When only the police have guns

Only the police can commit mass slaughter. Fortunately, we all know that one can never find sociopaths on the police force:

Woo had an argument with his live-in girlfriend in the afternoon of April 26, 1982. Enraged, he left the house and went to the police armory, where he began consuming large amounts of whiskey. He became moderately drunk, raided the police armory of its weapons and built a personal arsenal. Woo then stole a single high-powered rifle and some grenades and left the armory. By this point it was around dinner time. He walked from house to house, and abused his position as a police officer to make people feel safe and gain entry to the home. Then he shot the victims, or killed the entire family with a grenade. He continued this pattern for the next eight hours, and into the early morning hours of April 27.

When Woo had shot a certain number of people in a village, he ran to another village and started killing. Eventually he had been through five villages in Uiryeong county. In the early hours of April 27, Woo took his final two grenades and strapped them to his body. He grabbed three people as he set the fuse of the grenades. They became his final victims, as he blew himself up, killing the three he had taken hostage and finally ending the world’s worst spree killing.

The utter lunacy of the gun control crowd is demonstrated by their trust in the armed police and government, when government is the single most murderous institution in the history of mankind and – if I recall correctly – police commit murders at a higher rate than the norm.

A commenter at Dr. Helen’s adds:

“Despite being technically a state of war for decades against North Korea, South Korea is a country where citizens are banned from privately owning guns and where no school shootings are known to have occurred.

However, the country has not been immune from shooting rampages.

In 2005, a military conscript believed to be angered by taunts from senior officers killed eight fellow soldiers, throwing a grenade into a barracks where his comrades were sleeping and firing a hail of bullets.”

Shall we ban movies too?

I always find it interesting how an industry which claims it can save lives by showing action heroes buckling their seatbelts when getting into a car will simultaneously claim that violent movies cannot possibly have an impact on anyone:

In the chilling video Cho also appears to re-enact scenes from a film detectives say he had repeatedly watched in the days leading up to the massacre. The South Korean movie Oldboy has themes of obsession and revenge which also occur in Cho’s own writings.

Obviously, the vast majority of those who have seen that movie have not gone on to commit violent massacres. But it is downright dishonest to insist that there is no connection whatsoever between the influence and the act. This connection doesn’t mean that anything should be done about the negative influences, I don’t even believe in forcing movie producers to rate their movies.

But it does demonstrate that it is never a bad idea to pay attention to the influences surrounding you and those around you.

Talking guns and Ismail Ax

Here’s a link to that Libertarian Politics Live podcast in case you’re interested in listening to it. If it strikes you that I’m a bit slow, note that I was operating on something like four hours of sleep distributed over two nights at the time.

Combining book-writing mode with WoW is a bad, bad combination. But fortunately, amaretto-laced cappucino is the antidote and I just so happen to possess all the necessary ingredients in copious quantity.

Read the fine print

One could reach a reasonable conclusion about the intelligence of Democrats and Republicans here:

Pew judged the levels of knowledgeability (correct answers) among those surveyed and found that those who scored the highest were regular watchers of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show and Colbert Report. They tied with regular readers of major newspapers in the top spot — with 54% of them getting 2 out of 3 questions correct. Watchers of the Lehrer News Hour on PBS followed just behind.

Virtually bringing up the rear were regular watchers of Fox News. Only 1 in 3 could answer 2 out of 3 questions correctly. Fox topped only network morning show viewers.

So, because Democrats watch Jon Stewart and Republicans watch Fox News, this means that Democrats are smarter than Republicans. QED.

Not so fast….

Men scored higher than women, and older Americans did better than younger, on average. Democrats and Republicans were about equally represented in the most knowledgeable group but there were more Democrats in the least aware group.

Remember, most people are idiots. So, since Fox News has loads more viewers than Comedy Central, a higher percentage of them are largely clueless… to say nothing of the fact that Fox News spends more time reporting on celebrity spawn and school shootings than it does on American politics.

Although I have no doubt that all those Media Matters Stasi are contributing to dragging the average down as well.

Regardless, I think it’s worth pointing out that knowing who the vice-president is does not qualify one as knowledgeable, it just indicates that you’re not quite as sublimely ignorant as my Viszla.