Doubling Down on Stupid

The old phrase goes “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” No doubt whoever said it first thought it was quite profound. It was stupid then and in light of last Saturday’s massacre in Tucson, AZ, it is all the more stupid now. So let’s see, someone needs to defend the poor innocent little gun. It’s gotten a bad rap. It’s not the gun’s fault that it falls into the hands of criminals, lunatics, suicides and klutzes who accidentally shoot their own foot off or worse. This is an absurd asinine argument. The fact is the way you control misuse of guns is to limit people’s access to them and control by legislation, their allowed use of them in a civilized society.

Well, the left is doubling down on stupid. After blaming the “vitriolic rhetoric” of everyone else for the actions of Jared Laughner, the Tucson shooter, they’re now off and away on blaming the gun. Of course this is a nature progression with the left, the criminal isn’t to blame, just everyone else who “made him do it.” It’s ludicrous, it’s intellectually vacant, and it’s not really all that surprising.

Calls for increased gun control continue the progression of the left’s mantra that no crisis should go to waste. After all, it is a golden opportunity:

Gun Control’s Golden Opportunity

Gun control advocates have suffered defeat after defeat and the majority of the nation today clearly supports the right of private citizens to bear arms and to defend themselves, their loved ones and their property. Second amendment opponents would like to reverse those trends and, for some, Jared Loughner’s rampage this weekend offers a golden opportunity to press forward with their old agenda.

But this forgets some real important facts. The Washington Post did a national survey, asking this question:

Are any firearms now kept in or around your home? Include those kept in a garage, outdoor storage area, car, truck, or other motor vehicle.

State: Montana Respondents: 3,066 Answered YES: 1,723 57.7% Answered NO:1,343 42.3%

I am from Montana, so I can tell you that, of those households that answered yes, the number of guns in that home probably average 3-4. This is anecdotal, but you’ll probably see a handgun, one or two rifles and one or two shotguns. The population of Montana is ~975,000. So, extrapolating this out, about 563,000 people in Montana own a gun, and if my anecdotal observations are true, then there are about 1.7-2.3 million guns in the state.

There were 28 murders in Montana in 2009.

By contrast, in Washington D.C., Maryland and Michigan the results showed:

The District: Respondents: 1,859 Answered YES: 66 3.8% Answered NO: 1,793 96.2%

State: Maryland* Respondents: 4,271 Answered YES: 1,028 21.3% Answered NO: 3,243 78.7%

State: Michigan Respondents: 3,653 Answered YES: 1,339 38.4% Answered NO: 2,314 61.6%

The populations are ~600,000, 5.7 million, and ~10 million, respectively. We’ll assume just one gun per household, since I limited experience in these areas vis a vis guns. That means there are ~23,000, ~1.2 million and ~3.8 million guns, respectively.

There were 144, 438, and 627 murders, respectively, in 2009.

Think about this, there are either equal amounts, or more, guns in Montana, yet its murder rate is a fraction of these other examples. The difference is that these other examples have a lot more people. And this is the kicker, the vast majority of these murders occurred in D.C., Baltimore and Detroit, which have some of the most stringent gun laws in the nation.

But, but, but, if guns laws are passed then gun violence goes down, right?

Apparently not.

So the question goes back to, why? Well, the answer is pretty simple-

Guns don’t kill people, People do.

I am in no way surprised that those calling the loudest for the constraint of our Constitutional rights are on the left. After all, it has been those on the left who have derided the reading of the Constitution, heaven forbid we actually live by it. Gun control isn’t about guns, it is about control. The Fairness Doctrine and Net Neutrality are not about equal speech, they’re about censoring speech.

Anyone who thinks that liberals are about the liberalization of our Constitutional rights is quite simply deluding themselves.


6 thoughts on “Doubling Down on Stupid

  1. The damnest thing is that we “are” having the discussion he damands we have at this moment. Where’s he? Hiding out somewhere in an echo chamber.

    We’ve been snowed in down here in Atlanta. I can tell you an idle mind is a dangerous thing. So dangerous in fact, I watched MSNBC this morning. Rutherford’s window on the world (and apparently only window). Since it tells him what to think, I wanted a preview.

    They pound their fists, claiming to be upset about a discussion that we are supposedly not having, extra mad that the right won’t engage them in their liberal orgy over the event (really strange when there was not one single right-wing guest invited on to have the discussion they claim to want). I mean spit-flying pissed. Like a little kid screaming “listen to me, damn it listen to me,” then when someone says “what is it” they forget the point.

    Unbelievably (not really), Bubbles Brzezinski points to a CBS poll showing that 32% of the country believes that the right-wing rhetoric was partly responsible for the tragedy as proof that he discussion should take place. This is then followed by, ” we all know there’s no direct link and there’s no proof that Palin’s map caused this.” In other words, they trumpet a poll that shows 32% of the country is wrong as proof that we should be having a discussion about its merits. WTF??????

    So, what do the Rutherfords-of-the-world really want out of this? Not a discussion. They have it already. They want — no demand — acceptance of blame for the tragedy (at the same time they admnit there’s none to be had). Until there is agreement that the left’s political philosophy is correct from the right they will continue to scream. That’s what is being insisted on here. Period. How old are these people and why won;t they just admit that’s what this all about?

    1. His charge-counter charge comment was very telling. It demonstrates a willful intent to totally disregard facts in the matter. And I’m sorry, unless MSLSD fires Doughboy Schultz, then any call or claim for civil discoord is crap. And this last post, it demonstrates a falling down the rabbit hole. He’s going left hard.

  2. I won’t be preached to by people drowning in their hypocrisy.

    I won’t entertain more “solutions” that call for less freedom and more government.

    I won’t take seriously any lectures on what makes sense from people who have serious gaps in their knowledge and understanding of our own history.

    Rutherford will.

    Aside from poking him with the reality stick, I’m not sure what else is to be done anymore.

    1. Unfortunately, I have found that it is the bitter medicine of experience that fixes this problem. Let him find himself in a position where he must defend himself, then let him lecture on self-defense. Let him endure call after call for censorship because someone doesn’t agree with his ideas. He pontificates from CT. Really?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s