“When I watched Easy Rider (1969) it immediately reminded me of Woodstock (1969), an event I had hoped Lyndon Johnson would carpet bomb. Had he done so, roughly 100% of today’s college educators would… not have been. ” — Rodge
Not much I can add to that, other than to note that (under his wishful scenario) a goodly number of our current Democrat politicians might likewise not have been.
“So what we see is that there is no direct correlation at the global level between firearm ownership and violence.” — Anna Alvazzi del Frate (program director, Small Arms Survey)
There are several interesting snippets contained in this study, which blessedly seems to be focused on data and not an agenda.
The one that’s got the most airplay has been of course that the United States constitutes nearly half of all the guns held in private hands — yeah, I know, we need to do better — but the quote above is, I think, the clincher in the study. This is because in the grand scheme of things, who and how many gun owners there are is just a statistic; the more important information is how those gun owners use their guns — and the most interesting observation is that once you exclude military gun use, the most common use for privately-held guns, even with crime included in the incidence, is suicide.
And of course because suicide is going to occur regardless — whether by guns, pills, hanging, falls, jumping in front of trains, whatever — it’s quite clear that including gun suicide in “violent crime” statistics (which is what most of the would-be gun confiscators do) is a mendacious device. (I know, when someone eats their gun there’s a violent outcome because brain splatter, but it’s hardly a more violent outcome than, say, hitting the sidewalk after a jump from a height of twenty stories, where no gun is involved.)
It’s a fascinating read, and it’s so clinical that not even TIME magazine can spin it into a Schumeresque sound bite. In fact, the only reasonable sound bite from the study is the conclusion at the top of this post, which is why it’s the Quote Of The Day.
“If Americans are going to be lectured on how much more wonderful life outside the US is, these critics at least ought to be asked to comment on why it is that so many more Europeans are moving to the United States, compared to the other way around.” — Tyler Durden
Sent to me by Mr. Free Market, this piece looks at the numbers underpinning the above statement.
So when Lefties scream about moving to Europe after some unspeakable triggering (caused by, say, Trump winning the presidency) and they do no such thing, it’s either because they’re fucking blowhards [Q.E.D.] or else they looked at Europe and discovered that it’s not quite the Paradise they imagined, e.g. because of taxes.
“These guys can talk about banning assault rifles and banning guns, but when it comes and happens to them, they’re going to wish they had one.” — Scott Reardean, after stopping a carjacker.
Story here. My only quibble is that between the two gun owners, they somehow failed to shoot the damn goblin.
“Leftist propaganda is usually split into two halves. The first half invokes a victim group of some sort, for whom we are expected to feel sympathy for their plight. The second half invokes hate towards a group that is portrayed as deliberately doing down, punishing or disadvantaging the first group. This process is a kind of emotional dialectic – a thesis and antithesis of oppressor and victimhood. Whilst the sympathy of the Left for the victim group sometimes comes across as strained, contrived or even hypocritical, the hate is expressed in a heartfelt and visceral way. This technique is one of the reasons why a debate with a Leftist nearly always departs from any cool rationality and descends into emotional irrationality and contradiction of terms. Emotions are used in this way because emotions are very, very powerful political tools for manipulation of peoples’ actions. Whole revolutions have been justified using this technique.” — David Eyles, Country Squire Magazine
Read the entire article: it’s magnificent.
From Mandy Baldwin at Country Squire Magazine :
“Talking of sex, ladies, if you don’t like what’s being dished up, try varying the menu, instead of betraying private foibles to anyone who’ll listen. How would you like your bits being the subject of gossip? He’s not a rapist just because you’ve gone off him. If he makes your flesh crawl in a bad way, you don’t make a feminist statement by hanging around. Leave, make your own life, let him make his.
“After all, one woman’s mouldy chipolata is another woman’s prime beef-steak, and chances are, he’s equally miserable: not everyone enjoys being shackled to someone who pulls a face like a bull-dog chewing a wasp at the merest hint of a Morning Glory.”
That’s some priceless imagery, right there.