Categories
Antigun Crime Guns Race baiting

CDC to have Gun Study Ban

It seems that the CDC has been doing firearm homicide studies. The study found that the rate of gun homicides among Black males between the ages of 10-24 was 21.6 times higher than white males of the same age. I guarantee you that this means the CDC is about to have its gun violence budget cut.

The CDC also claimed that the study showed that planting trees and grass on vacant lots reduces firearm violence by nearly a third.

16 replies on “CDC to have Gun Study Ban”

Well… actually, I can kinda see the latter. Give people something to do, and they might not have time to get into trouble.

My thought was:
Study guy 1: “Hey, did you notice that there is more crime in the city?”
Study guy 2: “Maybe if we plant some more trees, the city will be more like the country, and crime will go down.”
Study guy 1: “That’s a great idea. Let’s put in for a million dollar grant to study it.”

They needed to spend a truckload of tax dollars on a study to determine the brothas shoot each other at a much higher rate than us Caucasians? Heh. They could’ve gone to heyjackass.com and found that out with about 5 minutes of reading, for free. Fucking government stooges.

And yeah, plant some trees. Were going to need a lot of them for all the hangings that need to take place.

Re tree planting, I seem to recall the good people of Detroit being unhappy over the city deciding to do that.

A government deciding to do something without asking its citizens whether they would like it done. Shocking, I know.

Hey, you know what else works? Enforcing laws that already exist. Studies show that hoodboogers can’t engage in gun-related homicides while in jail, and there’s that whole thing about the largest predictor of criminality being prior incidences of criminality. There’s lots of crying about the jail-industrial complex, but F it, I’m cool with giving a few less bucks to Raytheon to give bombs as gifts to other countries and instead opening up a couple of shiny new jails to house people that don’t deserve to be out and about.

I would agree, but we need to reduce the number of things that will get you put in jail. Owning the wrong plant? Tearing the tags off your mattress? Not using the spraypaint according to label instructions? Not jailable crimes.

Tearing the tags off your mattress?

I really don’t believe that you believe that.

A bit of hyperbole, but many felonies are just as silly.
1 If you are using a household cleaner and the label tells you to mix a cap full of the cleaner with a gallon of water, and you only mix it with 3.5 quarts of water, you have just used a labeled product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. Federal felony.

2 In Texas, it is a felony to own more than 4 sex toys (chapter 43). 11 of the 2,324 acts that the Texas Legislature thinks are worthy of being called felonies, have to do with acts that you can commit with or to an oyster.

3 In Montana It is a felony for a wife to open her husband’s mail.

4 In Florida, it is a felony to access WiFi without permission. There was a man who was convicted in 2005 of using the WiFi of a restaurant that advertised free WiFi for customers, because he was using the access from the parking lot while the establishment was closed. Since it was advertised as free WiFi for customers, and he could not be a customer while the business was closed, hello felony.

5 It’s a felony to have a raffle in Georgia unless you are registered as a non-profit organization with the state.

6 In Michigan, it is a felony for a man to seduce an unmarried woman, punishable by 5 years in prison. Adultery is also a felony in Michigan, but only if the spouse being cheated on is the one who complained.

7 In Mississippi, if you promise to marry a woman, have sex with her, and then decide not to marry, you are guilty of a felony punishable by ten years in prison.

I think it’s 5 or 6 devices in Texas, not 4. Not that it changes the point of the argument any. It’s not up to the government to enforce morals.

You are right, it’s six. But still, why are we throwing someone in prison for a year or more simply because they own sex toys? Not use, not show to children, but merely possess.

That means that the state has deemed you to be so dangerous that you must be in jail for a year or more, can never vote again, and can never own a firearm or ammunition.

Ridiculous.

Agreed. Wikipedia says a store manager was arrested for having sex toys in their shop and the manager might now have to file as a “sex offender”. Could you imagine having your neighbors notified that you’re a “sex offender”? What’s the first thought that comes to mind? Abusing children. Except the person didn’t have anything to do with children. Just owned a shop that had more than 5 “sex toys” on the shelves.

I’ve read that satellites can find buried bodies, because the surrounding plants grow much better. Using each other for fertilizer in the hood might work.

The thing with sex toys being illegal in TX makes perfect sense. The government demands to be the only one ever allowed to fuck you. Being able to take care of one’s own needs is simply too dangerous a power to he granted to mere mortals.

It’s going to take a big big can of Round Up to push the overgrown .gov jungle back to where it should be. I think a good filter to apply as to what we should prune away, and what we should keep would be to throw out all of the malum prohibitum laws.
We all understand malem en se, things that are evil of themselves. Murder, robbery, rape etc ie a clear perpetrator and generally clear victims of the crime. Malum prohibitum on the other hand are all those things which are illegal simply because we say so, many examples of this already posted in the comments.
Among other injustives, malum prohibitum “crimes” remove intent from whether a crime has been committed. Your shotgun is legal now, but shave 1/16″ off it’s total length and suddenly it’s a federal felony. Just having the wrong kind of plants, or too many common plumbing tools and accessories or whatever.
I’m sure there must be somewhere an example of a malum prohibitum law or regulation that’s ok, but I don’t know what it is and I’m sure that 99%+ of these kinds of laws and regulations do more harm than good.

When that’s done, then we can talk about salting the crushed remains of all the law schools with salt, or something more durable like cobalt-60 or Raid.

Comments are closed.