as if that matters at AtH…), $SPOUSE says that the weather people* say that most of Eugene is without power due to the ice storm(s). We got a tiny taste of it in Flyover County, and a tenth of an inch of freezing rain is far more than I want to deal with. Doesn’t look like dep729 escaped the problems. I hope it’s a short outage, though the road reports from ODOT don’t look encouraging.

                   Non-electric heat for the win.

                   ((*)) Weather Nation, based in Denver, so somewhat accustomed to vile winter weather.

                   1. Got a report from the local yarn shop in Ilwaco, WA they got ice, too. I was curious. If the state government didn’t suck and the cities (Yes, you, Seattle) weren’t edging into crazier, I might enjoy living in the area.

                      1. I like cities. But all the large ones have gone insane.

                   2. Escaped power outages. Internet & cable OTOH, out since Monday. gmail app last update on Android finally got fixed so access to categories worked. Some reason cell internet is slooooooow!!!!! (grin)

                   3. As far as the ice? A solid 1 to 2 inches. Non critical outside of neighborhoods opened yesterday. Schools today.

    2. I bought ‘In Defense Of The Second Amendment’ the minute it came out. Beautiful.

       1. Me, too. Got the distinct impression the book clerk was not amused. But that may have been because the (downsized) Book-a-Million had just re-opened and she wasn’t sure where to find it. Or anything.

21. In addition, she claimed she’d done the research and guns caused more harm than good, so we didn’t need them there. If there were any problems, we could just call the police.

    –
    “Pray tell, what research did you do? Besides reading propaganda promulgated by anti-gun activists, that is? Did you check crime statistics from primary sources? Did you give one second of attention to anyone who ACTUALLY KNOWS ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT GUNS?!”

    Of course not. Can’t risk contaminating her Invincible Ignorance!
    ———————————
    The Democrats trust violent criminals and terrorists with guns more than they trust you.

    1. Larry’s book is chock-full of references.

       1. That’s one of the biggest things that brought me around to the pro-gun side. Not Larry’s book, but the fact that the gun people brought facts and citations, while the anti-gun people I had previously been disposed to believe did nothing but throw the same emotional bombs over and over again (“facts,” they said; I do not think that word means what they think it means).

    2. Generally such people do not look beyond the first source that supports their position. Because that’s how they think Science works.

       However. It is important to note that The Literature, as it is styled, has been perverted to the socialist cause since the 1960s, and in fact contains nothing but anti-gun propaganda.

       The medical literature is particularly egregious in this regard, to the point where Congress passed a law forbidding the CDC from spending money on gun control studies in the 1990s.

       That all these studies are utter garbage is not really important, given the sheer weight and number of them in The Literature. Any “Recognized Official Source” you look up is going to be anti-gun, without fail.

       I, being the weirdo that I am, went and READ them all in the 1990s and 2000s. I used to have a Geocities site dedicated to my findings, that’s how old we’re talking here. The findings being that JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet and several more were nothing more nor less than propaganda organs for the US DemocRat Party. CMAJ in Canada similarly.

       That might seem extreme and tinfoil-hattish, but my findings were replicated by the meta-analysis of the National Science Foundation, which despite having stuffed the review board with anti-gun Democrats concluded there was no evidence that gun control reduced crime.

       Currently, Google search delivers -zero- (0) results questioning the efficacy of gun control policies.

       Therefore if Karen does her due diligence, she will find that the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, the US federal government, the Canadian and UK and Australian governments, the RAND corporation and pretty much every major university in the Western world all support her position. Guns are bad, and there oughta be a law.

       That seem impressive until you realize that the same list of authorities all say that a man can be a woman. “Red pill? Don’t mind if I do.”

22. Armed security at churches and synagogues has often been a contentious issue. I know I’ve mentioned before online and possibly here, the story told by my first carry permit instructor. There was a debate at his synagogue over whether to ban concealed carry on the premises. He opposed such a ban. State law would have required a specific sign at entrances to implement the ban. He proposed an alternate sign for clarity. It would have said “attention Nazis, defenseless Jews inside”. He prevailed and was able to continue coming to services armed.

    Unfortunately, the instructor passed away several years ago. He was a Science Fiction writer and I believe he taught Oleg Volk, the photographer to shoot.

    1. “Not bringing weapons into church” has a long history in the West.

       It may be that the tradition started in a certain place for certain purposes – like making sure that bitter political rivals who were both Christian respected God’s sovereignty by not allowing them the means to kill members of the other faction on holy ground – and just… ossified into “One does not bring weapons into church”.

       But the situation we are in is not “Christian political rivals taking out the other guy’s supporters”.

       The situation we are in is “Pagan or apostate barbarians are seeking to destroy the people of God.” That should change the calculus on weapons in holy places.

       And heck, Protestant Churches may not even count as holy places, which would make prohibitions on carrying weapons there entirely moot.

       Those better-versed in church history than I might have a more accurate analysis of the situation, though.

       1. There’s a long tradition of not bringing weapons into church, but there’s also a long tradition of having door guards. For example, the old minor clerical order of “porter,” with assistant from the deacon. Deaconesses and assistants of deaconesses also acted as porters, in cases where women had a totally separate seating area. Sextons and ushers have similar responsibilities (although it’s no longer so much about making sure that unbelievers and catechumens didn’t stay for Communion). And arguably the old minor clerical order of exorcist was also about defense of the congregation, admittedly with spiritual weapons against a spiritual foe.

          Now… there were political reasons why early Christians sometimes chose not to resist their persecutors… but there are also plenty of records of highly defensible churches being held for a long time, and of others with secret ways to slip away if needed.

          And before that, the Temple had a squad of guards, and Jewish priests ultimately had the job to “tend and guard” the Temple, just like the job Adam originally had in Eden. (Maybe there’s a different translation known by that lady?)

          So even though it’s not my business because it’s not my synagogue… it’s very weird for a Jewish person to object to Jewish imperatives assigned by God.

          1. I found some kind of Jewish-focused Bible translation, and it has Bereshith/Genesis 2:15 as “and He placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.”

    2. Would that have been J. Rosenberg?

       Mayhe RIP.

       1. Yup.

          1. What a mensch he was. The man who literally wrote the book on carrying a gun in Minnesota.

             BTW, What’s your avatar, Cub, Taylorcraft, . . .? Kind of difficult to determine at that scale.

             1. The avatar is a picture of the Aeronca Chief I used to own. Very similar to the Taylorcraft or the J4 Cub Coupe, two seat, side by side, Continental A-65 engine, no electrical system.

23. I am firmly in favor of armed security for places of worship and schools. Preferably volunteers who are ready, willing, able, and who know the congregants as well as the neighborhood.

    I respect people who have decided, after considering the possible dangers, not to go armed, for whatever reason. I have friends who are Mennonites and Quakers. They do not object to my right to be armed, should I choose to be so.

    I strenuously object to people who refuse to allow others to decide for themselves.

24. To the name of Shlomo Ron I would add Liviu Librescu, who was denied weapons by his employer (VA Tech) and did everything in his power to save his students even so.

    May their memories be a blessing.

25. One of the reasons why I refuse to fly anywhere within the continental U.S. Too hard to bring my hole punchers. I can bring them if I drive. Takes longer, and I do have to know the various state regs on ccw to be legal. But it’s worth it for peace of mind.

    1. Worth it just to stay out of the airport, you ask me.

26. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Comments are closed.