Jeez. THAT argument again.

I somehow ended up at a congresscritter’s Twitter feed, where he was expressing sympathy for the folks of Virginia Beach. Most of the replies were demands for — never defined — new victim disarmament laws.

So I issued a challenge: propose specific constitutional laws which — if in place — would have prevented chumbucket’s murders.


But one Mike Taxter did take the time to declare that, ” Silencers, semi automatics, high capacity magazines and gun clips are not a 2A right.”

and even DRED SCOTT

The Supreme Court disagrees.

So he cited another tweet calling for an amendment of the Second Amendment. I noted that HELLER already addressed that point. So he fell back on this tired argument:

No. It’s an abomination and completely wrong to consider these inventions as what the framers thought were needed in 1791. We don’t need an armed militia in 2019 either. Keep your pistol and hunting rifles; go the range and hunt little birds. Fix the laws or Amend the language.

Yadda yadda. The framers never envisioned the development of new technologies, so the 2A shouldn’t apply to them.

Says the guy using an electrically powered computer to exercise his 1A right to free speech over a complex, worldwide telecommunications network. I’ll expect any further replies to be submitted via quill penned letter on parchment, delivered by messenger on horseback.

Because the framers, who lived in a time when repeating firearms, breechloaders, and early cartridges were being developed; who included a Copyright and Patent Clause to promote innovation, invention, and progress, coyld never have envisioned modern firearms or communication technology.

About those VNRA membership numbers

[Vichy] NRA Memberships Bounce Back In 2018
The report, which was handed out during the group’s latest annual meeting, shows dues went from $128,209,303 in 2017 to $170,391,374 in 2018—an increase of $42,182,071, or 33 percent. It also shows contributions rose from $132,879,299 in 2017 to $165,075,288 in 2018—an increase of $32,195,989 or 24 percent. The rise in dues came ahead of the NRA announcing it had reached 5.5 million members, a record number.

Just as a thought exercise, let’s pretend that all those memberships were $45 annuals.

170,391,374 / 45 = 3,786,474.97

Maybe someone familiar with financial reporting can help me out here. Do multi-year (and life) membership dues paid up front get reported in full for the year in which the money was received, or is it “amortized” over the membership period for reporting purposes?

I’m trying to reconcile that dues number with the claim of 5.5 million members. There could be another 1.8 million members who made their payments in a previous year.

I do find it interesting that my 3.7 million figure matches the 3.7 million magazine subscribers found by Mother Jones.

‘Twould be nice if the VNRA simply issued a report of member totals broken down by type, and how many opted not to take a magazine subscription.

No, it’s not impossible, Bennet

This morning, I discovered yet another Democrat presidential hopeful, Colorado Senator Michael Bennet. Looking at polls, it appears he’s currently ranking at “Who?” (Quinnipiac can’t even spell his name right.) Possibly because of stupid crap like this.

‘Impossible’ to argue Colorado’s not safer because of this law: Sen. Michael Bennet
“After Columbine in Colorado, the people of this western state voted to close the gun show loophole and internet loophole,” he said. “It’s impossible to argue that our state isn’t safer because of this law. If McConnell doesn’t take this on the floor, the people of America and the people of Kentucky will hold him accountable for that.”

Ah, the mythical “gun show loophole.” Let’s consider just how effective their law would have been in stopping the Columbine chumbuckets. Would background checks at gun shows have had a useful effect?

On November 22, 1998, their friend Robyn Anderson purchased the carbine rifle and the two shotguns for the pair at the Tanner Gun Show, as they were too young to legally purchase the guns themselves.

They used a straw buyer, who would passed a background check. That’s three of the assholes’ guns. The fourth?

Standing in Jefferson County District Court with his hands folded in front of him and his parents seated behind him, Manes pleaded guilty to providing a handgun to a minor and possession of a sawed-off shotgun.

An outright unlawful transaction with a seller who knew it was illegal.

Maybe Colorado should have made straw purchases and other illegal firearms sales… illegal. Because expanded background checks wouldn’t have made them any safer.

But let’s talk about this, too. One of my pet peeves:

The House of Representatives have passed background checks to close the internet loophole. This person bought the guns lawfully as we know. Every single fact pattern will be different. We should pass those background checks. 90% of Americans support it.”

That “90% of Americans want universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks PPYI)” is a standard Dimcrat meme. Is it true? What state that put it to a popular vote actually got 90% or better?

None. I happened to do some research on this a couple of weeks ago and still have my notes. The state that passed universal PPYI with the greatest majority appears to be California. Naturally.

It passed with a 63.08% majority. Counting up on my fingers, I’d say that’s a little less than 90%. Even in California. But, as the salesweasel said, there’s more.

Or less.

75.27% of registered voters bothered to cast a ballot. So 44.63% of registered voters wanted this. Except…

The state says they actually had 24,875,293 people eligible to vote. 8,663,159 of those voted for PPYI.


Only about one-third of Californians wanted PPYI enough to vote for it.

And the top reason for gun control is…

“I’m mentally ill, suffering from uncontrolled anxiety.”*

Maine ‘red flag’ bill compromise would peg gun seizures to mental health
Rep. Victoria Morales, D-South Portland, told the committee on Friday that she was terrified after seeing a man run into her kids’ school with a hand in his pocket shortly after the 2012 shooting** that killed 20 children and six staff members in Newtown, Connecticut.

“I just put that out there because I want you to know how fearful parents are, how fearful grandparents are, how fearful our kids are,” she said.

Speaking of mental health, Rep. Morales should consider getting treatment for herself; better anxiety meds at the least. Irrational, unjustified anxiety over normal things like hands in pockets is no reason to violate the rights of everyone else just so she can avoid the sight. Maine winters must be terrifying for her.

Perhaps Morales will also move to ban pockets.

Unless you’re working a southside Chi-town convenience store at night, and he’s wearing a mask and hoodie, seeing a guy with hand in pocket should not automatically instill fear.

If this drives her into a panic that causes her to demand the mass violation of human/civil rights, then she’s is not mentally healthy. She needs help. Fortunately, it’s available.

Maine Statewide Crisis Hotline
1-888-568-1112 (Voice) or 711 (Maine Relay)
Should that bill pass, someone should immediately “red flag” Morales, lest she shoot some poor innocent during a panic attack. She’s dangerous to rights, and probably just as physically dangerous.

* Not an actual quote; just explaining her… reasoning.

** She cites the Sandy Hook shooting. Did she think this guy had an AR in his pocket?

Monopoly Money Theory

Or, as proponents like to call it, “Modern Monetary Theory”.

Basically, this is how Occasional-Cortex expects to fund her Green Raw Deal, spending trillions of nonexistent dollars. Since proponents are usually pretty vague in their descriptions, it comes across as Zimbabwe-style hyperinflationary to sane people. But that link above finally explains why it isn’t.

Rather, it is essentially a description of how a modern credit economy actually works – how money is created and destroyed, by governments and by banks, and how financial markets function. Nor is MMT new: it is based on the work of John Maynard Keynes, whose A Treatise on Money pointed out back in 1930 that “modern States” have functioned this way for thousands of years.

From this description, certain straightforward facts flow. Governments create money by spending and extinguish it via taxation. It follows, therefore, that a large country, borrowing in its own currency, cannot be forced into default. That is why the US is not Greece, and cannot become Venezuela or Zimbabwe.

It is not hyperinflationary because the government will simply “destroy” the would-be excess money supply through taxation. Allow me to explain, through a simplified example, how that works.

1. The Fed cranks the printing presses all the way up to Ludicrous Speed.

2. The government then pays Contractor X to build “infrastructure;” say, a solar power farm.

3. Contractor X uses that money to buy materials and pay workers to build the boondoggle.

4. Government then “recovers” all that money by taxing it away from the contractor and workers, and “destroys” it. (Note that this cleverly ignores the fact that a very large chunk of that money actually left the country, beyond the government’s tax&destroy reach, going to purchase PVC panels from China, since the US only has a small part of the manufacturing capacity. Even if they also do a print&pay scheme to build PVC factories here, the money still leaves because we still have to buy the raw materials from elsewhere since the greenweenies decided we don’t need rare earth mining anymore.)

5. Contractor and workers then scratch their heads and wonder why they just did all that work for free: retroactively unpaid labor and materials.

Slavery and Theft, v2.0.

But at least it isn’t hyperinflationary, eh?

You now understand why @AOC et al are puzzled when we ask where the money is going to come from to fund their GRD, free healthcare for all, free college, and ponies. It comes from slavery and theft.

I’m hoping this is satire

But it reads like the idiot is serious.

We Need Gun Control at Every Level
The vast majority of Americans do not need a firearm, and yet they own them anyway, and continue to use them to kill. This is an epidemic that stems from a single source—the enormous, poorly regulated market for arms, propped up by an obscenely rich political lobby holding half of America’s electoral politics hostage.

1. “The vast majority of Americans […] continue to use them to kill.”

As I write, the US population is 328,889,018. A majority of that would be 164,444,510. If they were all using guns to kill, then we would have had millions of firearms deaths. Wrong. We would have noticed.

2. “the enormous, poorly regulated market for arms”

You need a federal license to manufacture firearms for sale. You are subject to inspection. Laws require you to maintain permanent records every firearm you make. Every firearm is required to be marked very specifically, right down to the depth of the lettering. You have to ship your product to another federally licensed seller, who s aslo subject to inspection and reams of paperwork requirements. That seller can only sell firearms to people who in turn get federal permission to buy a gun. All these manufacturers and sellers are subject to the same product liability and negligence penalties as any other industry. Not merely civil penalties, but criminal. The is a federal agency just for regulating firearms (and alcohol, tobacco, and eplosives) unlike the CPSC which oversees nearly every other product. So the industry is rather heavily regulated, dipstick.

3. “obscenely rich political lobby holding half of America’s electoral politics hostage”

Crosby appears to be talking about the Vichy NRA. Id he’d really been paying attention, he’d realize that the VNRA is pretty small potatoes compared to other lobbies. He might also notice that it’s only set up to enrich itself at members’ expense, and actually promotes gun control.

If it’s satire, it’s isn’t that well done. If it’s serious, then @jscros is just as ignorant of real facts (or lying) as every other victim disarmer.

VNRA’s “Intern”

LaPierre seemingly had Ack-Mac paying $4,500 a month in rent for his “intern’s” apartment.

Forty-five hundred bucks. Per month.

First, offhand I can’t recall seeing an internship that provided a free apartment. And did Allen declare that $13,804.84 payment in-kind in her tax filings?

Second, that rent seemed high to me but I don’t know what Fairfax rents are like. So I looked up The Ridgewood II by Windsor. Nice place. The listed rents run from $1,710 (1BR, 1BA) to $3,460 (3BR, 2BA) per month.

For the mathematically challenged, the rent billed to Ack-Mac, and passed on to the NRA to be covered by gullible members, was $1,040 more than the highest rent listed for the place. (There are larger apartments for which you have to “call for rent.)

Not a bad deal for a summer “intern.”

Nice intern if you can afford her. Oh, wait. VNRA MEMBERS paid for her.