Nuclear Unicorn's Journal
Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2009, 07:33 PM
Number of posts: 15,774
Number of posts: 15,774
When debating with those claiming guns exact too high a toll on society in lives and money I often cite alcohol and the crimes/diseases it brings in its wake.
(In the interest of full disclosure I do drink -- just ask my husband, especially if he has a stupid grin on his face.)
I make the argument in order to see if Controllers are consistent in their views. If X lives lost = case to impose a ban then X+ lives lost would surely carry the same argument. Obviously it doesn't because no serious person wants to reinstate Prohibition. Regardless of why a Controller might shy away from also championing a return to Prohibition history has demonstrated beyond a doubt the foolishness of attempting to enforce such laws.
One of the reason I came to support the RKBA was my education to the fact that gun control was often used as a means to keep minorities defenseless so that they might be later victimized. The KKK was made up of bullies and bullies don't like it when their intended victims can fight back.
Bullies like to control. In fact, it probably isn't even the external characteristic of the object of their attentions, i.e. skin color, religion, etc. that rives them. I would offer what they need is a sense of personal empowerment. They feel higher by tearing down others. That is why POC are portrayed as indolent, Jews as evil, etc. That allows the bigot to tell himself "I'm not lazy and not a child of the devil. I deserve to control those who are."
What I recently came to be surprised about is the KKK -- the progenitor of most gun control movements -- also moved to pass and enforce Prohibition.
The Ku Klux Klan (KKK), Alcohol, & Prohibition
by David J. Hanson, Ph.D.
One of the major supporters of National Prohibition of alcohol in the U.S. (1920-1933) was the anti-alcohol Ku Klux Klan (KKK).
• The Ku Klux Klan was “revived in Atlanta in 1915 to defend Prohibition,” which existed in Georgia at that time.* 1
•“Prohibition became one of the Klan’s leading issues” 2 and the Klan strongly supported both Prohibition and its strict enforcement. 3
•The Ku Klux Klan “adopted prohibition as a central rallying cry.” 4
•“Enforcing Prohibition was a cornerstone of the KKK’s ‘reform’ agenda.” 5
•“Enforcement of Prohibition, in fact, was a central, and perhaps the strongest, goal of the Ku Klux Klan.” 6
•“Demon Rum (and the support of Prohibition) was the most obsessive issue on the Klan mind next to the pope.” 7
•The KKK’s “support for Prohibition represented the single most important bond between Klansmen throughout the nation..” 8 (Emphasis in original.)
•Because it so strongly “opposed the sale of alcohol,” 9 the new Klan “attacked bootlegging.” 10
• “The Klan's resurgence in the 1920s partially stemmed from their role as the extreme militant wing of the temperance movement. In Arkansas, as elsewhere, the newly formed Ku Klux Klan marked bootleggers as one of the groups that needed to be purged from a morally upright community. In 1922, 200 Klansmen torched saloons that had sprung up in Union County in the wake of the oil discovery boom. The national Klan office ended up in Dallas, Texas, but Little Rock was the home of the Women of the Ku Klux Klan. The first head of this female auxiliary was a former president of the Arkansas WCTU.” 11
The rapid growth of the new Klan probably reflected the fact that “It promised to reform politics, to enforce prohibition, and to champion traditional morality.” 22
•There was much interaction and overlap in membership between the Klan and other prohibition supporters. For example, a top leader of the Klan, Edward Young Clarke, raised funds for both the Klan and the Anti-Saloon League. 12
•Its enforcement of prohibition was one of the factors “most responsible for the Klan’s great popularity” in some states and communities. 13
•The KKK challenged bootleggers by organizing armed patrols to intercept shipments of alcohol. 14
• “The Ku Klux Klan associated itself with the campaign against alcohol…. One of the major KKK activities in the 1920s was rooting out bootleggers and breaking up speakeasies.” 15
•“widespread were Klan efforts to put bootleggers out of business.” 16
•On occasion, Ku Klux Klan tarred, feathered and ran bootleggers out of town. 17
•Some bootleggers would have preferred being tarred and feathered. “In ‘Bloody Williamson,’ a county in far southern Illinois, battles between the operators of wide-open taverns and the ‘dry’ Ku Klux Klan killed 14 people in 1924-25.” 18
•Although Prohibition became increasingly unpopular with the passage of time, the KKK strongly and actively opposed its repeal. 19
Prohibitionists often advocated strong measures against those who did not comply with Prohibition. One suggested that the government distribute poisoned alcohol beverages through bootleggers (sellers of illegal alcohol) and acknowledged that several hundred thousand Americans would die as a result, but thought the cost well worth the enforcement of Prohibition.
It was more than a mere suggestion. The mania to impose Prohibition reached its nadir in The Chemists War a campaign in which the US government deliberately poisoned alcohol thereby conducting extrajudicial killings of more than TEN THOUSAND citizens while multitudes more were sickened.
While it is not my suggestion that Controllers are crypto-KKK it is my contention that human nature is what it is. Those possessed by the impulse to control may make all the high sounding moralist arguments they want but the more urgent they make the morality seem odds are the greater the propensity there will be to abuse whatever power they demand accompany their appeals.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Sat Jun 27, 2015, 01:26 AM (2 replies)
Here is something I have seen constantly among pro-gun control advocates here that continues to elude me.
Outside of this particular board they post on other topics. Many will post on a variety topics, others are a bit more narrow concerning where they offer comment. However, there is one thing that is nearly universal among them to some degree:
They all find a deep-seated dissatisfaction with the government in at least one facet. Some will tell you the police are killing unarmed civilians either out of the arrogance of power and/or racist animosity. Some will tell you we are being sold-out by the politicians to multi-national corporations that heed no national laws and are laws unto themselves. Many will claim the government has all but discarded our civil liberties and the Bill of Rights in the name of a surveillance police state. Others will claim the government wages illegal wars of aggression. Still others will even tell you the US government engineered 9/11. We incessantly hear of stolen elections and corrupt appointments.
Every person posting here on behalf of expanded gun control subscribes to at least one of these propositions. Some of these complaints I find absurd but there are many to which I am sympathetic to varying degrees.
But I'm not really interested in arguing the veracity of these claims. In fact, for the purposes of this OP I will assume the claims are all as true insofar as the proponents state them to be.
So why then the mania to disarm the people?
If you truly believe the government is a racist, corporatist, lawless, war-mongering, murdering, self-selecting, rights-abusing police state why in Heaven's name are the people to be made defenseless? Even if you believe civilians could never match modern militaries (the Viet Cong, ISIS, etc. may beg to differ) the entire premise of gun control relies upon the assertion that the government is and forever will be a beneficent caretaker.
How does anyone reconcile these beliefs in their own minds?
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Fri Jun 26, 2015, 06:20 PM (16 replies)
It takes ten tickles.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Wed Jun 24, 2015, 05:25 PM (2 replies)
SAFE Act: Gun groups say data shows low compliance
ALBANY – About 44,500 assault weapons have been registered in New York since a new gun-control law was enacted in 2013, records released by State Police to a gun-rights group this week showed.
The Shooters Committee on Public Education, a gun-rights group based in western New York, successfully sued after the state refused to release the details. Now the group claimed that the statistics showed what they suspected: Few gun owners are complying with the SAFE Act adopted by Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state Legislature in January 2013.
The total number of applications to register assault weapons in New York was 25,536.
"The majority of gun owners and sportsmen in New York have absolutely no respect for this law," said Stephen Aldstadt, the group's president.
The group said that estimates have showed that there about 1 million assault weapons in New York, so if that's the case, about 4 percent were registered as required under the SAFE Act. But gun-control advocates said there is no way of knowing how many assault weapons exist in New York.
I'm curious to know why the state had to be sued into providing the information. Are they that embarrassed by their failures? And if it's this bad in NY what does that portend for registration efforts in less blue-friendly environs?
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Wed Jun 24, 2015, 12:10 PM (144 replies)
Suspect in Attacks on Asian Women in Manhattan Found Dead of Apparent Suicide: Sources
The suspect wanted in a string of recent attacks on Asian women in Manhattan has been found dead of an apparent suicide inside a basement on the Upper East Side, law enforcement sources said.
The suspect, 25-year-old Tyrell Shaw, apparently hanged himself and was found in an elevator shaft on the 700 block of Madison Avenue, according to the sources. The body was positively identified as Shaw's.
This is how deeply disturbed this individual was --
"By starting an independent civil war where I will hit over a million Asian Women in the face with a stick will change history," the blogger wrote.
"Heres my plan: Every Asian Woman by herself must be hit in the face. I may even take a photo before hitting them. The reason is because I don’t think Asian Women like me and that specific one or two or three may have never met me. So I think its brilliant to give all Asian Women a legitimate reason to hate me," the person continuted.
The excerpts don't do justice to the depths of his depravity.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Jun 23, 2015, 10:26 AM (0 replies)
The day the Klan messed with the wrong people.
You saw those cars coming, and you knew who those men were. They wanted you to see them. They wanted you to be afraid of them."
- Lillie McKoy, former mayor of Maxton talking about the KKK
By the mid-1950's the Civil Rights Movement was gaining momentum and the KKK decided they had to fight back. Their campaign of terrorism swept through many of the southern states, but largely fell flat in North Carolina.
James W. "Catfish" Cole, the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan in South Carolina, decided he was going to change that. Cole was an ordained minister of the Wayside Baptist Church in Summerfield, North Carolina, who regularly preached the Word of God on the radio. His rallies often drew as many as 15,000 people. As Cole told the newspapers: "There's about 30,000 half-breeds up in Robeson County and we are going to have some cross burnings and scare them up."
Cole made a critical mistake that couldn't be avoided by a racist mind - he was completely ignorant of the people he was about to mess with.
Dr. Perry was a black doctor in Monroe, NC, and helped finance a local chapter of the NAACP. One night at a meeting, the word was received that the Klan threatened to blow up Dr. Perry's house. The meeting broke up and everyone went home to get their guns.
Sipping coffee in Perry's garage with shotguns across their laps, the men agreed that defending their families was too important to do in haphazard fashion. "We started to really getting organized and setting up, digging foxholes and started getting up ammunition and training guys," Williams recalled. "In fact, we had started building our own rifle range, and we got our own M-1's and got our own Mausers and German semi-automatic rifles, and steel helmets. We had everything."
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Jun 18, 2015, 07:41 AM (3 replies)
Polls that gauge how Democrat A or Democrat B stack-up against Republican X, Y or Z don't strike me as all that valuable at this stage of the game. Those polls really only gauge one thing, Name Recognition.
However, the primaries are the sport of the parties' base, not the general populace. Once the bases have made their decision Name Recognition ceases to be a factor because the resources of the Parties are aligned behind them. Name Recognition becomes moot at that point.
I honestly think it is an over-valued attribute.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Wed Jun 17, 2015, 03:19 PM (23 replies)
does the fact that Controllers act deceptively, prevaricate about their objectives, refuse consensus and vilify opponents in the most noxious terms make them responsible for the failures of their own efforts?
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Mon Jun 15, 2015, 01:03 AM (11 replies)
Free speech again at center of court case involving man's arrest at selectmen's meeting
Jared Bedrick of Sisti Law Offices, who along with Gilles Bissonnette of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, represents Clay, said his client on Feb. 3 had engaged in constitutionally-protected speech when — without obscenities, anger or physical threats — he asked some of the selectmen to resign for doing a bad job and for violating the state’s Right-To-Know law.
Clay was given five minutes to address selectmen — Clay reportedly set a timer on his cellphone to alert him as he approached the deadline — but just 40 seconds into his remarks, Bedrick said selectmen made and passed a motion that Clay had violated the terms of the public comment by making allegedly defamatory and libelous remarks.
The selectmen’s vote also closed the public input, and when Clay continued to speak, Heath approached him and told him to stop. Because Clay continued talking, Heath issued the command a fourth time, after which he escorted Clay out of the selectmen’s meeting and placed him under arrest — even though Clay still had a minute left to make additional comments.
Subsequently charged with two counts of disorderly conduct, Clay saw one charge dropped prior to Friday’s hearing before Carroll.
- See more at: http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150511/NEWS0606/150519939&source=RSS#sthash.EIkDlRNL.dpuf
Even if the charges are dropped the effort to silence dissent had succeeded -- unless the objections become more numerous and frequent.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Wed Jun 10, 2015, 09:38 AM (1 replies)
More than half of gun deaths are suicides. Anyone who uses a gun has no allusions about the extremity and permanence of their actions. There is no, "Oh maybe I'll shoot myself and someone will save me" cry for help; it's an act calculated to result in death.
Someone who is that determined to die cannot be dissuaded by what is or is not commercially available; they need help to move past what is destroying their lives.
And to ignoring what moves people to suicide in order to fixate on the chosen method of suicide is effectively saying it is okay to leave someone trapped in the abyss of suicidal depression for nothing more than a fleeting political victory.
Treat the mental health issues and guns become irrelevant.
Of the remaining roughly 45% of gun deaths we have a portion that are accidental and the remainder are deliberate criminal acts.
If banning a thing because of the misuse of that thing has never worked. It brought us Prohibition which turned irresponsible behavior into a criminal enterprise that remains entrenched to this day, decades after its repeal.
What reduces drunk driving isn't banning alcohol but rather a shift in social mores where responsible behavior is constantly reinforced. DUIs are down because people know it isn't cool to be the guy who killed a family of 4 after partying all night. It's better to find a DD and being a DD is considered a worthy cause.
As far as criminal use of guns is concerned, consider the fact that the majority of criminals using guns have prior criminal records. In others words their possession of a gun is already a criminal offence.
Many more are instances of domestic violence. Will a proposed law be.more likely to deter the offender or only end up disarming the targeted victims?
President Obama recently took steps to bolster the flagging NICS database. He is to be applauded for this. Now it is time to open NICS to private sellers as well.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Sun Jun 7, 2015, 10:36 AM (8 replies)