Thursday, December 20, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Where I give you my slightly quirky opinion, and you can give me yours, as long as you're man or woman enough to be civil and control your language.
Time (EST)
About Me
- Joe
- I was born in Miami, Florida, the son of an Air Force officer, traveled the world, was saved at age 17, and have served the Lord since. That's me on the left and my lovely wife, Bonnie...the pretty one...on the right.
There Are But A Few Rules To Follow
1. Absolutely no foul language (including the use of asterisks). If you are not man or woman enough to control your language, you are not welcome here...go somewhere else.
2. I am not looking for strings of commenters arguing with each other, so confine your comments to the topic at hand and address your comments to me, unless you can be exceptionally gracious and polite.
3. Since this is my blog, I am the sole arbiter of what can be placed on this blog. My decisions are final and without recourse. All anonymous comments, unsigned, will be deleted, as will ad hominem attacks against me or others.
4. Within the scope of those rules, you may feel free to have fun here (I sure will). Sarcasm, wit, half-wit, nit-wit, parody, satire, puns (especially puns), etc. are encouraged.
FOUR PRINCIPLES THAT DEFINE TRUE CONSERVATISM:
1. Respect for The Constitution
2. Respect for Life
3. The Smallest Possible Government
4. Individual Responsibility
This blog is about my philosophy of government, which is a very conservative philosophy.
You are not required to agree with me (although you would be better off if you did).
I am biased toward conservatism, and make no apologies for that.
Freedom means not being controlled by the government, that being the very reason we declared our independence from Great Britain.
2. I am not looking for strings of commenters arguing with each other, so confine your comments to the topic at hand and address your comments to me, unless you can be exceptionally gracious and polite.
3. Since this is my blog, I am the sole arbiter of what can be placed on this blog. My decisions are final and without recourse. All anonymous comments, unsigned, will be deleted, as will ad hominem attacks against me or others.
4. Within the scope of those rules, you may feel free to have fun here (I sure will). Sarcasm, wit, half-wit, nit-wit, parody, satire, puns (especially puns), etc. are encouraged.
FOUR PRINCIPLES THAT DEFINE TRUE CONSERVATISM:
1. Respect for The Constitution
2. Respect for Life
3. The Smallest Possible Government
4. Individual Responsibility
This blog is about my philosophy of government, which is a very conservative philosophy.
You are not required to agree with me (although you would be better off if you did).
I am biased toward conservatism, and make no apologies for that.
Freedom means not being controlled by the government, that being the very reason we declared our independence from Great Britain.
Government's job is not to provide things for people, but to provide the opportunity for people to persue the things they want via the vehicles of freedom and responsibility.
Some of My Favorite Bloggers
NATIONAL BLOGS & STUFF
- American Spectator
- American Thinker
- Big Government (Breitbart)
- Big Journalism
- Breitbart TV
- CNS News
- Cato Institute
- Contact Your Congressperson
- Contact your Senator
- Daily Caller
- Darwin's God
- Drudge Report
- Everything About Congress!
- Fox Nation
- Gateway Pundit
- Heritage Foundation
- Hot Air
- Insta Pundit
- Joe's Jottings (My Other Blog)
- Kingdom FM Christian Radio
- Mark Levin
- Michelle Malkin
- News Max
- NewsBusters
- On Racism & Republicans
- Politico
- Real Clear Politics
- Right Scoop, The
- Rush Limbaugh
- Sean Hannity
- WINK News Radio
- Wall Builders (A Web Site)
- Weekly Standard
- What's Happening in Congress
SPECIAL STUDIES
BHO-THE CONSUMATE AMATEUR
WHY I CALL HIM "PRESIDENT BO"
I call him "President" out of respect for the office. I call him "BO" (as in Body Odor) because his agenda stinks.
I also refer to him as our "Acting President."
I also refer to him as our "Acting President."
SPECIAL REPORT
The Obama Dictionary
IF YOU REALLY WANT TO LEARN, READ THESE
FAIR USE
FAIR USE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Former Features to Visit or Revisit
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(303)
-
▼
December
(28)
- SUNDAY RESPITE-I Can Begin Again-Larnelle Harris
- WHY KEEP AND BEAR ARMS?
- EMPTY THEATERS
- HERE IT COMES!
- THEY DIDN'T HAVE A GUN
- The Chistmas Story-Michael W. Smith
- What Child is This-Andrea Bocelli (With Mary J. Bl...
- SUNDAY RESPITE-O Come All Ye Faithful-Celtic Woman
- THE RIGHT TO CARRY AND MASS SHOOTINGS
- GIVE OR TAKE?
- IT HAS BEEN TRIED---AND FAILED
- WHO SHOULD HAVE THE GUNS?
- RECEIVED IN EMAIL - I AGREE WITH THE WRITER COMPLE...
- REASONS TO BE A DEMOCRAT
- SUNDAY RESPITE-Give This Christmas Away-Matthew We...
- PREVENTABLE, BUT NOT THE WAY YOU MAY THINK
- THE REAL HEART OF UNIONS vs THE HEART OF RIGHT TO ...
- THE UNION STATES OF AMERICA
- TRANSPARENCY REDEFINED
- LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO PRESIDENT FOR LIFE
- SUNDAY RESPITE-Angels We Have Heard on High-Belmon...
- ARE BLACKS REALLY KILLED AT A HIGHER RATE BY OTHER...
- TWO ATTACKS, TWO VERY DIFFERENT RESPONSES
- IT'S EASY - OR IT SHOULD BE
- CLIMATEOBAMA-Or How the U.S. Is Doing Under Obama'...
- POISED FOR POWER
- FISCAL INSANITY
- SUNDAY RESPITE-Do You Hear What I Hear-Mannheim St...
-
▼
December
(28)
IMPORTANT FEATURED ARTICLES FROM OTHERS
Visitors Since 02-04-10
13 comments:
I am shocked, I tell you, I'm simply Shocked, that people in America would propose such a thing.! What person in America would want to join with a group that would support such an inalienable right that is written in the Constitution of the United States? I'm simply Shocked!
Lets get our facts straight, this story is about a nut-job gunman, his Mother who buried her head in the sand,and a dysfunctional government, not about gun control.
h: Do I detect a note of sarcasm?
Why yes, I think I do.
You are correct. This is about a society that has grown and nurished the mentally challenged, the angry and the deranged.
Who made this video, Joe? There are no credits identifying the source. It's not hard to figure out, the NRA endorsements at the end might be a clue. It's light on facts, heavy on promoting fear.
Here's some facts;
Before the gun buy back, Australia already had strict gun control laws. 7% of Aussies owned a firearm. That was reduced to 5% after the buy back. A criminal could have been reasonably sure a person whose home they were breaking into would be unarmed before 1996.
The video shows some startling stats on crime. It doesn't source those stats. I got this from Australia's Minister for Home Affairs.
Break-ins have been cut by about half since 1996.
The overall number of violent crimes decreased in 2010 except for the offence of kidnapping and abduction.
There has been a 27 per cent drop in the number of homicides between 1996 and 2010, with a drop of 11 per cent between 2009 and 2010.
The homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000 population.
The number of victims of robbery in 2010 is the lowest on record since 1996, with 14,582 victims. Robbery victim numbers peaked in 2001 with 26,591 victims.
It should also be noted that Australia includes simple assault, if you punched your neighbor, in their violent crime stats. The U.S. doesn't. Look at that murder number, 1.2/100,000. The U.S. is over 9/100,000.
The ban/buy back was in response to the Port Arthur massacre where 39 people were gunned down. In the 18 years before Port Arthur, there were 13 mass shootings in Aus. In the 16 years since, zero.
Maybe Australia isn't the model for what U.S. policy should be, but calling it a failure is a flat out lie. You might learn something if you expand your research beyond YouTube.
Craig: "calling it a failure is a flat out lie. You might learn something if you expand your research beyond YouTube."
While it IS a YouTube video, I did not get it there. It was a part of an Email sent to me by a friend, who included stats relative to the time the video was produced.
See tomorrow's post for some really detailed research about both successful and unsuccessful mass shootings in the U.S.
Open your mind and learn!
Open your mind and learn!
I can't wait til tomorrow!
Craig: Australians do not, and never did, have a Constitutional right to bear arms even before the 1997 gun buy-back program.
The average Australian did not own firearms before the buy-back.
Also note that raw statistical percentages are not very useful in determining trends.
A decrease of 50% when the raw number is 2 is only one less. Raw numbers are much more meaningful in this type of statistic.
The Australian Institute of Criminology reveals that gun crimes have actully changed very little since 1997, only dipping a little. http://www.aic.gov.au/
You can also check: http://web.archive.org/web/20090417100922/http://aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi003.html
See, I might be stupid, but I ain't dumb.
Sometimes your mind set csuses a misinterpretation of the facts.
PLUS the video really presents only the perspective of SOME Australians and their impressions of life around THEM as it relates to gun crime.
See tomorrow's post for some really detailed research about both successful and unsuccessful mass shootings in the U.S.
----------
But Joe, Craig is critiquing a clip about Australia.
Don't back peddle.
Ducky: "Don't back peddle."
Is that like selling goods and services yesterday?
Or did you mean backpedal?
Sometimes backpedaling (note spelling) is the most comfortable form of transportation.
Jus' wundring. Was you edjicated in pubic skule?
Craig: Australians do not, and never did, have a Constitutional right to bear arms even before the 1997 gun buy-back program.
Which is why I said,
Maybe Australia isn't the model for what U.S. policy should be
Their murder rate was 1.9/100,000 before 1996, so I agree with you that the drop isn't that dramatic. The video paints a far different picture, that crime has exploded since the gun ban. It's message is clear, Aussies are loosing their freedoms and the result is more crime. It simply isn't true. It isn't definitive proof that the gun ban is the cause but, the fact remains, no mass shootings since 1996.
The 2nd amendment has always been adjudicated with respect to the prefatory clause, a well regulated militia. Despite your trying to parse it out of existence, according to Noah Webster's grammatical analysis that informed the Framers, the militia clause is an 'absolute construction' and necessarily informs the second clause.
Even Heller was restricted to handguns in the home. Restrictions on gun ownership should be debated, I'm not arguing either way. They can't be taken off the table on constitutional grounds. Our long history of jurisprudence and Common Law since before the founding are evidence.
Joe, the video is very short on concrete data but long on opinion.
Frankly I didn't watch it all but the last minute seems to be lamenting the loss of freedom caused by a voluntary gun buy back and strict storage requirements.
Seems a pretty big stretch especially given the right wing record of playing strictly to emotion in firearms matters.
Jus' wundring. Was you edjicated in pubic skule?
------
Thanks grmmar girl. Yes I am pure left handed and do struggle with spelling at times.
I was educated at private schools, Rhode Island School of Design and Brown. I managed a degree in Fine Arts with a minor in mathematics.
I've done well enough for myself and I.m sufficiently well educated that I don't have to spend my retirement years working a help line. Thank you very much.
Ducky: " I.m sufficiently well educated that I don't have to spend my retirement years working a help line."
I'm sure that is at least half correct.
Post a Comment