Joan Likes to Lie

Man she’s posting a LOT! This one is really target-rich with lies:

I have been writing about things that can go wrong when the wrong people are able to get their hands on loaded guns. But it’s not just the wrong ( prohibited buyers) who do bad things with guns and bullets. It’s sometimes those who can legally buy guns who have no intent to kill anyone but do anyway in a moment of anger, depression, jealousy, during a relationship separation, after too much alcohol, or while believing, sometimes falsely, that another is out to harm them. Occasionally a shooting is justified to save one’s life. But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other( pg. 10)

Let’s look at the report she cites. First it is simply a homicide report, I haven’t read the whole thing but page 10 which she cites is not broken down by means of homicide, just homicide in general. So the deaths cited, contrary to how she frames it, are not all “Gun Deaths”.

Females were more likely than males to be the victim of intimate
killings (63.7%) and sex-related homicides (81.7%)
(table 5)

Males were more likely to be involved in drug- (90.5%) and
gang-related homicides (94.6%).

Doesn’t really sound like she read the same report does it? I wonder what constitutes a “Sex-related Homicide”. Still it’s the bulk of the female homicides, and no data on how many are “Gun Deaths”. Of course as we know the majority of homicides are drug or gang related. Again not what Joan is talking about, nor does it really support her agenda, but we’ll get to that.

A small group of American gun owners have been influenced by the ramped up fear and paranoia about gun confiscation or some sort of government take over of their rights to buy or own guns.

And you wonder why they might think that, huh Joan? Remember Joan is 100% in favor of confiscating firearms from lawful owners.

American gun culture that has taken a turn away from hunting and recreational gun use.

The 2nd Amendment is not about shooting ducks and deer. The 2nd Amendment is NOT about poking holes in pieces of paper or shooting tin cans. Again, why are we concerned that guns will be confiscated when somebody who is in favor of confiscating guns also states that she sees the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution “extreme”, and something that should be ignored?

America has more gun deaths per 100,000 than any civilized democratized country not at war.

Not only is that not true, I’m not even sure that’s English! Yep we have more “gun deaths” than any other civilized “democratized” nation, except for the ones we don’t, but I guess those nations aren’t civilized or “democratized” enough!!!!

Even most gun owners side with those of us who just want a world where our loved ones don’t get shot to death

Not even citing the bogus study properly. First up there is NO nation on the planet where people don’t get shot. The only time that world didn’t exist was before the invention of the firearm, and then we were just hacking and beating each other to death. Odd how Joan always cites that she is in the majority, but she can’t even get comments on her blog supporting her, let alone people to support her crazed views politically.

If what she claimed was true, all guns would be banned now. The only logical assumption is the study she improperly cites was wrong, and she’s a liar.

We understand that there are people who believe that owning and carrying a gun makes them safer. So be it. But these folks also fight against measures to lessen the risks of loaded guns in homes and in public. That just doesn’t make sense.

Umm, if guns make us safer, than why would we want to ban having guns in home and in public? Let me know where you’re confused, Joan, I’m here to help!

Our country is home to regularly occurring mass shootings.

Umm, no they aren’t, mass shootings are statistical anomalies and very uncommon, the the overall rate is unchanged, the rate per-capita, or per-gun-owner is on the DECLINE.

I have met Sandy and know that she is making a difference. In a short time after the death of her daughter, she has traveled the country to support others in their grief after high profile shootings like Sandy Hook and the Santa Barbara shooting while working for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. She has supported the efforts of those working to strengthen gun laws in states all over the country.

If you type in “Brady Campaign Victories” into Google it SHOULD respond “Do you mean Brady Campaign Defeats?”. Man I would LOVE a job where failure results on a pat on the head and a gold star!

The shooter had mental illness. He was able to buy guns anyway. He got his ammunition- 100 round drum magazines- from a private seller on the Internet. Who needs 100 round drum magazines for anything reasonable regarding guns? For what purpose does someone buy this type of ammunition for personal use? To kill as many people as possible of course.

There is a lot of talk about the Aurora 100 round AR-15 magazine. What there isn’t is hard evidence. There has never been a police report released that says WHERE and in what condition it was found it. The only hard evidence anybody has seen was a news Helicopter shot of the shooter’s rifle lying on the ground outside the theater where he dropped it, with a 30 round magazine fixed in the well. For all we know the 100 round drum was empty and in his car. It’s all speculation. Of course we DO know why HE bought his ammo, but he’s hardly the only person buying bulk ammo online. Is there a Costco, Sam’s Club, or BJ’s near you, Joan? Does your grocery store sell toilet paper in large packs? Why, how often does one need to wipe their ass? Duhh, ammo is a durable commodity, and when you buy in bulk, you save. Further the recent ammo droughts make even the more stalwart shooters with millions of rounds in their collection thinking that maybe they didn’t buy QUITE enough.

Yes, the shooter was severely mentally ill, but that has nothing to do with background checks, it has everything to do with a failure of a system. Of course Joan just wants to ban guns, so she could give two shits about the mental health system.

We can strengthen our background check system to make sure that everyone who purchases a gun should be able to own one. Congress just needs to Finish The Job which they could do if they weren’t so afraid of the corporate gun lobby. We can educate the public about the risks of guns in the home and make sure guns are stored, locked up and unloaded to stop small children from getting their hands on them- teens and others from using them in gun suicides- and to keep thieves from stealing them.

So this whole post has been about mass shootings. This is the anniversary of the Aurora shooting where the shooter bought his firearms after passing a background check. She mentions Sandy Hook where the shooter’s firearms were locked up and stolen after he murdered his mother.

Also the whole “Locked and Unloaded” business is something taught by the “Evil Corporate Gun Lobby”, yeah if you aren’t using a gun, or have it for defensive means, unload it an lock it up. That’s real common sense, and not anything new. Still Joan seems to want ALL guns (before she can confiscate them, of course) to be unloaded and locked up, which of course is unconstitutional, but fuck that old document, what does it mean?

Man, NOTHING but lies there. She might be unaware of some of her dishonesty, but she can’t be unaware of ALL of it. So why is she intentionally being misleading?

Maybe the same reason why she has said in the past she supports door-to-door confiscation, but in this post notes that people are paranoid about door-to-door confiscations.

She simply wants to take all the guns, she knows this is wildly unpopular, so she chooses to lie so that at some point she can take all the guns.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics, Safety. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Joan Likes to Lie

  1. Eck! says:

    It been true since the infamous 20 posting that turn into the first real debacle for her questions years ago…

    Japete is a shill and liar. Anything she passes as reasoned is rife with illogical and fanciful thinking or outright fraud.

    Nothing new here folks.


  2. “But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other”

    So, criminals don’t know each other?

    She keeps using that statement to draw an unwarranted conclusion. She thinks that since “gun deaths” (actually, all murders) are more common between people who know each other that they cannot have been as a result of some criminal action. She’s wrong on two counts. First, according to the numbers, the largest single category of victim/offenders is “Unknown.” Third is “Stranger.” Second is “Acquaintance,” which the FBI defines as not a Wife, Girlfriend, Friend, Son, Daughter, Boyfriend, Father, Mother, Neighbor, Husband, Brother, Sister, Employee, Employer, or “Other Family.” Well, shit, who’s left after stripping out all those other relationships? You know the person but you don’t have any relationship closer than “Acquaintance.” So the guy at the checkout counter at local Stop and Rob gets mad that I don’t have exact change, says “That’s the last time you make me figure out how to give you 37 cents change on 2 dollars,” hauls out a gun and ventilates me, my death is some sort of proof that murder is among “people who know each other?” Is she that stupid? (Don’t answer!)

    Leaving all that aside, let’s assume she was correct, that people know each other who kill each other, even though 79.56% of all murders in 2012 fell into the relationship categories of Unknown, Stranger, and Acquaintance. What does that prove? Most rapes occur between people who know each other. Is she suggesting that women should only deal with perfect strangers? Is she trying to say that by only speaking to strangers, women are less likely to be raped? Is she saying that women should not be permitted to use force on people she knows in order to prevent rape?

    Joan reminds me of the guy who found out that 50% of all auto accidents occurred within 5 miles of home. So he moved.

    I made a pie chart using FBI data. I’ll post it on my blog.

  3. Bubblehead Les says:

    I’ve noticed that there’s been a large amount of Anti-Freedom posting by the Usual Suspects lately. I believe this is part of a larger Propaganda Campaign tied to the Mid-Term Elections. But the arguments being used in their attacks on the RKBA are about as Factual as the Earth being Flat. Yet it doesn’t matter. If they argued using the Truth, they would have nothing to say. So as usual, some of the Undecided Sheeple who can’t add 1+1 and get 2 will believe them. Combine that with how many Elections there are, and you get the impression that they are Desperate for Votes. But it only takes one more than the Opponent has to win an Election. They have to know that, even if the Republitards win back the Senate, they won’t get The Anointed One out of Office. But they WILL be able to block all kinds of Legislation from being passed against the American Citizen. That leaves the Uber-Liberal Lefties with only being able to use Executive Orders and their Political Hacks who were appointed to the Federal Judiciary to try and stop the RKBA. Look for that to happen next year.

  4. The_Jack says:

    If Universal Background Checks were such cure-all, then how come the antis keep using shootings where the killer either passed a check or simply stole his guns?

    I mean if this was such a common scourge you’d think they wouldn’t have to lie.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Or as Sean points out in his post, serious street criminals engaged in the illegal drug trade.

      Oddly the dude selling coke or heroin on the street might not be too interested in getting an FFL involved when somebody decides to pay for their junk with a stolen gun…

  5. Pingback: Japete lying more than usual | An NC Gun Blog

  6. Old NFO says:

    I’m to the point I don’t even waste the 30 sec it takes to read her drivel…

  7. Jack/OH says:

    I guess you could even apply Joan’s style to the First Amendment: “What is wrong with our writing culture? Is there anyone who could reasonably object to commonsense registration of pens, pencils, computers, writing paper, and flash drives? What do people need all that storage capacity for anyway? Is there anyone who could reasonably object to universal background checks for people who write for publication? Doesn’t most everybody think it’s a good idea that we ought to be protected from the thoughts of people who might not have the right backgrounds for publishing? We can see most every day ‘dangerous thoughts’, and it’s just not right?”

    You could probably “work” the other Amendments in Joan style. I guess you could call her stuff argument by pathos–she feels crappy about a whole lot of stuff, therefore she’s right.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      That’s why I call them “Anti-Freedom” not “Anti-Gun”. If you don’t believe in the 2nd Amendment you don’t believe in the entire Bill of Rights or the US Constitution.

  8. Pingback: Miscellany ……………………………………. | Freedom Is Just Another Word...

  9. Archer says:

    Late to the party, but this part stuck out to me:

    We understand that there are people who believe that owning and carrying a gun makes them safer. So be it. But these folks also fight against measures to lessen the risks of loaded guns in homes and in public. That just doesn’t make sense.

    So, the “people who believe that owning and carrying a gun makes them safer” also oppose “measures to lessen the risks of loaded guns in homes and in public”?

    What a shocker! I mean, I always want to carry an unloaded gun for self-defense purposes at home and in public! Condition 4 is the only safe way to go, and an unloaded gun is the only gun equally useful against one assailant as it is against 20, amiright? [/sarcasm]

    • Jack/OH says:

      Archer, you’re right. Had to read your comment twice before it sunk in. What’s the point of a home defense or CCW handgun that’s not loaded? Duh?!

  10. Pingback: SayUncle » The magic number is zero

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *