The Real Gun Guys

“What’s a gun for Dad?”

I was going to come up with a clever title for this post, then I realized the “artist”, and I use the term loosely, lifted most of his material from other sources. From the looks of it, I’m guessing it’s a Beretta 92FS. Links here and here.

Found on Flickr:

I’m sure my readers can come up with at least thirteen things a gun is good for instead of this guys crap. I’d do it myself but I’m worn out. Perhaps I’ll update this post tomorrow when I’ve had some rest.

Share/Save

Clueless Lyon Jumps Off the Cliff

Cliff Lyon, see also, in his futile effort to prove Alan Korwin a liar, chooses to ignore all of the evidence his commenters have submitted to the contrary and declares Alan a fraud, proving his quest for the truth about Defensive Gun Uses as only so much mental masturbation. Not content to make personal insults and threats of physical violence against me, he has dedicated three whole posts to trying to expose Mr. Korwin and refuses to accept any evidence to the contrary. What is the saying about leading a horse to water?

An excerpt from his latest screed:

Despite claims to the contrary, Alan Korwin did make a public statement that is untrue (a lie), and given the opportunity to apologize or correct his statement, has chosen to defend this untruth.

On April 9th 2008, Alan Korwin appeared on C-Span. In that speech, in reference to gun ownership in America, Alan Korwin claimed “hundreds of millions of lives are save each year.” His defense is a 1995 poll by Kleck.

But that poll never won peer review, and the 1997 National Institute of Justice Research Brief, “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms” concludes, NSPOF based estimate of millions of DGUs each year greatly exaggerates the true number. (National Survey of Private Ownership of Firearms)

So Alan’s claim is not only laughable and absurd but also, demonstrably false and therefore irresponsible.

Go over there and comment if you’d like, or not. Nothing you say is going to change his mind, but there might be some fence sitters over there.

UPDATE: I just saw this response he posted in the comments. Is this guy for real?

And, as a matter of fact Glenn. I do not believe that preventing robberies, burglaries, rapes, assaults, auto theft, etc are valid reasons to use a firearm.

Why would you kill someone who is trying to steal your car or your girlfriend. Isn’t that a bit heavy-handed?

Do you seriously want a bunch of folks out there carrying guns just in case they think they see someone trying to steal something?

So theoretically, some thug could break into this guys house, assault him and proceed to rape his wife and/or daughter and he wouldn’t lift a finger to help. Some people have reached an evolutionary dead-end and are just too stupid to live. Even sheep will try to protect their young from predators. Someone who is too dim witted to protect themselves and their loved ones should do us a favor and not reproduce, further polluting the gene pool. What did Robert Heinlein say?

Oh yeah…

Selfishness is the bedrock on which all moral behavior starts and it can be immoral only when it conflicts with a higher moral imperative. An animal so poor in spirit that he won’t even fight on his own behalf is already an evolutionary dead end; the best he can do for his breed is to crawl off and die, and not pass on his defective genes. — Robert A. Heinlein, Address at the U.S. Naval Academy, 5 April 1973

Perhaps the title of this post should have been, “Cowardly Lyon Jumps Off the Cliff.”

Share/Save

What Planet is this Guy From?

In the comments on his blog Cliff Lyon has this to say in response to a comment about why the commenter needs his sidearm:

I’m sure his premise is that we should have the right to defend ourselves (with guns).

Certainly that seems reasonable. But I would ask at what cost.

Do we all accept that individuals should have the right to decide when and if their life is in danger and who the danger is?

Do we want to demand the right to kill someone who is merely trying to steal our money?

Do we want to live in a world where our justification for arming everyone is based upon the assumption that one needs self-protection?

Aren’t we supposed to insist that America is a pretty safe place where the chances of dying from criminal attack are almost zero?

If the proliferation of hand-guns is a deterrent to would-be criminal, wouldn’t the banning of hand-guns reduce violent crime?

How else would he have someone decide if their life was in danger? Are we supposed to hold a committee meeting or postpone the conflict until an authority on lethal force has had a chance to review the assault? The idea is preposterous. Who else, but the person being assaulted, would know better whether their life was in danger. Can someone afford to wait until the crooks intentions are clear before defending themselves? We always hear the advice, “Give them what they want!” spouted off, but what if what they want is to kill you and rape your wife and daughter. There was a news story I read not long ago where a man did just as he had been told. He gave the crooks his money when they demanded it, and they shot him several times in the side as they turned to go. Trying to guess the intentions of a crook is the height of stupidity. Only an idiot would do so before attempting to defend themselves. And no Cliff, America is not a “safe place where the chances of dying from a criminal attack are almost zero.” Whoever told you this is lying. If a law were passed tomorrow banning all sidearms in public possession, and assuming everyone obeyed the law and turned their’s in, it would do nothing to reduce violent crime. You’re assumption is that criminals would obey the law and turn theirs in as well. As with what happened in England, nothing could be further from the truth. All it would do is embolden the criminals because they would be the only ones with guns, their victims would no longer be able to stop them. You see, you forgot criminals don’t obey the law. That’s why their called criminals.

Some peoples kids…

UPDATE: Seems like he just can’t get enough. He continues his attack, along with a picture I guess he thinks typifies the average gun owner, here. What a buffoon! I could posit that all hoplophobes such as him are girly men, like the picture below, but that wouldn’t be correct.

Share/Save

Cliff Lyon Loves Me

I think I pissed him off.

May I assume Yuri is your real name and as such, if I returned your invective, I would be calling Yuri Orlov a Jackass? …which I am not doing yet, but certainly can if you prefer to go down that road.

I’m not one for an elitist standard of decency in dealing with authoritarian tribalists with selfish, narrow, rednecked paradigms.

You know, sticks and stones…

I’m happy to go toe to toe with you if you like, as long as I don’t have to smell you. From your picture on Technorati, I’m guessing the pile of flesh you carry around is commensurate not only with the strength of your conviction, but also the myriad of odors one finds in a meat packing plant.

You may assume whatever you like, I really don’t care. Your opinion is of no consequence to me. I find it ironic when you say “You know, sticks and stones…” and then stoop to calling me a redneck and close with a fat joke. You are soooooooooo funny. You must be the funniest person you know. Tell me, when you tell jokes at parties, do people laugh and smile nervously and then sneak away when you’re not looking? What’s next, dick jokes? I do find the notion of me as as an “authoritarian” hilarious however. Seriously though, isn’t that more the province of you statists?

Aren’t name calling and personal attacks the last refuge of those without a leg to stand on?

Just asking…

Sticks and stones Cliffy…

You must know that the need to cite unscientific polls conducted by mindless, gun toting zealots to defend an absurd position (people need and guns to defend themselves in America) reflects the very desperation that position.

The claim that 400,000 people per year use a gun to save their lives, is on the order of a statistic that would have been implausible even in World War II. Thats why no one has bothered to prove the “professor” wrong.

But since you like dealing with absolutes, like when my bullet enters your brain, you are definetly (spelling! -ed) dead, lets do the same here.

Was that a threat? I guess that explains the difference between you and I. I would never, even in jest, suggest that I’d shoot you. Why are you anti-rights bigots so violent? Regardless of the reason, you seem to think that everyone has as little self control as you, as evidenced by your comments.

Let’s get one thing straight. Nothing I say is going to change your mind. You are one of those people who are so invested in their belief system, Jesus himself could come down off the cross and tell you I am right and you still wouldn’t believe him. Still, I’ll give it a shot.

The estimated US population (July 2008), according to the CIA World Fact Book is 303,824,646. 400,000 of 303,824,646 is .13%. What do you find so unbelievable about .13% of the population defending themselves with firearms?

There is a saying, “If it isn’t written down, it didn’t happen!” This is why if someone defends themselves with a firearm and doesn’t file a police report, there’s no record. Obviously. This is why there’s no exact number, only an estimation. If no one is hurt, and the bad guy runs away, why is there a need to file a police report? Most people don’t.

In any case, there are at least three sites I can think of that make a habit of archiving DGU’s (the ones that make the papers). You’ve been pointed to them before, but here they are again:

Civilian Gun Self Defense Blog
The Armed Citizen
Gun Watch

You’ll probably sneer at these, but the paper of record these came out of are all listed, so someone of your great intelligence should be able to track them down to verify their authenticity if you’re so inclined.

Can you give me ANYTHING more bankable than some professor did a poll? How about a link to the poll, or the questions asked or the methodology used. How about some peer review (do you know what that is)?

I think your statement, “totally pwned in the process by people who rely on facts and statistics instead of blind emotion.” is a bit pre-mature.

IOW, saying it, doesn’t make it true. True to me is something on the order of, you know, a bullet to the brain.

There’s that shooting thing again, you really need to chill out.

If you refuse to believe you’ve been “pwned” by the good professor and other commenters on your blog, then you haven’t been reading the comments. Try reading them again, and pay attention this time.

Google is your friend, but to show my charity, here’s a short reading list for you:

• “Targeting Guns”, Dr. Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State University, 1997
• James Wright and Peter Rossi, “Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms”, New York: Aldine, 1986
• FBI, “Crime in the United States”, 1998
• U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Federal Firearms Offenders study, 1997. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, “The Armed Criminal in America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons,” Research Report, July 1985
• Dr. Gary Kleck, “Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force”, Social Problems, February 1988
• Fall 1995, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology
• “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-control Laws” by John R. Lott

One more, this from the Department of Justice. You do read your comments, right?

Read these and get back to me if you have any questions.

Share/Save

Anti-Rights Bigot Caught Lyon

Anti-rights bigot Cliff Lyon attempts to take Alan Korwin to task for his statement: “Guns save hundreds of thousands of lives a year.” The title of his post being “Gun Advocates Lie While People Die.”

To save you the trouble, here’s what he has to say:

Hi Alan,I just saw you on C-Span giving a talk on April 8th 2008.You said, “Guns save hundreds of thousands of lives a year.”

You said this after describing a situation in which a women killed her intruder.

I think this claim needs to be fully explored for veracity because if it is true, we gun control advocates will need to take pause.

If on the other hand, this statement is off by say 99.9%, then it is arguably a lie. As a non-fiction writer, your moral and ethical integrity are in question.

I’ve posted this e-mail on our blog so that you may defend your statement publicly. Please go there to respond.

Thanks
Cliff

This is the beauty of the internet. Unsupportable public comments and the people who make them can be taken to task and a permanent record established.

Fortunately, because of OneUtah’s very high search engine ranking, this post will soon be returned on the first page of a search on Alan Korwin.

I hope he will address our concerns responsibly.

This is indeed the beauty of the internet Cliff, so people can not only see your pathetic attempt to smear a good man, but see him respond, and you get totally pwned in the process by people who rely on facts and statistics instead of blind emotion.

Way to go Cliff, you jackass, let us know when you want another spanking.

(h/t) Of Arms and the Law

Share/Save