Snowflakes in Hell

Or, if CNN is to be believed, I’m going to kill her any minute! Criminal Profiler Pat Brown says that having guns should be a “big red flag” that any guy they are dating is a potential psychopath.

Oh well, at least they didn’t mention that we also all have small penises, as long as they were dragging out the unfounded stereotypes. But someone who does criminal profiling for a living, should at least know that just because criminals have an interest in weapons, that doesn’t translate into an interest in weapons making one a criminal. It’s statements like these that made me reluctant to tell any dates that I owned guns and enjoyed shooting.

UPDATE: Turns out she has a blog. Perusing through, it seems she falls into the “reasonable restrictions” category:

While I personally believe in the right to own guns and the right to carry them to protect yourself, I also believe we have a responsibility as a society and as citizens to be serious about gun ownership. We should be required to have a background check, one which checks criminal, behavioral, and mental status. In other words, this should be a solid check so that people like Cho who exhibit frightening behavior and are on antidepressant meds aren’t considered citizens safe enough to be gun owners. The owner should also have to go through strong training in gun safety and sign a document that accepts full responsibility for the gun, that if the weapon is used by anyone other than the owner in a criminal act, the owner will also be liable for prosecution.

I know plenty of people who are on anti-depressants that are no danger to anybody. She should think about what she’s saying! Is someone who breaks into my house and steals a gun going to cause me to be responsible for his criminal acts? Or does she just mean knowingly transferring a firearm to someone else to commit a crime? In the former case, that’s just ridiculous, in the latter case, that’s already illegal. It’s doubly illegal for those of us in Pennsylvania, and a lot of other states.

UPDATE: If anyone has problems viewing the video, please say so in the comments. I’m aware of at least one person who can’t view it, and if there are others it would help troubleshoot the problem.

UPDATE: Pat Brown has responded in the comments.  In light of her clarifications, I think we can safely say she just misspoke, and didn’t intend to malign gun owners.

Clayton still isn’t buying GOA’s concerns about HR2640.  I’m not either.

Bitter points out a new regulation that may go into effect in Tennessee requiring everyone, regardless of age, to flash ID to buy alcohol. I would actually be willing to agree to have that in Pennsylvania if they abolished the state run liquor system and I could buy a bottle of bourbon in the supermarket. Can’t make the argument that it’ll encourage underage drinking if you have to card everyone! Whipping out the drivers license is less of a burden to me than having to drive to New Jersey or Delaware to get decent hooch.

Of course. all this is going to do is cause more straw purchasing of alcohol. Pretty soon after that, you’ll only be able to buy so much alcohol in a month in order to deal with the problem. But then they’ll start manufacturing it at home like I do [I should be clear here, I mean home brewing, not distilling.  The ATF already has my number for the F part, I don't want any trouble with the A part too :)]. And then…. but oh wait, we already went down this road and it didn’t work. It’s a pity folks can’t make the analogy.

I have to agree with SayUncle that this is not the way to go about things. Any political movement will have its whack jobs. I would point out some examples of anti-gun people coming to my site to leave bozotic comments, but there aren’t any. In order to have bozos, you have to actually have some grass roots. When you don’t have grass roots, you have to resort to paying people to be bozos.

I’m a little skeptical that Ford’s troubles have more to do with their stance on homosexuality than the fact that they aren’t making products that people want to buy.   While I don’t have any issues with Ford’s supporting of homosexual groups myself, I will say I don’t know how much it makes sense for Ford to court gay buyers.   Gays typically are in demographic brackets are that are less likely to be attracted to Ford products.

I think it’s wise for corporations to stay out of controversial political issues as much as they can, otherwise they shouldn’t act surprised when they create PR problems for themselves.   I have no problem with Ford supporting groups that are promoting gay marriage, but people who have no issues with the idea of gay marriage are very much in the minority right now.   Any company that wades into that issue, one way or another, does so at their own peril.

I totally dig the concept of a Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) in .17HMR.   I’d buy one!  How hard is it to get a SOT for making SBRs?  Maybe things would go easier with the budget committee if the gun hobby were bringing in money :)

The signing of a bill to make criminals out of ordinary citizens who fail to report a stolen in Connecticut is making its way around the blogosphere, but it’s always good to read the actual law.   You can read the whole act here.

(a) Any person who lawfully possesses an assault weapon under sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a or a firearm, as defined in section 53a-3, that is lost or stolen from [him] such person shall report the loss or theft to [law enforcement authorities] the organized local police department for the town in which the loss or theft occurred or, if such town does not have an organized local police department, to the state police troop having jurisdiction for such town within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered or should have discovered the loss or theft. Such department or troop shall forthwith forward a copy of such report to the Commissioner of Public Safety. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the loss or theft of an antique firearm as defined in subsection (b) of section 29-37a.

Most of these bills, including the one in Pennsylvania, are specific to require reporting after discovery of the theft.   That doesn’t mean you need to constantly inventory.   However, if you notice the part I highlighted in this bill, you will see a big problem with this one.  What defines “should have discovered?”  Who gets to decide whether I should have?   Either you’ve discovered it or you haven’t.   This is RIPE for abuse.

Any person who fails to make a report required by subsection (a) of this section within the prescribed time period shall commit an infraction and be fined not more than ninety dollars for a first offense and be guilty of a class D felony for any subsequent offense, except that, if such person intentionally fails to make such report within the prescribed time period, such person shall be guilty of a class C felony. Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section for the first offense shall not lose such person’s right to hold or obtain any firearm permit under the general statutes.

So it goes from a summary offense to a class D felony on the second count?  Absolutely ridiculous.   If I get two guns stolen, and I discover it two weeks later, and prosecutor decides I should have discovered it, I’m facing a felony count?   Pardon me if I don’t say “screw you” to the politicians in Connecticut.  Connecticuit has always been a moderately anti-gun state.   Looks like they are moving to join their neighbors in being a place that likes to find excuses to lock up law abiding gun owners.

It also adds a new crime of firearms trafficking:

(a) A person is guilty of firearms trafficking if such person, knowingly and intentionally, directly or indirectly, causes one or more firearms that such person owns, is in possession of or is in control of to come into the possession of or control of another person whom such person knows or has reason to believe is prohibited from owning or possessing any firearm under state or federal law. (b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class C felony if such person, on or after the effective date of this section, sells, delivers or otherwise transfers five or fewer firearms, and a class B felony if such person, on or after the effective date of this section, sells, delivers or otherwise transfers more than five firearms.

This is a bad law, and they are trying to pass similar legilsation in Pennsylvania.  I will continue to fight it here.   My current state rep supports the anti-theft provisions.   I am going to write him about what has just happened in Connecticut, and tell him to make sure it does not happen here.

SayUncle only got PG-13:

Strangely enough it was gun appearing so many times that did it. I’m guessing it didn’t go back far enough to pick on the stripper guest blogging.

Conservative Scalawag has some good posts lately:

Which hot swimsuit model would make you need a cold shower? I’d take Miss Israel over the Burkhini chick any day.

This is totally friggin awesome. I would never buy an RV, except maybe for this one.