So the explanation Disney is pushing in their new book as to why Rey has such skills with a lightsaber and the force in TLJ is because she basically downloaded them from Kylo's brain when they had Force Skype calls
A laugh-a-minute take on guns from the other side. Here's an excerpt:
Gee whiz, lady, maybe the reason gun owners don't want to deal with you is because you treat them like insubordinate children and their rights like that trip to Disney World you promised them if they'd be good.
Another thing I find funny about this is that "Design Mom" (I'm sure she knows a lot about crime and firearms regulations!) claims that the "majority of Americans want better gun regulations" - by which she later explicitly outlines as "gun control". To which I respond: Really? Where? I could buy that most people in the Bay Area and in the Devil's Triangle will blindly support anything their corrupt oligarchs want them to, but in the rest of the country - you know, the part of the country that would be subject to these "better gun regulations" that the bluest areas already have - do they support these measures? An honest take suggests the answer is not "no" but "hell no".
But of course "Design Mom" doesn't know any of these tens of millions of people, because, as she says, "My social feeds were absolutely overflowing with calls for outright gun bans." I wonder if she ever thinks why that might be. Why is it that all of her friends think exactly the same way she does? I wonder if she's ever unfriended someone because they didn't have the "right views".
Wait, how can someone be a lifelong gun rights supporter and, currently, while they are alive, call for a total gun ban? You know, I've worked in the firearms industry my whole life - I've met THOUSANDS of true blue lifelong gun rights supporters, I've walked the halls of the SHOT Show, the wastelands of Wyoming, the streets of Dallas, and the swamps of Southern Maryland, and I've likewise had thousands of conversations with these people, and I have never, ever, not once in my whole life met one of these mythical people that anti-gunners describe. Nobody, who has spent their whole life supporting the NRA, buying, owning, and using guns, and proselytizing about the Second Amendment, has ever told me they thought it was time for a total gun ban. I have, however, met loads of people who grew up hillbilly, fired a shotgun once when they were fourteen, and then converted to being anti-gun when subjected to Leftist Conversion Therapy in college. Maybe those are the people she means. In support of this theory, I want to point out this particular bit:
So in other words, this guy isn't really pro-gun, he just lives in rural Pennsylvania or wherever. See what I mean?
I don't think she really groks what we mean when we say it's impossible, because I doubt she's familiar with the numbers: There are over 300 million guns in the US - that number comes from a 2009 study. Since then, at least 100 million guns have been added, according to ATF records. Both of those numbers are likely highly conservative. So, this total ban on guns, it would need to confiscate, what? 400-600 million firearms from US citizens, many - if not most - of whom are willing to fight the government to protect their rights. Even if most lie down and show their bellies, what about those that don't? Will the massive, unprecedented civil unrest that will almost certainly result in the deaths of hundreds, thousands, maybe even millions of people (in the worst case) - including children - be worth it?
The problem with the comparison to gay rights is that it hardly affected anyone. Nobody really had skin in the game. Only the religious far right thought it was unacceptable, and, frankly, they didn't care very much either. The reason a gun ban will never happen is because it would beget the biggest period of civil unrest in the US since the Civil War.
I just wanted to emphasize those last two sentences. The answer is "yes, fully automatic weapons can be made in a closet with a drill press and some scrap metal." This answer would not have taken Design Mom very long to find had she bothered to google that very question.
Here is a homemade silenced machine gun that was confiscated in Australia:
Perhaps the reason this woman does not think these arguments are logical is because she has no bloody idea what she's talking about.
I'm pretty comfortable with the idea that countries with fewer guns experience fewer shootings. That's well-supported by data. But these countries aren't necessarily less violent, and this logical pathway between "fewer guns" and "fewer deaths" distracts from the real question: If there are 600,000,000 guns in the United States, what happens to them after they get banned? Because at best, the Australian government was only able to confiscate a fifth of their subjects' guns, and the country has more guns now than they did before the ban. Australia has at least 600,000 illegal guns - almost 15 guns per incarcerated criminal, and more than 1.3 guns per crime committed per year. Demonstrably, those who want guns in Australia can get them. They will be sold to criminals and become part of a gigantic black market. The availability of guns won't go down, the availability of legal guns will. There are lots of countries with a high ratio of illegal guns to legal guns. I tell you what, I don't want to live in any of them.
To get all the guns, to stop all crime, to really deliver on your promises of a safer world, you'd need a central government that knows just about everything about everyone at all times. You'd need a gigantic bureaucracy whose job is to spy on, track, and attack if necessary all of its citizens. To the extent that we don't already have that, few Americans want it realized fully. Is Design Mom ready for her country to go full police state? What exact number of children saved would make it worth what comes next?
I can't seriously address this. Her head isn't in the real world it's in some other place, where smuggling doesn't exist and criminals will willingly surrender their guns within "5-10 years" or so. Remember Australia? That country now has more illegal guns than it ever did. How could Design Mom's plan stand a chance in a country with 150-200 times as many guns?
The power of "Design Mom Logic", ladies and gentlemen. So because gun owners disagree with you on policy, they are culpable in the death of children? I doubt this woman has ever in her miserable life reflected on how her own actions may have made people unwilling to deal with her. Why would any gun owner want to change their mind to a new view, when the person who holds it considers them culpable in crimes of murder which they had nothing to do with, just because of their opinion.
There's also a little bit of doublethink going on here. Design Mom says that loads of pro-gun people, she promises, are ready for a total gun ban - yet all gun owners refuse to allow for more regulations. So... Is this an admission that none of the "pro-gun" people she's talking about, y'know, actually own guns?
She may be surprised to find that the largest gun safety education program in the United States is run by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which holds the SHOT Show every year in Las Vegas. Other gun safety programs are run by the NRA (which has one of the nation's largest), the Civilian Marksmanship Program, and Project Appleseed.
Meanwhile, it's likely that neither Design Mom nor any 5 of her closest friends have any idea what "Four Rules" means without googling it.
Catch that? While she was getting the reader riled up about how victory is inevitable, she avoided actually answering the question. Because it's a great question, and there is no answer except "it wouldn't".
Also, do note she repeats that bit of idiocy about gun owners wanting to pass laws to "force teachers to be armed." @Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect.
Oh boy, I can't wait to see what tired and failed ideas she trots out! Let's get into it!
Actually, most gun owners do advocate for reform of the background check system, which desperately needs it (as both Sutherland Springs and Parkland prove). Few want private sales to require a background check, but the vast majority want the ability to access NICS (does Design Mom know what NICS is? I've got money on "not") to run background checks for private sales if they so desire. The problem most have is that private sales to prohibited persons, as well as straw purchases (someone who is not prohibited who buys a gun for someone who is) are already illegal, so making private sales illegal would do exactly diddly squat.
Maybe you should actually ask the big bad NRA about that? But you won't, because you've already sorted everyone into "Good People", and "Bad People", and anyone who actually knows anything about safe gun use is Bad by default.
I agree, so long as that is extended to every other item in existence. It'll have a one year sunset. I bet you $10,000,000 it won't get renewed!
We tried that from 1994-2004, it did nothing. Here's a hint: On what date did the Columbine massacre occur?
Wouldn't have stopped Parkland, Sutherland, Las Vegas, Columbine, nor any other premeditated mass shooting.
Wow, firearms insurance will save the children. That is a new one.
Design Mom seems to be unaware that this is required already in most rental agreements, anyway.
Here it is! Finally, the only real regulation that we can meaningfully discuss with any more than a zippy one-liner. But since Andrew Tuohy already pretty much covered it, I'll direct us to him.
Andrew points out that the purpose of registration is confiscation, which most gun control people pinkie swear isn't the point, but at least Design Mom is pretty honest about it.
So that if their girlfriend breaks up with them, we can take their guns!
This is probably a new concept to Design Mom, but that's not how we treat Constitutional Rights in this country. Does she want it to become how?
Lots of gun owners are open to this - so how are you going to incentivize them to come to the table? Would you, say, offer them something in exchange that both you and they can agree is a sensible reform (such as a law enforcement reform bill)? Or would you even offer them something you don't quite agree with but that they really want (such as removing SBRs from the NFA registry)?
No? Then who's really unwilling to compromise here?
See this is why gun owners get a bit frustrated with gun control advocates. Even a second of googling would have revealed to her that not only are domestic abusers already banned from owning guns. The problem with the second bit is that it compromises due process - and since the US judicial system is based on precedent, do we really want to go there?
No law is preventing the CDC from doing so - it's just been defunded in that regard and it's scared to. Having said that, I am quite sure that you could come to an amicable compromise with the vast majority of gun owners on this issue. Gun owners aren't really worried about studying firearms, most welcome it. But when it comes to gun control, "compromises" never involve any real bargain - it's just "give us what we want, or else". No wonder gun owners won't deal with you on even the simplest things.
Gee maybe the reason gun owners don't want to talk to you is because you treat them like spoiled children instead of fellow citizens, say they are culpable for the deaths of children, imply they are irresponsible with their guns, say they should be subject to yearly mental health evaluations, are unwilling to trade for anything, and, perhaps worst of all, know absofuckinglutely nothing about the subject at hand.
Design Mom Logic™
Actually, the state of the NICS system is all on the government. Specifically in these last few cases, the Broward Country PD, the FBI, and the US Air Force.
Yeah, why do you think that is? See it turns out, in the NRA has a long history of working with gun control advocates, but then the Democrats threw all that goodwill away by giving nothing back, pushing the attack, and using underhanded tactics to get regulations passed. And consistently, every time the issue arises again, that side never tries to find common ground or make any kind of deal - they just trot out the same old regulations that don't work. Like you did. So now, gun control is radioactive to the NRA. Pat yourself on the back.
Incorrect. They love it every time a Democrat gets elected. Nobody loves these shootings.
I bet you can guess what the next word will be!
I want to stop right here and do some critical reading. Look at the language she's using. The blame she's trying to paint on her own friends who hunt. Look at how imperious she's being. It's clear that she's not confident, she's sad, she's angry, she's tired of death and seeing terrible tragedies happen on the news. And she has no other outlet but to get on her little blog and pound out about how we are strong and we're coming for your guns - but it's all puff. It's all exhausted desperation. She wants to do something, anything, that will let her feel like she helped make it stop. She expresses it with the tyrannical fits of an angry toddler. But what she really needs to stare into the eyes of the beast and realize there is nothing, at least not in this way, that she can do.
I appreciate that the footmen of the Left have fully absorbed the narrative that "armed guards don't work!" Yeah, OK. Keep telling yourself that.
"Kneel or die". Yet she wields a rattle, not a sword.
I'm glad she brought this point up. I wonder, though, what would kill people if not guns? Nah, I'm sure it'll be fine.
That's... That's not what circular reasoning is. People are trying to establish how big of a problem these high profile rampage killings really are by measuring them against a different scale. You may not agree with it (I don't - not 100% anyway), but it really doesn't fit the definition of circular reasoning or even a fallacy. And, frankly, the last people to just shrug and say "shit happens" are the ones who carry a gun on their hip.
It's really, really not.
If "assault weapons" are the reason we have higher levels of "gun violence" (no word on actual violence violence), then why are rifles (of all types) used in so few murders, despite being so much more lethal?
Lots of professional criminals exist. I would say, most criminals are professional criminals or will become professional criminals in the future. Ask your local police officer whether he recognizes the faces of the criminals he interacts with, or if it's a fresh face every time.
This sort of babbling is definitely a sign that she's emotionally reaching out for any comfort. And I do understand, empathize, and feel the same way, I just wish her methods didn't involve word vomiting all over the Internet.
100 years of compromises never got the anti-gun side to back off, so why should we expect it will now?
Again, no actual nuts and bolts here. Just "I feel that this will happen and it will totally work out". Nothing about how to get support for a Constitutional Amendment, nothing about how to claim the judicial branch, nothing about how to confiscate 400-600 million guns. Just feels.
I can't off the top of my head think of a clearer example of scapegoating than what she's doing here. She doesn't even really know any gun owners (indeed she has probably curated her circle to that end), so she doesn't have a clue what gun owners will or will not take responsibility for. But she's right that gun owners are unwilling to take the responsibility that she wants them to - considering she wants to hold them culpable for literally all gun crime in the US.
Well, you're growing from "politically insignificant" to "temporarily loud". The NRA, meanwhile has maintained millions of members for decades now. So I doubt it's time for gun owners to break ranks, exactly.
After this very emotional, and not terribly well thought out or researched, diatribe, she ends on a classy note:
Different strokes for different folks, but my dad as a former highschool teacher(both primary circuit, and Juvenile Detention) supports the option to arm teachers. One experience he cited was when he used to teach at one of those minute southern California native american tribal areas(Too small for a casino like a nearby tribe, but big enough to have their own mountain area) back in the early 90's. Living up on their mountain valley, it was rural enough and displaced from urban sprawl that many families owned ranches and some students rode on horseback to school. The key point that got my dad's attention however was that it's a 40 minute drive, one-way, to get down the hill to the nearest hospital or the valley's police department. So if there was ever a problem, it had to be settled pretty frickin quick. Luckily two of the teachers on staff were retired police, and open carried, and as far as my dad knew everyone felt just that much safer for it.
I suppose it's a different matter of priorities when you're in the depths of urban sprawl of a major city, but having it as an option instead of a mandate I think could still be useful.
Since it's being floated on my Facebook news feed, an alleged plot for a school shooting in the Los Angeles area was thwarted when school security overhead a potential threat and reported through the proper channels with school authorities and the local Sheriff's office that led to the student being arrested
Basically the "connected the dots" model that should have happened in Florida
Of course the kid could have been talking full of shit, but they're going to pin him for possessing an unregistered AR-15 anyway(the other belonged to his Army vet brother)
You know, there used to be a time when the Soviets decided to influence an election, it meant an entire government would fall to the red banner of revolution; another domino having fallen.
Today the Russkies can barely scrape together the wherewithal to buy a few Facebook ads while trolling normies on Twitter.
Sad!
Calling it right now, if it goes off completely then Trump wins points for supporting the military. If the Pentagon doesn't pull through then Trump can wheel around to congress and tell them how ragged our military apparatus has become that it can't support a single parade
Bonus articles: The Last Jedi's plot elements might have hit so low as to bear similiarity to Fanfiction tier writing
On the other hand, holy fuck 1 million words written over the course of (probably a bit over) a year. That guy must have been spitballing plot ideas left and right nonstop
It seems the tack being taken by the Moore campaign/attorneys is that the signature was lifted from the divorce paper work that Judge Moore presided over in 1999. And rather than the "D.A." standing for "District Attorney" the initials instead belong to the law clerk who handled his paper work who would - presumably - sign them with a stamp or Auto-pen and add her initials after.
According to initial reports the gunman drove to the store across from the church and exited his vehicle. He was dressed in all black, with face mask and wearing a ballistic vest. He was armed with a Ruger 5.56x45mm AR rifle equipped with an inexpensive red dot sight, white light, sling and a vertical grip. He began shooting walking towards the church, moved to the right of the church and continued firing and then entered the church shooting. He fired as he walked to the front of the church, stopped, turned and continued shooting as he walked back out. It is believed his rifle was loaded with Hornady TAP or VMAX ammunition based upon a loaded cartridge left at the scene. 23 people were killed in the church, two outside the church and one died at a hospital. 20 more were wounded. Ages of the victims range from 5 to 72 years old.
A neighbor heard the gunfire and responded by grabbing an AR-15 rifle and taking up a shooting position. He fired on the gunman as he exited the church. It appears the gunman was hit by the armed citizen, possibly in the neck, as he dropped his rifle, a Ruger AR, and fled to his vehicle. The armed citizen continued to engage the gunman attempting to stop him and prevent him from fleeing. He fired at least one shot which blew out the back window of the vehicle. The shooter drove away at a high rate of speed. In order to prevent the gunman from escaping and causing further harm the armed citizen flagged down a vehicle. The armed citizen quickly informed the driver of the vehicle, a pick-up truck, the situation and entered the vehicle. The driver of the pick-up truck set out in pursuit of the fleeing gunman while contacting the police via his cell phone. During the pursuit the driver of the pick-up closed the distance with the fleeing gunman while reaching speeds of 95 mph. The pick-up truck driver was able to get within a few feet of the fleeing gunman's vehicle, which then slowed, before the gunman lost control of his vehicle and went off the road at an intersection.
The armed citizen exited the pick-up and covered the gunman's vehicle with his rifle to prevent the gunman's escape. The driver of the pick-up stated the gunman made no movements inside his vehicle. The driver of the truck placed his vehicle in park and informed the police of the gunman's location. The police arrived on location approximately 5 to 7 minutes later. The gunman died at the scene, and as the driver of the truck stated he made no movements and there were no shots fired for the 5 to 7 minutes before police arrived. Evidence indicates he bled out and died from a gunshot wound or wounds inflicted by the armed citizen. Police stated the gunman's vehicle contained multiple firearms and he may have been headed to another location to continue his shooting spree, but was killed instead.
The shooter, Devin Patrick Kelley, was 26 years old, father of two. High School classmates of his are quoted as saying he was an outcast who preached "atheism" and said "anyone who believes in God is stupid". He served in the US Air Force from 2009 to 2013 and was Court-Martialed and discharged in 2014 after assaulting his wife and child and serving 12 months in the brig. Under Federal Law a Domestic Violence conviction would prohibit him from legally owning a firearm but evidently was not disqualified as he purchased his rifle at an Academy store. So, for a motive he was a militant atheist who hated Christians. As a militant atheist me might have ties to the Left but that remains to be proven.
Without a doubt the armed citizen is a hero who likely saved many more lives by his quick thinking and willingness to step in and take action. His ability to properly employ a long gun against an armed and moving gunman while under great stress saved lives and put an end to the shooting spree. His actions demonstrate how a legally owned firearm can be used to save lives if the person behind the gun has the mettle and ability to properly put it to use."
That brings up a memory from last week during Rush Limbaugh's show, talking about this one woman author's plan to get Hillary into the "Big Chair" of the Oval Office. It was this convoluted sequence of:
Mueller's special counsel finds hard evidence of Trump-Russia collusion
Trump resigns or is impeached
Pence, becoming president, is to resign since he benefited from the collusion
Pence, in resigning before appointing a VP, allows Ryan to become President
Ryan would then name Hillary his VP since she is the most deserving in light of the 2016 election
Ryan, knowing his party's honor was stained by Russia, would then step down on Day 1
Thus Hillary would become president
They just do not want to let it go, do they?
Legiondude got a reaction from Donward in The Star Wars General Discussion Thread
Legiondude reacted to Meplat in United States Gun Control Megathread
Legiondude got a reaction from Sgt.Squarehead in United States Gun Control Megathread
Legiondude got a reaction from Jeeps_Guns_Tanks in United States Gun Control Megathread
Legiondude got a reaction from Sturgeon in Post Election Thread: Democracy Dies In Darkness And You Can Help
