First you're all like, Wow, they can achieve compelling new levels of verisimilitude with microprocessor-controlled servos & LIDAR nowadays!

But then after a second you realize it's like any other party, and the waitstaff is just uncomfortable and busy.

Zach Ford attempts to mansplain that women shouldn't be armed, and they definitely shouldn't shoot muggers. Maybe he should go back and rewatch that Gillette infomercial again?

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/15/think-progress-editor-dare-conservatives-celebrate-woman-defending-gun/

Funny. Tho I'm not convinced that this is a helicopter mom, but someone trying to pull a fast one.

https://www.boredpanda.com/car-bill-sale-son-crazy-lady-texts/

Hey Crid, the link is broken in your first post.

SO WOKE.

CNN analyst Areva Martin accused Sirius XM radio and Fox Nation host David Webb of benefitting from “white privilege” because of his views on race Tuesday morning, to which Webb responded… that he’s black.

https://www.mediaite.com/online/cnn-analyst-calls-out-radio-host-david-webb-on-air-for-white-privilege-webb-informs-her-hes-black/

Zack Ford's tweet, "The penalty for theft is not death, nor do we want it to be" is misguided at best. The penalty for waiting for a bus is not death either. The 25-year-old woman did not introduce guns into the equation that morning, the 19-year-old would-be mugger, Laavion Goings, Jr., did.

What if Goings' gun had "just gone off?" Would Ford be as quick to condemn the mugger's possession of a gun as he has been to condemn the would-be victim's?

I saw a bumper sticker once that said, "Gun control is the belief that a 110-lb. woman has the right to fist-fight a 225lb. man." While I don't advocate getting one's political philosophy from bumper stickers, this one had some truth to it.

Anti-gun activists seem to live in a world with double standards. The woman is excoriated for carrying a gun to protect herself, but the young man mugging her at gunpoint is mourned as a victim of gun violence.

In an alt-weekly editorial I read back in the late '80s, the author, Hal Crowther, wrote, "We should concede that pacifism is always limited - anyone will shoot at hostiles who are carrying off his wife and daughters - and leave it at that."

Um, no Hal. That's what pacifism is, the decrying of the use of violence, in any circumstances - i.e., not shooting at hostiles, even if they're carrying off your wife and daughters.

If we accept Crowther's exceptions to pacifism, then pacifists will have to concede the George Zimmerman may have been simply defending himself, as might have Officer Darren Wilson.

They'd have to admit that Michael Drejka might have been justified in shooting Markeis McGlockton, even as the autopsy shows that McGlockton was turning away from Drejka when he was shot.

But they won't. They won't accept that the standard applies equally. Why is it that the standard allowed in these types of arguments with pacifists always benefits the pacifist; always benefits the anti-self-defense side of the argument? They won't accept that Goings was attempting to carry off her proverbial wife and daughters.

Ford's argument is a variation of that same double standard. He assumes that if she'd just let Laavion Goings, Jr. mug her, both of them would have walked away alive. He wasn't there to kill her, after all.

However, Ford never accepts that guns, even in the hands of teenaged muggers, are inherently dangerous. He never concedes that, by being the one who introduced guns into this equation, Goings made it more dangerous, not the woman waiting on a bus; that Goings' gun could have "just gone off." Ford blames the mugging victim, and guns, for an armed mugger's death.

Anthony Daniels (dba Theodore Dalrymple) writes in Life at the Botton of his time as a psychiatrist in the UK prison system, that the inmates often blamed things out of their control, and not themselves, for the violence they inflicted on others, "the knife just went in." Ford enables this kind of thinking with his defense of the "innocent" armed mugger as victim.

In the end, contrary to Ford's argument, it's not simple theft as in "who steals my purse steals trash." I'll have to defer to Jack London's Wolf Larsen on this one,

"Who steals my purse steals my right to live, old saws to the contrary. For he steals my bread and meat and bed, and in so doing imperils my life. There are not enough soup kitchens and breadlines to go around, you know, and when men have nothing in their purses they usually die, and die miserably – unless they are able to fill their purses pretty speedily."

More Gillette.

The takeaway from Gillette’s sloppy and hackneyed characterizations is that “the best a man can be” is a clean-shaven hall monitor. No woman wants him. No man wants to be him. Sad!

https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/01/15/gillette-selling-sexlessness-in-2019/

Tangential to Gillette, but related. They're going for the "New Soviet Man".

The most recent to adopt the feminist claim about “toxic masculinity” is the American Psychological Association, which asserts this feminist “truth”: “The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful.” But men should not be offended because the APA, after all, is condemning “traditional masculinity” for men’s own good:

https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2019/01/15/the-toxic-mission-to-reengineer-men/

And more on shaver prices.

He assumes that if she'd just let Laavion Goings, Jr. mug her, both of them would have walked away alive. He wasn't there to kill her, after all.

Maybe. Or maybe he would have decided that live witnesses were a problem. Or he would have found her address in her purse and paid her a visit a little later on. They lived not far from each other.

He was shot center mass and he managed to travel some distance before collapsing.

> Hey Crid, the link is broken

Sorry: Verisimilitude.

Computer programming.

Sorry: Verisimilitude. ~ Crid at January 16, 2019 8:04 AM

So, topless waitress?

I admire Elaine tremendously, and would like to date her Mom.

Her Grammaw. Somebody.

Is that a carrot or toxic masculinity?

https://twitter.com/peta/status/1085573461315997696

Zack Ford:

"A gun death is a gun death, and the fact that she was able to protect herself in no way motivates me to change my belief that she should not have had a gun in the first place."

It's as if he has no internalized sense of right and wrong, at least that applies to other people.

"A gun death is a gun death" --- He doesn't see a moral difference between a criminal murdering a victim and a victim killing a criminal in self defense?

He says, "The penalty for theft is not death."

Nor are the penalties for rape, first-degree assault, second degree assault, third degree assault, rape of a child, manslaughter, second-degree murder, negligent homicide, assault with a deadly weapon, burglary, kidnapping... not even for first degree murder in most cases.

So at what point do anti-gun liberals think would be justified in using deadly force to defend herself? Their answer would be never, because they would outlaw any means for her to do so.

I sometimes am armed and hopefully dangerous. It's really, really easy for someone to not be killed by me. All he has to do is not choose to commit crimes against my family, my neighbors, my friends or me - at least not while I can do anything about it. It's as easy as not choosing to set himself on fire or cut off his leg.

Point #1: "Anthony Daniels (dba Theodore Dalrymple) writes in Life at the Bottom of his time as a psychiatrist in the UK prison system, that the inmates often blamed things out of their control, and not themselves, for the violence they inflicted on others, "the knife just went in."":

Note that improperly instructed children possess this ability. As John Rosemond notes:

"If misbehavior is not a child's inclination, how is it that youngsters who've never witnessed acts of violence will hit people when they don't get their way, slap and even bite other children in order to possess their toys, and act demon-possessed when they, the parents, do not obey?"

----------

Point #2: Zack Ford idiocy has been with us for some time. The proper reply has been around for over 25 years...

"It's as if he has no internalized sense of right and wrong, at least that applies to other people."

The hidden-in-plain-sight operating principle of a lot of pacifists: "I have the right to defend myself. You don't."

"CNN analyst Areva Martin accused Sirius XM radio and Fox Nation host David Webb "

His Twitter feed: on-topic, multiple source tweets regarding the exchange.

Her Twitter feed: Silence, save for 30+ re-tweets of other people's content in the last 24 hours.

Consider this theory from Flanagan, it makes a lot of sense.

https://mobile.twitter.com/CaitlinPacific/status/1085659975181975553

The truth is that the men who are most pissed off about this are old people, such as ourselves. The young men who are growing beards this year aren't paying attention to such things... They're out chasing tail. Gillette will be happy to welcome back to the customer base when they grow up, none the wiser.

Remember to take part in/of our political process.