…or he has some issues that require a net and a straight jacket.

He is from Louisiana, so voodoo may have been involved.

No, what the three-lettered, gun-clutching He-Men are actually doing is more of what they do best: They’re now using a cartoon to appeal to the clearly underserved teenage-and-under market for the Bushmaster Carbon-15.

Think of it as a Joe Camel for the modern age. With armor-piercing bullets

NRA Makes a Gun Cartoon for the Kids

I almost dropped my coffee when I saw this.  I know Eddie Eagle has been a thorn on the side of the Gun Control groups because it keeps asking them the obvious question: If you are into safety, show us what you’ve done to teach kids not to mess with guns? To which the answer is a big fat zero.

And now a bit of history for the Youngins:  Back in 1996 (Yes, the author went back to the trash pile almost 20 years) there was a huge campaign against the cigarette brand Camel because they had a character named Joe Camel who the cognoscenti said made it cool for kids to smoke.

This was the era of the huge lawsuits against the Tobacco companies so eventually the campaign was dropped. Now, the geniuses of Gun Control saw what happened and went after Eddie Eagle by comparing it to Joe Camel and adding the narrative that the Eddie Eagle Program incited kids to go buy and use guns…. well, the truth has never been their strong suit.

Every major media outlet ran with this. You would have thought the NRA was bringing heroin to the classroom and injecting it in the kids so they could become instant addicts. Legislators demanded that laws be written to forbid the use of such disgusting scheme in our sainted schools. Newspapers wrote long scathing editorials about the thinly veiled attempts to kill our kids with guns, even though at least one major newspaper in the Gunshine State ran a front page story of a girl who saw a gun abandoned in a playground and followed what she had learned in school and made sure nobody touched the gun, got her friends to leave the playground and got adults involved who called the cops. That newspaper hailed the girl as a hero. No, I am not kidding you.

What happened next, shook the Gun Control community: The NRA and gun owners in general flipped their ugly middle finger and refused to be cowed into silence. Them effing rednecks defied the experts! How dare they! They kept at it for a while, but after being asked “OK, show us YOUR plan to teach kids how to be safe around guns” mixed with healthy doses of STFU, the Antis called it quits. I guess we somehow offended their sensibilities too much and went to their respective safe areas.

Now, that a pundit had to go dumpster-diving and pull out this smelly piece of failed strategy, shows how depleted of ideas their brainpan is at this time…or any time for that matter.

Guys, if the Eddie Eagle = Joe Camel strategy went turd 20 years ago, it did not turn into fragrant musk just because you pulled it out from the landfill, dumped a gallon of Old Spice on it and presented it in a new fancy container: It is still a turd.

NRA Sticker on a Prius that probably belongs to a University of Kentucky student. He or she will inevitable fall in our hands…MUHAHAHAHAHA!

 Hat Tip to @GreenMeanie

Even if the defendants did not have immunity under the federal or state statutes, the Phillipses never showed any of the online stores knew or reasonably should have known about Holmes’ potential criminal acts or misuse, the judge said.

Additionally, the plaintiffs never alleged any individual defendant had knowledge of Holmes’ other online purchases or the firearms he bought offline, the judge said.

“There can be no question that Holmes’s deliberate, premeditated criminal acts were the predominant cause of plaintiffs’ daughter’s death,” Judge Matsch wrote, but “[n]either the Web nor the face-to-face sales of ammunition and other products to Holmes can plausibly constitute a substantial factor causing the deaths and injuries in this theater shooting.”

via Parents lost daughter to mass shooter, now owe $220,000 to his suppliers | Thomson Reuters Blog.

These type of lawsuits have not progressed for a long while now. But they still pop now and then because the silly idea that they can wear out the target on both effort and money…. that is if you have the money to initially spend and you don’t get nailed with having to pay the costs of the defendant in case you lose, which is what happened here.

Sandy and Lonnie Phillips decided to be the faces on the lawsuit brought forth by the Brady Campaign and now are stuck with almost a quarter of a million dollars’ worth of payments to make against Lucky Gunner and Sportsman Guide. The question that I ask is, Weren’t they told of the very likely consequences of this lawsuit? Or if they did,, did the lawyers from the Brady Campaign downplayed the danger of losing and having to pay for legal fees and costs under Colorado law?

I don’t know if there are grounds for legal malpractice, but if the Brady Campaign washes its hands from this, they surely are committing moral malpractice in mu humble opinion: they cannot just entice somebody to be the face of a lawsuit and then go “Ooops! My bad” when it collapses and there is a nasty bite back.

One of the reporters I complained to said that he had covered climate change for many years. He explained that journalists were able to stop their “balanced” reporting of that issue only when objective findings indicated that the overwhelming majority of scientists thought climate change was indeed happening, and that it was caused by humans.

So I decided to determine objectively, through polling, whether there was scientific consensus on firearms. What I found won’t please the National Rifle Assn.

Op-Ed There’s scientific consensus on guns — and the NRA won’t like it

Yeah, that global warming consensus thing is working real fine. So fine in fact that it is April 24, and 23 states are still reporting snow.

It is like a bad joke from a Harry Potter movie: utter the magic word “consensus” and watch the whole world go 180 degrees of what you intended.

At least we get a good laugh out of it.

In collaboration with Miller, Mother Jones crunched data from 2012 and found that the annual cost of gun violence in America exceeds $229 billion. Direct costs account for $8.6 billion—including long-term prison costs for people who commit assault and homicide using guns, which at $5.2 billion a year is the largest direct expense. Even before accounting for the more intangible costs of the violence, in other words, the average cost to taxpayers for a single gun homicide in America is nearly $400,000. And we pay for 32 of them every single day.

via The True Cost of Gun Violence in America | Mother Jones.

I did this post on a rush, so it is not written pretty.

Since 1989, Florida has averaged 1,100 homicides a year (1989 the highest with 1,405 and 2001 the lowest with 867 and actually not having very wild swings other than a continuous down trend) and as Motherjones says there is a cost to the taxpayers of $400,000 per homicide, so we get a yearly total of $440,000,000 obviously a number not to be sneezed at. But the whole tone of the article is we, poor taxpayers are being socked with this awful cost, right? So in reality, how big is the cost for the Florida taxpayer since our Gunshine State became the blight of civilization for our loose gun laws?

So, how much the average Floridian “paid” for a homicide? We take that $440,000,000 number and divided it by the number of Floridians in 1989 (12,797,318), the year with highest number of homicides and we get $34.38. per murder per Floridian. The same $440,000,000 divided into the 19,259,543 Floridians in 2013? It comes down to $22.84 per murder.

And you know the way I am doing the numbers is wildly in favor of Motherjones’ accounting. $440,000,000 of today’s dollars does not buy even close to the same amount of goods and services it did in 1989. Out of the 24 years, ten had numbers under 1,000 and only six over 1,100 and still, the cost per homicide – per Floridian dropped one-third. in a state awash with guns, loose gun laws and an increase of almost 2/3 of the population,

So, it is not just More Guns = Less Crime, we can make the case that More Guns in the hands of More People = Less Crime & Cheaper Costs.

I am going to need to consult John Lott about that.

(As usual, y’all check my math and let me know what corrections are needed)

Misery loves company…. get your own Excedrin.

Hat Tip to Brian R….the bastard!