Search This Blog

Saturday, December 27, 2014

Can't believe this made it into "Hands Off My Gun"

Hands off My Gun is touted as, "Defeating the plot to disarm America".  I'm up to chapter 6, and so far it's been more, "Bash the left and spout inaccuracies."  It is incredible what she thinks she can get away with.  Here's a couple interesting tidbits.

She attacks celebrities for having armed security.  I get the logic.  If these celebrities say you shouldn't have guns, then they shouldn't have anyone around them with guns, too.  But here's where that breaks down.  Most of the celebrities listed don't have a strong stand against the 2nd amendment. Even if they did, they still live in a society where guns are prevalent.  That reality, and the fact that celebrities daily face threats and harassment, and it would be stupid of them not to have an armed guard. It's not hypocrisy, it's common sense.

She states that Nia Sanchez was in the Miss USA Pageant in 1994.  I hate to pick on typos, but Nia Sanchez won in 2014.

She sites the Gary Kleck/Marc Gertz thesis on guns from 1995, claiming that there are sixty times the number of people defending themselves with a gun than being killed by them.  That date is not a typo, however. Even more shocking is how she touts this thesis as the end all in gun studies right after she puts down a dissenting study by Arthur Kellerman as unscientific. Got news for you, Dana. Your study gets it wrong, too.  Know who gets it right? These guys are one of many who have done studies independent of Kellerman and come to the same conclusion, that you are many times more likely to be shot in an altercation when you own a gun, than when you don't.  She also sites another John Lott study, and I've already debunked him.

I'm plodding my way through this book slowly.  So far, I would be embarrassed to use any of these arguments for defeating the "plot to disarm America". Since there are about as many guns as there are people in the US, how do they plan on rounding up all those guns anyway?

And now, a correction  In my post about the man shot in Wal*Mart with a fake gun, I stated that the guy who called in on 911 was an ex-marine, and I was correct.  But he didn't serve very long before being thrown out. It also looks like, while the guy was holding a gun, he was not brandishing it as the 911 call states.  It was a pretty real looking pellet gun, but this looks more and more like an overreaction on the 911 caller's part, and on the part of the police. I apologize for the error.

Friday, December 19, 2014

Michelle Obama's scandalous Target trip revisited

Dana's thoughts on Michelle Obama's story of woe when someone mistook the First Lady for being helpful at Target (spoiler: she's not helpful).

Okay, I'm with Dana on one point, it doesn't seem to be much a story of racism.  But the reason why escapes most from the right, as Dana shows in this video.  It wasn't racism because she asked her to help, it was because nobody recognized her.  Like I said, not a great example, but Dana is way off the mark, illustrated by the pictures of helpful people she uses at the end of the clip.

Also, does Dana's show seem poorly produced to you?  It's like there's a 5 year old in the control booth saying, "Hey, get a closeup on the side of her face!"  "Hey, use the boom camera to back away from Dana, and up, that would be so cool!"  Really, it's not cool.  It's not professional.  Frankly, I expect better.

Saturday, December 6, 2014

Only "just" laws should be followed

Dana had something about the Eric Garner case on Wednesday.  In her third hour, she thinks it is just fine for him to be selling loose cigarettes because the cigarette tax in New York is just way too high. She then doubles down by saying it is an unjust law, and while some conservative tell her it's still a law, she says "not every law is just, and not every law requires a choke hold." And her defense is to say you don't support Obamacare, do you?

The big question is, what is just?  Should we go any speed on roads because we find speed limits unjust?  Should we lie and slander people because we think the laws about that are unjust? Should we shoot people we don't like because we believe laws against that are unjust? It's tantamount to criminal to say just laws do not need to be followed. Dana is smart enough to realize this.

Listen to it on the third hour of Wednesday's show.  It begins at about 12 minutes and skip ahead again to 23 minutes when she goes into the story about Anita MonCrief (who walks into crowds of Mary Landrieu supporters, innocently in Dana's eyes, and posts clips where they say dumb things, then Dana calls it, "they are trying to intimidate Cassidy supporters") Actually, maybe the whole hour is worth listening to, just to remind yourself of the depths it seems Dana will go to promote her agenda.