Gun Free Zone

Where a Redneck Jew, a Hispanic Catholic, and a Computer Geek write about Gun Rights, Self Defense and whatever else we can think about.

I can't think of a category

CSGV Followers = Laddites.

ByMiguel.GFZ

Jul 5, 2011

Luddite: one of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying labor saving machinery as a protest;. One who is opposed to especially technological change.

Laddite: Mentally unstable member or Follower of the Coalition to Stop Gun Rights Violence. They are opposed to any change that might allow Law Abiding Citizens keep and bear arms.

Example:

PS: This was posted on the Fourth of July.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

Related Post

I can't think of a category

Proof that it’s spring!

Apr 3, 2024 hagar
....... I can't think of a category

Shannon, answer the hard questions.

Feb 6, 2017 Miguel.GFZ
I can't think of a category

Merry Christmas!

Dec 25, 2013 Miguel.GFZ
17 thoughts on “CSGV Followers = Laddites.”

  2. Amazingly this guy can look into my mind and tell me things I did not know about myself. It is good to know that despite my love for this country, expressed via military and other service, and my deep conviction that individuals be able to pursue their own goals, I am truly a heartless bastard who cares little for those around me. All because I don’t agree that disarmament = safety.

  4. “They are opposed to any change that might allow Law Abiding Citizens keep and bear arms.”

    Should be “They are opposed to any change that might allow Law Abiding Citizens to defend themselves.”

  6. I will be looking over their “statistics” to see the relevance.

    It has been done repeatedly in the past to calculate the crime rate for CCWs and they are much lower than the general population. The big thing is that citing 300+ cases is not so important if you do not talk about the denominator nor the complete benefit/risk ratio.

    Some questions I will investigate in the database:
    1) Time frame – appears to be 3-4 years (i.e. 2007 to present, which really alters their numbers game).
    2) Justifiable use of handgun? If some street thug is killed in the comission of a crime than the CCW should be a non-issue.
    3) Is the CCW permit both active and legal (i.e. not expired/taken)?
    4) Was a gun even used by the CCW holder?
    5) Suicides do not count!

  7. I did some quick math and posted some time ago on the CCWs accused of murder and came out pretty much to the same numbers as usual:
    Less than half of 1 percent versus 5% of the general population.

  8. I agree Miguel.

    I looked at their cases briefly and was unimpressed. I’m not going to waste more time on it because the flaws are so gross.

    There are a bunch of acquittals and pending situations so you cannot count them. The time frame is substantial so that dilutes the magical number of >300 incidents. There are some accidents thrown in. Also, there are cases where the bad actor was a bad actor or mentally unstable, who should either have been convicted of a lesser crime or hospitalized which would have prevented any CCW or firearm at all. So there may have been failures in the justice or psychiatric evaluation systems.

    So, how would more gun laws have prevented these “damaged” people from getting a CCW and firearms legally? I know, just outlaw ALL guns, everywhere, all the time! WRONG!

    Finally, I’m not sure if their point about CCWs is whether they are supposed to not be law-abiding or if it enabled the transgressions. Little detail is provided, but the gist is that the fact that they had a CCW seems to be the major idea; not that it helped the bad guy with the crime. Given that the CCW process is strenuous, it just shows that some “good” people can and do commit crimes. You have to look at over all rates to get a read on a group, not just a few outliers. If you don’t, then we can condemn all of the political parties, police departments,religions, and other groups because they have all had a few bad apples. That is not a reason to deny rights to everyone for the few offenders.

    That logic means no one can do anything because they might abuse it and cause harm. No alcohol, no vehicles, no sharp objects, no free speech, and so on. Anything can be misused.

  9. I want Mikey there to hand over a million dollars on account of being a raging, intolerant, narrow-minded, hateful bigot. Something tells me my desires are more likely to transpire than his.

    They really do live in their own little worlds, do they not? What do you want to bet that his posting IP is within the confines of the US, though…?

  12. “There are no gods, and this country sucks.”

    Well the two concepts are unrelated, but he has my permission to GTFO and go to some gun-control haven like (Formerly) Great Britain.

  13. […] Miguel has coined a new term. Here’s some more example of Laddite activity. Meanwhile they are flushing pro-gun comments down the memory hole. And they wonder why they are inconsequential in the new media space. An echo chamber might be good for keeping followers appropriately frothing at the mouth, but it does no good for the overall health of your movement when dealing with people who are not mouth frothers. […]

Comments are closed.