Most offensive to Kirby and others was that one student chose to wear a Confederate flag — for many a grim reminder of slavery and segregation.

…

The student, who is from a state where the flag is more prevalent, did not see a negative connotation, the superintendent said.

…

Maureen Costello, director of the Teaching Tolerance program at the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., said schools would do well to adopt the slogan of physicians: Do no harm.

“Do no harm to a student’s sense of identity,” she said. “Everyone should feel welcome.”

Unless, of course, part of your sense of identity involves a confederate flag…in which case you’re NOT welcome.

Or involves Christianity, or doesn’t support re-defining marriage into something it isn’t, or disapproves of murdering the unborn, or supports the US Constitution, etc. etc. etc.

The overall story is about how horrible it was that a school hosted a “redneck day”. At one point, they mention the evils of stereotyping and how hurtful that can be. Strangely, they didn’t seem to be able to find any offended members of the group that was stereotyped to quote abut how terrible it was, only NAACP and SPLC members.

Funny that.

Do people think it’s going to be banned? Or taxed? Or restricted in some way?

I can understand stocking up on .223 or 9mm or any of the “evil” calibers that may be threatened, but .22lr?

I’ve got about a brick and a half in my ammo locker, but I’ve got 6 new shooters to take to the range in a couple of weeks. I always start new shooters off with .22lr and I’m afraid if I shoot up what I’ve got, I won’t be able to get more.

Anybody know where I can pick up a brick or two of .22lr?

Here’s the video he talks about. Even couldn’t resist getting in the old standby of those who lack facts or evidence to support their position: the dick joke.

Quick tip to Jim Carrey: In the words of Jennifer: “shut your pie hole and dance, monkey!”

INDIANAPOLIS – The IUPUI campus is on lockdown after reports of a man with a gun on campus.

“IUPUI Alert! Man with long gun seen in lot at Barnhill and Vermont. Seek shelter,” a text alert sent by the school just before 1 p.m. read.

…

Professor Trevor Potts told RTV6 on the phone that the mood was tense on campus.

“Everyone’s doing a very good job of staying calm and staying inside,” he said. “I think this speaks to those who would argue for guns on campus, I think this is a rationale for why this is not a good idea, myself.” [Emphasis added - ed]

So…basically…someone THINKS they see someone with a rifle in a parking lot and reports it.

The school administration goes into full blown panic mode and locks the place down for 4 hours.

No rifle or perpetrator is ever found…but this is a reason to continue banning guns on campus…because irrational people panic and overreact when they see something vaguely gun-shaped in the vicinity.

Riiiiiight.

Remember now, this is one of the people we entrust with “educating” our children. If you have kids in college (or in any school for that matter), I hope you’re providing them with adequate counter-indoctrination. This is the kind of idiocy they are exposed to on a daily basis.

Hat tip to bff CB via e-mail.

It’s raining in New Orleans.

No, really.

They’ve got reporters on the scene providing live reports and updates about every 15 minutes.

Excuse me guys…the game isn’t for another 4 days.  Oh…and it’s going to be indoors.

Ridiculous.

In other news…the San Francisco police are already working on their contingency plans to prevent the upstanding denizens of this fine metropolis from burning the town down in the event that the 49ers win.   Or lose.   Or tie.

I feel safer already.

Posted from WordPress for Android

Plus I’ve been traveling and just very busy, so…

But this morning, I ran across this AP opinion piece (masquerading as a story) which makes the claim:

In California, most guns come from Nevada, where there is almost no regulation of firearms, Cutilletta said, and in Arizona, gun owners don’t need a permit.

The story isn’t exactly clear on exactly what they mean by “most guns come from…” so I have to make an assumption here*.

I doubt that they’re talking about LEGAL guns because Californians can’t legally purchase handguns in Nevada by federal law and I’d imagine that state laws preclude them from purchasing rifles across state lines as well (especially since California has a ban on scary looking cosmetic features on rifles).

So I imagine that they’re talking about illegal guns or guns used in crime. That means they must be relying on trace data for this information (which, by the way, the ATF expressly cautions is NOT a proper use of their trace data). This would be VERY surprising to me if true, because most ATF trace data reveals that the vast majority of traced guns originated in the very state they were recovered in.

Let’s find out, shall we? From the 2011 ATF Trace data report on California:

(click to make bigger)

Hmmm. Not only is California itself the source of the vast majority of the guns traced in California, but Nevada isn’t even the source of most of the out of state traces; Arizona is.

So, as I expected, the AP, and the gun control community (sorry for the redundancy) are talking out their butts.

Someone explain to me again why we are supposed to listen to these people about setting policy when they can’t even get their basic facts straight?

*I attempted to contact the organization that made the claim (Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence…formerly Legal Community Against Violence**) but my e-mail was returned as undeliverable. Their web site is still up, so I don’t think they’ve gone defunct, but the e-mail address is dead.

**Why do these groups change their names so often? Do they think it’s their NAME that’s preventing them from getting the support of the general population? In this particular case I have to laud them for the change, they actually changed their name to be MORE descriptive of their agenda rather than less, as is normally the case. They aren’t REALLY against “violence”, they’re against guns, so their new name actually is more descriptive of their goal. Kudos to them for that, even if they do try to mask their agenda in terms of “gun violence” rather than just saying “Law Center Against Guns”.

I don’t remember where I sat it first, but a blogger linked to this earlier in the year…I mentioned it to The Wife, and she took it for action.

Behold, the lethal Bug-a-salt

Posted from WordPress for Android

She works in an eye doctor’s office.

He told them that he was going to get them all iPads for Christmas.

They were all excited.

They received their gifts yesterday:

I’ve seen mention that modern semi-automatic rifles are no different functionally than any other semi-automatic rifle.

I’ve seen mention that there are valid self and home defense purposes for modern rifles.

I’ve seen mention that there are valid hunting purposes for modern rifles.

I’ve seen mention that rifles are rarely used in crimes of any type.

I’ve seen mention that most traditional hunting rifles are more powerful than modern rifles.

But what I haven’t seen is this:

Modern semi-automatic rifles are, by far, the most popular rifles in the US. They are everywhere. Virtually every one at the rifle range has one with them, even if they also have a more traditional pattern rifle as well.

If 80% of the vehicles sold were blue, it would stand to reason that the majority of drunk drivers would “prefer” blue vehicles because they are the easiest to get their hands on just by pure numbers.

If, as a result, legislation were passed banning blue cars, would the incidence of drunk driving go down simply because the preferred color of car for drunk drivers was no longer available?

Silly isn’t it?

So why isn’t silly when we are talking about the cosmetic features of guns rather than the cosmetic features of cars?