Showing posts with label guns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label guns. Show all posts

Saturday, December 22, 2012

The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results

JoshuaPundit on Dec 21 2012

The Council Has Spoken!: Alea iacta est…the Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

This week’s contest ended up in a tie, between Joshuapundit’s The Newtown School Shooting And What It Should Tell Us, a theme many on the Council chose to look at this week and The Right Planet’s Talking Past Each Other, an interesting look at the left/right divide in America based on psychological types.

In accordance with our by-laws, any time there’s a tie between The Watcher and one of the other members. I happily make way for the latter, in this case, The Right Planet’s excellent look at the state of discourse in America, Talking Past Each Other. Here’s a slice:

He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not , shun him for he is a fool
He who knows not, and knows that he knows not, Teach him that he should learn
He who knows, and knows not that he knows, Wake him for he is asleep
He who knows, and knows that he knows, Follow him for he is is a leader

Exasperation is how I would describe the feelings I have right now regarding the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama, but I refuse to give into hopelessness and despair. I’m in this for the long haul. Although it may be tempting to pick up my ball and go home, I would rather make the other poor bastard pick his ball up and go home—even if it is a long, hard slog.

Yesterday, as usual, I listened to my favorite conservative talk show personalities—folks like Rush Limbaugh, Dana Loesch and local radio host Greg Garrison—for their take on the reelection of Barack Obama and what it means for “moving forward.” I also talked to family members and friends to get their views as well. If there’s one common consensus as to what went wrong for the GOP from the people I listened and talked to yesterday, I think Rush Limbaugh summed it up best: “It’s just very difficult to defeat Santa Claus.” People love free stuff. Well, I think greed and selfishness is a huge part of the problem in modern-day society. But it appears to me that there are a myriad of reasons why Obama is back at the helm again, in addition to a culture that demands instant gratification and cradle-to-grave entitlements.

I’ve believed for a very long time that liberals and conservatives seem to talk past each other. In psychology, the concept of personality types is a very important one—meaning: certain personality types are more prone to base their decision-making solely on intuition and feelings, as opposed to other personality types who may base their choices solely on cold, hard facts and logic—devoid of much emotion. In a nutshell, I’m referring to the touchy-feely type, for lack of a better term, versus the cold, calculating type. The point here is that it’s not that either personality type is wrong per se, but that they are simply different personality types who communicate in very different ways. What is required for two different personality types to communicate effectively is the need for the differing personality types to understand each other’s language.

A hypothetical example: it may be more effective to communicate with a touchy-feely personality type with pictures, song or dance, as opposed to handing them a field manual or spreadsheet. Conversely, the touchy-feely type may find communication is vastly improved with the cold, calculating type by avoiding the song & dance—just the facts, M’am.

Once again, from a purely psychological perspective, it’s not that either personality type is necessarily wrong—just different. Naturally, when communication breaks down between two disparate personality types conflict will ensue. I’m of the opinion that more touchy-feely types are attracted to the left-side of the political spectrum (democrat), while the more calculating types are attracted to the right-side politically (republican), thus the constant conflict between liberals and conservatives.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Ben Stein with G-d Help Us submitted by The Razor. It’s a masterful piece that looks at why some evil in this world becomes a major news story while other evil is simply conveniently ignored. Do read it.

OK, here are this week’s full results:

Council Winners
Non-Council Winners

Honorable Mentions

See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day and weigh in…don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!

Friday, December 21, 2012

Chicago: 446 school age children shot so far this year with strongest gun laws in country - media silent

Screen Shot 2012-12-19 at 9.45.28 AMFireAndreaMitchell.com The cesspool known as Chicago probably has the toughest gun laws in the country, yet despite all the shootings, murders, and bloodshed, you never hear a peep about this from the corrupt state run media. In Chicago, there have been 446 school age children shot in leftist utopia run by Rahm Emanuel and that produced Obama, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, etc. 62 school aged children have actually been killed by crazed nuts in Chicago so far this year with almost two weeks to go. So why isn’t this news worthy? Is it because it would embarrass those anti second amendment nuts who brag about Chicago’s tough gun laws? Is it because most of the kids who were shot and killed were minorities? Or is it because the corrupt media doesn’t want to show Chicago in a bad light?

THE LIST OF MURDERED SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN 2012
18 YEARS OLD- 15

17 YEARS OLD- 16

16 YEARS OLD- 16

15 YEARS OLD- 6

14 YEARS OLD- 4

13 YEARS OLD- 2

12 YEARS OLD- 1

7 YEARS OLD- 1

6 YEARS OLD- 1

446 School Age Children Shot in Chicago so Far This Year

THE LIST OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN SHOT IN 2012

18 year old- 110

17 year old- 99

16 year old- 89

15 year old- 62

14 year old- 39

13 year old- 21

12 year old- 10

11 year old- 2

10 year old- 3

9 year old- 1

7 year old- 3

6 year old- 2

5 year old- 1

4 year old- 1

3 year old- 1

1 year old- 2

Related:

Gun Control is Genocide – documentary by Mike Adams

A 'what if' gun-seizure scenario

So How Do These Gun Totting Libs Justify Their Anti-Gun Stance and Legislation?

Former FBI Informant Says: Obama Will Destroy America Once He Has All The Guns… as Details of False Flag and Conspiracy in Connecticut Shooting Appear

Gun-Free Zones Are a Magnet for Attacks Like the Tragedy In Binghamton… Aurora, Columbine and Connecticut

Stampeding Gun Control Through Crisis

Expert Says Ban Gun Free School Zones, Allow Teachers to Carry

Pastor Chuck Baldwin’s Comments on the Connecticut School Shooting

Sandy Hook Elementary: 3 Shooters (A CLOSE LOOK)

My Thoughts on the Sandy Hook Shooting

It Isn’t About the Guns… It Is About Control… Controlling You!

John Bolton: Gun control a top goal of Obama 2nd Term

Why Do They Want Us Disarmed?

Hillary & Barack will BAN GUNS during the UN GUN TREATY on JULY 27, 2012!!!!

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Why a gun is civilization

Jack E. Kemp

Munchkin Wrangler asked to make this article go viral. I'll do my part here, as he has an excellent point. As Munchkin states, gun ownership is the true women's equality, making her equal with a 230 lb. gang-banger who wants to steal her car...or worse. It also makes senior citizens equal to thugs, etc. This is one argument that Gloria Steinem's fans almost never considered...and Sarah Palin thinks is almost too obvious to mention.
Without further adieu..

Why the gun is civilization.

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

Video: Suzanna Gratia Hupp explains meaning of 2nd Amendment!