lou gagliardi wants to kidnap your children

But she wants someone else to do it for her, so that is ok. 

Unfortunately, the following Twitter conversation will be somewhat disjointed and I will be unable to adequately link to all of the various tweets.  Why?  Because Lou Gagliardi is a spineless coward who, upon realizing what she said, Memory Hole’d the tweets I managed to keep screen captures of. 

Why did she delete these tweets?  Why do you think – because she knows just how reprehensible and disgusting they really are. 

In any case, we are jumping in mid-conversation, with: 

Linoge_WOTC:  According to #guncontrol #extremist @lougagliardi, I’m a terrorist for standing up for my human rights. If that’s not insanity…

lougagliardikidnapper1Lou Gagliardi:  #gunowner #terrorist @linoge_wotc thinks owning military grade weapon is a “human right” If he has children, they should be taken off him

Read that again, just to let it sink in.  Check out the screen capture if you do not believe my reprinting of it.  For the heinous “crime” of standing up for my human rights of self-preservation, self-defense, the ownership of private property, and simply being left alone to live my life in peace, Lou Gagliardi wants some nameless, faceless entity (otherwise known as “the federal government”, no doubt) to unjustly relieve me of my (non-existent) children without due process, a trial, or any other Constitutionally-protected rights observed. 

Wow.  Just.  Plain.  Wow. 

To begin with, as we pro-rights advocates have always maintained, if you cannot respect one Constitutionally-protected right, you cannot respect any of them.  As much as Lou Gagliardi absolutely despises the rights protected by the Second Amendment (which, by the way, does include the right to own “military grade weapons” – after all, the Founding Fathers had no problems with their citizenry owning cannon and warships, for heaven’s sake), she likewise hates the rights protected by the First and Fourth Amendments, and arguably the Ninth and Tenth as well. 

Moving on, Lou Gagliardi has, to put it simply, been losing her gos-se over my comment that she wants to kidnap the children of people who own AR-15s, and whatever-the-hell else she thinks qualifies as a “military grade weapon” (even though, obviously, AR-15s are not even used by the military).  Unfortunately for her, that is simply the way our representative-style government works.  If you call for the government to do X, and it actually does X, you share in the responsibility of that action being executed.  If you elect a representative who says he does X, and he actually goes and does X, you share in the responsibility of that action being executed.  This is part of the reason I am becoming a more and more staunch independent, and why I am having a harder and harder time voting for any incumbents whatsoever – I refuse to share in the dirt they have on their hands. 

Having armed men do something on your behalf simply does not keep your hands clean; this is actually one of the largest disconnects we rational pro-rights activists have with “gun control” extremists like Lou Gagliardi here.  They absolutely cannot tolerate the notion of private citizens keeping firearms for their own personal defense, but they have absolutely no problems calling… armed citizens who happen to have badges to come and use their firearms to defend them.  Helpful Hint: violence by proxy does not keep your hands clean. 

Addendum to Helpful Hint:  neither does kidnapping by proxy. 

Unfortunately, Lou Gagliardi was not content to simply leave it at that: 

Gun Rights Alert@linoge_wotc They’d have to go through me first. And the kids can take care of themselves, too. @lougagliardi pic.twitter.com/3iy2sncX

lougagliardikidnapper2Lou Gagliardi:  @GunRightsAlert @linoge_wotc this is exactly why they should be taking off of you. thank you for the evidence to prove my point. 

Incomprehensible grammar aside, Lou Gagliardi’s position is pretty clear – if you own “military grade weapon(s)” (which basically means whatever this ignorant imbecile says it means), your children should be forcibly removed from your protection. 

But Lou Gagliardi herself is not going to be doing the kidnapping… oh, no, she could not dream of getting her pretty little hands dirty like that.  Instead, she wants other people – other armed people, ironically enough – to do her dirty work for her… as if that will somehow keep those hands of hers clean. 

Newsflash: it will not. 

Secondary Newsflash:  attempting to forcibly relieve firearm-owning, responsible, willing-to-defend-themselves-and-their-families adults of their children is not going to end well. 

But, after all, that is exactly why Lou Gagliardi wants someone else to execute her totalitarian pipe dreams – she is too much of a coward to go door-to-door herself, and face those armed parents while attempting to unjustly and unethically strip them of their children.  She would rather hide in whatever hovel she calls a home, and demand, plead, scream for men – armed men, despite her hatred of firearms – to go and kidnap law-abiding citizens’ children for no good reason except she does not like something you said. 

And, tell me, what will those armed men do when you say, “No”?  What will those armed men do when you attempt to defend your children – your family – from unjust and illegal attempts at kidnapping them? 

If you follow Lou Gagliardi’s demands to their logical conclusion, she wants people – other people, of course (you, federal agents, your children, etc.) – to die simply because she does not like you owning firearms and peacefully expressing that you support the right to continue owning them. 

How disgusting is that

Some folks following me questioned why I was toying with Lou Gagliardi for as long as I did, especially once she sunk into the inescapable morass of endless logical fallacies.  This is why.  It is important for we pro-rights activists to fully grasp some anti-rights cultists’ deep-seated, irrational, visceral, and obscene hatred for us, for our families, for our lives.  Certainly not all “gun control” fetishists believe as Lou Gagliardi does, but this theme of attacking pro-rights activists through their children is becoming distressingly common

Bear that murderous hatred in mind when you question the need to contact your senators and representatives and let them know that your support depends on their support of freedom and our individual rights. 

[Update]  Holy crap on an everloving crutch.  Immediately after writing this post and finally tired of Lou Gagliardi’s incessant lies and harassment, I went to block her Twitter account, only to be confronted with this tweet: 

lougagliardikidnapper3Lou Gagliardihotair.com/archives/2013/01/06/mom-shoots-intruder-saves-kids/ … this mother needs to have her kids taken off of her by children’s bureau for having guns in the house #guncontrol

Take a look at the article she links to – a woman defends her family from a known felon breaking into her house, and yet Lou Gagliardi wants this woman’s children stolen from her?  “Disgusting” does not even begin to cover that position.  [/Update]

pop quiz, part the second

What is this? 

DoctorsWithoutText

(Click to really, really embiggenate – do not say I did not warn you.) 

Give up? 

This is me accepting a damned good suggestion, and running with it. 

As you all are probably aware by now, I am a firm proponent that graphics and pictures can take otherwise complicated concepts and numbers and make them easy to understand for the average reader.  Bob S. approached me with an idea, and this was the end result… so time for the explanation. 

As you may or may not be aware, Florida is one signature away from passing a law that would “ban doctors from asking about the presence of guns or ammunition in the home”.  I confess to not having read the entirety of that particular document, but I can honestly tell you one thing – I oppose it.  Predictably, the anti-rights cultists of America also oppose it, but something tells me we are approaching the matter from somewhat disjoint perspectives. 

Personally, I believe the law unjustly abridges the First-Amendment-protected rights of the doctors in Florida, and I likewise believe that it will unnecessary cut off what could have been an otherwise interesting social conversation between doctor and patient. 

That said, I likewise believe that doctors have absolutely no business discussing firearms from a medical standpoint, that doing so opens those doctors up to a world of hurt when it comes to medical malpractice (*.pdf warning), and that their reasons for doing so are largely debunked and seriously flawed “studies”.  However, should a doctor feel the need to discuss those kinds of topics with their patients, I see no reason why they should not be legally permitted to do so… just like I see no reason why the patients should not be legally permitted to tell the doctor to shove his self-righteous idiocy up his nether regions and go find a less intrusive practitioner to use. 

However, most of all, I know doctors have more-important, and more-pressing, things to be discussing with their patients. 

Which brings us back to the graphic – one very large blue square (to be specific, 5492×5492 pixels), with a series of multi-colored squares contained within it.  What are those?  Well, I will give you a hint – one pixel in the above image represents 10 American citizens in 2007. 

Still give up?  Well, here is the answer: 

DoctorsWithText

From right to left, we have the leading causes of American deaths

Heart disease: 616,067
Cancer: 562,875
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 135,952
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 127,924
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 123,706
Alzheimer’s disease: 74,632
Diabetes: 71,382
Influenza and Pneumonia: 52,717
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 46,448
Septicemia: 34,828
Firearm-related: 31,224

Actually, I added that last one – firearms do not even make the Center for Disease Control’s top ten list of causes for American fatalities (there were somewhere around 620 firearm-related accidental fatalities in 2007, which will be counted twice under that category and “accidents”).  Bear in mind that, as with the last few graphics like these, that “firearm-related” number includes all firearm-related fatalities – accidents, law-enforcement, suicides, murders, etc.  Something tells me doctors will not be terribly helpful in discussing how to avoid “death by cop” or being shot by a mugger, but, as usual, I want to give the anti-rights cultists every single advantage we can – their positions seem to need it. 

So, with the proportions of what kills Americans now firmly established by the above graphic, might you think that the good Florida doctors’ time might be a little better spent on actually relevant topics? 

“But wait,” I can hear you exclaiming, “Most of the objections are coming from pediatricians!  What about that specific demographic?!” 

Sure.  Let us take a look at that sub-18-year-old range, and just for the sake of making things easy, let us toss out the newborns – their birth-related fatalities will skew the numbers even worse.  A rough approximation of the 2009 Census approximation (w00t for nested approximations!) gives us somewhere around 74,602,591.65 folks under the age of 18 in America…  I think we can round up.  That gives us a box 2731×2731 pixels.  Off we go! 

… Actually, no, we do not.  The largest leading cause of death amongst the ages of 1 through 18 is “Unintentional Injury”, and its box would only be a scant 91×91 pixels – hardly even noticeable against a field of blue that large.  So, instead, we will simply break down the numbers below: 

Unintentional injury (non-firearm-related):  8309
All firearm-related fatalities (homicide, suicide, and unintentional):  2167
Malignant neoplasms:  1834
Congenital anomalies:  1077
Suicide: 738
Homicide:  732
Heart disease: 650
Influenza and pneumonia:  251
Chronic lower respiratory disease:  228
Septicemia:  195

Well, there you have it – the anti-rights cultists finally have a demographic where firearm-related fatalities rank high enough to be worthy of note.  Can you not hear their blood-covered shoes jumping in glee? 

Except… wait… what good does a doctor talking to a parent about firearms in their home do a child who is murdered by another child, or adult, with a firearm?  Not a damned bit.  Which takes out 1553 of those fatalities, suddenly bumping “firearm-related” to fourth on the list, which still leaves us in the “doctors have significantly more-pressing things to be discussing with their patients” category. 

For example, do you know what kills more than twice as many children as firearms?  Motor vehicle traffic.  So how many doctors talk to their 16-and-older patients about looking both ways at stop signs and keeping a safe following distance?  Do you know what the most-chosen means of suicide is for that demographic?  Not firearms – suffocation.  How many doctors talk to the parents of teenagers about not keeping plastic shopping or trash bags in their home?  And you and I both know what would happen if I had some way of excluding “gang member” from our numbers, and you and I both know that no amount of talking-to from a doctor is going to convince a “child” like that to give up his “extracurricular activities”… 

The number of firearm-related fatalities unquestionably needs to go down, but the way to accomplish this is not to inappropriately invade people’s privacy, or demand they “find another doctor” (as the doctor who precipitated this entire incident did) if they do not see the need to discuss the topic with you. 

Likewise, this proposed law in Florida is stupid – there is simply no way around it – but the anti-rights cultists’ reaction to it demonstrates the same remarkable lack of scale as their continuing drive for “gun control”.  There are simply more-important, more-pressing, and more-effective things for doctors to be discussing with their patients than something they just have no business prying into, especially during the time when their patients are paying them to address whatever medical issue brought them in in the first place.  Unfortunately, it would seem as though the hoplophobes will pass up no opportunity to wet their pants over firearm-related legislation, even if they come off as complete and utter fools in the process. 

(This post suggested by Bob S. who was, in turn, inspired by Brady Board Member, Million Mom March something-or-another, and all-around anti-rights nut Joan Peterson, who seems to believe that homicides are a “major health issue”.  Really, Joan?  Really?) 

breaking out the small, pink guns

Remember, boys and girls, guns are bad news for women… unless, of course, you are a five-year-old who just got her first .22. Just look at the smile on that kid’s face – it is going to require a jackhammer and blowtorch to remove! But wait… it gets better – something tells me that if we could harness the energy of a five-year-old jumping around after perforating her target, we might be able to power a small city for a month or so… Kid-sized hearing protection? Check. Safety glasses? Check. Single-shot .22? Check. Box of now-expended ammunition? Check. A new gunny, possibly for life? Check. Anti-rights nuts everywhere wetting their pants? Oh hell yes.

And, once again, boys and girls, guns are bad news for women… unless, of course, the not-quite woman enjoys recreationally shooting and performs remarkably well at it. Oh, sure, the “firearms” in question were nothing more than BB guns, but those are just the start:

I think the best part was they both insisted that I sign them up for the next class.

What do the anti-rights nuts have that can even begin to compare?