Comment rescue: your Editor on the Delaware Liberal

Our good friends at the Delaware Liberal are all up in arms — pun most definitely intended — about guns being legal, because of the massacre by a wimpy guy who couldn’t get laid, Elliot Rodgers. I’ll leave the stories about Mr Rodger in the fine hands of Patterico and Robert Stacey Stacy McCain (that’s three separate links for Mr McCain), but I wanted to record this into-moderation comment I left on the Delaware Liberal, because it contains some important statistics:

Dana says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
May 26, 2014 at 3:04 pm

radef16 wrote:

Say that the perpretartor took his BMW at 100 mph and aimed it toward the largest group of students that he could find. Many would have been killed and seriously injured. What would your response be in that case?

Unfourtunatly, for you, guns connote only the negative.That is your opinion and I respect it. Why are you so unable to respect my opinion? Are you somehow better than me? Maybe more “enlightened?”

Almost 100 years ago alcohol was the object blamed as the root of all evil. So much so that a constitutional amendment was passed to ban it entirely.

We all know how that worked out.

Well, if you search this fine site for “marijuana,” you’ll find a fair amount of support for legalizing yet another intoxicant, which would result in more people on the road driving stoned. And though it has been awhile, this site used to sponsor “drinking liberally” get togethers, parties at local taverns and other establishments which served alcoholic beverages. Given that these parties were widely spaced out geographically, it meant that almost all of the participants would have had to have driven to them, thus greatly increasing the probabilities that some of them would have been driving back with blood alcohol levels in excess of the legal limit.

The good folks of the Delaware Liberal do not have what I would call a sterling record when it comes to wanting to crack down on the intoxicated getting behind the wheel of two tons of rolling death, even though, in 2011, there was one alcohol-related automobile fatality every 53 minutes, 9,878 people were killed in alcohol-impaired-driving crashes. During the same year, there were 8,583 people murdered, with all types of firearms, in the United Statesfewer than were killed by alcohol-related wrecks.

There are something like 310 million firearms in civilian hands in this country, and roughly 254 million automobiles registered in the United States.

The odds that an individual American will be killed by a firearm are .00279%; the odds that an individual American will be killed by an alcohol-related automobile accident are .00389%, right at 40% higher, but our good friends at the Delaware Liberal don’t want to ban automobiles, and have been rather blasé about driving while intoxicated. But, then again, perhaps now that they are aware of the statistics, perhaps they’ll convert over to a ban-the-Buick status.

Jason330, the site owner, does not particularly like or respect me, which is absolutely his privilege, and my comments have “been disappeared” from that site before, which is why I wanted to reproduce this one here (very slightly edited). What the anti-Second Amendment left will not tell you is that you are far more likely to be killed by an automobile than by a firearm, despite their arguments that the sole purpose of the firearm is to cause death, while the automobile has many more purposes than killing people.


  1. So where is the news BO’s WH Geniuses put the name of the Afghan CIA Station Chief during his quickie visit (didn’t know Reggie went) to Afghanistan. Potential for carnage is great compared to this little sexually frustrated pipsqueek.

  2. Well, they’ll get the station chief out of there now, right away, so he’ll be safe, but any local friends he had will quickly turn up dead.

    President Obama doesn’t get the blame for this, because he almost certainly wasn’t the one who put together the lists, but it’s still his responsibility. I’m sure that he’s just madder’n'hell about it, and will tell us that whoever made this mistake will be held accountable.

  3. I wonder how many peole will die due to drunk driving this weekend? The easy solution is to BAN Alcohol. Wait ……… we did that once and called it prohibition. Oh wait, that lead to illegal distilleries, organized crime and a lot of needless deaths. Then we legalized booze again, but kept the organized crime. Wonder how Britian and Australia are doing with their outlawing guns?

  4. The Old NRA Slogan from Decades ago is just as true today, as it was then: “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” (BTW, slip Booze for guns and there was Prohibition) Isn’t Common Sense such a burden?

  5. And the banned communist would probably love to ask me what I’m a-feared of with my 3 babies. Well, I’m concerned double-tapping (a necessity when zombie hunting) might make the carpets a bit too hard to clean, after using my guns.

  6. Unfourtunatly, for you, guns connote only the negative.That is your opinion and I respect it.

    That was your first mistake, being “Nice” and “Respectful” to a left winger. Treat ‘em like dirt, same as they treat us.

  7. Now might be a good time to recall that Gloria Steinem admitted she was on the CIA’s payroll from 1958 to 1962. She organized American participation at international student conferences to counter the influence of the USSR’s outreach to student activists worldwide. She also edited a newspaper associated with the US National Student Association.

    When questioned later how someone of her reputation as an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War could have worked for the CIA, she defended the Agency claiming initially she held the typical liberal view the CIA was a right-wing incendiary group, but on closer examination found them to be liberal, enlightened, and non-partisan activists of the sort that characterized the Kennedy Administration.

    (One wonders if she changed her mind after the assassination.)

  8. And the Shooter/Stabber followed Progressive sites like “The Young Turks” so they’re stuck with a Hollyweed Lib with Money. A True One Percenter with no (R) after his name. No one to blame but the gun and the knife. The LSM strikes out again. Meanwhile, no news about the outing of the Station Ch. in Afghanistan. I did check the ABCCBSNBC News webites, just crickets.

  9. >> Say that the perpretartor took his BMW at 100 mph and aimed it toward the largest group of students that he could find

    He intended to use his father’s Mercedes (because he felt that car was more suited for mayhem) after killing his younger brother (because he couldn’t face the prospect of his brother having better success than he did – it would ruin his legacy) but it seems like something caused him to advance his plans one day.

    May 23 was for murdering his roommates, which he did, and luring people to his apartment and killing them. He may have killed one person. Another (mentioned by name in his autobiography or manifesto) declined to go.

    For some reason maybe he got worried and went to the sorority at 9 pm May 23, instead of May 24.

    His plan had called for killing all his visitors and staying at his apt overnight – then, Saturday morning, go to his father’s house to kill his brother, and probably also his stepmother, avoiding if possible killing his father, switching cars, and then going at night to the sorority and murdering the girls inside, then escaping in his Mercedes to commit mayhem with the car and guns. Finally killing himself by firing two guns (one in each hand) into his head simultaneously,

    It’s not clear when he intended to send the e-mails out and post the vide, but he actually did that Friday night before going to sorority (omitting the murder of his brother and the stealing of the Mercedes.)

    He found that when he knocked they didn’t answer the door, and he was stymied, settling for killing two or three girls outside. One survived. Then to a cafe, where he got out of his car and killed a man, and after that he didn’t stop the car any more. He injured a lot of people but didn’t kill anyone else after that.

    He fired at pedestrians, he hit a cyclist, and exchanged gunfire with police, but nobody was killed.

    After his car (the BMW) was riddled with bullets in his second encounter with police, he slammed into a second cyclist and parked cars and committed suicide.

  10. Eric wrote:

    I wonder if the Steinem thing ever actually had an abortion. That would assume a human actually had sex with it.

    Gloria Steinham was the attractive feminist, and worked as a Playboy bunny for a while to get information for an article. I’m sure tha she had plenty of opportunities for heterosexual copulation.

  11. As far as Mr Rodger is concerned, we may be putting too much effort into tying to understand him; there’s a point at which trying to apply logical standards to an obviously irrational person and act becomes an exercise in futility, and a waste of time.

    The left want to exploit Mr Rodger’s actions to try to curtail or eliminate our right to keep and bear arms, and to try to shame men in general because one idiot thought he had a right to sex which was being denied by evil women. That’s pretty much the standard reaction from the “never let a crisis go to waste” crowd, but, as Jodi Giddings pointed out, the Memorial Day weekend saw at least six people killed and 20 wounded by gunfire in Chicago, and nobody cares.

    Why? Oh, it’s simple: Mr Rodger, a reasonably well-off and privileged kid, killed two white sorority girls, while most of the killers and most of the victims in the Windy City were just poor blacks, and it’s just expected that they’ll go around shooting each other. Of course, the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois have some of the toughest, most unconstitutional gun control laws, but that never stopped the killers. It was Chicago’s ban on all legal handgun possession which was overturned in McDonald v Chicago, the 2010 case in which the Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment as being applicable to state and local governments as well as the federal. Interestingly enough, despite all we hear about the shootings in Chicago, homicides were actually down in 2013, to 415 from 446, while the number of shootings declined to 1864, from 2448, and lower than 2010, the year McDonald v Chicago was decided. (Slightly) less strict gun control, yet murders declined? How did that happen, unless the notions of the left are all wrong?

Comments are closed.