Richard Aubrey: there was talk of violence, reference to violence, but the depiction of the violence itself was surprising non-violent.

According to some, that “sanitizes” the violence, and makes it more acceptable.

The Left, thus, requires the control of guns, but it is not the banning of guns they seek. No, they seek to be able to conduct operations like Ruby Ridge and WACO with impunity, what they don’t want to happen is the citizens figuring out that they don’t need to rely on the government for life and limb.

In the context of preserving and protecting the First Amendment, the Left does so only to the extent that they will use it, and everything else, to destroy the US Constitution and completely transform America into a nation of slaves. They already have 3/4ths of the Jewish population, a super majority of urban dwellers, and a 99% Saddam democratic majority in the black city demographics. In so far as they can paint themselves as defenders of justice, free speech, and the US tradition of Constitutional limits, they will do so, but only in so far as it fulfills their desires of unlimited power and mad dog style politics. To create a nation of slaves, one must disarm the slaves in both body and mind, for the shackles of the heart and spirit are far stronger than the bonds put upon the body.

For a regular person, they may misinterpret the Leftist alliance’s aims as being something of a “political nature”, and thus believe all other political parties are simply just as corrupt or with just as many hidden corrupt agendas as the Left, thus they’ll vote for whoever offers them the most goodies. In this case, that would be the Democrat party. What regular people don’t understand is that evil knows no bounds, and there is a particularly definite division between those who are evil, and are using politics and the tools of law to pursue evil, and those who just make mistakes in politics and law. So long as Americans believe the Left is composed of the latter, they will never be able to exert the necessary motivation to do anything productive against it. It is only when one realizes the true nature of evil, that one can both understand it and fight it.

A responsible and duty bound citizenry and citizenship, with its allegiance owed to the country at large, which includes everyone in it, is much safer in terms of politics and economics than a slave owned empire that is entirely under the aegis of the Leftist authoritarian nobility. Yet even though the Left knows this (remember Diane Feinstein and other Democrats arming themselves for “protection”), they would rather make you suffer, and net themselves a smaller reward in security, than see everyone prosper.

How can people not understand such a definition of evil where a group of people consistently chooses the option of 5 for them 0 for you, over 6 for them and 6 for you. Then, of course, one remembers that many blacks believe Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat, and the story narrative becomes much clearer as to why people are motivated to do one thing but not another. He who controls the past, controls the present. That was true of Divine Rulers in the past as it is true of today’s petty politicians.

The Left will destroy this nation and remake it in their own utopian death cult image, and they will make you pay for the privilege. Those who thought this was about “political disagreements” are so far behind the reality of this conflict, that they might as well be sight seers.

The Left will make you see that which you never thought possible in terms of cruelty and evil. Whether or not you want to believe it.

Coming from the front lines: until this law, the legal organs of the State of California were utterly consumed with re-processing the same felons — over and over — over and over.

Though only 0.75% of the male population — this crowd was logging 70% of the Criminal Court’s time.

This disparity makes sense when you consider the magnitude and depravity of their crimes.

Charles Manson would’ve been put out of business before the Tate murders if Three Strikes was law, He and his crew were feral. Virtually every time a LEO saw them they were engaged in one form of criminal behavior after another.

After the law was in effect, the courts unclogged. Civil suits finally could get a place on the court calendar. LEO morale went straight up.

The single most dangerous intersection in San Jose was pacified in just months. The drug retailing (murderer) could no longer limbo underneath the felony threshold. Resources became re-allocated towards getting those three felonies — and the life-time criminals were swept up.

It cleaned up East Palo Alto, too. (Same drill.) Until the Three Strikes law, no LEO felt it was worth it to press these clowns with even three felonies. As a practical matter, LEOs shift their tactics towards players that they can’t get off the streets — permanently. There’s only so much paperwork that can be endured.

This behavior shift explains the Mafia in New York and elsewhere. Local cops simply give up: they know that they’ll never get the goods on the Goodfellas — no matter how obvious it is that they’re life-time criminals.

So, the Three Strikes law has had far more impact than Liberals ever want to admit.

Something like a Three Strikes law has to be invoked for the aggressively insane.

I’d go with a point system – like traffic infractions.

Crazed crimes will never stop until the afflicted are taken out of circulation.

Now that we have an expanded pharmacia – -perhaps they can be chilled out without destroying their humanity.

We might start with free booze for end game alcoholics. That’d certainly beat having them flopping on steam grates downtown, Thunderbird in hand.

Until policies WRT the mentally insane are corrected there is no stopping them.

When guns are banned — they use knives, poisons, baseball bats…

And, at what point does one censure art, graphics or toys?

Does GI Joe kill?

At the margins, it’s a crappy world we live in. Some crazed behaviors are going to kill and maim no matter what Big Government does or doesn’t.

The over arching threat: Big Government, itself, gone insane. Upwards of 100,000,000 souls perished from insane Big Government in the last 100 years.

A global average of 1,000,000 per year is in stark contrast to the trite horrors of a handful of crazed nut-jobs.

WRT to Adolf: as a full blown drug addled addict he still didn’t make it to the top of the gore standings.

Stalin out blooded Adolf 2:1…. Which is astounding.

And, then, there’s Mao, Saddam, Pol Pot, …. et.al.

Yet in all of that tyranny — do keep in mind that they kept getting worse and worse.

Even Adolf wasn’t the ‘full Hitler’ until the end.

Stalin had been in power for seven years before he Really went off the rails.

Mao’s worst bloodletting didn’t happen until he felt ‘safe.’ That took about eight years. After that point, in stages, he went after one slice of China at a time. By the end, like Adolf, he was killing his inner circle.

All of which is a long way of saying that Barry’s true downside is still in front of us.

Remember the odds: Reactive-Dependents, when elevated to the top executive position, normally utterly destroy that organization.

(The scale is unimportant/ doesn’t permit fate avoidance.)

( c.f. GM, etc.)

All those guns are, in the hands of law-abiding citizens (still the great majority), tools of SELF DEFENSE.

THAT’S the statistic you should think about. Seriously. See this link: http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm

Excerpt:
“The new survey, conducted by random telephone sampling of 4,978 households in all the states except Alaska and Hawaii, yield results indicating that American civilians use their firearms as often as 2.5 million times every year defending against a confrontation with a criminal, and that handguns alone account for up to 1.9 million defenses per year. “

I live in a part of New York City that used to see a Lot of crime: the Bowery. People would go to 14th Street 30 years ago and ask the shop owners if they had any Mace (illegal in NYC also: man, they REALLY want the “People” castrated), and if they like the look of the person, they’d sell it to him or her. Apart from that, no one has any means of self-defense or protection of their property, without complying with laws that are so damn draconian, only the rich and well-connected can manage it.

You have to apply for a permit to even have any type of gun in the house; have to crawl on your belly to a judge every 2 years and beg him to “allow” you to own the gun because you persuade him that you “need” it; pay hundreds of dollars for the privilege, and Repeat the process every two years!

Meanwhile, you have to practically sink the gun in wet cement and let it harden to carry the thing to the extremely few gun ranges. In fact, you have to be a licensed gun-owner to even GO to those gun ranges. [Going from memory; haven’t read up on it lately, but under the “No Painkillers for Surgery Patients!” despicable toad Bloomberg, it can only have gotten worse. “Let no innocent person escape!” is the City motto.]

But the hoods and criminals have all the guns they want, babydoll.

Analyze your statement rationally.

Do you believe that doubling the number of guns would double the murder rate? Or that halving them would halve the murder rate?

No, of course not. Over a wide range, the murder rate is zeroth order (i.e., appears in a rate equation raised to the zeroth power) in the number of guns.* It is, however, probably first order in the number of people with previous criminal convictions.

* As an instructive example, Berkeley used to (and doubtless still does) have a problem with feral dogs running loose. Leftists proposed neutering male dogs, heedless of the fact that puppy production is essentially zeroth order in male dogs, but first order in females. To halve the rate of puppy production, one would have to neuter virtually every male dog in the city, or spay half of the females. Sometimes – perhaps most of the time – math is politically incorrect.

Put another way, if you were trying to breed more dogs (or, more appositely, cattle) would you lay on more males, or females?

I wonder how much of that is due to “Three Strikes and You’re Out” laws? We have that law in Washington State and there is no doubt it has reduced violent crime. Many of the hard core criminals are now in jail for life. There’s a cost, as prisons aren’t free, but it seems to work.

We also have a pretty effective TV program (Washington’s Most Wanted) that shows the perps that are wanted and offers rewards for information leading to their arrest. They keep racking up new arrests. It seems to be a help.

There are other things affecting crime statistics besides the level of gun ownership in the nation.