Rebane's Ruminations
July 2015
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

This is in the Letters to the Future department.  We recently had two more multiple killings in the US – one man killed two and wounded nine with a handgun in a Louisiana movie theater, another two young brothers stabbed five family members to death in their Oklahoma home (more here).  This follows the murder of five military service members in Tennessee the week before.  And it wasn’t that long ago before more multiple murders were committed, and before that even more.  There definitely seems to be a correlated sequence of multiple killings from unexpected ambush going on in our land.  And none of them are crimes of forceful takings; there was no robbery or confiscation of material things by the killers, they just wanted to kill as many people as possible before (usually) taking their own lives or being killed by police.

All of these killings receive extensive media attention.  Regular programming is interrupted with detailed reports, more often than not containing very little additional information but repeating in great detail what was reported before.  The media outlets seem to be in a frenzy to compete with each other as they broadcast live from the crime scenes the very latest developments no matter how insignificant, just to have another excuse to comfort their audiences so that they will not miss a jot or jiggle about the latest tragedy.

The killers seem to be of two distinct groups – the mentally weak/deranged and the ideologically driven.  The Tennessee killings were definitely motivated by Islamic globalism, and was the latest of a long string of such inspired killings in America.  The Louisiana killing had components of both a deranged ideology and a deranged psychology.  The Oklahoma killings were committed for unknown reasons by two deranged sons of a larger family, and seem to have no greater motivation than some intra-family tensions.  Yet they all have a common thread in that whatever the dissatisfaction was, it was best solved by multiple killings that would draw a known measure of national and international attention to the killers and their causes.

To me it becomes more clear with every episode that such killing sprees are triggered and, perhaps even motivated by the coverage that the previous occasions of murder and mayhem received.  The common mentality of the killers seems to be that their final ‘moment in the sun’ is clearly worth the loss of their lives and/or lifelong freedom.  The question quickly arises how would the frequency and magnitude of such killings be affected if they each did not receive the media circus that each has to date launched.  Would they continue to be so attractive to the next potential killer if the ‘glory component’ were removed or greatly reduced?

When you consider the number of borderline deranged or ideologically primed people out there who are drawn and positively impacted by today’s lurid and drawn out coverage of these events, it staggers the imagination about what is yet to come.  We can get a sense of the numbers when we consider poll results of our indigenous Muslim population.  The results from a poll by the liberal Migration Policy Institute are reported here.

To arrive at an estimate of the deranged one need only to consult the ‘Mental Illness Facts and Numbers’ published by the National Institute of Mental Health (Download Mentalillness_factsheet).  It would be extremely conservative to assume that in the US at least one person in 100,000 is in a mental state that a continuing reportage of single person carnage would trigger them to seriously consider perpetrating one such event themselves in order to bring their own condition to some state of conclusion or resolution.  If we expand that into a population of 320 million, then there are at least 3,200 of such desperate individuals out there looking at the news and seeing their own vindication in a similar act.  Out of such a population, it is not unreasonable to accept that two or three per year would commit to such a crime, and at least one would proceed undetected to execution.  As the NIMH report indicates, the actual numbers are most likely higher.

So the question stands – do we entice our own mentally ill and religious zealots to commit mass murders by the exhaustive coverage of such events.  I believe we do.  But if that is the problem, then the cure is not clear in a liberal nation whose population is in the large stimulated by circuses rich in death and destruction.  The state cannot readily shut off such reporting, the demand for which has become a cultural imperative for us.

[26jul15 update]  As expected, our liberal commenters would rather not address the point of the above commentary, but immediately rewind and replay their sermons on ‘gun violence’.  This relatively new term is used today by people given to socialism and central planning as a blanket pejorative in their unceasing efforts to disarm America’s civilian population.  One typical approach is to cite the average number of people whose death is caused by firearms, the implied point for the light thinkers being that if we only removed guns from the law abiding population, then this many deaths would be avoided and lives saved.

Today public sentiment dictates that their approach to banning guns must be surreptitious and piecemeal, essentially proscribing the legal usage of guns, making their acquisition range from difficult to impossible, and reducing the availability of ammunition and other gun related equipments.  But their fundamental tack is still to add more gun laws to the books to augment and complicate the unenforced laws already in place.

Apropos to that, Associated Press reports that almost all the recent mass shootings were committed by people whose possession and acquisition of guns was already prohibited by existing laws (more here).  The killers obtained their murder weapons either because government did not enforce a law, or the law’s enforcement went awry through one or more bureaucratic mistakes.  Nevertheless, our progressives’ eternal solution is to pass yet more laws which are guaranteed to suffer the same fate at the hands of criminals, crazies, and the dedicated combatants.  And so goes our national gun debate in 2015.

Posted in , , ,

94 responses to “Do We Invite Carnage? (updated 26jul15)”

  1. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    “Are we seriously talking about the contribution of the media to the carnage while regularly denying here the role easy access to guns, large capacity magazines, and the modern interpretation of the second amendment plays?”
    Steven Frisch writes as if the 2nd Amendment only recently was thought of as conferring an individual right, but there are famous opinions to the contrary which clearly show they were so widely believed as to not require a SCOTUS taking a case:
    From one infamous majority opinion:
    “[This] would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased…to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”
    Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford, March 6, 1857
    Taney didn’t like the idea of Negroes With Attitude and Guns, both of which would be a natural consequence of granting Dred Scott his due.
    I’d like to assure Frisch that, were he King and tried to trash the Bill of Rights as he has detailed, he would be the first one up against the wall after the revolution was over.

    Like

  2. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 July 2015 at 01:45 PM
    Sorry, no Wiki here Todd, I made the list up all by myself.
    What I find amazing is how stupid Todd and Don appear when they just say shit off the top of their heads.

    Like

  3. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    What I find amazing is how stupid Frisch appears when he writes shit after giving it what passes for thought in his world.

    Like

  4. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 26 July 2015 at 02:05 PM
    I will gladly let you stand with your peers Gregory 🙂

    Like

  5. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    In the matter of restrictive gun laws, it would appear Bernie Sanders is one of my peers, though I wouldn’t put him past supporting onerous gun restrictions on the law abiding if he didn’t have to win any more elections in his home state.

    Like

  6. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Honestly, Steve Frisch is the most ignorant poster on this blog. My goodness, hide the children.

    Like

  7. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    There is nothing in my list posted above that has not either been implemented at local levels in the US before or has not stood the test of a Constitutional challenge.
    There should be nothing in that list that responsible law abiding gun owners disagree with.

    Like

  8. Don Bessee Avatar
    Don Bessee

    HAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAH! Frischy is always good for a laugh, sounds like you would be happier in Serbia! frischy @ 157, there are no posts from me on this thread braniac. LOL Perhaps the other thread noting your perception of self-perfection condition that makes for such a brittle exterior covering the usual vacant interior that causes the repetition of long discredited socialist talking points. Ya, sounds like a crack in the in the candy coating for sure. 😉

    Like

  9. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Steven Frisch | 26 July 2015 at 02:35 PM
    So if all on your list are already law or proved Constitutional? You apparently can’t read the question of you. What would you do was the question. Once again proving your are the dumbest person posting here.

    Like

  10. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    By Frisch’s 2:35 we could reimpose slavery and cite Dred Scott v. Sandford as a justification.
    Steven Frisch, CEO of the wretchedly misnamed Sierra Business Council, none of the laws you enumerate in your 1:26 would pass muster in the modern SCOTUS save #5 and that is already pretty much the law.

    Like

  11. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 July 2015 at 03:06 PM
    You’re an idiot Todd. They are not widely nor universally applied.

    Like

  12. fish Avatar
    fish

    Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 July 2015 at 01:26 PM
    1) Destroy all guns confiscated and adjudicated rather than keeping them in the marketplace
    This would be fine except I doubt that local law enforcement would forgo the revenue from these sales. It could be done very easily administratively but frequently isn’t. It behooves the monarch to keep the kings men happy.
    You would also have to ensure that weapons weren’t seized capriciously and destroyed without due process.
    2) Ban all assault style weapons….period
    You’d have to settle on a workable definition. Democratic legislators seem completely incapable of crafting legislation that actually gets rid of “assault weapons”…..they are pretty good at criminalizing non lethal cosmetic features……maybe this is another ploy to continuously fail upward legislatively.
    Perhaps the king will be more effective.
    3) Ban all high capacity magazines
    Largely pointless but hey you’re King Steve and the monarch gets to be capricious.
    4) Require a certificate of ownership be issued in advance for all gun sales
    I’m not sure that I understand the rationale for this at all.
    4) Require a 30 day minimum check for ALL arms purchses (no check conducted no sale)
    Again, I’m not sure that I understand the rationale for this. In California it’s seven days….again it seems rather arbitrary. Perhaps the gears of the bureaucracy just turn a little slower in Steveghanistan?
    5) Ban sales at gun shows and from private parties–sales would be required to go through a dealer
    His lordship will probably just create a black market.
    6) Require registration of all guns…ALL
    To what end other than eventual confiscation?
    7) Ban public carry of firearms (except concealed weapons in tightly controlled situations)
    Interested to know what those “tightly controlled situations” would be? Protecting the liege perhaps?
    8) Require that ‘collectable’ firearms be disabled
    Sound thinking my lord…there has been a rash of musket related crime as of late!
    9) Require showing certificate of ownership for the purchase of ammunition
    Again his lordship is going to make a certain set of people fabulously wealthy from black market ammunition sales. I hope to be one of these people.
    10) Ban ammunition designed to penetrate body armor.
    Hollow point ammunition only sire then….excellent choice! I’m sure your subjects will approve.

    Like

  13. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 26 July 2015 at 03:13 PM
    Gregory, how nice of you to name my employer. I wonder why you would do that? What does it have to do with anything we are talking about here?

    Like

  14. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    As a founder and current CEO, you are your employer, Steven.
    Your ‘all guns must be registered’ is already unconstitutional… if you are a felon or any other person forbidden arms, your guns are protected from needing registration due to 5th Amendment protections against self incrimination.

    Like

  15. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Regarding ‘no private sales, all must go through dealers’… look at the fine print. Most all of the “sales” that would start going through dealers would be transfers between family members.

    Like

  16. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Fish and Gregory have demolished the Steve Frisch, Letterman Top Ten and very handily. When Frisch said they (the ten) were already on the books or constitutional, he showed his ignorance of the questions asked. Then in response to his inanity he namecalls. I think the readers here can see his total ignorance and childish behavior are his stock and trade.

    Like

  17. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 26 July 2015 at 03:47 PM
    I think you are kind of showing how little you know Greg. I work for a corporation not for myself.

    Like

  18. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Gregory is totally right. Frisch is his own non-profit boss. Just look at those 990’s. If you can make out what they mean then you should be a IRS agent.

    Like

  19. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Steven Frisch, it’s not like you’re one of the worker bees at the Sierra Business Council hired off the street for a quarter of your pay. You are a proud co-founder and current CEO, correct? And because of your position, people like the Mayor of Sacramento sign op eds with you concerning public matters.
    You don’t get to turn off the public persona just because you want to espouse a radical fringe position on a blog and make no mistake, it is a radical fringe position, even for California.

    Like

  20. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Oh, thank you Steven F. As I thought. Once you have to actually try to come up with a specific you fall on your face. How would any of your anti-Constitutional laws have prevented Sandy Hook?
    Seems our little nut job forgot to follow the existing rules and just offed mom and made off with the weapons.
    Naughty, naughty – didn’t follow the Steven Frisch rules. Steve will be just livid. And the children are still dead, but hey – we gots all these new rules! Doesn’t that make the parents of the dead children feel waaaaay better? Of course we don’t want to have any guns at the schools. At least not at the govt run schools. The president is happy his daughters go to a swell private school and there’s a rumour that maybe folks with machine guns hang around the place.
    So his kids are safe. Sorry about yours.
    Steve, really – you jump from one statistic to the next and conflate them all with out thinking. Stop using the cut and paste and use your brain.
    First you cite statistics on ‘gun violence’ and then jump to murder. Not the same thing, my friend.
    ‘Gun violence’ includes suicide, (large capacity mags mean a lot here) drunken fools accidentally shooting themselves or their kids or their buddy and so forth.
    Like most folks, you have no education on fire arms, save what you read in the LSM or Daily Kos.
    Really, Steve – “I never said reducing guns would reduce the huge number of people killed by hammers every year.”
    Uh – who said you did? Please try to stick to the subject of reducing random violence.

    Like

  21. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Ok, everyone knows it is easier to kill a few people with a gun than with a ball ping hammer or a fireplace poker. I would use a tomahawk and long knife, but that is not the preferred instrument of mayhem used by murders or terrorists or the criminally insane. Every so often, someone uses an explosive device or just plain drives a car down a crowded sidewalk. But yeah, guns are easier and do a splendid job of whacking folks.
    But, why are these formerly rare events becoming so commonplace. Is it something in the water (for the non-Muslim attacks)?? My answer is the blanket statement that the days are becoming more evil as predicted. Not a very satisfactory answer I admit. It is no consolation to those who wish to return to the days of Ozzie and Harriet. The first man born murdered his brother (Cain and Abel) and it was not called The Wild Wild West for nuthin’.
    Remember that mother than put her kids in a car and pushed the vehicle into a pond about 10 years ago? Shocking. Made international news and here in the States the debate raged for days as to why. It was almost unbelievable at the time that any mother was capable of doing such an unthinkable thing to her children. Some (especially the women’s groups) blamed the husband for not stopping it while he was at work. What is my point??? My point is nowadays, if some crazy Mom drowns her kids in the bathtub we just read it and weep with no week long story reharsh and experts spouting their opinions on CNN. We are conditioned and it happens all the time now. Just a news blurb.
    Why? Why all the gang bangers and family murders and shot-em up bang bang stories daily?? Because of the breakdown of societal structure. Because of the devaluation of life. Because of the “do your own thing” attitude. Because of drugs, mental and emotional illness, because of too many rats in the cage, because of a feeling of isolation, because of this feeling of being lost and friendless on a hostile planet. Because of a lack of love in one’s heart. We live in a time when evil reigns supreme. Solution: Kill everybody. Real solution? Prepare for it getting worse. Our government is.

    Like

  22. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Regarding the Wild West, I believe Tucson was never as dangerous as Boston.
    My comments on King Steve’s proclamations:
    1) Destroy all guns confiscated and adjudicated rather than keeping them in the marketplace
    Bad gun! Bad gun!
    Putting firearms out of the financial reach of the poor, especially blacks, has been a feature of US gun control efforts from the start, and all this does is raise prices for used guns. It would also likely destroy a number of irreplaceable firearms with historic or sentimental value. Granddad’s M1911 from WWI or WWII, perhaps.
    2) Ban all assault style weapons….period
    “Assault weapon” is a US political fabrication, an intentional conflation of single shot per trigger pull semi-auto/autoloading rifles and pistols with machine guns that are cosmetically similar. “Assault rifles” date from around WWII and have never been legal for sale in California. “Assault weapon” as a term of art was from the start designed to make enough people think the Assault Weapons Ban was banning machine guns, when they were already effectively banned already, with new production halted (for civilian sales in the few states that allow them) during the Clinton years.
    And, King Steve, after telling your subjects to throw away these weapons… were you intending to actually compensate owners for the actual market value before the proclamation?
    3) Ban all high capacity magazines
    This only affects self defense uses. Folks intending to kill innocents can carry as many 10 round (purely subjective, the most common legislated “high capacity” number) magazines they want. A self defense weapon will likely only have one or two at hand. And by banning, I assume King Steve would want to force owners of such legislated contraband to dispose of them without compensation.
    4) Require a certificate of ownership be issued in advance for all gun sales
    Obviously just to make it a bigger hassle to gain ownership.
    4) (sic… two #4’s) Require a 30 day minimum check for ALL arms purchases (no check conducted no sale)
    And if someone is wanting to buy a gun for an immediate threat against their lives, they can just hope their would-be killer has a full schedule. This hurdle of Frisch’s assumes there is no valid need to have a gun, including defense of self and family.
    I’m not sure there is any good reason whatsover to make someone wait 30 days if they already lawfully possess one or more guns. Steve?
    An aside… US v. Miller, the very SCOTUS case that found the big national firearms act (1934) to be constitutional, had Miller claim a self defense need for the sawed off shotgun when he lost a lower court case. The SCOTUS hearing was without defense counsel speaking for Miller because he was murdered in the meantime and his estate didn’t hire an attorney so for 80 years, we got laws based on a precedent found without anyone arguing the case against the Federal attorney. In a further irony, one of the justices opined that unless there was evidence that the sawed off was usable in a “well regulated militia” they couldn’t rule the 2nd applied (there was no one to present such evidence, and military historians can point to numerous examples) and, with the biggest double whammy… those military-styled weapons Frisch wants to ban outright are exactly what that justice would have found constitutionally protected 80 years ago.
    5) Ban sales at gun shows and from private parties–sales would be required to go through a dealer
    So, I have to go to a dealer to give or lend a gun to my adult son?
    6) Require registration of all guns…ALL
    Except those possessed by felons, other violent criminals, the insane, the underage. They can’t be convicted of registration violations.
    7) Ban public carry of firearms (except concealed weapons in tightly controlled situations)
    Like in Chicago… if you aren’t a crony of the Mayor, forget about it.
    8) Require that ‘collectable’ firearms be disabled
    Bad gun! Bad gun! These are undetectable in crime stats.
    9) Require showing certificate of ownership for the purchase of ammunition
    Again, just makes it harder to own and use your firearms for valid purposes.
    10) Ban ammunition designed to penetrate body armor.
    This one really is insidious… as these proposed laws effectively ban most hunting ammunition and at least one, banning any “Teflon” bullet, actually resulted in removing a handgun cartridge that was designed to not only not go through body armor but also not through walls.
    It may well be that all of the above have, at one time or another, been found to be constitutional… before the 2nd was fully incorporated into the Bill of Rights and found to bind state and local governments, but the current movement is repeal of state and local laws that infringe on the now settled law that the 2nd is an individual right to own and carry guns. Just how much owning and carrying can be regulated before it would be considered an unconstitutional infringement is the current task of state and federal courts.
    Steve missed a couple from the all time hit parade of laws to catch those without criminal intent… mandatory trigger locks, requiring locked metal storage boxes, etc. Anything to make it harder to actually use a lawfully possessed firearm, even if one’s door is being broken down by thugs during a home invasion.
    Steven Frisch, just wondering… is the “Sierra Business Council” posted as a gun free zone? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Like

  23. fish Avatar
    fish

    From the city “Where Black Lives Matter”…….
    and where….despite recent court rulings it remains difficult to legally purchase a gun.
    July To Date
    Shot & Killed: 45
    Shot & Wounded: 229
    Total Shot: 274
    Total Homicides: 47
    The Weekend’s Stupidity
    Shot & Killed: 7
    Shot & Wounded: 34
    Total Shot: 41
    Total Homicides: 7
    Year To Date
    Shot & Killed: 234
    Shot & Wounded: 1319
    Total Shot: 1553
    Total Homicides: 268
    I wonder if they run an excursion bus….much like the casino buses we all see on the highway….to buy guns in the hinterlands surrounding Chiraq?

    Like

  24. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Now the poor gal who handed herself in jail is the cause celeb of the anti-cops. I am sorry she did that to herself but the spin the race hustlers are using is so farcical. The cop was initially polite to her but she did not obey the commands and was out of control. But as Sheriff Clark of Milwaukee says (he is black), obey the commands and be courteous. All will end well. Don’t and all hell breaks loose.
    I wonder why Al and Jesse are not saying the same things about the Arab who murdered five white military last week. As they stay quiet on that, their cred level drops way way down.

    Like

  25. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    1) Destroy all guns confiscated and adjudicated rather than keeping them in the marketplace.
    Yes, with roughly just under one gun per person in the US, and with many jurisdictions embracing a SOP where confiscated guns are sold and end up back on the market, I believe the policy should be that once guns are confiscated and adjudicated (note that, because if jurisdictions wanted to save collectible guns for historic purposes they could) the guns should be destroyed, thus INCREASING THE COST of buying a gun. I don’t really care if the cost of a gun goes up.
    2) Ban all assault style weapons….period
    Assault weapons that fire multiple rounds with a single trigger pull, that are designed for urban warfare and anti-personnel uses rather than legitimate hunting purposes, should be banned, period. No more AR-15’s that make little men feel like soldiers.
    3) Ban all high capacity magazines
    I don’t really give a damn if Greg thinks this is arbitrary–I don’t want the murderer of my friends to be able to have a 100 pound magazine for an altered or even a legal assault weapon, I want them to have to change magazines more often. And yes, I don;t care if we ‘compensate’ owners of high capacity magazines for them. Make them illegal and confiscate and destroy them as we find them.
    4) Require a certificate of ownership be issued in advance for all gun sales.
    This is analogous to to the gun ownership certification required in Great Britain and Germany. Registering owners rather than guns means before potential owners are even eligible to purchase a gun an initial screen for mental health and criminal behavior is conducted. If it creates a two step process to purchase a legal firearm, I got no problem with that.
    5) Require a 30 day minimum check for ALL arms purchses (no check conducted no sale)
    30 days is a more realistic period of time for law enforcement agencies to conduct the investigation they need to do to ensure that mistakes are not made. If someone has a safety issue in the mean time they could go to law enforcement and report the problem. In cases where an interim carry permit needs to be issued to provide safety that could be done, but it would be done under the auspices of law enforcement. If you think your ex husband is going to kill you you should go to law enforcement anyway.
    6) Ban sales at gun shows and from private parties–sales would be required to go through a dealer.
    Yes, I don’t really give a damn if this means that Dad can;t give junior an AR-15—the kid needs to get registered, issued a permit, and the sale needs to be controlled.
    7) Require registration of all guns…ALL
    So if we need to change the Constitution to do this, or return to a more rational interpretation of the 2nd amendment, so be it.
    8) Ban public carry of firearms (except concealed weapons in tightly controlled situations)
    There is no reason for people to be walking into a Denny’s or a Walmart with an AR strapped to their back. It is bullshit anti-social behavior. If one needs to get a concealed carry permit for safety let them go to their local police and get one.
    9) Require that ‘collectable’ firearms be disabled
    This is a market limitation measure. As guns get more expensive the utility of collectable forearms will increase and make them more attractive for the commission of crimes. Disabling could be done without damaging the firearm.
    10) Require showing certificate of ownership for the purchase of ammunition
    Yes, this makes it harder to use ammunition for legitimate purposes, but it also makes it harder to use ammo for illegitimate purposes. If you are a legal certificate holder it should slow you down by about 30 seconds. If you are not legal it means you have to go through someone else and makes it criminal behavior.
    11) Ban ammunition designed to penetrate body armor.
    Stands on its own just ask any cop.

    Like

  26. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Oh, I changed the numbering, thanks Greg.

    Like

  27. fish Avatar
    fish

    Posted by: Steven Frisch | 28 July 2015 at 07:49 AM
    Well good luck with your bold proposals King Steve.

    Like

  28. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Steve Frisch’s proposals are not his. He is always a cut and paste guy and a WIKI fanatic. My guess, the Communist Manifesto or some other high level coomie book. He seems to be a follower of Marx and I don’t mean the brothers.

    Like

  29. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Communist Manifesto Todd? You made a grievous error my good man. I will attempt to correct that for you. You either meant Agenda 21 or the Obama Doctrine. There, it’s fixed.
    What I cannot understand is all this hullabaloo over “Bang, your time has expired.” Agenda 21 can only work in theory and reality if we decrease the population. Now that we have people taking it upon themselves to implement this Enlightened Vison by doing their own population control, the lefties get their panties all crinkled in a wad. Go figure.
    Anybody know if Chicago’s population is increasing or decreasing?

    Like

  30. fish Avatar
    fish

    Posted by: Bill Tozer | 28 July 2015 at 08:57 AM
    Don’t know with any certainty William but given Chicago propers impending financial problems and routine crime related weekend antics my guess would be decreasing.

    Like

  31. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Steve, one small teenie weinnie point you overlooked. I once owned a 1866 US standard issue Calvary rifle. Single shot. I drove around with that in the back of the van down by the river without problems. You see, the ATF declared a gun that old was NOT a firearm. Nay, it was legally classified as an antique. To me, it was a historical antique well worth it’s weight. Think there are more laws you have to get changed along with a total rewrite of the 2nd Amendment than you may be aware of.
    Guns don’t kill people, but antiques sure did.
    Heck, why stop at the 2nd Amendment. Make it unconstitutional not to have a private wind farm. Hmmmm. Not a bad idea. I know, call it a tax, not a mandate.
    I could peddle solar powered ball caps with little plastic propellers on top. Beenie and Cycil together again.

    Like

  32. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Here you go. Not a bad idea if it were Constitutional. Let’s leave ole grannie and the remaining WW2 vets defenseless. It’s for their own good. Joe K will not read this for sure.
    http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/07/28/obama-pushing-largest-gun-grab-american-history-nra

    Like

  33. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Let’s start with the most idiotic Frisch statement first:
    “2) Ban all assault style weapons….period
    Assault weapons that fire multiple rounds with a single trigger pull, that are designed for urban warfare and anti-personnel uses rather than legitimate hunting purposes, should be banned, period. No more AR-15’s that make little men feel like soldiers.”

    No such thing exists, Frisch. What you are describing are NFA Machine Guns, the most heavily controlled firearm in the USA. Banned in California and many other states since 1934 and in the few states that do allow them, it’s only after the Federal government passes them with an equivalent of a Secret clearance investigation.
    NONE of the weapons covered by the last “assault weapons ban” fired “multiple rounds with one trigger pull” as they were all one round per trigger pull, semi-automatic designs that can’t be fire six times any faster than a revolver can.
    Steven Frisch, you seem to be just as informed about firearms as you are about atmospheric physics. That, and the 2nd Amendment was never about hunting.

    Like

  34. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Continuing, it’s my understanding that licensed NFA machine guns have never been used in a crime, and constitute a tiny percentage of the guns in private hands in the USA.
    “1) Destroy all guns confiscated and adjudicated rather than keeping them in the marketplace.
    Yes, with roughly just under one gun per person in the US, and with many jurisdictions embracing a SOP where confiscated guns are sold and end up back on the market, I believe the policy should be that once guns are confiscated and adjudicated (note that, because if jurisdictions wanted to save collectible guns for historic purposes they could) the guns should be destroyed, thus INCREASING THE COST of buying a gun. I don’t really care if the cost of a gun goes up.”

    Of course you care, Steve. Your schemes are designed to make the cost of guns go up! Exactly the same as the old “Ban the Saturday Night Special” campaigns as whites knew the “Saturday Night” being discussed was (please pardon the language, retained for historical authenticity), was a “Niggertown Saturday night”. Face it, Steve, you just want to disarm the poor first, and it was blacks in the South that bore the brunt of the first gun control laws in the country. Ban the cheap guns that an average black man might be able to afford, and you’ve won.
    A poor man or woman wanting to protect themselves and their family from threats real or imagined have an absolute and individual right to keep and use a gun, as real and every bit as important as the right of the rich to hire bodyguards.

    Like

  35. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    OK, we’ve established Frisch has no clue (or at least had no clue) as to the difference between machine guns and fake machine guns, so the “assault weapon” disinformation campaign to blur the distinctions hit him right between the eyes.
    “3) Ban all high capacity magazines
    I don’t really give a damn if Greg thinks this is arbitrary–I don’t want the murderer of my friends to be able to have a 100 pound [sic] magazine for an altered or even a legal assault weapon, I want them to have to change magazines more often. And yes, I don;t care if we ‘compensate’ owners of high capacity magazines for them. Make them illegal and confiscate and destroy them as we find them.

    A 100 pound magazine would be hard to carry… let’s assume Frisch meant 100 round magazine, such as the Colorado shooter had with him. First, the big problem there was the pretend gun free zone of the movie theater, and there’s a reason the military doesn’t use 100 round drum magazines. They tend not to work reliably and while the Colorado mental case was smart enough to travel far enough to find a “gun free zone” to use as a killing field, he was dumb enough to choose unreliable equipment. That 100 round magazine jammed early on. Ten 10 round mags would have served his purposes better.
    Thank Zarquon for incompetent homicidal maniacs, many more would have been killed had he just stuck with pump action shotguns loaded with OO buckshot.
    Just think… one infamous crime perpetrated by one disturbed individual, using, among other items, one faulty 100 round drum magazine that jammed and saved some lives as a result, and Frisch thinks that means any magazine larger than 10 should be banned unless owned by local, state or federal agencies.
    I think just about everyone would accept that as arbitrary.

    Like

  36. Steven Frisch Avatar
    Steven Frisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 28 July 2015 at 09:40 PM
    You are entitled to your ignorant, twisted opinion Goodnight 🙂

    Like

  37. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Not opinion, Stevie, facts.
    BTW, you never did answer a direct question… is the “Sierra Business Council” a gun free zone? If not… why?

    Like

  38. fish Avatar
    fish

    Posted by: Steven Frisch | 28 July 2015 at 09:52 PM

    It appears, the police say, that James E. Holmes, the man accused in the Aurora shootings, used all three types of weapons inside the theater as well, first firing the shotgun, then using the semiautomatic rifle until its 100-round barrel magazine jammed, and finishing off with a pistol. (A second .40-caliber pistol was also found at the scene, though it was unclear whether it had been used in the theater.)

    What’s twisted about Gregs comment? He is correct. The 100 round magazine did jam, as they are prone to do. Someone with a fanny pack, a little skill, and ten 10 round magazines could have caused far more carnage in the Colorado theater than Holmes did!

    Like

  39. Jon Avatar
    Jon

    Greg, you sound like you are an expert on yet another topic. Unreal. That makes by my count- 59 topics of your expertise so far! You are in the top 1% in America! What an awesome man.

    Like

  40. fish Avatar
    fish

    Posted by: Jon | 28 July 2015 at 10:23 PM
    I’m sure you’ve compiled a list of Gregs errors on the topic jon?
    Any time then…..

    Like

  41. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Crickets from Jon. Thanks, fish. It does appear Jon, like Frisch, prefers politically correct ignorance over facts when it comes to guns. No, I’m no “expert” when it comes to firearms, but I have been paying attention to folks who are for a few decades. It ain’t rocket science; semi and fully automatic firearms are 100+ year old technology and there is just no excuse for calling for their confiscation if you can’t even tell the difference.
    The best advice I ever came across regarding magazines is to not trust them until you have emptied them a few times without a hitch. If one fails to feed reliably, the best remedy is to take a large rock and smash it into oblivion to make sure you don’t use it again… I wouldn’t be surprised if the Colorado shooter barely had the price tag removed before his spree. Again, it could have been worse… imagine the carnage if he had been competent along with being homicidal.
    “4) Require a certificate of ownership be issued in advance for all gun sales.
    5) Require a 30 day minimum check for ALL arms purchses (no check conducted no sale)
    30 days is a more realistic period of time for law enforcement agencies to conduct the investigation they need to do to ensure that mistakes are not made. If someone has a safety issue in the mean time they could go to law enforcement and report the problem. In cases where an interim carry permit needs to be issued to provide safety that could be done, but it would be done under the auspices of law enforcement. If you think your ex husband is going to kill you you should go to law enforcement anyway.”

    Steve has a hard time internalizing the difference between an individual right to own and carry guns, and a privilege that may be granted if you ask nicely enough and wait your turn. There is no “investigation” unless it’s for an NFA weapon; either you are known to law enforcement as a criminal or mentally fragile individual, or you have a clean record, retaining all the rights of a citizen or permanent resident. Get stopped for speeding and, as soon as the cop runs your plates or driver’s license through the system, they could have the same info.
    Steve is just designing a Byzantine system that meant to convince folks to not bother; prove to the authorities you deserve it. If you think ANYONE is trying to kill you going to law enforcement is an imperative, but people have died after going to LEA and applying for a permit, but before it is granted. Especially in this county, you are on your own much of the time; the lone officer on patrol could be an hour’s drive away if you call 911 in the middle of the night when someone is trying to break in.
    If an adult citizen with a clean record wants to buy a legal gun, they have a right to buy the gun. Period. That said, ethical dealers (which is most all of them) can and do refuse to sell guns when something tells them something is not right with the buyer.

    Like

  42. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Steve Frisch is the consummate bureaucrat. He actually endeavors to be one after BKing the Passages. But now he knows everything about everything and knows all about weapons. Wow! Just as he knows all about child rearing, liens and taxes. What a guy!
    Reading his confiscate gun manifesto, well, one so hard to comply with people would give up, we can all rest easy the fellow is looking after us all. BTW, the gal back east that wrestled the gun away from the liberal serial killer and shot him to death before he could kill her, she should be getting the SBC award!

    Like

  43. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Drapers Meadow Massacre, July 30, 1755.
    We think times are tough.
    “What followed was a very sophisticated campaign designed to denude the areas west of the Blue Ridge of settlers. Not only were farms burned and settlers killed but livestock was slaughtered and fruit trees cut down. Historically, the Shawnee and their closest allies the Delaware had raided for prisoners. Now it became common for prisoners to be dismembered and disemboweled and the remains left were pursuing militia were sure to find them. By 1763 most of the Virginia frontier beyond Winchester was completely depopulated.”
    And everyone thinks Cecil the Lion was the only lion ever taken.History, you gotta love it!

    Like

  44. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Steven Frisch, co-founder and six figure compensation CEO of the famed rent seeking 501c3 “Sierra Business Council” (it isn’t a Council of businesses), had a list of 11 feces (well, theses, but they stank enough to rename) regarding guns. We only got through debunking the first 5… here’s the rest:
    “6) Ban sales at gun shows and from private parties–sales would be required to go through a dealer.
    Yes, I don’t really give a damn if this means that Dad can;t give junior an AR-15—the kid needs to get registered, issued a permit, and the sale needs to be controlled.”

    But then this new universal registration scheme of yours apparently covers all guns down to a bolt action .22 rifle of the sort that would be used at a Scout summer camp. This fascination of Frisch’s with the AR15 has a life of its own, apparently because he still thinks it’s a machine gun that fires multiple times with one pull of the trigger. No Steve, it’s the same sort of one shot per pull autoloading that has been continuously legal for civilians for about 125 years, with similar rates of fire available from revolvers.
    It appears Frisch’s dad never took him shooting.
    “7) Require registration of all guns…ALL
    So if we need to change the Constitution to do this, or return to a more rational interpretation of the 2nd amendment, so be it.”

    Wow… Steven Frisch, CEO of the Sierra Business Council, is calling for the 2nd and 5th Amendments of the Bill of Rights to be weakened. Imagine what we can do once he makes it legal to charge people with the crime of not turning themselves in, or not giving testimony against themselves.
    “8) Ban public carry of firearms (except concealed weapons in tightly controlled situations)
    There is no reason for people to be walking into a Denny’s or a Walmart with an AR strapped to their back. It is bullshit anti-social behavior. If one needs to get a concealed carry permit for safety let them go to their local police and get one.”

    I’ve seen this once or twice, and it wasn’t an “anti-social” tantrum. A Walmart shopper with a rifle may have purchased it there and had a warranty issue.
    If they’re hungry, have no place to leave the rifle and be assured of its security and the Walmart or Denny’s doesn’t mind, why is it Steven Frisch’s business? Go somewhere else, Steve. And let’s remember, Steve really doesn’t want the local police to issue carry permits, either.
    Those of us without a phobia regarding guns don’t see the mere carrying of a firearm as being threatening, which is covered by the term “brandishing”. Look it up, Steve.
    “9) Require that ‘collectable’ firearms be disabled
    This is a market limitation measure. As guns get more expensive the utility of collectable forearms will increase and make them more attractive for the commission of crimes. Disabling could be done without damaging the firearm.”

    More evidence of Steven Frisch wanting to disarm the poor and a willingness to destroy the function of a piece of history to keep it from being used rather than just displayed on a wall somewhere, merely to help drive up the price of self defense.
    “10) Require showing certificate of ownership for the purchase of ammunition
    Yes, this makes it harder to use ammunition for legitimate purposes, but it also makes it harder to use ammo for illegitimate purposes. If you are a legal certificate holder it should slow you down by about 30 seconds. If you are not legal it means you have to go through someone else and makes it criminal behavior.”

    Hate to be the one to break it to you, Steve, but the illegit:legit ratio is probably 1:100000. Thugs who just want an excuse to pop a cap into somebody’s ass don’t look forward to weekends of hunting or target shooting, taking along a couple of bricks of .22LR or a few hundred rounds of NATO 5.56.
    Be honest, Steve. You just want to make it difficult for your political opposites and to keep a good list of who is shooting.
    “11) Ban ammunition designed to penetrate body armor.
    Stands on its own just ask any cop.”

    You do that, Steve. Last I heard, after thirty years of that scary “cop killer bullet” story, no cop has actually been killed by one of those cartridges; it’s just another one of those invented categories used by the Frischies of the world who are trying to chip away at a fundamental right of US citizens.
    The truth behind the BS is that any bullet designed to go through armor is already effectively banned, bullets that may infringe on the old law aren’t be designed to go through armor but are lead free designs for hunting and target use to get around environmental laws popping up against lead ammo that technically fall under the armor piercing language. And, for the real kicker, armor piercing designs tend to do the least damage to the target, leaving the most survivable wounds.
    In short, from 1 to 11, Frisch is just repeating claims he does not understand about a fact of life he hates… Americans have an individual right to own and carry guns, and have from the very forming of the country. That is why the USA has the largest number of guns per capita in the world; we’re a wealthy country whose citizens have always had that right, nearly 240 years. Progressives in the 20th century did their best to erase that right, replacing the standard model of the 2nd amendment with a collectivist interpretation, but we once again have the standard model that was the accepted interpretation in the 18th and 19th centuries. This is progress.

    Like

Leave a comment