J. Kb

Eau de Rem Oil

I got a haircut and beard trim today. It is one of those high end places that cater only to men.  I like it because I can get a straight razor shave there.

The woman asked me if I wanted “beard oil” when my trim was over.

I told her there were only four acceptable oils to have in your beard

1. Motor oil.
2. Gun oil.
3. Machine oil.
4. Fry oil.

Also, the only acceptable way to get those oils into your beard is by getting dripped and/or sprayed with the requisite lubricant while working.

Any man worthy of his beard will not have scented oil rubbed into it. 

A followup on Ellen

Miguel made a post yesterday about Ellen’s restaurant making an anti-gun statement during the NRA AM.

 

Well, this story made it’s way around the internet and some people on twitter decided to support Ellen’s.

Because NRA members do the killing?  No.  It’s because the Goebbels Jr. and the Parkland SS say so.  Jonz here is also an insane Trump/Russia conspiracy theorist, so you know his opinions are well grounded in fact.

https://twitter.com/ashleylynch/status/992519395661381632

“NRA members are racist.”  That is so played out it’s boring.  Makes me wondered how many NRA members are going to see Colion Noir’s speech, I bet that room is empty.  No, it will be PACKED.

All this tweet says is “I am an anti gun owner bigot.”

There was the mass stabbing in China in 2014 that killed twice as many people as the Parkland shooting.  Or the one a few days ago that killed seven students in a school.  Or the mass stabbing in a school in Japan that killed eight.  So yes, I’ve heard of knife massacres.

Also, no.  I don’t expect a lot of new customers.  It is easy to virtue signal on twitter, it’s much harder to put your money where you tweet is.  Just ask Dick’s about that.  Delta too.  Soon we’ll hear how Yeti is being affected from taking a giant shit on their main customer base.

I doubt many people are going to go out the their way to visit Ellen’s to support their anti-gun message.

https://twitter.com/Zeusacsom/status/992498866774790145

Again, I doubt the restaurant is doing better business.  But the small penis rub is a nice touch.  Haven’t seen that since… yesterday.

Also not burning people alive, chopping off heads and hands, throwing gays off buildings, or doing anything else like that.  Makes you wonder why they would compare us to ISIS when they spend so much time apologizing for Islamic Terrorists.

I guess when you side with a President who was mentored by a domestic terrorist who thought of himself as a freedom fighter for bombing the Pentagon, Americans who want to be left alone to peacefully enjoy their Constitutionally protected rights must be the enemy.

None of us are balking at Ellen’s First Amendment rights.  In fact we are glad she did what she did.  It means we know not to spend money there.  It would be worse for us if we did and she did the anti-gun thing in secret.

She said something we disagree with so we feel no need to give her our business.

But these people are part of the “bake the cake, bigot” crowd.  In their mind me must be compelled to buy food from Ellen’s or else we are violating her free speech rights.

I have a feeling that Ellen’s is going to go under.  The restaurant game operates on thin margins.  In a place like Texas this won’t soon be forgotten.  Not just will she not see a surge in business from the NRA AM, the locals will remember what she did and avoid her in perpetuity.

If she does fold, I guarantee you we will be held liable for it because not spending money at a place you don’t agree with is some sort of evil act.

I’ll tell you, in my opinion, who should be the most pissed.

Ellen’s waitstaff.  I worked in the restaurant and catering business.  Waitstaff fight over prime time during conventions and tourist season.  A convention can bring in huge money in tips.  Forget Ellen for a moment, how does the waitstaff feel about this making the rounds and not having the convention business to boost tips?  Ellen not just shot herself the foot but blew the toes off her waitstaff as well.

Maybe the harpies of Moms Demand Action will take a road trip to Ellen’s.  I just don’t see that happening.  I do see Ellen’s not being there a year from now, because as I keep seeing in the comments: go woke, go broke.

 

 

 

Liberal males have the worst sex stories

I saw this tweet from Slate.

Okay, Slate’s click bait broke down my will power.  I’m gonna read it.

Easier With Three.  My wife’s girlfriend moved in with us, and balancing work, life, and leisure has never gone better.

Tell me more…

When people think of polyamorous relationships, they usually jump right to the potential complications: How will you deal with jealousy? How will you schedule your time so that nobody feels shortchanged? What if your partners argue and can’t get along? What if you feel left out when your special someone has a date with a special someone who isn’t you?

No they don’t.  When “people think of polyamorous relationships” they think of threeways.

I once had these worries too, but for nine months I’ve been living with my wife and my wife’s girlfriend (a poly threesome V, rather than a triad, because all three of us are not romantically involved).

Dude!!!  Your wife is sleeping with another woman and you are not in the middle of it?  Yeah, now I understand why she is sleeping with another women.

We’re finding that having more people around means less, not more, complexity—more hands for the chores, more options for socializing and fun, an extra income to help with the bills, and more time for any one of us to spend going our own way.

That is the worst sexual fantasy every.  Two women in your house sharing a bed and all you get out of it is someone extra to help with the chores.

A typical day at our house begins at 6 a.m., when I grab my laptop from my bedside table and begin my work for Slate without getting dressed, or even out of bed. 

You’re a real He-Man aren’t you?  Writing for a Left Wing magazine that doesn’t even require you to get out of bed.

It’s like he has to make it clear in every paragraph why his wife has to sleep with another person.

When it was just the two of us, my wife’s breakfast and morning routine often got in the way of my early-morning productivity.

I’d say that is part of being a husband, having to accommodate another person in your life.

I make sure that before I go to bed the dishwasher is going and the coffee pot is set so all my wife has to do in the morning is pour coffee from a fresh pot into a clean cup.  Doing that takes up some of my time, but I do it because I love her and I am a husband that takes care of things.

I’d feel obliged to keep her company at breakfast, chat about our plans for the day, and help her find her missing shoe (under the blanket, dear, on the floor by the couch).

You “feel obliged to keep her company?”  Just get a fucking divorce already.

Nowadays Cassie and her girlfriend, Mandy, get up at about 7. Mandy makes breakfast. She and Cassie feed and walk our dogs, plan their days, and commute together to their respective workplaces. I get a plate of bacon and eggs brought into the bedroom as I work.

Why the fuck are they still in that house you freeloading cock?

Lest I sound like a leech, I’ll add that having one of the three of us working from home has benefits for Mandy and Cassie as well. 

You are a leech.  What do you bring to this relationship?  You are a writer for Slate who has to have someone else service his wife sexually.  Do you even know which end of a hammer to hold?  I’m pretty sure if you bought a step stool they would throw you the fuck out of the house.

When we inevitably forget which day is trash day, I’m there to do a last-minute dash for the curb.

Ahhh… so everyone in the house is retarded.  That explains it.

I’m around to let a worker in to do repairs or receive a package, and often I’ve got extra time in the afternoon to take a dog to the vet or make a trip to the store.

I was right, you don’t know what end of the hammer to hold.

It turns out that splitting household chores three ways is a lot easier than dividing them in two! 

You finally put down the words “three ways” and it is about chores.  Do you even have a dick?

With dishes, we rotate so that everyone has a luxurious two days off in between each day they spend scrubbing a pan. We each take responsibility for cooking dinner once a week, and then those of us who like to cook (Mandy and myself) work out the rest of the cooking informally between ourselves.

So you are less of a married couple and more like roommates.  I’ve never seen a married couple rotate like this.

Most of the cat feeding and care falls to me, while Mandy and Cassie largely take care of the dogs. 

Of course you take care of the cats.

I hate having to make calls for appointments, insurance, or home maintenance, so Cassie kindly takes them off my plate.

AGAIN!!!  No wonder Mandy took your wife out of your bed.  You can’t do home maintenance.

And the benefits spill over into socializing. My extroverted wife and I had a long-standing tendency to clash on how often we’d go out. With Mandy around, there’s an extra person to go do something with her if I’m not in the mood—and we also do things together as a family, comfortably watching TV, playing video games, or going out for a picnic in the park.

So you play video games while your wife is out on a date night with her girlfriend.  You suck as a husband.

And, would you believe, it’s actually pretty nice to have a bed to stretch out on by myself three nights a week?

No, no it’s not.  That is not something any decent husband would say.  What the fuck is wrong with you?

 One of the few problems we have encountered is that my wife might like to sleep alone once in a while herself.

I doubt it.  She’s probably using that night to get serviced by one of the repairmen you let in because you can’t swing a fucking hammer.

It’s probably not surprising that it’s great to have the income of an extra working adult as well. A rent we could afford as two becomes easy as pie with three, and there’s something extra relaxing about the nights when Mandy treats both of us out to dinner. It’s really common sense—if pooling resources between two people is good, pooling them with three is great!

Mandy is getting the short end of that stick.

Of course, not everyone is going to want to get involved in a polyamorous relationship, and even those who do won’t necessarily find it easy to replicate the structure that we have.

Lets see “somebody else fucks my wife while I play video games and write for Slate, then I cook that person dinner.”

I’m pretty sure you can find a lot of people who would want to be the third party in that relationship.

It helps that Mandy and I were friends before she and Cassie began to date, and that we’d each had success dating others casually without incident before Cassie tried adding a second, serious, long-term relationship to the mix.

So your wife slept around on you a lot before Mandy?

We talked a lot before and immediately after Mandy moved in about how to make things work and set some ground rules around how we’d show affection when all three of us were present, how many nights Cassie would spend with her versus with me, what contribution to the rent it would be reasonable for Mandy to make, and how we’d address it if it didn’t seem to be working out.

Did you actually put considerations about rent and sleeping arrangements in the same sentence?  For any other real man, the moment your wife announced that she need to get her orgasms elsewhere because you weren’t passing the muster, that should have been a full stop.  You said “okay, she can fuck you four nights a week but she needs to kick in her share of the rent too.

Cassie felt strongly that she didn’t want a hierarchical structure where Mandy felt like she was second class, and while there were a few jitters early on, we’ve found that relating to one another as equal members of one family really works for us. In many ways, we’ve been lucky to make this work for us so well.

Your wife is with someone else the majority of the nights in a week.  There is a “hierarchical structure” and too dumb to see that you are on the bottom of it.

It’s a shame Americans have to luck into work-life balance and that, even with two working adults in the house, so many families are struggling to make ends meet. With employers demanding more and more at work, so many people find they have little left to take home, while having one person stay home while the other works has become less and less feasible as wages fail to purchase what they once did. That’s why so many Americans are so worn down, and work-life conflict is affecting everything from their health to their relationships.

You write for a magazine on the other side of the country from where you live without getting out of bed, you have no work life balance.  I have to be at a factory early in the morning and if I have to stay late I do that too.  That’s a work life balance.

You just write bullshit while avoiding talking to your wife about her day and then let somebody else bang her in the evenings.  That’s not the usual American dream.

The big obstacles in most relationships are in the little details—finances, housework, child and/or pet care, and how to spend free time.

Little details – like who other than you is going to fuck your wife?

Before I lived with my wife’s girlfriend, I might have said that having an extra person would only make the conflicts and disagreements of daily life that much harder to work out.

But you got someone else to make you breakfast so it’s all good?

Instead, for our family, we’ve found the opposite is true. Whether we need an extra set of hands, an extra listening ear, another chum to hang out with, or an extra couple of bucks, our family has found that three can be easier, not harder, than two.

Dude, you don’t have a family.  You have a slow motion divorce in progress.

This is the worse think I’ve read this week.

If you want to write a good three way story, read some Penthouse Forum for good ideas.  If you want to write about your shitty, failed marriage do that too.  But this is the worst possible mashup of the two I can image.  That, or Beta Males really do have the worse sexual fantasies ever.

More of the great divide

Alyssa Milano is an actress and producer in Hollywood.  She grew up in New York.

I doubt she has ever been to Oklahoma, I doubt she could point to Oklahoma on a map without labels, and I guarantees shes knows nothing about Oklahoma except for Rodgers  Hammerstein musical.

Oklahoma decided to adopt Constitutional Carry.

Alyssa Milano voiced her opinion on twitter about this.

My first question is: why would she care?  She’s in California and will never travel to Oklahoma.

Oklahoma, as America’s 35th least densely populated state is entitled to pass laws that are for the good of its people.  Much the same way states like Wyoming and Alaska did before.  Notice a trend here?  When you have low density states with large open areas and economies heavy in energy/oil and agriculture, it’s easiest just to let people be and defend themselves as they please.

What works in Oklahoma and was voted on by Oklahomans is fine by me.

Not for Milano.  She had to busy body in the Sooner state.  I would put even money on her still thinking about Oklahomans as Okies.  Just stupid, poor, country bumpkins.  “Flyover country rubes” I believe is how the elite like to refer to people from the middle of the country.

This is the great American divide.  A celebrity from California and raised in New York can’t let Oklahoma be Oklahoma.  She has to get involved and criticize and condescend.

There are some people in this world who just want to let others the hell alone for them to decide was is best for them.  Then there are others who just have to interfere.

Milano lives to interfere, and there in lies the cause of the divide.

Carry what you want

I saw this over at Gun Nuts Media.

Carry gun rotations are a bad idea

I don’t spend a lot of time of gun forums these days, and even less time in “gun related” facebook groups. I realize that as a result of this, I’ve largely self-selected my circle down to people who are relatively like minded about the whole concept of EDC. This means that when I do venture out into the wild of FB or youtube comments, I end up running into ideas that I forgot people even had, such as the terrible idea of a “carry rotation.”

Echo chambers exist everywhere.

To understand why this is such a bad idea, first we have to define exactly what a carry rotation is, and more importantly what it isn’t. What is NOT a carry rotation is carrying specific guns for very specific purposes, or if you want to be all operator about it, mission profiles.

That doesn’t sound so bad.  I have different guns I carry because they fit the weather and what I’m wearing.

Now that we understand what a carry rotation isn’t, we can look at what a carry rotation is, and why it’s a bad idea. Note that with the three guns I carry regularly, they are all similar trigger types (DA/SA or DAO) and each gun is used for a particular set of circumstances. A carry rotation on the other hand is when you say “oh well it’s Sunday I’m going to carry the 1911 today, Monday I carry the Glock 19, Tuesday I carry the HK P30L, etc etc.” Choosing to carrying a different gun because it’s a different day of the week, or the moon is in retrograde, or because “I felt like it” is a pretty terrible idea and here are a few reasons why.

That’s just stupid.  Sometimes I get in the mood to be different.  I have a shitload of knives that I put in rotation.  Why?  Because I can.  We actually had a competition at work with who could carry a different knife every day and go the longest before repeating.  I didn’t win but I came in towards the top.

First is a lack of consistent practice. If you’re carrying four different guns with four different action types, how do you consistently practice? How do you adapt to the trigger going from a DA/SA to a striker fired to an SAO with a safety?

Shoot more, it’s not that hard.

The real answer of course is that you don’t.

Um…

Sure, some people are at a high enough skill level that they can pick up basically any gun and shoot it pretty well, but it’s been my experience that the sort of people who have “carry rotations” aren’t those people.

Kiss my ass.  The only gun in my collection I can’t shoot well is my Glock.  It’s probably because I’m not a Teutonic Ubermensch but my hand doesn’t attach to my wrist at 22 degrees.

I shoot competition with a 1911 and carry either a 1911 or a DAO revolver.  Pretty much opposite ends of the handgun spectrum, and guess what?  I can use them both.

Second is the equipment issue! I already have a box that has 100 holsters in it, and at this point I don’t really want to have any more holsters laying around. I can’t imagine trying to have enough holsters to carry four different guns simply because it’s a different day of the week. It would get exhausting and expensive.

I’m sorry that you are poor and can’t afford more holsters or a bigger house to store them all in.  Tell me more about how sour those grapes are.

Finally, there’s the issue with access. Let’s say sometimes you carry a 1911 in a traditional IWB holster behind the hip, but today you’re carrying a j-frame AIWB because it’s J-frame day or whatever. What happens if you actually need that gun? Are you going to be able to access it from a holster position you don’t practice with and manage a trigger you’re not used to? Like the 8-ball says…signs point to no.

Or just carry the same way all the time.  I carry strong side in competition.  I carry strong side for CCW.  I still don’t get appendix carry.  I’m a fat guy, it’s not comfortable.  I also don’t want to thrust my crotch at the bad guy like some music video backup dancer in order to get my gun out.

I get it though, guns are cool. Sometimes we want to show off guns and carry different things. However, I’d suggest that if the primary reason that you’re carrying a gun on a specific day is because you think that gun is cool…you might want to re-examine your priorities.

I’m pretty sure I can have both by cake (cool gun) and eat it too (effective for defense).

There is an old saying: “fear the man who has just one gun, for he knows how to use it.”

That may have worked for the cowboys.  Today, the only reason I fear the man with just one gun is that the guy who has it is probably a Fudd who only does one thing like shoot skeet or hunts pheasant and doesn’t mind me having my arsenal confiscated by the goverment.

Personally, I believe in carrying what you are comfortable with.  I am comfortable with a lot of things.  I got a new 1911.  I knew it came with the wrong sight height the second I pulled it out.  Why?  Because I lined up the sights and it felt wrong.  It just pointed… wrong.  I got it out to the range and I was right, it was off.

At the same time range trip as I was tinkering with my 1911, I had my LRC with me and was going back and forth between a SAO 45 and a DAO 38 and doing equally well.

The trick is… shoot a lot and practice with what you have.

But forget me, let Clint Smith explain it.

Know how to use everything because you never know what you will have when shit goes down.  If I have to pull a gun off a dead cop or a bad guy, I need to be able to fight with it.  I can’t say “it’s not fair, this is not my usual carry gun.”  Gun fights aren’t fair.

Even Clint mixes and matches on the same day.

He carries a 1911 on his belt but packs a DA revolver on his ankle.

I prefer the statement to be: “fear the man who has a lot of guns and even more knives because he can kill you with anything.”

Don’t tell me why your limitations as a shooter should effect how I carry.

Interview Question

Yesterday, some friends of mine were on lockdown at work because a disgruntled employee made threats.  Everybody is safe and the guy was arrested, he was just being an asshole online, but you can’t take chances.

One of the things the people I knew said about him was “that he was quiet.”

You always hear that.

The news headline could be The bodies of 27 women were found in chest freezers in a rape dungeon under a suburban house.”

The first interview with a neighbor will be “he was so quiet, you never would have thought he was up to anything.”

In order to gauge personalities, I think I’m going to ask the interview question “What did you do last weekend?”

Candidate 1: “Well I spent a quiet weekend at home, talking with my yellow lab.”

Me: “We’re done here.”

Candidate 2: “So there I was in a hot tub filled with college cheerleaders…”

Me: “I’m going to stop you right there.  Can you start on Monday?  Okay, now finish that story.”

You know the guy who spends his free time that way isn’t eager to die in a hail of police gunfire at the end of a rampage.

 

There is not enough money in the world

Eric Swalwell is the Congressman from California’s 15th district, which is in the San Francisco bay area.

He penned an OpEd for USA Today titled Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters: Ex-prosecutor in Congress.

Ban assault weapons and buy them back. It might cost $15 billion, but we can afford it. Consider it an investment in our most important right, the right to live.

That’s direct.  Surprisingly he doesn’t start with Parkland.  He starts in 2009.

Gary Jackson never stood a chance.

Gary was 28 and working as a security guard at a taco truck in Oakland, Calif., in 2009 when he saw Dreshawn Lee carrying a sawed-off shotgun and reported it to police. Three months later, Lee took his revenge by shooting and killing Jackson with an AK-47-style semiautomatic assault rifle.

Taking this at face value, possession of a “sawed off shotgun” is a felony (assuming it is not an NFA device) while grandfathered AK’s were legal in Ca and the federal AWB had expired by that point.  So really the possession of the illegal SBS was worse than the possession of the AK.  But don’t let that stop him.

I was the prosecutor who persuaded a jury to convict Lee and persuaded a judge to put him away for 65 years to life. But Gary’s autopsy report still haunts me.

So that how did he get his revenge?

Trauma surgeons and coroners will tell you the high-velocity bullet fired from a military-style, semiautomatic assault weapon moves almost three times as fast as a 9mm handgun bullet, delivering far more energy. The bullets create cavities through the victim, wrecking a wider swath of tissue, organs and blood vessels. And a low-recoil weapon with a higher-capacity magazine means more of these deadlier bullets can be fired accurately and quickly without reloading. 

I’m not a trauma surgeon but I have done ballistic testing.  I’m pretty sure that a load of 00 buck will do more damage than an assault rifle round.  So will a 1 oz slug.  Modern JHP ammo is pretty nasty.  Not to mention any sort of soft point or ballistic tip center fire rifle.

I went hunting once.  I shot a 75 lbs pig in the guts with a 7mm Rem Mag with a 175 gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw.  It literally blew the pig’s intestines out the exit wound.  The pig moved about 10 feet dragging its guts behind it.  That is why I will never hunt again.

The point is, don’t bullshit me about how trauma surgeons thing that a 55 grain 5.56 is TEH MOST DEADLY EVR!!!

So Gary didn’t stand much chance. First-graders and teachers in Newtown, Conn., didn’t either. Nor did dancers at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, nor concert-goers in Las Vegas, nor teenagers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland, Fla., nor the people at the Waffle House outside Nashville. Like so many American mass-shooting victims in recent decades, their doom was all but assured by the murderer’s tool.

I want to stop mass shootings too but this is crap.   Their “doom was all but assured” not because of an AR-15 but because layer upon layer of security, much of that federal and state government you put so much faith in, dropped all the balls, repeatedly.  Remember, the Pulse shooter’s dad was an FBI informant and didn’t bother to tell the FBI what his son was up to.  Even the Sandy Hook shooter threw up red flags, which *shocker* were not followed up on.  So add those deaths to the list of “killed because of government incompetence and ineptitude.”

There are tens of millions of AR-15 owners who have never and will never kill anybody.  They are a lot less of a threat to American safety than a narcissistic, dipshit of a Sheriff that 85% of his deputies think is worthless.

Nonetheless, we can give ourselves and our children the chance these victims never had. We can finally act to remove weapons designed for war from our streets, once and for all.

How?

Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come.

Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.

The AWB had no effect on reducing mass shootings.  Crime was already going down and once the AWB ended, still went down.  It was a uselss law of supreme feel-goodary.

A buy back will not reduce shootings.  If it only targets assault weapons it’s pointless as the Virgina Tech shooter killed 32 people with a pair of handguns.  One was 22 caliber with a 10 round magazine.  If it targets all guns, well… good luck with that.

Also, thanks for allowing the useless and cowardly cops to have the guns that we previously law abiding citizens can’t.  It’s good to know that the Coward County Sheriff’s department will hide behind trees with AR-15’s.

There’s something new and different about the surviving Parkland high schoolers’ demands. They dismiss the moral equivalence we’ve made for far too long regarding the Second Amendment. I’ve been guilty of it myself, telling constituents and reporters that “we can protect the Second Amendment and protect lives.” 

There is something different about the Parkland kids.  Their seething hatred and vicious totalitarianism.  And thanks for clarifying that you believe that the way to protect lives is to destroy the Second Amendment.  It’s good to know there are whole parts of the Constitution you don’t want to protect even though you swore and oath to do so.

The Parkland teens have taught us there is no right more important than every student’s right to come home after class. The right to live is supreme over any other. 

I agree with the right to life.  Which is why I own AR-15’s.  The lesson of history is “don’t trust the goverment to protect you.”  Go ask the Indians about that.  Or maybe Andrew Pollack who is suing the SRO who hid like a chicken shit allowing his daughter to get murdered.

Our courts haven’t found a constitutional right to have assault weapons, anyway. When the Supreme Court held in 2008 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that this right “is not unlimited” and is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Of course a Democrat can’t read Heller or McDonald.  These are the same people who read Roe v. Wade and see the words “right to privacy” and read “right to a goverment funded partial birth abortion.”

Since that District of Columbia v. Heller decision, four federal appeals courts have upheld assault weapons bans. Many other firearms are available for self-protection, they found, and the danger that assault weapons pose to society is a legitimate reason for states and localities to ban them.

Yes, the 4th and 9h Circuit Courts, the two most liberal courts in the land.  They called AR-15’s “weapons of war” despite that fact that they are not, the whole semi auto vs. full auto thing.  This is a lot of judicial activism by the same courts that used campaign rhetoric in their decision making processes, which is beyond the scope of what the court should do.

Australia got it right. After a man used military-style weapons to kill 35 people in April 1996, that nation adopted strict new measures and bought back 643,726 newly illegal rifles and shotguns at market value. The cost — an estimated $230 million in U.S. dollars at the time — was funded by a temporary 0.2% tax levy on national health insurance.

And they don’t have civil rights down under either.  We do.  Also, their gun ban did nothing to reduce their violent crime rate.  I’m getting tried of the politicians who effectively say “as long as nobody gets shot with an AR I don’t care how many people get stomped to death.”

America won’t get off that cheaply. Gun ownership runs so deep that we don’t even know how many military-style semiautomatic rifles are in U.S. civilian hands.

You have no fucking idea, and that should scare the shit out of you.

Based on manufacturing figures and other indirect data, there could be 15 million assault weapons out there. If we offer $200 to buy back each weapon — as many local governments have — then it would cost about $3 billion; at $1,000 each, the cost would be about $15 billion.

No, I’m not selling my civil rights for $1,000, and $200 is just an insult.

The FBI budget for 2016 was only $8.7 billion.  If you are going to spend upwards of $15 billion, you could spend it in a way that will reduce crime, like following up on leads or funding the hiring of police and sheriffs who are not lazy gutless wonders.

Nope, because you have free citizens bearing arms, you will spend the money to strip us of our rights.

It’s no small sum. But let’s put it in context.

A Democrat who is budget conscience, really?

The federal government is spending an estimated $4 trillion this year; $15 billion would be 0.375% of that, not that we must spend it all in one year.

Nevermind.

Meanwhile, the GOP’s tax “reform” — a giveaway to corporations and the rich that threw comparatively meager scraps to working families — is projected to increase the national debt by $1.9 trillion over the next decade.

Eat my asshole!  I bought a new gun and the down payment on a beautiful, head-turner of a truck with my “crumbs.”

What is it worth to American taxpayers to not see our families, friends and neighbors cut down in a hail of gunfire? Consider this an investment in averting carnage and heartache and loss. 

Fuck you!  I will not sell my guns to the US government unless I start my own gun company and submit for contracts.

What you are really asking is “what is it worth to American taxpayers to see millions of law abiding Americans who never hurt anybody get turned into felons because they legally purchased something we decided after-the-fact they shouldn’t own?”

How many families are you going to ruin because dad or mom has an AR?  God forbid we send some illegal who drove his car drunk into a school bus back to Mexico because “it will break up his family.”  But a law abiding, tax paying engineer from Alabama has to get taken from his kids because he like to shoot service match?

When I think of Jackson, I think of all the others who died with wounds like his. I think about my dad and two brothers who put their lives on the line as law enforcement officers. I think about my 11-month-old son, Nelson, and the safe classrooms I want him to learn in.

Under normal circumstances I’m not going to kill any of them, so why do you want to put me in jail?

America has a deadly problem, a problem other developed nations have avoided or addressed. Some say we’re already too far gone to take corrective action, but we cannot have a defeatist attitude about this. Fixing our problem requires boldness and will be costly, but the cost of letting it fester will be far higher — for our wallets, and for our souls.

More people have been stabbed in London this year than shot with AR-15.  You can kindly shut the fuck up about “ a problem other developed nations have avoided or addressed.”

There are tens of millions of us who will not part with our rights for your petty pieces of silver.

We are not Australians.  Culturally, they are subjects of the commonwealth.  We are not.  We will not humbly submit.  If you think that you can prosecute those who won’t participate in the buyback, you are sorely mistaken.

Do you really thing you can jail 50 million Americans for not giving up their AR’s to law enforcement?  How very NKVD of you.

Your Australian fantasy might be nice for you to think about when avoiding eye contact with the junkie shooting up in the BART.

Out here in Middle America, I dare you to try it.