Remember, Democrats Totally Aren’t Trying To Take Your Guns Away (Part Lots)

By William Teach May 20, 2018 – 7:57 am

As Glenn Beck points out

We know what’s behind the Democrat talking points, so when they call for ‘common sense gun control”, we won’t allow things that even we think are good ideas, as they will then be expanded, Dems will want more and more and more. Because you see plenty of Dems responding to Lauren like

https://twitter.com/elinorgray/status/997896153206214656

Then there’s

Isn’t it nice that a person who took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States (with Democrats, you have to specify, as they might think you’re talking about the Constitution of a different country) is saying “nah, let’s get rid of what I don’t like”? I say we do away with all armed protect for Congress. While in session, at the Capital building, at the Congressional office buildings, when they’re traveling, heck, restrict them from even hiring private security or carrying their own firearm while in elected position. See how they like that.

Then there’s this from Esquire’s Dave Holmes

Okay, Now I Actually Do Want To Take Your Guns

Hey there, NRA:

Listen, I know the moments after a gunman opens fire in a school are hectic for you. You have to get your talking points together, you have to mentally prepare to debate a traumatized yet sensible child, you have to look at yourself in the mirror and practice saying that more guns would have made the situation less deadly. It’s a busy time! And since we are always either in the moments after or the moments before a mass shooting, you’re pretty much always busy, I have noticed!

Anyway, I just wanted to drop you a line and let you know that I now actually do want to take your guns.

All of your guns.

Right now.

Go ahead and try, chump.

And Vox’s always nutty German Lopez

I’ve covered gun violence for years. The solutions aren’t a big mystery.
America can prevent shootings. But it has to come to grips with the problem.

The problem? Well, German tries to be subtle, but finally gets around to say that the problem is guns, not mental illness, and goes on to tell us how great the Australian gun ban and forced confiscation was and still is. And that this has to be applied nationally, not just at the state and local level (because no one could possibly smuggle anything across our borders, you know). And that “America needs to go much further than anyone admits,” even further than the solution imposed in Australia

If the fundamental problem is that America has far too many guns, then policies need to cut the number of guns in circulation right now to seriously reduce the number of gun deaths. Background checks and other restrictions on who can buy a gun can’t achieve that in the short term. What America likely needs, then, is something more like Australia’s mandatory buyback program — essentially, a gun confiscation scheme — paired with a serious ban on specific firearms (including, potentially, all semiautomatic weapons).

But, wait, there’s more

Part of the holdup is the Second Amendment. While there is reasonable scholarly debate about whether the Second Amendment actually protects all Americans’ individual right to bear arms and prohibits stricter forms of gun control, the reality is the Supreme Court and US lawmakers — backed by the powerful gun lobby, particularly the NRA — widely agree that the Second Amendment does put barriers on how far restrictions can go. That would likely rule out anything like the Australian policy response short of a court reinterpretation or a repeal of the Second Amendment, neither of which seems likely.

Now, does that seem like they’re pushing for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment? Sure does. I say, go for it. Give it a shot. As Stephen Miller responded to Chris Murphy, “”Your rights aren’t absolute” Sure. Run on that one guys.” Yeah, run on attempting to take Constitutional Rights away, Dems. And try to take our guns away. You won’t like the results if you manage to do it. Which you won’t.

Read: Remember, Democrats Totally Aren’t Trying To Take Your Guns Away (Part Lots) »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Irony: Nation Complaining About ‘Climate Change’ Allowing Hotel For The Uber-Rich To Be Built

By William Teach May 19, 2018 – 4:08 pm

I don’t think Mother Jones considered this when they reprinted a Slate screed

A $50,000-a-Night Underwater Hotel Room in the Maldives Shows How Oblivious We Are to Climate Change

In a tiny nation that will likely be underwater due to sea level rise within the next century, an American luxury hotel chain is constructing an underwater hotel roomthat the world’s wealthiest will be able to reserve for $50,000 a night. No one seems to have noticed the irony. But it’s hard to imagine a more perfect example of the way we think about climate change: a scary thing that will happen at some point in the future but not a problem worth mentioning in the present.

When you search for the Maldives, a country composed of 1,192 islands that speckle the Indian Ocean southwest of Sri Lanka, on Google Maps, the names of the biggest islands appear in a blank sea. You have to zoom in to identify the minute slivers of land that are home to a population of 400,000. Soon even these slivers will be gone. With an average elevation of about 4 feet, and with literally zero hills or mountains, the Maldives is the world’s lowest-lying country. It will not survive the sea level rise caused by anthropogenic climate change.

In 2009, then-President Mohamed Nasheed tried to broadcast the plight of the Maldives by holding what he called the world’s first underwater Cabinet meeting. Nasheed and several high-ranking government officials donned wetsuits and scuba gear, dove down 20 feet to the ocean floor, and, using hand signals and white boards to communicate, signed a document urging all of the world’s countries to cut carbon emissions. Should the world fail to control climate change, they implied, the Maldives would only be able to conduct its business underwater. This piece of political theater served as a metonym for the problem of climate change, a small and globally weak nation trying to publicize its environmental trauma in universally comprehensible terms.

What the Maldives want is some of that sweet, sweet, redistributed climate cash. Also, lots of tourists taking long fossil fueled trips to their 4 international airports and 8 domestic ones. They’re upgrading their international airports and constructing new runways to accommodate bigger passenger jets. And a new seaplane terminal. Does this look like a nation concerned about ‘climate change’ from fossil fuels?

Reading the article more, we see what a massive construction this hotel will be. Most of the material will have to be brought in by fossil fueled cargo ship. Why is the government allowing this? Some data suggests that the waters around the Maldives are rising at 3.5mm per year tide gauge/3.2 satellite. That’s .1377 inches per year. Other data shows 2.2mm per year. Some data shows no change. None are particularly long term to make a proper judgement.

What is known is that some of those pushing this issue the hardest are hypocrites. If the government of the Maldives really cared, they wouldn’t allow mega hotels to be built, nor new runways, and, really would shut down their airports and only allow sailing ships to bring people and stuff.

Read: Irony: Nation Complaining About ‘Climate Change’ Allowing Hotel For The Uber-Rich To Be Built »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 19, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrendous fossil fueled machine causing tectonic action, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post wondering what would happen if a GOP admin sicced the CIA and FBI on a political opponent.

Ideas for next week’s theme?

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Record Heat Means More Ferocious Hurricanes Or Something

By William Teach May 19, 2018 – 10:30 am

So, we had a big hurricane year in 2017, meaning it’s time for the Dire Prognostications Of Doom to sally forth

Record Heat Means Hurricanes Gain Ferocity Faster

Hurricanes are becoming more violent, more rapidly, than they did 30 years ago. The cause may be entirely natural, scientists say.

But Hurricane Harvey, which in 2017 assaulted the Gulf of Mexico and dumped unprecedented quantities of rain to cause devastating floods in Texas, happened because the waters of the Gulf were warmer than at any time on record. And they were warmer because of human-driven climate change, according to a second study.

Both studies examine the intricate machinery of a natural phenomenon, the tropical cyclone. Researchers from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory looked at how fast four of 2017’s hurricanes—Harvey, Irma, Jose and Maria—intensified: episodes in which maximum wind speed rose by at least 25 knots, which is more than 46 kilometers (approximately 29 miles), per hour within a 24-hour period. They report in Geophysical Research Letters that they combed through 30 years of satellite data from 1986 to 2015 to find a pattern.

Researchers have repeatedly warned that hurricane hazard must increase with global warming, driven by profligate human combustion of fossil fuels that dump greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Hurricanes will hit higher latitudes and deliver more damage within the Gulf of Mexico. But climate change is only part of the answer.

The latest study did not find that storms were intensifying rapidly more often than usual. But the researchers did find that when a storm grew at speed, it became much more powerful within a 24-hour period than such storms did 30 years ago: wind speeds had gained 3.8 knots or seven kilometers (approximately 4.3 miles) an hour for each of the three decades.

So, while it could be natural, no, is has to be due to you, yes you, driving a fossil fueled vehicle.

It’s also your fault over the low hurricane, particularly major hurricane, activity from 2006-2016. Regardless, a 30 year peak at data discounts not only the rest of this current warm period, which started in the mid to late 1800’s, but what happens during a cool period. Warmists are making judgements, opinions, not science.

You know what will happen now, though, right? The Gore Effect, where hurricane activity will crash once again.

Read: Record Heat Means More Ferocious Hurricanes Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Dehumanizing And Treat Illegals As Animals Or Something

By William Teach May 19, 2018 – 8:04 am

And this is how it works: a leading media outlet manufactures some sort of Outrage, in this case the utterly out of context “animals” quote. They then correct, or sorta correct, the “mistake”, meaning they got caught. But, by that point, they’ve gotten their mistake into the leftist talking points, and the leftists run wild. That’s how we end up with this schlock at Vox

It’s not just rhetoric: Trump’s policies treat immigrants like me as “animals”
Trump’s rhetoric and agencies like ICE immigration enforcement dehumanize immigrants.

“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals.”

This is what President Trump said on Wednesday during a roundtable meeting with top officials of his administration and California politicians to discuss California’s new “sanctuary” law. It’s a little unclear whether these “animals” he was referencing were undocumented immigrants as a whole, as he seemed to imply, or specifically members of the MS-13 gang, which was the subject of some previous questions. Regardless, the comments went viral: Without missing a beat, the internet and the media were swift to castigate Trump over his deplorable remarks.

No, it’s not unclear, that’s just a cop-out to continue your rant.

I’m an immigration advocate and a recipient of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy. I’ve been following the Trump administration’s words and actions closely on immigration issues because my future depends on it. The “animals” comments are nothing new: Trump has consistently dehumanized immigrants as a group, comparing all of us to rapists and gang members from the earliest days of his campaign.

You’re in the country illegally. Don’t want to be dehumanized? Leave.

The ambiguity — whether Trump was dehumanizing gang members or all undocumented immigrants — is predictably being exploited by conservative politicians, including Trump himself, and pundits who make the case that the “fake news” media is being unfair to the president.

Wait, is there a problem with dehumanizing gang members now? Really? Here comes the big spin

But that argument fails to recognize that whether Trump meant MS-13 gang members or immigrants as a whole doesn’t really matter: In his eyes, and in the directives that have shaped his policies, they are one and the same. Equating these groups is impacting real lives — Trump officials do it in their rhetoric, and they do it in their policies.

Don’t like it? Leave. You’re hear in violation of our laws. You’re sucking up resources and money meant for U.S. citizens and those who are legally present.

Trump has vilified immigrants and their contributions every step of the way.

You aren’t an immigration. Immigrants come to the U.S. legally. You didn’t. And this kind of schtick is a main reason that illegals, at least those who aren’t scumbag animal gang members and serious criminals, aren’t getting any sympathy from Conservatives, who tend to be way more religious than liberals: these unhinged demands and screeds push us away. Instead of being abusive when you’re in violation of the law, try being nice and asking politely. You do not get to demand anything. Personally, I’m at the point of just saying “deport them all.”

Read: Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Dehumanizing And Treat Illegals As Animals Or Something »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Dehumanizing And Treat Illegals As Animals Or Something | Trackback URL

After Santa Fe Shooting, NY Times Blames Congress For Failing To Pass Gun Control That Wouldn’t Have Made A Difference

By William Teach May 19, 2018 – 7:42 am

This is pretty much expected out of the NY Times which is itself protected by armed security, and seems to be a reprint of an article they ran on February 15th, with a few changes

How Congress Has Dithered as the Innocent Get Shot

Once again, Americans are facing a tragedy involving guns. This time, at least 10 people were killed during an attack at a Texas high school Friday.

More than five years have passed since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children and six adults were killed. In that time, dozens of gun safety proposals have been introduced in Congress attempting to fix glaring issues with gun safety and regulation. More than 1,600 mass shootings have taken place in America since then.

Here is a guide to what Congress has — or, more accurately, has not — accomplished during this time.

They offer a long “interactive” calendar related to “Congressional inaction” with the header

Gun control laws included here are: expanding background checks, closing the “Charleston loophole,” improving record reporting, closing the “terror gap,” banning bump stocks, addressing gun trafficking, closing the “boyfriend loophole,” and creating a “red flags” process. A mass shooting involves four or more people injured or killed in a single event at the same time and location. Mass shooting estimates available after Jan. 13, 2013.

Not one of these things would have stopped the Santa Fe shooter, Dimitrios Pagourtzis, 17. Not a one. And this is why we can’t have a rational, reasonable, adult conversation on sensible gun laws to reduce shootings. Virtually none of the myriad ideas from the gun grabbers would have worked, either

(Buzzfeed) He used a .38-caliber revolver and a shotgun that belonged to his father, Abbott said. However, authorities did not know if the father was aware that his son had taken the weapons.

Santa Fe ISD police said explosive devices were found at the school and off campus, including at a home and a vehicle. And bomb squads spent much of the day carefully searching two residences believed to be associated with the suspect.

Murder and attempted murder are illegal. So are bombs. He used weapons that the gun grabbers typically approve of, rather than scary “assault rifles.” Heck, one of the guns was Joe Biden approved. So nothing in the NY Times Editorial Boards screed would have made a difference, other than red flag laws

At the same time, investigators were struggling to find any signs that could have foreshadowed the level of violence seen Friday.

“One of the frustrating things in the early status of this case, unlike Parkland and Sutherland Springs, there were not those type of warning signs,” Abbott said. “We have what are often categorized as red flag warnings.”

“Here the red flags warnings were either nonexistent or imperceptible. There is on his Facebook page a T-shirt that says ‘Born to Kill.’ But as far as investigations by law enforcement agencies, as far as arrests or confrontation with law enforcement, as far as having a criminal history, he has none. His slate is pretty clean.”

So, no red flags, either. Everyone seems to be describing him as a “quiet kid.” He had some pictures of a few weapons, one of which was an arcade game, on his social media. And a pic of him wearing a bisexual pride pin. And, potentially, some Antifa stuff. Still, no red flags.

So, what would you have us do now, gun grabbers? Nickolas Kristoff has a long screed, of which the majority makes it harder for law abiding citizens to purchase, possess, and or carry firearms for protection. Heck, harder for their much used talking point about hunting. It punishes and controls the law abiding, while playing games in allowing suits against gun manufacturers, which is a means to put them out of business. Can’t buy something not made. But, there is almost nothing that goes after the criminals and those who would use guns illegally. Because this is about disarmament of the law abiding. Democrats seem to like criminals.

Read: After Santa Fe Shooting, NY Times Blames Congress For Failing To Pass Gun Control That Wouldn’t Have Made A Difference »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Wonky Media | Comments Off on After Santa Fe Shooting, NY Times Blames Congress For Failing To Pass Gun Control That Wouldn’t Have Made A Difference | Trackback URL

Plants And Animals Which Survived Previous Warm And Cold Periods Now In Danger Of Total Doom

By William Teach May 18, 2018 – 4:50 pm

It’s all your fault, for driving a fossil fueled vehicle, eating cheeseburgers (double cow badness), and not setting your AC to 85

Holding global warming to 2.75 degrees Fahrenheit saves most species

The world’s nations can protect the vast majority of plant and animal species from climate change by limiting global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, a new study finds.

The report, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the first to examine how species across the globe would benefit from restricting global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial averages – the lower limit for temperature as outlined in the 2015 Paris climate agreement.

The findings suggest that meeting this goal would avoid half the risks associated with warming of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit – the upper limit established by the agreement – for plants and animals, and two-thirds of the risk for insects. Species in Europe, Southern Africa, Australia and the Amazon would benefit the most.

Well, good news, so far we’ve only seen a rise of 1.5F since 1850 (and potentially less, depending on the hard data). These same plants and animals survived plenty of climatic changes over millions and millions of years, much less the last 20 years since the ice age ended, and came out fine. And insects, too

Climate change on track to cause major insect wipeout, scientists warn

Global warming is on track to cause a major wipeout of insects, compounding already severe losses, according to a new analysis.

Insects are vital to most ecosystems and a widespread collapse would cause extremely far-reaching disruption to life on Earth, the scientists warn. Their research shows that, even with all the carbon cuts already pledged by nations so far, climate change would make almost half of insect habitat unsuitable by the end of the century, with pollinators like bees particularly affected.

However, if climate change could be limited to a temperature rise of 1.5C – the very ambitious goal included in the global Paris agreement – the losses of insects are far lower.

Everything is doooooom with these people, at least according to their computer models, which assume that all life on Earth can only survive in a tiny, itty bitty, teensie weenie temperature range.

But, hey, it’s all something that can be fixed with a good carbon tax, you know.

Read: Plants And Animals Which Survived Previous Warm And Cold Periods Now In Danger Of Total Doom »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on Plants And Animals Which Survived Previous Warm And Cold Periods Now In Danger Of Total Doom | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 18, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a sea that is totally rising dozens of feet, you might just be a Warist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on yet another fake racist accusation against a police officer.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Bummer: Cryptocurrency Is Totally Bad For ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach May 18, 2018 – 10:16 am

But, then, everything is bad for ‘climate change’, even if it causes nice, pleasant days which are good for taking someone out for a nice lunch just to say “thank you for being you”

From the article

Bitcoin’s energy footprint has more than doubled since Grist first wrote about it six months ago.

It’s expected to double again by the end of the year, according to a new peer-reviewed study out Wednesday. And if that happens, bitcoin would be gobbling up 0.5 percent of the world’s electricity, about as much as the Netherlands.

That’s a troubling trajectory, especially for a world that should be working overtime to root out energy waste and fight climate change. By late next year, bitcoin could be consuming more electricity than all the world’s solar panels currently produce — about 1.8 percent of global electricity, according to a simple extrapolation of the study’s predictions. That would effectively erase decades of progress on renewable energy.

See, here’s the thing: Warmists say they want to totally transform economies and the energy sector to make everything less energy intensive, more efficient, and so much more. But, when you more things more and more into the digital age, you use……..electricity!

Surprise!

Read: Bummer: Cryptocurrency Is Totally Bad For ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Trump “Defends” His Animals Remark Or Something

By William Teach May 18, 2018 – 7:12 am

The day after the NY Times utterly took President Trump out of context (which led to many, many, many leftist media outlets, personalities, and elected Democrats to follow suit) regarding his MS-13 are animals remark, the NY Times is doubling down on their #TDS

Trump Defends ‘Animals’ Remark, Saying It Referred to MS-13 Gang Members

President Trump on Thursday defended his use of the word “animals” to describe dangerous criminals trying to cross into the United States illegally, saying that he had been referring to members of the brutal transnational gang MS-13 when he used language critics called inappropriate.

“I’m referring, and you know I’m referring, to the MS-13 gangs that are coming in,” Mr. Trump told a reporter who asked him about the remark, a day after using the term during a White House meeting about immigration. “We have laws that are laughed at on immigration. So when the MS-13 comes in, when the other gang members come into our country, I refer to them as animals. And guess what — I always will.”

The president was doubling down on a statement he made on Wednesday at a round-table discussion with state and local officials from California, at which Mr. Trump and his guests criticized the state’s so-called sanctuary laws, which restrict communication between local law enforcement and federal immigration officers. He used the word as one of the officials argued that the state laws made it more difficult for her to share information with immigration authorities about dangerous criminals, including MS-13 members.

“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — we’re stopping a lot of them,” Mr. Trump said in response, during a session where he complained that the United States has “the dumbest laws on immigration in the world.”

“You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are,” the president added. “These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.”

And this Times article still leaves out the full context.

In context, Trump is talking about MS-13. Period. Full stop. And, why would Trump even need to defend calling MS-13 animals? They are. But

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/997294282192154630

Democrats all over the place are trying to spin their defense of slamming Trump for calling MS-13 animals once it became known that that’s what the comment was about in context. If Trump came out and said he was 100% for abortion on demand, Democrats would suddenly be 100% against it.

Read: Trump “Defends” His Animals Remark Or Something »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Journalistic Malpractice, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove