An Interesting quote

Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent.
—Isaac Asimov

Sort of like the Ambrose Bierce Quote I like:

PATRIOTISM, n.
Combustible rubbish ready to the torch of any one ambitious to illuminate his name.

In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer I beg to submit that it is the first.

Which leads to
PATRIOT, n.
One to whom the interests of a part seem superior to those of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerors.

A Meleanie Hain Memorial Shooting Match!

A Meleanie Hain Memorial Shoot? Seriously?

October 10, 2009 by Sean Kelly

Q. What’s the best way to memorialize a victim of deadly gun violence? What’s the best way to raise money for orphans of a horrific murder-suicide involving a 9 mm. automatic handgun and a shotgun?

A. Why, get the whole gang together down at the gun store and shoot off a bunch of guns, of course!

If that makes sense to you, don’t miss the Melanie Hain Memorial Shoot Nov. 1st at Heberling’s Gun Shop in Prompton, PA!

No, it’s not an insensitive, tasteless joke (Or is it…?). It’s a real event. The details are posted on the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Forum:

MELEANIE HAIN MEMORIAL SHOOT — NOV. 1ST, HERBERLINGS GUN SHOP
PROMPTON, PA.
Hemlockshooters is hosting a “Memorial Shoot” for Meleanie Hain’s children.
The time is 12:00 noon till 4:00pm.
ENTRY FEE = $10.00 P.P. AUCTION WILL BE HELD EVERY HOUR
REFRESHMENTS: Hot Dogs, Hamburgers & Sodas will be available for purchase.
100% of all moneys collected will go to whatever fund is set up for the benefit of Meleanie kids.
Hemlockshooters will be grateful for all that want to help, please PM hgsw67 or e-mail Hemlockshooters @ aol.com if you wish to donate something for the raffle, or can help with logistics.
Help us help Meleanies kids
Thanks, Harry G

So come on down for some hamburgers, hot dogs, handguns, rifles and ammo… bring the spouse, kids and firearms… What better way to celebrate The Domestic Violence Awareness Month?

Who Was Melanie Hain (shefearsnothing)?

Meleanie Hain was the pistol-packing mama who gained national prominence by insisting on wearing her loaded Glock 25 to her children’s soccer games. She solidified her role as gun-rights media icon by filing a $1 million lawsuit against Lebanon County PA Sheriff Michael DeLeo for revoking her gun carrying permit (for “bad judgement”). Meleanie Hain blamed DeLeo for, among other things, emotional distress and hurting the babysitting service she ran in her loaded-gun laden house.

The story of gun-rights advocate Hain ended both tragically and ironically. According to the Huffington Post, Meleanie’s husband Scott “used his own gun to fire several shots into his 30-year-old wife, Meleanie, while her video chat was active and perhaps as she washed dishes in their kitchen, police said. Scott Hain, 33, later killed himself in an upstairs bedroom.”

According to the Post article:

Meleanie Hain’s loaded pistol — with a bullet ready in the chamber — was in a backpack hanging from the front door….

Police found several handguns, a shotgun, two rifles and several hundred rounds of ammunition in their Lebanon home, as well as six spent shell casings in the kitchen.

Friends and neighbors told police the couple had been having marital problems, but police knew of no immediate cause of the violence. Scott Hain was living at the family home at the time, Wright said.

Their three children are ages 2, 6 and 10.

Neighbor Aileen Fortna has said the children told another neighbor that “daddy shot mommy.”

The judge who restored Meleanie Hain’s concealed-weapon permit last year questioned her judgment and said she had “scared the devil” out of other parents at the soccer field.

Self-Proclaimed Gun Control “Patriots” Put Blinders on, Close Ranks

I don’t know the answer in regard to gun control. Personally, I like shooting guns. I did a fair amount of target shooting when I was younger and I’ve shot nearly every style and caliber of pistol, rifle and shotgun… and enjoyed it. While I’ve never hunted (and would rather not) I’m not opposed to or bothered by hunting. And I’ll admit that I’m not sure where the line between public (and private) safety ends and personal liberty begins.

But just because I like guns doesn’t blind me to the fact that gun violence is a big, big problem. And it seems to me that the people who could be most helpful in addressing these serious issues refuse to acknowledge that they are obvious and serious issues. These self-proclaimed “patriots” and NRA cult members use their (unfortunately) considerable clout to automatically oppose and shoot down anything that hints of gun control regulation… or anything that might lead to it.

If you read the entries on the forum where Meleanie Hain was active, you’ll see that the PA Patriots refuse (or are unable… unwilling… or scared to…) acknowledge:

… the irony of holding a memorial shoot for the orphans of two shooting victims

… the irony of a mother being killed by that which she professed would keep her safe

… the fact that those who were afraid of the potential of gun violence were, in this case, correct

… that in a country where more than half of all marriages end in divorce, homes stocked with loaded weapons are a seriously hazardous to the health of the entire family.

What’s truly scary is that the PA gun-toting patriots have really learned nothing – and will learn nothing – from the death of their friend. They will simply demonize the distraught husband (“burn in hell” is their online refrain), feel like they are caring and compassionate by donating the hot dog and hamburger proceeds to the orphans, and then stock up on guns and ammo at Heberling’s Gun Shop to bring home to their happy households.

Until the next one qualifies for their very own memorial shoot.

Pro-Life????

I have long joked that the anti-abortion movement should adopt the motto "kill a doctor for life", but it seems they are now whining that Harlan Drake, an anti-abortion activist has been shot.

Of course, you can't ask for gun control. Nevermind the Second Amendment was intended to prevent the militia formed under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution from being disarmed and no private purpose intended. Part of the use of abortion and gun control to keep the US political system as divisive as it is requires perpetuating the lie of an "individual right" (whatever that means) under the Second Amendment. And Heller didn't say shit since the holding said that Heller was able to register the gun provided he passed the registration requirements.

Donald Granberg said it pretty well in his post found at http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1315.

In a “pro-life” society, certain basic needs would be assured, including a nutritious diet, sanitary water, decent shelter from the elements, a safe environment, and humane medical care. Programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, public housing and food stamps are assertions that satisfying these basic human needs should not be determined by one’s ability to pay. Structural violence in society occurs when people’s basic needs go unfulfilled because they are too poor to purchase goods or services.

On the matter of health, it almost goes without saying that the “pro-life” person would refrain from smoking, oppose government subsidy of domestic tobacco production and sale to overseas markets, encourage physical fitness, and donate blood for transfusions to people whose lives might thereby be saved. Also, insofar as a surplus existed, one might also expect the society to provide relief to needy people in other societies in the form of nonmilitary foreign aid, directly providing goods or teaching developmental skills.

The U.S. is a violent society, as reflected in the statistics showing the very high rate at which we kill each other and the frequency with which we go to war. We are a nation armed to the teeth, in terms of civilians owning guns and in terms of the amount we spend on the military.

At both levels there are sincere and well-intentioned people who believe that having more weapons makes for more safety, peace and security. Statistics, however, do not bear this out. There is no evidence that would indicate that a family is less likely to die from gunshot wounds if it keeps guns in the house. In fact, the contrary is true.

What does that mean in practise?

Well, if you are truly pro-life, then you should be supporting health care and really concerned about gun control.

But the issue isn't really "pro-life" or Scalia wouldn't have put his name to that piece of shit called the Heller decision. It is anti-abortion.

So cut the crap folks: if you don't want an abortion, then don't have one.

BUT KEEP OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S PERSONAL DECISIONS: ESPECIALLY PERSONAL DECISIONS REGARDING MEDICAL CARE, WHICH ABORTION IS..

I have a serious problem with the US believing in gun rights, but denying the basic human rights of health care, housing, or education.

What is wrong with the situation where some asshole can show up at a rally where the president will be speaking with an assault rifle, scream tyranny and decry healthcare? Maybe we should send him to Iran or North Korea and learn about Tyranny.

Seriously, any other country and he would have been cuffed face down on the ground. In a tyrannical society they would have shot him without a by your leave.

That would have served him for being enough of an idiot to show up with a weapon. Maybe he will be more intelligent in his NEXT life.

Yanks are such cretins that they don't realise that a couple of people with the same type of rifle carried by the cretin in AZ held the US capitol hostage for a couple of weeks. There are people running around openly carrying guns. These people allow for the carnage at LA Fitness by blocking laws that would prevent access to firearms by psychos because they are Psychos who know they wouldn't be allowed firearms if registration were required.

Unfortunately, the US has this bizarre myth that requires them to attack and harm innocent people. On the other hand, there are people who go bankrupt from serious illnesses because the healthcare system in the states sucks. Yes, the US is #37 in the world as far as actual healthcare services go according to the World Health Organisation. Quote:

In spite of improvements, on various measures of health outcomes the United States appears to rank relatively poorly among OECD countries. Health expenditures, in contrast, are significantly higher than in any other OECD country. While there are factors beyond the health-care system itself that contribute to this gap in performance, there is also likely to be scope to improve the health of Americans while reducing, or at least not increasing spending.

What is wrong with the picture of a person carrying an assault rifle to protest people having health care? Is it just me?

The US has some serious problems if the Second Amendment allows for George Sodini the firearms to kill and maim at LA fitness, yet Heather Sherba, one of Sodini's victims, has to have a car wash to pay for treatment.

Pro-life my arse.

Right wing astro-turf, or why nothing ever really gets done

There is a phenonmenon called astro-turfing by politicians. This is the practise of creating a fake grass roots effect. The Gun Rights/RKBA crowd are notorious for this since they tend to appear like flies to shit when someone makes any sort of comment that some form of regulation is needed regarding the purchase and ownership of firearms.

Their funniest statment usually runs along that there are loads of gun laws on the books right now, why don't we enforce them?

Because these gun laws are toothless due to the fact that the legislators are scared shitless of the "gun rights" lobby. Quite frankly, they aren't worth the paper they are printed on.

And even more foolishness, the agency tasked with enforcing these laws, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF, ATF) is vilified by the gun rights crowd. This agency has no power or funding because the gun rights crowd don't like them. In fact, the gun rights crowd does everything possible to make sure gun laws aren't (a) enforcable or (b) enforced while saying the gun laws on the books need to be enforced!

So, go figure!

From the Center for Responsive Politics's OpenSecrets.org website:

If lawmakers are guilty of tiptoeing around gun control issues, it is because the NRA and other gun rights groups wield an enormous amount of influence in Washington. The source of that influence is money. Gun rights groups have given more than $17 million in individual, PAC and soft money contributions to federal candidates and party committees since 1989. Nearly $15 million, or 85 percent of the total, has gone to Republicans. The National Rifle Association is by far the gun rights lobby's biggest donor, having contributed more than $14 million over the past 15 years. Gun control advocates, meanwhile, contribute far less money than their rivals -- a total of nearly $1.7 million since 1989, of which 94 percent went to Democrats. The leading contributor among gun control advocates is the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, formerly known as Handgun Control, which has given $1.5 million over the past 15 years.

If gun rights groups have a substantial advantage in campaign contributions, they dominate gun control advocates in the area of lobbying. The NRA alone spent nearly $11 million lobbying elected and government officials from 1997 to 2003. But it wasn't the gun rights lobby's biggest spender. That was Gun Owners of America, which spent more than $18 million on lobbing over the same period. By contrast, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence spent under $2 million on lobbying from 1997 to 2003, and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence spent $580,000.

The National Rifle Association has an additional advantage over all other groups in the debate. As a membership organization, the NRA can spend unlimited funds on communications to its 4 million members that identify pro-gun candidates. Those members also contribute millions of dollars in limited donations to the NRA's political action committee, which runs ads aimed at the general public that expressly advocate the election or defeat of a federal candidate. Since 1989, the NRA has spent more than $22 million on communications costs and independent expenditures, with more than $18 million spent in support of Republican candidates.

So, what we are seeing isn't really the popular voice, but the voice of money talking and influencing politics. In fact, Most of the "Second Amendment Scholarship" that has come out in recent years has been funded by the NRA! For example, Nelson Lund is the Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at the George Mason University School of Law. This position was created thanks to a one million dollar commitment to GMU School of Law by the National Rifle Association Foundation announced in 2003.

The Academics for the Second Amendment is funded in part by the National Rifle Association. Academics for the Second Amendment isn't exactly a collection of academic gun nuts--most of its more than 500 members aren't academics! The organization is engaged in a genteel lobbying effort to popularize what many liberals consider the gun nut's view of the Second Amendment: that it confers an individual right to bear arms, not just the right to bear arms in a well-regulated militia. Since it was founded in 1992 by Joseph E. Olson of the Hamline University School of Law, who was on the NRA's National Board of Directors, Academics for the Second Amendment has held by-invitation-only seminars for academics who share its beliefs about the Second Amendment--or might be persuaded to adopt them.

Strangely enough, Academics for the Second Amendment doesn't have a website, but it does have a blog!

In fact, it's fairly hard to find information on this group, but I would put that it does have an incredibly strong connection to the NRA given the lobbying efforts of the "gun rights" crowd. Funny though that Academics for the Second Amendment doesn't give out any info on who belongs to it. The most I could find was this:

A2A is a tax-exempt educational organization recognized under IRC §501(c)(3) [that makes your contributions tax-deductible]. Our primary goal is to give the “right to keep and bear arms” enshrined in the Bill of Rights its proper, prominent place in Constitutional discourse and analysis.

A2A was formed in 1992 by a number of present and former law school teachers, joined by historians, political scientists, and philosophers of government, who believe it is time to stand and be counted in support of a complete Bill of Rights which includes an individual right under the Second Amendment. The organization seeks to foster intellectually honest discourse on the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and, of course, the environment in which academics, judges, politicians, and the public place the rights preserved by the Second Amendment.

Now, wouldn't an organisation with such noble goals work in the open?

Anyway, I plan on delving deeper into the topic of paid "scholarship" and the Second Amendment, but the real point I am making here is that there isn't an "intellectually honest discourse" going on here--especially since money is talking the loudest. In fact, money is drowning out any real discourse or action.

So, I don't need to mention that there was yet another mass shooting near Pittsburgh, PA since even more inactivity will come of it. I might have even been flooded with comments if I allowed them.

Gun Myth #2: Gun control caused the Virginia Tech Shootings

That comment might make sense if the Virginia Tech shootings occurred in Massachusetts, New Jersey, or California.

But they didn't.

It happened in Virgina, a state with liberal gun laws. It was pretty high up there on the NRA good state scale. Brady gives it a grade of 18 out of 100. Virginia must be doing something correct from a "gun rights" standpoint. So, Just how did gun control cause the Virgnina Tech Massacre?

Virginia has shall issue concealed carry. Heck, you can strap on a holster and carry openly in the part of Virginia where the shootings happened. It's not unusual to walk into a gun store in Virgina and see machineguns for sale.

According to the RKBA crowd beliefs, this kind of gun culture should have prevented the shootings.

But would an armed citizen have stopped a lunatic intent on committing suicide on a grand scale? I mean Klebold and Harris engaged in a shoot-out with an armed Sheriff at Columbine. That's a real trained Law enforcement agent.

Didn't stop them from killing 13 people besides themselves.

What would some armed citizen do to stop the violence if a trained cop couldn't?

First off, a private citizen does not have all the legal advantages a policeman does when he engaging in his official duties. The private citizen can legally only protect himself if he, or his family is faced with immediate bodily harm. That harm must be resisted with the least amount of force necessary to stop the attack.

So, if someone is coming at you and you could stop that person with somehting less than deadly force, use of deadly force makes the victim the aggressor!

Not to mention if Rambo with the gun there mistakenly hits someone besides the gun toting maniac. Bimbo with the gun has just added to the chaos, confusion, and carnage. Think of the liability there!

Hero to zero in nothing flat.

Anyway, I've seen in posts that Cho Seung-Hui wasn't a US citizen (in gun groups where this is a thread no less). Not to mention the guy had psychological problems.

Now, shouldn't that have disqualified him from owning a gun?

Nope, Cho Seung-Hui plunked down the money and passed the instant checks to walk away with a Walther P22 and Glock 9 mm handguns, not to mention how many rounds of ammunition.

Now, does that sound like gun control contributed to those shootings to you?