Sebastian – Page 38 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Monday News Round Up

I haven’t really had enough material to continue with the regular news link post for some time. It’s not that the media isn’t writing about guns, it’s that so much of it is dreck it’s not even worth a link. It used to be, I’d ignore a lot of the local papers, and focus on big, reputable national papers writing stupid and ignorant things about guns. Of course, they still do that, but are there still people who aren’t committed lefties who don’t realize the New York Times is, for the most part, full of shit? So I’ll do these kinds of posts when I have material, and dispense with the notion that it is a regular feature.

The sky is, in fact, falling in Illinois. They only need to get lucky once. We have to be repeatedly lucky. If they can get assault weapons bans in just a few more states, that makes our fight against them that much more difficult. Right now those laws are outliers. We want them to stay that way.

Also, Florida is in big heap trouble, and Florida WILL be a bellwether for the nation, unlike some of the other states.

Dave Kopel is starting a multi-part series on the history of the assault weapons issue. He starts with the Stockton murderer, whose story will sound eerily familiar. Worth keeping an eye on.

Axios has a story about NRA’s digital game. I’m working up an article in my head about NRA’s ground game in general, and how it’s going to need to improve. This incident should be a wake up call. But more on that later.

Salena Zito: By ditching the NRA, companies are dividing Americans. They had all this planned out and ready to execute at the first viable pretext. You should be very worried, because they have been executing this strategy very well. I have in my time in this issue never seen the gun control movement so well-organized. We will need to up our game. Doesn’t matter that billionaire money is the only reason they can afford all this. Doesn’t matter that it’s unfair. It is, and we have to be prepared ourselves. I can say personally, I was not prepared for the Republicans to cave as quickly as they did.

I haven’t done any posts people about Trump’s gun control comments with Democrats. One, because Trump has a habit of saying whatever crazy shit comes into his head and then changing his mind later. Two, because my preferred candidate in 2016, Marco Rubio, folded like a cheap deck of cards under pressure, so it’s not like my preferred option was any better, and three, NRA has met with Trump and said everything is fine. All I have to say is I would not count on Trump with a Democratic Congress, so don’t any of you Trump voters even think about saying home in 2018.

School shootings spread like a virus. The article points out the media has managed to maintain an unwritten rule about not covering field rushers. Well, field rushers don’t earn the media great ratings. School shootings do. The media aren’t going to stop glorifying the mass murderers until there’s real social shame in it. But until then, the drive for ratings will dominate.

The Federalist: “Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Studentsâ€™ Astroturfing?”

Tam on “Playing Hooky For Gun Control”

Let the age giscrimination suits begin!Â Delta has already been made to pay. Others should follow. They need to be convinced that Bloomberg’s people mislead them. They must pay a terrible price for working with him.

Shocker: Membership in pro-gun groups surging. I’m at the highest level of life membership, so I can’t join any more, but despite the fact that my finances have been tight for some time, I’m going to find some money for a donation.

Kevin Creighton: “How do we flip that into a message of hope?” One word: community. As civil society and civic culture in this country implode, it’s what a lot of people need. It’s also something we can offer if we develop it. Churches were more successful when they were community institutions, but we’ve spent a lot of time in the past 40 years trying to tear it down. I’d also note: online communities are no substitute for real ones.

USA Today: “School shootings are not the new normal, despite statistics that stretch the truth.” More on that theme here as well.

Reason: “The jumping-off point of the story is that millennials (variously defined as those between the ages of 18 to 29, or people under 40-years old) seem to be left-wing on such issues as marriage equality, more-open immigration, drug legalization, for instance. But they also seem to be pretty right-wing on guns, despite having come on age in the post-Columbine era of semi-regular school shootings.” I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. None of this will matter if they don’t actually give a shit about the issue. Because if they elect a fanatic anti-gun big city Democrats, our gooses are cooked.

Remember, no one wants to take your guns. Though, personally, I agree that they should call for that. It would at least be a more honest debate. I’ll likewise do the favor of admitting that I think machine guns should be legal.

LA Times: “Actually, there is a clear link between mass shootings and mental illness.”

Analysis True: “Attacking the NRA is really attacking everyday Americans.”

Mass Killer Used 10 Round Magazines

Because they were easier to fit in his gym bag. You’d think this would be the end of that narrative, but you’d be wrong. New narrative: just think of how many lives were saved because he didn’t use those evil “high-capacity magazines” and “his gun jammed because he had to reload so much.” Even though in the Gifford’s shooting, the killer’s gun jammed because he was using an extended magazine that wasn’t designed for the gun.

Heads I win, tails you lose.

This is a difficult thing to discuss with non-gun people, and even some gun people who aren’t all that knowledgeable. Because it seems “obvious” that allowing fewer rounds in a magazine will reduce gun deaths. In truth there’s no evidence for this. Also, basic tactics would tell you that a magazine restriction disadvantages a defender more than an attacker.

It takes a few seconds to change a magazine. As a defender, I cannot and will not be carrying around a gym bag full of magazines with me all day. Most mass killers do this. Most of them also bring multiple guns to the attack. As a defender, I will carry the magazine that’s in my firearm. Maybe some more hard-core carriers will carry a reload. My likelihood of ever needing one round, let alone more than one, is very very low. But so is the likelihood I’ll ever be in the vicinity of a mass shooting. We don’t carry guns in anticipation of high-probability events, so I don’t want its capacity artificially blocked. The grip of my Glock 19 is designed to hold 15 9mm rounds, and as a defender, that’s what I want it to hold. Telling me I can only have 10 rounds serves merely to put me at a disadvantage to an attacker, who can plan around the restriction.

Cops know this. That’s why they would fight magazine restrictions that affect them tooth and nail. But if cops need them, they should be generally available.

Analysis True!

From Glenn Reynolds, on people ignoring assault weapons bans:

But since the point of gun control is to humiliate and grind down flyover people and demonstrate that the Ruling Class is ultimately the, well, Ruling Class â€” not to control crime â€” the appearance of submission is probably enough. Plus, a seldom enforced and often ignored law is ideal if you want to be able to target troublesome individuals later.

That pretty effectively sums it up.

My Congressman to Gun Owners: See Ya!

Probably because Johnny Doc’s brother Kevin, Justice of the State Supreme Court, along with his partisan allies, illegally and and flagrantly usurped legislative prerogative to make us a Democratic district*, Brian Fitzpatrick, who I’d note is a former FBI agent, the agency that utterly failed those kids in Florida, is jumping on board with shifting the blame to gun owners.

â€œWe have to be willing to stand up and be willing to have the courage and say that if prohibiting the sale of these military-style assault weapons will solve the problem, we need to get on board with it,â€ he said.

I’m done with the Fitzpatricks. When Mike retired, it was a prime chance to get a new face out there, but the Party decided to pull a switcheroo and hope no one would notice. I’d note that there is a primary challenger. Usually my first question to a primary challenger is “Can they win?” Too many people ask “Does he agree with me?” Or if you’re a Republican, they’ll ask “Is he a True Conservative?” If your candidate can’t win, that doesn’t matter very much now, does it? You have to run people that can win in the district, and with the fresh addition of a bunch of Dems into District ~~Eight~~ One, any Republican will have an uphill climb. The truth is, I have no idea whether Dean Malik can win, and I don’t frankly care. My overriding desire now is to see Fitzpatrick sent packing, even if it means sacrificing that seat to the Dems. I will vote for Dean in the primary. I seem to recall I was favorably impressed by him at a political beauty pageant a local group held a few years back. I will not vote a single more time for Brian Fitzpatrick, or any other Fitzpatrick, for Congress ever again.

Ordinarily, I am very much reluctant to not hold my nose, because the Dem is almost always guaranteed to be worse on guns and other things. But some stench is just too much, and you can’t get much worse than endorsing a ban on semi-automatics (and make no bones about it… read that CNN poll… it polled banning semi-autos categorically). That Fitzpatrick delivered this message to the sycophants at the Chamber of Commerce is just icing on the cake. The idea that Fitzpatrick is going to give a pass to his buddies at the FBI for failing to act, and instead is going to jump on board with punishing me? Fuck no, and fuck off.

* <rant>
Don’t get me started on this. They claimed a power in the state constitution that simply isn’t there. They basically rewrote the PA constitution to their liking unilaterally, then claimed legislative powers to actually rewrite the districts. I’m really hoping Alito delivers on an injunction, because the elections clause of the federal constitution says state legislatures (and recent precedent allows a function of law to assign redistricting to a commission) draw districts, and Kevin Doc and his buddies are not my fucking legislature and no function of law gives it to them. But no one else in this state seems to believe process matters. Hell, no one believes rule of law is important anymore. We’re warring camps and it’s “Ra! Ra! Go team!” Except my team sucks.
</rant>

Hated by All Nations

I remember writing a while back, though I can’t find it now, that one reason the anti-gun movement could be dismissed as astroturf with very little in the way of a real movement behind it is because the big indicators of a true cultural struggle were absent. If there were real, motivated opposition, you’d see them attacking our core cultural institutions.

I’m sorry to say, but we’re starting to see that. Now, I do believe that social media has greatly enhanced the ability of a small number of determined activists to intimidate traditional companies who don’t really get social media. But in 2008, they did not have even a small number of determined activists. I believe we are seeing a resurgence of the gun control movement, and the time to get serious is now.

Yes, I am skeptical those poll numbers linked are so out of whack with what we’ve seen in the past even after mass shootings, but I’d note the shift here is almost exclusively women. I notice a few issues with this poll’s questioned, but it doesn’t look like the hatchet job I wish it did. To steel yourselves and start organizing. We’re going to need to all hang together over the next few months. It never hurts to start communicating with your reps.

Armed SRO Stayed Outside

It’s breaking news that the Stoneman Douglas high school had a School Resource Officer who stayed outside and failed to act. It’s easy to armchair quarterback this kind of thing in retrospect, but here’s the deal: no one has any idea how they are going to react when bullets start flying. Trained soldiers and cops are not immune to freezing up under fire. If people are going to argue that this shows armed intervention is a fool’s errand than we should disarm the police and military too. The only way you will find out for sure how you will act when people start shooting bullets at you is to have bullets shot at you. Training helps. That’s why I believe armed individuals make the choice to carry in schools with an intent to protect children should receive active shooter training, and whatever else is useful above and beyond what an average owner with a carry permit typically receives. I’d also note this country has a pool of veterans, many of them retired and with free time, who already know how they react when people are shooting bullets at them. They might be a useful part of the solution too.

So I’m not going to blame this school officer. I don’t like the odds of facing a rifle wielding maniac armed with a pistol and soft body armor either. I’d like to think I wouldn’t freeze up, regardless, and I’d give myself good odds on landing hits. But I don’t know. I’ve never been shot at, and neither have most police officers, even those with long careers. So I’m inclined to cut this guy a break. He decided to resign. That is the right thing. You know now that you’re not cut out for this line of work. I’d hate to have to live with what he’s going to have to live with, but he won’t be the first nor last.

UPDATE: I know this post is a bit controversial. Bitter is discovering some more information about the SRO that would indicate, yeah, sorry dude, I’m willing to judge. What I don’t like to do is beat my chest and declare “I could do better!” I’d like to think I could, but I’ve never had to face down an active shooter.

UPDATE: One deputy freezing up is something that can happen. Four of them freezing up is a systemic problem with the department.

Gun Rights Threat Shaping Up

It looks like the big thing we have to worry about post-Parkland is going to be a move to raise the age for buying a long gun from 18 to 21. I’ll be honest, telling a 20 year old kid who’s coming back from a tour of duty in Afghanistan that he’s responsible enough to use an M4 to shoot Taliban for God and Country, but not responsible enough to own a semi-automatic AR-15 to shoot paper or to say, defend his family after a natural disaster, does not sit well with me at all. Are we going to repeal the 26th Amendment? Because if they aren’t responsible enough to own a rifle, why are they responsible enough to vote? Maybe we shouldn’t let them join the military either. Maybe we should raise the age you can get married without parental permission back to 21, like it used to be in many states?

This is bullshit. If you’re old enough to die for your country, you’re old enough to vote for or against the people who would send you, old enough to have a beer, get married, and yes, own a gun. If we’re now talking about moving the age of majority back to 21, and maybe we should (we have an awful lot of man and women children running around out there) we ought to have that serious conversation about that. Otherwise, this is just another case of the Second Amendment, to borrow from Justice Thomas, being treated as “a disfavored right.”

And to make matters worse, it’s the fucking Republicans doing this to us. Not that I’m shocked. I’m way too cynical about politics to be shocked. But I can’t think of any better way to make me stay home, rather than lift a finger or even vote for your shitty, awful candidates.

I Like Them to Learn Early

Local municipalities in Pennsylvania are preempted from enforcing any ordinance relating to guns. This is pretty well-established under our law. But that doesn’t stop them from passing ordinances, and a popular thing to do is for Boards and Councils to use their positions to lobby state lawmakers to let them have a go at gun regulation, or lobbying on behalf of some legislation or another that the majority of the Board or Council would like to see. It’s like what we do, only they get to do it with taxpayer dollars.

On a rumor, I dragged a bunch of club people out our township meeting with the belief that they might try to pass something like they did after the Vegas shooting. It was shot down after Vegas, because the three Republican Supervisors could outvote the two Dems. However in November, the Dems flipped a seat, and took control of the Board. The Dems this time were assuring members who e-mailed that no gun issue was on the agenda, and they would be taking no action. Even though they are preempted, I like my politicians to learn early about the gun voter. Also, getting them on the record is helpful if they try to run for higher office.

Last night we get through most of the meeting and nothing comes up. Good, that’s victory. But now I’m worried about having a dozen or so people questioning why I dragged them out to a meeting to hear a retirement speech, watch a few appropriations votes, and hear the Chief of Police give his report. Then, at the end, right before adjournment, the big anti-gun Dem on the Board decides he can’t help himself and opens his yap. Wonderful! Thanks for pulling my ass from the fire there! I was starting to worry they might begin to think I cry wolf, and I won’t be able to rally troops the next time I need them. But then again, if he had let the meeting just adjourn, he probably wouldn’t have gotten hisself in the papers.

The Bump Stock Issue Never Went Away

The ATF, in a rare move, decided several months ago to enter the rule making process with the bump stock issue. There was even the required public comment period. I say rare, because ATF has never liked using rule making, choosing to do most regulation through determination letters. They traditionally prefer policy to regulation.

Now the big deal is that Trump called for a bump stock ban, probably because NRA called for a bump stock ban, and there’s already a rule making process going on that’s headed in that direction. NRA called for a bump stock ban because in Congress, the votes were there to pass one, and all the Congressional bills I saw on the topic were overly broad and sucked. They would have made any gun smithing work on a semi-automatic firearm legally risky, and that’s before you get into the multitudes of constructive possession issues.

So what do you do? Call on ATF to undertake rule making, where you can control the process under a friendly administration, and make sure whatever comes out is narrowly worded. Also, since it’s regulation, rather than law, it’s much easier to change.

So that was the choice: a bump stock ban that swept in a lot other ordinary and legal activity, and a bump stock ban that was just a bump stock ban, and was regulation rather than law. There are no other options. Don’t like that? Then you’re left replacing many of the squishy Republicans. But you’ll be hard pressed to find anyone running for office in this country willing to stand up and shout, “Yay for machine guns,” let alone win on it. And if you challenge all the squishy Republicans and lose? You’re done. Finished. Bump stocks ain’t a hill I’m dying on, and trust me, it is a hill you’ll die on.

This Will Shock No One: Moral Outrage is Self-Serving, Says Reason

New research out, and the science is settled! We all knew this. Hell, Zuckerberg built an empire on this: what would Facebook be without self-serving moral preening? A platform to share baby and cat pictures, basically.

When people publicly rage about perceived injustices that don’t affect them personally, we tend to assume this expression is rooted in altruismâ€”a “disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.” But new research suggests that professing such third-party concernâ€”what social scientists refer to as “moral outrage”â€”is often a function of self-interest, wielded to assuage feelings of personal culpability for societal harms or reinforce (to the self and others) one’s own status as a Very Good Person.

Well bowl me over with a feather. I will admit I’m one of those odd ducks that doesn’t feel guilty about a whole hell of a lot. If anything, I feel guilty over the fact that I don’t feel guilty about much. Maybe I’m sorry I didn’t spend more time with my mom when she was terminally ill. I kind of feel bad about that. Wish I had been more interested in getting to know my paternal grandparents before they died when I was in my early 20s. I probably also don’t do enough to mix with and help people who are truly needy. I’m more of a person to lose touch than keep in touch.

But that’s all my cross to bear, not any of yours. Maybe that’s a difference. It’s not that I, and people like me, don’t have guilt: we internalize it. I don’t need to make my failings as a person your failings as a person. But if there’s anything people are bad at these days, especially on social media, its internalizing things. This rings true: