Posts filed under 'Gun Control'


It shouldn’t be hard to exercise a Constitutional right. You’d think someone whose job depends on the First Amendment would understand that.

How I Got Licensed to Carry a Concealed Gun in 32 States by Barely Trying | Mother Jones.

Add comment September 23rd, 2013

There is one problem…

…with this article’s implication that guns should be registered just like cars.

No government every tried to confiscate cars.

1 comment August 10th, 2013

In other news…

…many foreigners also don’t understand why our First Amendment allows blasphemy.

Which is just as irrelevant to how we run our country as this is:

Kerry: Foreign Students 'Scared' of Guns in America | The Weekly Standard.

Found at The War on Guns

1 comment April 15th, 2013

Yeah, that’ll do it

In an attempt to improve school safety in the wake of the Newtown school killings, Homestead High School in Mequon is telling students not to open exterior doors for anyone during school hours.

Because a man with a gun is no match for a glass door.

13 comments January 3rd, 2013

This is EXACTLY why I carry a gun

But my instinct was that if someone is shooting at you, cialis canada diagnosis it is generally better to shoot back than to cower and pray.

via The Case for More Guns (And More Gun Control) – Jeffrey Goldberg – The Atlantic.

4 comments December 3rd, 2012

The perspective that people who want to ban guns never see

I think this blog post from a woman who was NOT killed in an episode of domestic violence is particularly apt considering the shooting at the Azana Salon here in Milwaukee:

Do you know what kept me safe? Not some piece of paper. Not a judge tut tutting at him and shaking his/her finger and telling him to leave me alone. Not the police, best cialis cheap who, there after all, would only be able to respond once he had caused me harm. No, what kept me safe was my Glock. What kept me safe was my Glock and the fact that he knew I had both the ability and the will to empty a clip into his chest if he made good on his statements that if I did not come back, I would not see the next week. He never tried to do any of the things he screamed he would because he knew that not only would I defend myself but that I could. My Ex was nearly a foot taller than me and, at the time, had about 150 pounds on me. If he had been able to get close enough to me to harm me, there were very few options I had to protect myself. But with my Glock, well, I would be able to stop him before he got that close. I am alive today because he knew that if he tried to make that otherwise, there was a better than even chance he would be the one lying there in a pool of blood instead of me.

via An open letter to Bob Costas and Jason Whitlock « doubleplusundead.

2 comments December 3rd, 2012

So what law would have stopped him?

The man who shot his wife and six others on Sunday didn’t care that he was under a restraining order to stay away from his wife. He just ignored it.

He didn’t care that the restraining order prohibited him from having weapons. He ignored that, too.

And, now, it turns out he ignored one more law, as well:

Just another sign that signs don’t stop bullets.

20 comments October 22nd, 2012

Never let a crisis go to waste

Even though there’s absolutely no evidence that limiting gun magazines to 10 rounds would have prevented the shootings in Oak Creek, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is using the occasion to insist that we do just that.

Rather than argue that forcing a shooter to reload more often won’t really slow them down, I’ll just let you see for yourself:

2 comments August 7th, 2012

Two thoughts on the Aurora Shootings

  1. To the people who think an armed civilian would have put a quick end to the massacre: If I had been caught in that theater I would have wanted to be armed, but I’ve got to say it would have been the worst self-defense situation imaginable. Outgunned by a madman in the dark and surrounded by panicking innocents?Firing a handgun at an assailant swaddled in bullet proof/resistant clothing? Blinded by the flash of your own fire? I would have wanted my gun with me, but I’m not sure it would have made much of a difference.
  2. To the people who would use this tragedy to try to implement more “reasonable” gun control laws: The most severe laws we have are reserved for murder and attempted murder. This mad man violated those laws approximate 60 times in just a few minutes. What possible gun-control law can you imagine implementing that he wouldn’t have violated just as blithely? By definition, gun control laws only serve to disarm the law abiding. When you advocate gun control, you are doing your best to make good people helpless in the face of evil. That’s not “reasonable” or compassionate. It’s illogical and cruel.

Add comment July 23rd, 2012

Wow, in her case, I suppose justice really must have been blind

The person who wrote this used to be a criminal prosecutor:

I am staunchly opposed to concealed carry because,  in my opinion, only overly suspicious or dangerous people feel the need to carry concealed guns in the normal course of daily life.

  1. As a prosecutor, I would think she probably saw plenty of cases where the victim hadn’t been suspicious enough.
  2. As a prosecutor, I would think she had plenty of cases where the criminal had been illegally carrying a weapon. The lack of a concealed carry permit hadn’t dissuaded the “dangerous people” from carrying a gun anyhow.
  3. As a citizen, it scares the hell out of me that a former prosecutor feels her personal opinion trumps my Constitutional and natural right to defend myself from the sort of people she used to spend all day putting in jail.

1 comment June 14th, 2012

Older Posts


Being in a wheelchair gives you a unique perspective on the world. This blog features many of my views on politics, art, science, and entertainment. My name is Elliot Stearns. More...

The Abortionist

Recent Comments