What Have I Gotten Myself Into?
I’ve agreed to appear tonight on Gun Nuts Radio. I’ve often said that I have a face for radio and a voice for print. I guess I’ll get to prove the latter this evening. See Hear you there!
The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. – Ayn Rand
What Have I Gotten Myself Into?
I’ve agreed to appear tonight on Gun Nuts Radio. I’ve often said that I have a face for radio and a voice for print. I guess I’ll get to prove the latter this evening. See Hear you there!
NOW I Understand!
Back when CNN (the most busted name in news) misidentified this 1911 as a Glock, I wondered why anyone – anyone – would do this to John Moses Browning’s (PBUH) 1911:

Now I think I know. It was a subtle political statement:

Makes perfect sense!
. . . over at the Christian Science Monitor, I’ve left another one. Probably too long (you know me), but it’s in response to comments 82 and 82 by Suzan Gill and “AdamG” respectively.
Susan Gill: “Well, I knew I’d bring everyone out of the woodworks with my comments, and my post did just what I wanted it to.”
But did you learn anything?
AdamG: “I’d like to see the NRA and gun enthusiasts work on a way to prevent firearms falling so easily into the hands of criminals rather than worrying about their own rights.”
Sorry, Adam. Wrong premise. Let me quote from the 1982 Carter Administration commissioned report, “Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime and Violence in America”:
“The progressive’s indictment of American firearms policy is well known and is one that both the senior authors of this study once shared. This indictment includes the following particulars: (1) Guns are involved in an astonishing number of crimes in this country. (2) In other countries with stricter firearms laws and fewer guns in private hands, gun crime is rare. (3) Most of the firearms involved in crime are cheap Saturday Night Specials, for which no legitimate use or need exists. (4) Many families acquire such a gun because they feel the need to protect themselves; eventually they end up shooting one another. (5) If there were fewer guns around, there would obviously be less crime. (6) Most of the public also believes this and has favored stricter gun control laws for as long as anyone has asked the question. (7) Only the gun lobby prevents us from embarking on the road to a safer and more civilized society.
“The more deeply we have explored the empirical implications of this indictment, the less plausible it has become. We wonder, first, given the number of firearms presently available in the United States, whether the time to “do something” about them has not long since passed. If we take the highest plausible value for the total number of gun incidents in any given year – 1,000,000 – and the lowest plausible value for the total number of firearms now in private hands – 100,000,000 – we see rather quickly that the guns now owned exceed the annual incident count by a factor of at least 100. This means that the existing stock is adequate to supply all conceivable criminal purposes for at least the entire next century, even if the worldwide manufacture of new guns were halted today and if each presently owned firearm were used criminally once and only once. Short of an outright house-to-house search and seizure mission, just how are we going to achieve some significant reduction in the number of firearms available?” (pp. 319-20)
—
“Even if we were somehow able to remove all firearms from civilian possession, it is not at all clear that a substantial reduction in interpersonal violence would follow. Certainly, the violence that results from hard-core and predatory criminality would not abate very much. Even the most ardent proponents of stricter gun laws no longer expect such laws to solve the hard-core crime problem, or even to make much of a dent in it. There is also reason to doubt whether the “soft-core” violence, the so-called crimes of passion, would decline by very much. Stated simply, these crimes occur because some people have come to hate others, and they will continue to occur in one form or another as long as hatred persists. It is possible, to be sure, that many of these incidents would involve different consequences if no firearms were available, but it is also possible that the consequences would be exactly the same. The existing empirical literature provides no firm basis for choosing one of these possibilities over the other. Restating the point, if we could solve the problem of interpersonal hatred, it may not matter very much what we did about guns, and unless we solve the problem of interpersonal hatred, it may not matter much what we do about guns. There are simply too many other objects that can serve the purpose of inflicting harm on another human being.” (pp. 321-22)
The UK has done everything that the major gun-control groups over here have insisted will reduce gun violence and access to firearms by criminals: licensing, registration, “safe storage,” and outright bans on fully-automatic weapons, semi-automatic and pump-action centerfire rifles, and all handguns. The result? The Guardian newspaper recently reported, “Firearms: cheap, easy to get and on a street near you”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/aug/30/ukcrime1
Gun violence in the UK – always low, even before there were any gun control laws on the books – has steadily increased. Crimes committed with handguns has greatly increased. While US homicide rates have been trending down sharply over the last dozen years, theirs have trended steadily upward. If the trends continue, the homicide rates in the U.S. and in the UK will be essentially equal in about five or six years.
We’re told here that states with “lax firearms laws” are responsible for the high firearm crime rates in adjacent areas with strict gun laws (think Chicago and Washington, D.C.), but no one asks why the crime rates in the areas with “lax firearms laws” are so much lower than the areas they’re supposedly supplying. The UK – England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland – doesn’t HAVE adjacent jurisdictions with “lax” gun laws. In order for guns to enter the UK, they have to come by boat or by air or by train through the Chunnel.
And they do. It’s Economics 101 – Supply and Demand. There is always enough supply to feed the demand, and the UK is the sterling example of this well known rule.
Gun control doesn’t keep guns out of the hands of criminals, it only keeps guns out of the hands of the people you need to worry about the least. We know that. Decades of research proves it. It is said that repeating the same behavior over and over while expecting a different outcome is one definition of insanity. I call it “cognitive dissonance,” once defined thus:
“When someone tries to use a strategy which is dictated by their ideology, and that strategy doesn’t seem to work, then they are caught in something of a cognitive bind. If they acknowledge the failure of the strategy, then they would be forced to question their ideology. If questioning the ideology is unthinkable, then the only possible conclusion is that the strategy failed because it wasn’t executed sufficiently well. They respond by turning up the power, rather than by considering alternatives. (This is sometimes referred to as ‘escalation of failure’.)”
I call it “Do it AGAIN, only HARDER!”
Once You’ve Been Quoted in the CSM . . .
. . . I guess you’ve made it.
Last night at the meet-‘n-greet at Majerle’s I spoke at some length to Patrik Jonsson of the Christian Science Monitor. He was interviewing bloggers left and right for an upcoming piece. I guess now that the CSM has gone online-only there’s no six-week delay between deadline and the piece hitting the streets. His article went up today, apparently: A rifle in one hand, a laptop in the other. Behind the scene with pro-gun bloggers. I was even quoted accurately. Cool!
Agenda? What Agenda?
Eugene Volokh reports:
So I thought that the Ninth Circuit’s holding that the Second Amendment binds state and local governments (via the Fourteenth Amendment) was a pretty big deal. It was the first federal court of appeals decision to so hold. If followed, it would invalidate the Chicago handgun ban, plus perhaps some other broad state and local gun restrictions, such as New York City’s ban on all gun ownership by 18-to-20-year-olds. And it might well trigger Supreme Court consideration of the issue, since there’s now a split between the Second and Ninth Circuits on the issue.
But here’s the odd thing: I couldn’t find any articles about this in the New York Times, the L.A. Times, the Chicago Tribune, or the Washington Post. (I searched for second amendment or bear arms or nordyke or gun show.) There was early coverage on CNN and in the San Francisco Chronicle, but nothing else in any newspapers in the NEWS;MAJPAP file on LEXIS. Am I missing some stories that just didn’t happen to use the keywords I searched for? Or is the court decision just not worth even a brief mention?
There’s more, but is anyone really surprised?
Bill Whittle is as Good in Multimedia . . .
. . . as he is in print! Go watch!
Ladies and gentlemen, we not only have an aristocratic imperial congress-for-life that no longer represents the will of the American people, we also have in place in the unbiased, dispassionate watchdogs that they claim to be, a wildly partisan and utterly unethical press corps who decides over cocktails who should win elections and who should lose them, and then prepares the appropriate narrative which they sell to you as unbiased news. But the current product of CNN, Newsweek and all the rest are as far from actual news reporting as our current Congress and federal government are from the ideals that our Founders had in mind at the very birth of this great nation.
Edited to add today’s Day by Day:

How Can You Tell You’re at a “Grassroots” Protest?
1). Almost all the protest signs are hand-lettered.
2). There isn’t a tour bus to be found
3). Nobody is wearing a Ché shirt.
I took an early lunch today and went down to the TEA Party protest at El Presidio Park in downtown Tucson. I took a digital camera to record the scene. I don’t think there were a thousand people in attendance at any one time, but given the amount of traffic in and out, I’d say there were well over a thousand who showed up – many if not most like me, who could only spare about an hour away from work. Here’s three crowd shots from the same position. (I’d do a panorama if I knew how and thought I could post something you could actually see:



And that’s just a portion of the crowd. I’d like to see what it looked like from the upper floors of the nearby buildings.
There were a LOT of people with hand-lettered protest signs. Here are some of the better ones:









No Ché, but a Bob Marley T-shirt did make an appearance:

Of course, some people did make use of printers and graphics programs:



But no Debt Star.
While there was a lot of Obama-bashing, there really wasn’t a lot of anti-democrat signage, it was mostly anti-political-party stuff. Neither major political party got much love at this rally. But there’s always some:


She also had this to say:

And, of course, there was some free-enterprise capitalism going on. The Kettle Korn guy:

And the hot-dog vendor with a LONG line:

But by far, my favorite was this kid whose mother loves him very much!


I’ll be really interested to see how the legacy media covers these events as opposed to the blogosphere.
UPDATE: Well, that question has been answered.
Quote of the Day
They’re obviously filling the news cycle as much as they can. If a stickup artist wings two people at a 7-11, it’s going to get national airtime as a mass shooting, and if someone with Dissociative Identity Disorder smokes a gun barrel, it’ll be trumpeted in the headlines as a multiple homicide. They are not going to stop the constant barrage until they get what they want, or are distracted by something shiny, like a celebrity wedding. – Tam, Awwww…
Well, FOX News has had the temerity to expose the “Mexican Canard” for what it is – a lie.
This, of course, makes no difference to The Other Side:
Tom Diaz, senior policy analyst at the Violence Policy Center, called the “90 percent” issue a red herring and said that it should not detract from the effort to stop gun trafficking into Mexico.
“Let’s do what we can with what we know,” he said. “We know that one hell of a lot of firearms come from the United States because our gun market is wide open.”
I don’t know how I missed this before, but the UK’s Guardian newspaper printed a piece last August that I wish I’d seen then. No matter, now’s as good a time as any:
Firearms: cheap, easy to get and on a street near you
From drug dealing to settling playground squabbles, firearms offences are risingDuncan Campbell
The Guardian, Saturday 30 August 2008
The gun shown here, a Webley, is up for sale in London for £150, one of hundreds of such weapons that are easily and cheaply available on the streets of the UK’s big cities, a Guardian investigation can reveal.The variety of weapons on offer in Britain is extensive and includes machine guns and shotguns, as well as pistols and converted replicas. A source close to the trade in illegal weapons contacted by the Guardian listed a menu of firearms that are available on the streets of the capital.
“You can get a clean [unused] 9mm automatic for £1,500, a Glock for a couple of grand and you can even make an order for a couple of MAC-10s,” he said. “Or you can get a little sawn-off for £150. They’re easy enough to get hold of. You’ll find one in any poverty area, every estate in London, and it’s even easier in Manchester, where there are areas where the police don’t go.
This, of course, after the British government banned almost all handguns in 1996, and 162,353 were turned in by their legally registered owners.
The illegally possessed ones stayed where they were. You can bet those are the places “the police don’t go” – having ceded them to the criminal class.
“People who use shotguns tend to be lower down the pecking order. There is less use of sawn-off or full length shotguns, and if a criminal wants street cred, he wants a self-loading pistol, a MAC-10 or an Uzi submachine gun.”
Sawed-off shotguns & rifles and fully-automatic weapons were banned in the UK back in 1937.
How’s that working out, fellas?
This week a man who ran a “factory” for converting replica weapons into working guns was jailed for life. Police believe the products of Grant Wilkinson’s workshops were used in more than 50 shootings, including eight murders. His speciality was turning legally purchased MAC-10s into weapons that could fire live rounds, an increasingly common practice.
According to David Dyson, a leading firearms consultant, it is possible to learn through the internet how to make a firearm, given a degree of skill, and converted deactivated weapons also feature in shootings.
Why not? Pakistanis do it without the aid of the Internet.
But it is the arrival of eastern European weapons that, alongside a homegrown industry in converting them, has contributed to the firearms glut.
(My emphasis.) As I have noted previously, the argument you hear most often by The Other Side is that “lax gun laws” in adjacent jurisdictions are the reason that “reasonable gun control” laws don’t, you know, actually work. It’s too easy, they say, for people to just drive across the state, county, or city line and buy what they’re prohibited from having where they live.
The UK is a FREAKING ISLAND, one with uniform, draconian gun laws – gun laws that the Million Mommies said they wanted to implement here, and THEY CAN’T KEEP THE GUNS OUT.
“There has been an influx from eastern Europe and particularly from Poland, and there are also a lot coming in from people who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq,” said the source. “In Liverpool docks, you can put in an order for 10 guns and some grenades and they’ll say OK and two weeks later, they will be there – and they are straight goers.”
Gee, do you think the Mexican cartels are coming across our border to place orders for grenades and antitank rockets? Or do they just go to the docks in Puerta Vallarta or Ensenada, or Guaymas, or . . . Well, you get the picture.
According to Dyson, the latest “weapon of choice” is a Russian 8mm Baikal self-defence pistol, originally used for firing CS gas. “They are legally sold in Germany and won’t fire a bullet but they can be converted by removing the partially blocked barrel, and replacing it with a rifled barrel,” he said. “After other small alterations, it can then fire 9mm bulleted ammunition. The replacement barrel is longer than the original, and is threaded so that it will accept a silencer, which is commonly sold as part of the package.
“There are hundreds of these floating around and hundreds have been seized,” he said. “They look the part as they are based on the Russian military Makarov pistol. If you are a 20-year-old drug dealer and you want a gun, that is what you will get and it will cost about £1,000 to £1,500.”
Which is, what, a day’s income if you’re selling drugs?
“The trends in firearms are driven by the suppliers,” said Dyson. “About two years ago, a supplier brought back hundreds of German-made revolvers, blank-firing pistols which can be bought legally in Germany. They were then converted and new cylinders made. They could then be sold for £700 to £800 when the supplier would have bought them for €60 and spent about £30 on converting them.”
Supply and Demand. Economics 101.
Sad that so many can’t learn it.
Home Office data shows that gun crime is up since last year, despite the recent doubling of sentences for possessing or supplying firearms. There were 9,803 firearms offences in England and Wales in the year to March 2008 with most in London, Manchester and the West Midlands.
Most buyers are involved with drug dealing, the source said. Some are used to rob other dealers in crimes that go unreported, others are used as protection while a deal is under way. “Someone will have a tool and there is always one guy in a posse willing to use it. They will have one guy who doesn’t give a fuck.
“Everyone wants to be a gangster now, mainly the kids. You have five or six in a little crew and one of them will be carrying. They want handguns – shotguns are too big and bulky. The sawn-off doesn’t look so good but use a machine gun and you get known as a heavy guy. They have them just to be a chap on the street, to pose. Some of them walk around all day with a .38. It’s 16-year-olds at it and it’s getting like America, silly as it sounds.”
In terms of nationalities, the influx of eastern European criminals has changed the balance of power. “Who’s using the guns? The [Jamaican] Yardies’ value for life was so minimal that they thought nothing of killing people,” said the source. “We don’t like them, they have no moral code. But it’s the Russians and the Polish and Albanians around now. They are bullies. They want to take over the flesh business. The Russians are cold-hearted fuckers. What they have been doing is following the card boys [who put cards advertising prostitutes in phone booths in central London] and then taking the girls hostage, armed if need be.”
Force a nation into compelled helplessness, and the wolves will come. It’s a certainty. Keep reading.
Detective Chief Inspector Colin Sutton, who has investigated some of London’s most high profile shooting murders, said he believed the age of offenders was getting younger, and sometimes guns seemed to be used for the slightest reason.
“Playground squabbles are now being settled with guns,” he said. “And drug dealers are taking a policy decision to get youngsters to carry guns.”
He said guns could be purchased for a few hundred pounds in many parts of London. “You can hire a gun for a period and, if the gun has already been used for a murder, the going rate comes down.”
While the conviction of Wilkinson was seen as a breakthrough, it is accepted that with the increased traffic between Britain and eastern Europe, stemming the flow of weapons remains an almost impossible task.
Gee, ya think?
“Guns are always available,” said Dyson. “You can go to the former Soviet Union, or countries with less stringent regulations than ours, and although British Customs have their successes, many guns appear to be smuggled into the UK.”
Amnesties for people to hand over weapons are greeted with scepticism by criminals. “The gun amnesties are meaningless,” the source said. “All you get handed in are guns from boys who wanted to be gangsters and then got a job or someone whose mother found it in their bedroom. If I had a gun, I wouldn’t take part because, if I got pulled, what would I say – ‘Oh, I’m just on my way to the amnesty.’ Also if it gets out that you’ve given in your tool, people will think you’re a wrong ‘un.”
Few professional criminals would keep guns on their premises. “Only silly people keep it in their homes. Normally, you have a ‘keeper’ a couple of miles away and some of them have been at it for 20 years. It’s best to have an old fellow with no previous or a woman. You keep the ammunition separate because you’ll get a much heavier sentence if you have them together.”
When guns are moved from place to place, a young woman is often used as the courier because there is less risk of her being stopped and searched.
What is not in dispute is the devastating effect that the casual use of a gun over a minor argument can have on dozens of people. In December 2006, Sean “Stretch” Jenkins, 36, an amiable, 6ft 8in window-cleaner from south London, was shot dead at a party in Carshalton. His killer was a cocaine dealer called Joseph Greenland, a volatile man with a quick temper, who had apparently taken offence at something Jenkins said. The men had earlier been at a boxing night at Caesar’s in Streatham, where there had been some fighting outside the ring. Greenland had left the party, driven home in his Range Rover, picked up a gun and returned to kill Jenkins in front of at least five witnesses, who were warned not to talk.
None of the immediate witnesses gave evidence against Greenland, who had a reputation for threatening to “annihilate” anyone who crossed him, but there were traces of his DNA on a cigarette end and a wine glass at the party and his bragging about the shooting was to be his downfall. His recourse to a gun, for no other reason than some perceived slight, left Jenkins’s six-year-old son without a father and saddened a wide network of friends and family. Greenland was jailed for life last week and will have to serve 30 years before he can be considered for parole.
“We got what we wanted,” said the victim’s mother, Maureen Jenkins, of the verdict and sentence last month. “I went to the cemetery and said, ‘Well, boy, I can put you to rest’.”
The detectives investigating the killing and the prosecution team that secured Greenland’s conviction were “marvellous”, she said. “I shed tears every day and I probably will till the day I die. Why do these people have to kill for nothing? If they want to kill people, why don’t they join the army?
Sweet bleeding jeebus. If there was ever a more textbook example of someone who cannot distinguish “violent and predatory” from “violent but protective, “ I doubt I’ll ever find it.
You don’t ever think a shooting will happen in your life. It’s all down to guns, just guns.”
The Guardian’s source said that guns were becoming a first rather than a last recourse. “A gun used to be used as a mediator; now everything is revolved with a gun. It’s brought the heat on everyone. Before you would get a two [years jail sentence], now it’s a five. It’s getting like the US now, like The Wire. It’s like a prediction of what will happen here. I think they all think they’re playing Grand Theft Auto. It’s madness out there.”
And The Other Side here wants to force us into compelled helplessness, because (they say) it’ll make us safer.
I don’t fucking think so.