Saturday, December 5, 2009

Pet Peeve #176

Every day anti-gunners put out more material, nearly all of it based in distortions of fact, misrepresentations, fear-mongering, and often outright lies.

This blog posting may take the cake on a reality-distortion-per-word scale.

The general theme is: Guns didn't prevent the four police officers from being ambushed in Tacoma, Washington, therefore Guns = A Very Bad Thing.

Following the same train of "logic," I guess we should remove all smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and fire drills from our school systems, because they have been repeatedly failed to prevent fires.

The Freeholder brings this to our attention with a thorough fisking of some of the so-called data and outright lies, but my favorite quote from the article highlights one of my biggest pet peeves in the intertubes/blogosphere.

How about guns being used to kill innocent people? Type 'multiple shootings' into Google and you get over a million links.
This is relevant how? I've seen this kind of tripe in respected print publications. Since when did number of Google results become evidence for anything? I can type "I rock" into Google and get 193 million results! I guess that must make it true right?

Oh and for the author of that post, "gun saves lives" returns nearly 2.5 million results. Since this is apparently convincing evidence, I guess its time to change sides on the gun-control debate.


  1. While I agree with you in general, remember there is none, or very little constitutional protection of members of the military. The UCMJ takes precidence in the military.

    As a former Marine, I will stand by those rules.

    While it makes little sense to require registration of personal weapons off base, there is little that can be done about it fronm a constitutional standpoint. And there's little that can be done about it by the military if you simply don't report your weapon. But heaven help you if you get caught.

  2. The Uniform Code of Military Justice replaces United States Code for service members, but does not override the US Constitution.

    The military may regulate the conduct of SM's while on duty, just as a private employer can regulate certain actions of employees. However, service members do not give up any Constitutional rights while off duty and off a military establishment.