This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Simon Black's Take On This Weekend's Shooting, And What It May Mean For America's Future

Tyler Durden's picture


Simon Black, whose first person observations of the world outside America have made his website Sovereign Man truly an entertaining and informative read, and who has been anticipating the encroaching transition of America to a control state, shares his two cents on this weekend's tragic shooting in Florida. "With one of their own victimized, however, I'm concerned that politicians will close ranks, capitalize on the social mood to generate a renewed faith in government, and pass a host of reactionary policies... all after sanitizing their Twitter feeds for any reference to violence, of course. Perhaps some form of gun control is in the works... though with a Republican controlled Congress, I'd think new legislation targeting suspected 'Anti-American subversives' could be on the table, or something that gives sweeping new powers to government agents and police forces." And as always, Simon's suggestion is a logical one: "I would suggest that if your ideals and beliefs make you increasingly
isolated from your neighbors, maybe it's time to find new neighbors." We are sure this will anger Mike Krieger who advocates an attempt to regain control back from the kleptocratic corporatocracy (by peaceful means of course), although at some point one has to ask: when is enough, enough...

On the weekend’s shooting, from Simon Black

I abhor violence. Non-retaliatory violence is a desperate act of intolerant men who cannot sort out their differences reasonably and peacefully.  Violence is the answer for those who lack the intellectual merit to win a battle of ideas and can only resort to more animalistic behavior to impress their point.

The greater the violence, the more unfortunate the outcome-- major acts of violence result in loss of life, collateral damage, destruction of property, changes in social mood, and more.

Every single day, crazed lunatics claim the lives of innocent people; sometimes it's a premeditated crime, sometimes it's a crime of passion, sometimes it's a complete accident, sometimes it's an act of terror, and sometimes people are just in the wrong place at the wrong time when a 500 pound bomb is dropped over Afghanistan.

Each instance represents a theft upon humanity.

A shooting took place this weekend in Arizona which was devastating, to say the least... but in my mind, no more or less devastating than any other murderous rampage, whether in the United States or anywhere in the world.  Because a US Congresswoman was ostensibly the intended victim, however, it's captured worldwide attention.

Speaker of the House John Boehner summarized many politicians' reactions to Saturday's shooting when he said, "an attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society."

I'm inclined to believe that acts and threats of violence against -all people- have no place in any free society. The life of a politician is not worth more than the life of the nine year old girl who was shot and later died at the hospital, or the 76-year old man who died on the scene as he was protecting his wife, or of any of the other victims.

I've seen mainstream media reports that portray the apparent shooter as an anti-government subversive whose favorite books include Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto. This makes absolutely no sense-- what kind of anti-government proponent counts Hitler, Marx, and Engels as his favorite authors?

Rather, it's more likely that the shooter was just another loony who owned a firearm and decided to use it. If the victim had been Gabrielle the bus driver instead of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, it would have barely registered a few words at the bottom of the CNN news ticker.

With one of their own victimized, however, I'm concerned that politicians will close ranks, capitalize on the social mood to generate a renewed faith in government, and pass a host of reactionary policies... all after sanitizing their Twitter feeds for any reference to violence, of course.

Perhaps some form of gun control is in the works... though with a Republican controlled Congress, I'd think new legislation targeting suspected 'Anti-American subversives' could be on the table, or something that gives sweeping new powers to government agents and police forces.

In 1946, the 79th Congress of the United States passed public law 601 giving permanent standing to the House Committee on Un-American Activities. This committee was authorized significant powers to investigate 'subversive and un-American propaganda' and assist Congress in 'necessary remedial legislation.'

Ironically, in its efforts to ensure that America was nothing like the Soviet Union, the US government began turning the country into a fascist collective.  Given what may come after the weekend's shooting, I fear we may be returning to a time when it is increasingly dangerous to be a free thinking individual anywhere in the West.

With Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano perched above WalMart shoppers encouraging Americans to spy on each other, I sense the boiling frog may soon be getting a few degrees warmer.

I would suggest that if your ideals and beliefs make you increasingly isolated from your neighbors, maybe it's time to find new neighbors.

Vibrant expat communities are starting to blossom all over the world, and as we routinely discuss, it's possible (and in many cases easier) to live a much freer life and earn a great living by applying your skills overseas.

There are plenty of great options out there... dozens of places where you could feel more alive, more at home, and more at ease; it simply starts with the willingness and courage to take action, start the research, and develop relationships with like-minded people.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:35 | 864070 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

There are plenty of great options out there... dozens of places where you could feel more alive, more at home, and more at ease; it simply starts with the willingness and courage to take action, start the research, and develop relationships with like-minded people.

Name one.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:39 | 864085 Maos Dog
Maos Dog's picture

The middle of the great swamp

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:46 | 864102 bonddude
bonddude's picture

Shooter was nuts. Nevertheless when small town banks were

ripping off their depositor/shareholders, which are usually one and the same,

you get what we have now. Green shoots in the news but despair on main street.

here is but one example.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:31 | 864270 More Critical T...
More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture


When right-wing radio programmes, TV shows and websites are openly inciting against elected representatives who voted in favor of health-care, violence is what you will evenually get.

What else did you expect? You can paint cross-hairs over your opponents just so many times before some supporter of yours takes you by your word and follows your hints and winks. Not everyone realizes it that right-wing politicians are dishonest hypocrites.

This culture of non-tolerance on the right, this absolute fascination with broken thinking and the fearful hate-mongering is fascinating to observe in a way (I did not know that were this many idiots on the planet - let alone in a single country!) but it is also troubling - it will inevitably lead to more atrocities like this one.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:38 | 864311 Vergeltung
Vergeltung's picture

pure, 100% dreck, that is.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:40 | 864328 More Critical T...
More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture

Glen Beck and O'Reilly, indeed.

They should apologize to the Gifford family and should stop the hatemongering already.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:58 | 864342 Vagabond
Vagabond's picture

You should apologize for all your hatemongering and generalizations towards conservatives, and libertarians.  It's the Neocons that you should be going after.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:21 | 864639 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Yeah right Bammy says we should punish our enemies, find an ass to kick..

Bammy says "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"

You leftist asshats should go away, America is in the process of firing the lot of you..

Stop junking it and disprove he said it, but you cannot can you?  How about this one?   Bammy says "Get out there and "punish our enemies”

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 09:40 | 866815 More Critical T...
More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture


I'm including libertarians and in general conservatives in my condemnation for several reasons:

  • They have not spoken up against the hate spewing from Beck and O'Reilly when they had the opportunity to do so.
  • They repeated many of the false "big government, health rationing, ..." zombie lies against health-care, pretending as if those lies were true, helping promote the climate of hate and fear.
  • In this very article proponents of health care reform were blamed for the situation. Even if you have no shed of decency left, does the concept of electing representatives and accepting that they have the right to use that legislative power their constituents vested in them mean nothing to you?

So libertarians and 'other' conservatives are complicit with the neocons in creating this situation. Very, very few have spoken up on the right, and those who have were taken down with brutal, decisive force.  Dissent, thinking differently is not tolerated. (Remember David Frum who dared to speak up?)

That brutality was the sign of things to come ...


Tue, 01/11/2011 - 11:56 | 867116 grok
grok's picture

Why does failing to speak up mean that there is agreement?  A lot of people avoid discussions that involve nonsensical arguments based upon assumptions, unless those assumptions are being tested for the sake of argument.  My feeling is that people who consistently fail to reason logically are not worth trying to convince of anything.  That describes most political discourse as far as I can tell, people who can't get over their emotions.


The thing you need to start with is: What does all of that have to do with Jerrod Laughner?  For example, what reason is there to believe that he ever paid any attention to conservative media?  Based on everything that has been made public (which we can't assume is all that there is to know of course), isn't it more likely that this man couldn't string together a coherent argument and thus any explanation of his actions has to include his mental competency?  I mean, have you seen/read his youtube video creations?  How can you dismiss actual evidence while making connections based on nonexistent evidence?

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 12:32 | 867223 More Critical T...
More Critical Thinking Wanted's picture


Why does failing to speak up mean that there is agreement?

Ask the jews (and the rest of the world) why it was a bad idea that conservatives in Germany did not speak up when Hitler was gaining political foothold ...

[ They thought they could control him and they also remained silent for pragmatic reasons: Hitler's accomplices were doing the dirty job for them getting rid of social-democrats, communists, unions and other annoyances from the left. ]

So yes, if a political party or movement stays silent about something that should be condemned it means they were passively complicit, down the line if shit hits the fan.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:02 | 864429 Weimar Ben Bernanke
Weimar Ben Bernanke's picture

These ass holes are neo cons big statist who are not libertarians. I hate them but do not pin these guys as the same as us Constituionalist,Libertarians,or folks who do not trust govt.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:02 | 864725 ronin12
ronin12's picture

More Critical Thinking Wanted? Start with yourself.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:46 | 864348 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Ever think that maybe the Dems sent one of their own to do this, like when they attacked their own offices, and lied claiming that they were called racial epithets despite such behavior never being caught on camera?

These guys really like false flags and infiltration ops.  There have been numerous examples of such activity over the last several years.  Something like this is merely the logical progression.  You think it is a coincidence that this happened to one of the most "conservative" democrats in office?

I generally don't like conspiracy theories, but this one seems in keeping with my observations of what these nut jobs have done lately.  It's certianly no more nutty than blaming right wing talk for the actions of someone who enjoys the Communist Manifesto.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:19 | 864519 ConfederateH
Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:19 | 864526 atomicwasted
atomicwasted's picture

You lost me at Michelle Malkin.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:28 | 864581 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

So any aggregator of information that you dont like invalidates the information. Is that correct?  Oh yes, please post more we all have so much to learn.  Sure your name is not "Alwayswasted"?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:39 | 864830 HL Shancken
HL Shancken's picture

If you clicked on the Malkin link you would first cringe, because what is at the link starkly and irrefutably repudiates everything you believe in, stand for, wish and believe is true. You and your like-minded cohorts, mentally unbalanced loudmouths all, are of such low character, are so mentally warped and diseased, that those of you who do visit the link will be so angered by the reality that would smash you in the face there that instead of altering your own views to conform to reality you would instead redouble your efforts to attack the truth that waits to confront you there.


You and your deranged comrades are vile creatures and this fact is seen and known by all of us, including yourselves. You can't but hate yourselves, but being weak, gutter-dwelling creatures propelled by forces which seek to encourage your destructiveness, your hatred is redirected at the truth, the good. You believe that you can eradicate the good, the truth, by ignoring it, mocking it, but most of all by lying about it. But your lies are seen for what they are.


You live in a tolerant society. You have been permitted, even encouraged to spread your hatred and lies and the great majority has accommodated your madness because they don't recognize it as a danger, because while your voices are loud, they are relatively few. But you are becoming successful in spreading your mental disease to the point that you are beginning to threaten the peace of the nation. Jared Loughner is one of you. His actions are what you would carry out yourself if you were just a bit more unbalanced, had a bit more encouragement, if circumstances were just a bit different.


No, don't visit Malkin's site. It will enrage you, and you are unstable enough as it is.


Visit these sites instead:




Mon, 01/10/2011 - 22:22 | 865995 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

Thanks for leading me away from the hate and vitriol.

I don't suppose you have a site with nice pictures of kittens and puppies, do you?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 23:03 | 866091 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

I did but some leftist watermelon banned them as useless carbon emitters and sentenced them to death. 

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:56 | 869070 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

Then let's have a picnic!

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 08:11 | 866705 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

Wow  that is an eye opener!  I don't know who michelle malkin is so I viewed that site without any bias and wow!   we have a lot violent  haters on the left! 

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:36 | 864618 Burticus
Burticus's picture

I'll bet the federal judge was also giving the 'rats more than their money's worth.

Smells like a another routine false-flag op as justification for protecting us from subversive anti-gubmint speech and the right to keep and bear the means for resisting domestic tyranny.  Well planned and executed, with media piling on and responsive bills already drafted.  More surveillance cameras, internet control, more FeRNs for the MI complex, and thought police in black riot gear should take care of the problem.  Bag several birds with one stone.

Let's hope Zero Hedge or some other truthful non-lamescream media sources painstakingly research the Congresswoman's legislative disputes with her fellow jackasses and the judge's controversial rulings and public comments.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:17 | 864512 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Cut back on the 'roids they will shrink your brain too..

Check out Michelle Malkin's headline "Progressive Climate of hate an illustrated primer.

Look and weep for your conflationary crap. 

The left alwys initiates violence their thought and ideas cannot stand against true debate and fact.  It has never worked and it never will as it is against human nature it must be implemented by violence.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:40 | 864635 Blindweb
Blindweb's picture

Left v. Right.  What an intellectual conversation we got going here.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:56 | 864700 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

I agree they are both in hock to their patrons.  But, not being able to discern whether one represents you better or more fully than the other is the height of intellectual vacuity.  Thanks for coming down from the mountain to pass judgement, now climb back up.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:58 | 864709 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

It was Sarah Palins website with the scope crosshairs painted over PARTICULAR CONGRESSIONAL REGIONs that they had "targeted" for special attention.  I am sure that you have proof that the mentally deranged individual who was responsible for this act of terrorism was a member of the "Far Right"?

"(I did not know that were this many idiots on the planet - let alone in a single country!)"

I suppose that your count begins with Number One (the face that stares back from the mirror)?

By your own silly reasoning, wouldn't we all be in danger for shopping at a Target department store?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:59 | 864712 -Michelle-
Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:01 | 864988 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Here, let me make that 30 junks. There you go you politically ignorant douche.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:52 | 865171 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

More Critical T

 Most ALL of our political leaders have proclaimed political assassination as righteous when they do it,

and have denigrated the deaths of the children of others as acceptable collateral damage to their bombardments and drone attacks.

And ALL of them have thereby lowered the bar for what is considered acceptable morality.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 22:57 | 866070 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Are you still spouting that same LYING Left Wing Liberal  horseshit?.

Newsflash Gonzo, the more Stifling Laws they put on the books, the more problems they will have.

The tighter our nuts are squeezed, the more your threatened the more vendictive/violent it will get.

Take it, bank it.The democrats are theior own worst enemies on this issue.

Tell an adult American what they can and cannot do, and see what comes into play.( Esp when they have played by the rules, and are still getting screwed).

This is a game they do not want to play, grab a rattler by the ass, and it will nail your ass.

Plus, you seem to be listening to the MSM, they are the ones fomenting the hatred and violence.Not the ones with the HIGH ratings.

That should give you a MAJOR clue right there.

Also, what brand of politics,did this man espouse, and who did he vote for, and who did he campaign for????.

Who did he meet personally?,who invited him to her meetings (the woman he shot), who was a member of  Team Obama 2007 Team?,

The murderer, same one at the top.


 He is not a Repub, or a conservative, he's a glowing member of the most viscious,hate filled group on the Hill.

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 11:39 | 867083 grok
grok's picture

You realize you're committing one of the most basic logical fallacies right?  correlation does not imply causation ("if a, then b, therefore if b, then a").  Why do so many people mess this up?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 18:01 | 865221 Armchair Bear
Armchair Bear's picture

"Green shoots"

kind of eerie - the little girl's last name is Green...

"Green Shot"

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:09 | 865019 Triggernometry
Triggernometry's picture

Jersey, dats wassup!

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:35 | 864296 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture

Jeckyl Island

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:43 | 864333 Wynn
Wynn's picture

I don't know, but I bet its nice. No debt, stocks and home prices only go up, and everyone loves their job.

But just over the horizon lies doom and despair, where the evil King Bernank is looting and pillaging all the poor peasants.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:18 | 864520 Rider
Rider's picture

"Violence is the answer for those who lack the intellectual merit to win a battle of ideas and can only resort to more animalistic behavior to impress their point."

Mr Black is too romantic.

Thats the point; When even the best, well intended ideas are not heard. People try to make their point in other ways, they get tired of yelling.

This is a reason people fight revolutions, people feeling not being heard other ways.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:29 | 864579 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

Canada. California

A meme is essentially a life form. It's created, has a body, it grows, reproduces etc. A meme once mature, universally manifests as human action.

Guns, violence and intimidation as a method of persuasion is here to stay in the US of A. It runs much deeper than most people realize.

Leaders whom take advantage of this meme are dangerous threats to the value of human life.

It hurts to look in the mirror, so let the junking commence.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:50 | 864669 lawrence1
lawrence1's picture

Guns, violence and intimidation do run much deeper than most realize and Palin knows this and is capitalizing on it.  And she may well be chosen by the owners of America to be the next president.  Dumb as Bush the twig and ideal for distracting the masses from the real issues.

If you think this will hurt her popularity, think again.  When I returned from Army service in West Germany to the US in the early 70s, the first thing that impressed me was the American male proneness to violence.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:39 | 864636 Billy Shears
Billy Shears's picture

Ev'rywhere I hear the sound of marching, charging feet, boy
'Cause summer's here and the time is right for fighting in the street, boy
But what can a poor boy do
Except to sing for a rock 'n' roll band
'Cause in sleepy London town
There's just no place for a street fighting man

Hey! Think the time is right for a palace revolution
'Cause where I live the game to play is compromise solution
Well, then what can a poor boy do
Except to sing for a rock 'n' roll band
'Cause in sleepy London town
There's just no place for a street fighting man

Hey! Said my name is called disturbance
I'll shout and scream, I'll kill the king, I'll rail at all his servants
Well, what can a poor boy do
Except to sing for a rock 'n' roll band
'Cause in sleepy London town
There's just no place for a street fighting man


Just sayin'.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:15 | 864793 SgtShaftoe
SgtShaftoe's picture

Exactly.  The US isn't perfect, but it's not beyond repair either.  We can start at home and build our community one person at a time.  Seems like Zerohedge is a good start.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:23 | 865065 TheProphet
TheProphet's picture


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:34 | 864077 SilverRhino
SilverRhino's picture

>> A shooting took place this weekend in Arizona which was devastating, to say the least...


Good Lord, a few people get shot and everyone thinks revolution and crazy shit is around the corner.   Until this is happening everyday and/or truck bombs are going off around the country in front of politicians' offices this is a non-event.

99% of Americans have no stomach for war/violence or any sort of conflict outside of TV.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:57 | 864133 Kaiser Sousa
Kaiser Sousa's picture

"Until this is happening everyday and/or truck bombs are going off around the country in front of politicians' offices this is a non-event."...

i suggest u follow events around the country more closely...shootings between citizens and involving law enforcement officers who r members of the state r happening daily...

truck bombs??? be careful of what u may become reality sooner than u think given the the rapid dissolve of the republic and the continued abuse n all forms of the citizenry....

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:11 | 864198 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

WTC I, Murrah Building, OKC are two truck bombs that come to mind.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:55 | 864134 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

TV and movies are to a great deal (not all but a great deal) basically violence porn. Check out the top 20 shows on TV and in the movies if you don't believe me. I've seen studies showing that it desensitizes people to violence while at the same time offering people an outlet for their own inner anger and frustration at being impotent.

While I don't know if either view is correct, there is little doubt about this one. By the time a child hits 18, she or he has seen over 10,000 TV and movie deaths. If advertising has been proven to be effective, what does that say about TV/movie violence?

We talk about removing the violent words from the (political) vocabulary. Let's start with the TV and movies if we're really interested in cleaning up our act. But of course we aren't......interested in cleaning up our act that is.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:21 | 864245 Vergeltung
Vergeltung's picture

well stated CD.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:50 | 864367 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Cognitive Dissonance

The Desensitizing part is BULLSHIT!

As someone once said Jack the Ripper didn't have video games ( Or movies, or Comic books).

Anytime children are interviewed about where they learn violence it is always "at home". They learn it from Parents, from Grand parents.

Children can distinguish tv/cartoon/video game violence from it's real world counterparts.

How many here took a saw to a siblings head after watching a Three Stooges short? Dropped an anvil on someones head after watching Bugs Bunny?

People want an EASY target that does not require they examine their lives and actions.

This is similar to the Shaker Heights study that caused so much trouble for John Ogbu.

Check out the documentary Comic Book confidential for early associatians between Comic books and violence. It all boils down to the crap this guy, Fredric Wertham, started.

Seduction of the Innocent described overt or covert depictions of violence, sex, drug use, and other adult fare within "crime comics"—a term Wertham used to describe not only the popular gangster/murder-oriented titles of the time but also superhero and horror comics as well—and asserted, based largely on undocumented anecdotes, that reading this material encouraged similar behavior in children.

Comics, especially the crime/horror titles pioneered by EC Comics, were not lacking in gruesome images; Wertham reproduced these extensively, pointing out what he saw as recurring morbid themes such as "injury to the eye" (as depicted in Plastic Man creator Jack Cole's "Murder, Morphine and Me", which he illustrated and probably wrote for publisher Magazine Village's True Crime Comics Vol. 1, #2 (May 1947); it involved dope-dealing protagonist Mary Kennedy nearly getting stabbed in the eye "by a junkie with a hypothermic needle" in her dream sequence[5]). Many of his other conjectures, particularly about hidden sexual themes (e.g. images of female nudity concealed in drawings of muscles and tree bark, or Batman and Robin as gay partners), were met with derision within the comics industry. (Wertham's claim that Wonder Woman had a bondage subtext was somewhat better documented, as her creator William Moulton Marston had admitted as much; however, Wertham also claimed that Wonder Woman's strength and independence made her a lesbian.)

Given the subsequent emergence of organized fandom for comic books among adults who grew up reading them during Comics' Golden Age, it is ironic Wertham at one point in Seduction (pp. 89–90) asserts "I have known many adults who have treasured throughout their lives some of the books they read as children. I have never come across any adult or adolescent who had outgrown comic-book reading who would ever dream of keeping any of these 'books' for any sentimental or other reason."

What is often overlooked in discussions of Seduction of the Innocent is Wertham's analysis of the advertisements that appeared in 1950s comic books and the commercial context in which these publications existed. Wertham objected to not only the violence in the stories but also the fact that air rifles and knives were advertised alongside them. Also rarely mentioned in summaries or reviews of Seduction of the Innocent are Wertham's claims that retailers who did not want to sell material with which they were uncomfortable, such as horror comics, were essentially held to ransom by the distributors. According to Wertham, news vendors were told by the distributors that if they did not sell the objectionable comic books, they would not be allowed to sell any of the other publications being distributed.

The splash made by this book and Wertham's previous credentials as an expert witness, made it inevitable that he would appear before the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency led by anti-crime crusader Estes Kefauver. In extensive testimony before the committee, Wertham restated arguments from his book and pointed to comics as a major cause of juvenile crime. Beaty notes "Wertham repeated his call ... [for] national legislation based on the public health ideal that would prohibit the circulation and display of comic books to children under the age of fifteen." The committee's questioning of their next witness, EC publisher William Gaines, focused on violent scenes of the type Wertham had decried. Though the committee's final report did not blame comics for crime, it recommended that the comics industry tone down its content voluntarily; possibly taking this as a veiled threat of potential censorship, publishers developed the Comics Code Authority to censor their own content. The Code banned not only violent images but also entire words and concepts (e.g. "terror" and "zombies") and dictated that criminals must always be punished—thus destroying most EC-style titles, and leaving a sanitized subset of superhero comics as the chief remaining genre. Wertham described the Comics Code as inadequate, while most in the industry found it draconian.

That lead to the attacks on video games.

2. Scientific evidence links violent game play with youth aggression.

Claims like this are based on the work of researchers who represent one relatively narrow school of research, "media effects." This research includes some 300 studies of media violence. But most of those studies are inconclusive and many have been criticized on methodological grounds. In these studies, media images are removed from any narrative context. Subjects are asked to engage with content that they would not normally consume and may not understand. Finally, the laboratory context is radically different from the environments where games would normally be played. Most studies found a correlation, not a causal relationship, which means the research could simply show that aggressive people like aggressive entertainment. That's why the vague term "links" is used here. If there is a consensus emerging around this research, it is that violent video games may be one risk factor - when coupled with other more immediate, real-world influences — which can contribute to anti-social behavior. But no research has found that video games are a primary factor or that violent video game play could turn an otherwise normal person into a killer.



Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:10 | 864464 LFMayor
LFMayor's picture

Just think "Reefer Madness", bitchez

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:16 | 864508 Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

".....Children can distinguish tv/cartoon/video game violence from it's real world counterparts...."


Actually I really disagree with this. Even in my own case. When I was a small child, the "Three Stooges" were on all the time and I watched them. So one day while riding in the car I turned to my oldest brother and in the spirit of Curly, Moe and Larry I gave him the ol' forked finger poke in both eyes. THAT was very much spawned from watching the Three Stooges.

 And CD does have a point, if advertising is effective at all it would stand to reason that T.V. programing does also.

I remember there were a lot of fights and gang rumbles occurring outside of theaters after the first few gang movies came out.

Don't kid yourselves. Screw quoted 'studies'. Just look around you.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:38 | 864630 PierreLegrand
PierreLegrand's picture

Bullshit...please read the following from someone who doesn't think he is a genius because he slept in a Holiday Inn. 

Murder Simulators

Michael Carneal, the 14-year-old mass murderer in the Paducah, Kentucky school shootings had never fired a pistol in his life. He stole a .22 pistol from a neighbor, fired a few practice shots, and took it to school. FBI data shows that trained law enforcement officers average around 20% hits in real world situations at an average distance of 21 feet. In the 1998 Amadu Dialo shooting, four NYPD officers fired 41 shots at an unarmed African immigrant, at point blank range and hit him 19 times. This is about the level of accuracy you will find from trained marksmen in real world situations. In Los Angeles, in 1999, a neo-Nazi walked into a Jewish daycare center and fired over 70 shots, wounding five helpless children. This is the norm from untrained shooters.

Michael Carneal fired eight shots, in a large foyer, at a high school prayer group as it was breaking up. Firing at a milling, screaming, running group, he hit eight different kids with eight shots, five of them head shots and the other three upper torso. I trained the Texas Rangers, the California Highway Patrol, and a battalion of U.S. Army Green Berets. When I told them of Carneal’s accuracy, they were stunned. Nowhere in the annals of military or law enforcement history can I find an equivalent “achievement.”

Where does a 14-year-old boy who never fired a gun before get this “skill?” Video games. He came from a well-to-do family, and had all the access to arcade quality, pointand-shoot video games that any kid could possibly want. A hundred things can persuade someone to WANT to take a gun and go kill, but only one thing makes him ABLE to kill: practice, practice, practice. Not practice shooting bullseyes or deer, but practice shooting people. All witness statements claim that Michael stood, never moving his feet, holding the gun in two hands, never firing far to the left or right, never far up or down, with a blank look on his face. He was playing a video game, simply shooting everything that popped up on his “screen,” just like he had done countless THOUSANDS of times before. As an aside, it is interesting to note that it is not natural to fire at each target only once (the norm is to fire until the target drops) but what most video games teach you is to only shoot once, since the target will always drop after being hit. Many of the games give extra credit for. . .head shots.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:05 | 864736 lawrence1
lawrence1's picture

Excellent point.  We have a culture that not only glamorizes violence but provides excellent training.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:48 | 864656 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Hmmm. Well, I guess if you believe children's entertainment doesn't desensitize them to whatever is being portrayed, you won't mind their films and cartoons containing plenty of graphic images of sex, rape, torture, bestiality, animal cruelty, pedophilia, etc.

After all, children will 'get' the context of the depicted acts (fiction) and will not in any way be led to believe that such things are anything other than inappropriate in reality.

Note to stupid people: yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:02 | 864729 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Children can distinguish tv/cartoon/video game violence from it's real world counterparts.

Whatever you say GF.

Adults (who were children 10-20-30-40 years ago) are increasingly having difficulty distinguishing the difference. I have little hope for today's children.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:03 | 864732 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"As someone once said Jack the Ripper didn't have video games ( Or movies, or Comic books)."


And people wonder why he did the bad things he did.  Boredom?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:00 | 864719 lawrence1
lawrence1's picture

Hey, tons of psychological research on moddeling since the 60's have shown how observing violence desensitizes and how children and others are greatly influenced toward violence.  And, unfortunately, you are right that US industry has no interest in changing.  And where would you get military volunteers without selling machismo?  How about a movie about the disabled and distroyed filmed in a VA hospital, and the others not eligible for treatment?



Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:07 | 864741 ronin12
ronin12's picture

Eh, I used to watch horror films and the like until I realized they were diarrhea of the mind.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:06 | 864181 Pringsh Peensh
Pringsh Peensh's picture

This is at least the 3rd or 4th incident in the last 6 weeks, chuckles.


1. FLA City Council Shooting

2. Mail bombs to gov't officials

3. Tuscon nonsense

*** It's "on" man...I wish it wasn't, but it can't have a society of such a split in "haves" and "have nots" without this kind of thing.

He was nuts, I know that, but aren't they all??



Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:34 | 864616 downrodeo
downrodeo's picture

"He was nuts, I know that, but aren't they all??"

I agree with this completely. Crazy is a loose political term. It is not a medical term. We reserve it for those humans among us who's ideas and actions are corrupted to the point where we have no choice but ostracize the individual from the community. The label we attach to this person is 'crazy' (or nuts, etc). Of course, anyone willing to indiscriminately fire a weapon into a crowd meets the definition of 'crazy', by most standards. Well balanced people just don't do this.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:09 | 864756 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"Of course, anyone willing to indiscriminately fire a weapon into a crowd meets the definition of 'crazy', by most standards. Well balanced people just don't do this."

I kinda thought this fits the definition of a 'terrorist".  Someone taking an extreme action against a lightly or undefended target in order to maximize fear among certain demographic members.  Usually to convey a message.  Unfortunately, this persons message was not delivered, other than after the fact when it was found out that he was anti-government.  I think his condition is a symptom of those damn "Chem Trails".

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:54 | 864966 downrodeo
downrodeo's picture

'I think his condition is a symptom of those damn "Chem Trails".'

I see what your saying, but this comment above shows that you're dismissing him as being on the fringes of sanity, which is exactly my point. By the comment I re-posted in italics, I would judge that you do not find anything abnormal about so called 'chem-trails'. If this is your position, I would then make the assumption that you find the hysteria of those who believe chem-trails point to a sinister plot to poison the populace to be completely baseless. Hence, anyone who would adopt this point of view has to be 'crazy'.


On a side note, is it not somewhat crazy to blow up a truck bomb in a crowded shopping area to inflict maximum death and suffering because of a belief? Beliefs are by definition subjective, and not readily verifiable. I would argue that taking a life without proof of anything that one is acting on (in reality you can't qualify this statement, but that is another argument) is absolutely batshit 'crazy', insane, unhinged, loony, etc.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:16 | 865039 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

You are right.  I was making a point about how when anyone commits an act of just pure meanness like this, they attempt to find out what was "wrong" with him.  Yes, he was convinced that the government was using mind control on him.  Yes, he was opposed to the way the government handled monetary policy.  Yes, he stated that he felt he was being singled out for bad treatment by the government.  It makes sense then that he would retaliate against a government official.  At least that is what the investigative reporting has pieced together.

I am not sure what to believe any more.  It is so easy to fake a social networking page in order to create a "background" for someone to piece together a motive after an incident like this.  Is mind control possible?  How would we know anyway - would we see an expose' on 60 minutes?  How long would Dan rather last before he had an "accident" if this was true?


Chem trails?  I am on the fence about this one.  I know when I was growing up jetliners didn't leave persistent contrails like you see these days.  I do, however, notice that the "chem trails" seem to appear at the same time very high clouds exist in the stratosphere.  Could it be more of a phenomenon tied to higher humidity levels at the higher altitudes?


I think they guy was deranged, but he had a clear mission (in his mind), and none of us here will ever really know why he did this.  Mean and crazy - that's my diagnosis, and I am sticking with it!

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 01:09 | 866363 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

"UN bans Chemtrails"

"Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming (US patent)"


it's generally referred to as "geo-engineering" or "weather modification" now. . .


whenever you're ready.

Wed, 01/12/2011 - 17:47 | 871265 downrodeo
downrodeo's picture

"Could it be more of a phenomenon tied to higher humidity levels at the higher altitudes?"

Yes this is the big question. I've seen the chemtrail streaked sky and watched as the plumes expand out in the atmosphere. At the same time, I've often seen regular contrails from passing jets that disappear in short order, even while the 'chemtrail' plumes expand. The altitudes are almost impossible to judge from the ground, so I can't really factor that into my analysis. Once you have witnessed the two types at the same time, you have to wonder what is causing one to expand and the other to disappear. The contrails vanish quickly, just as you can see your breath on a cold day. That one is easy. So, what is the phenomenon that causes the chemtrails to expand out and create an eventual haze?

I would argue that the behavior of these chemtrails mimics an aerosol, although it is dismissed in the main stream as being the same phenomenon as the evaporation of contrails. I suppose that if the official explanation (make that denial) is correct, then I just need someone to explain to me how it is sometimes the case that contrails evaporate and sometimes the case that they freeze into ice crystals and expand out all over the sky into a haze.

PS. I have also witnessed a jet laying chemtrails begin its 'spraying'. The jet was flying along at altitude and the chemtrail just materialized quite suddenly. It seemed to be sputtering at first and the trail in the sky had several breaks in it. Not two minutes later another jet came in on the same trajectory and laid down another chemtrail. It is possible I did not see what I thought that I saw. However, witnessing this event sort of convinced me that it isn't simply ice crystals. What do I know though?


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:11 | 864774 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Thanks for having an attention span longer than half a day.

You know how they made a google map for mass fish and bird deaths? We need one for these kinds of events. 10 were beheaded in Alcapulco, but hey, that's not political, right? Nor are the riots at the stock exchange TD reported on, nor is.....

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:09 | 864191 DonnieD
DonnieD's picture

I was saddened to see the loss of life over the weekend and did not think it was justified. But at what point is it deemed acceptable for citizens to use violence to preserve their rights against an invasive and kleptocratic government? I suppose most Americans are glad our founding fathers resorted to violence to secure the freedom we enjoy today. At what point were they justified doing what they did?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:39 | 864316 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture

" At what point were they justified doing what they did?" ...maybe you should try and find that out, before you start rabble rousing.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:46 | 864345 DonnieD
DonnieD's picture

I'm not rabble rousing. I'm asking a historical and logical question.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:22 | 864547 Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

A very valid question.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:21 | 864538 Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

I believe that first you stand up and vocalize your position.

And when they move to shut you up you then have a right to resort to what our founding fathers chosed to resort to...violence.

I remember Issac Azimov's quote of "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent".

And yes...there are sometimes when anybody's competency is so limited that there are no other choices...such as when you are attacked.

But that quote always stuck with me. It is great applying it to some/most/all of our recent military actions (including Viet Nam). It shows just how incompetent our elected/appointed officals really are.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:11 | 864772 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"And yes...there are sometimes when anybody's competency is so limited that there are no other choices...such as when you are attacked."


Yeah, but couldn't we "just talk to them"  or bow to them?  Our current president thinks that is the best way to handle a belligerent force.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:09 | 864750 flattrader
flattrader's picture


Had it been someone who lost their job, home, family and health (no health care) a mass shooting with a politician as target might--and I stress MIGHT--have gotten the attention of the average American that something is amiss.

Instead, it is the arctypical lunatic young white male.

Even if it had been a formerly solid middleclass man (or woman) they would likely labled that person as a lunatic as well.

The so-called "Revolution" will not be kicked-off until, as the previous poster noticed, this is happening on a regular basis--and the targets are more varied.

Frankly, the average gold/silver hoarding ZH poster won't stand a chance when the SHTF.

Becareful what you wish for.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:32 | 864877 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

"won't stand a chance"  speak for yourself.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 22:27 | 866003 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

99% of Americans have no stomach for war/violence or any sort of conflict outside of TV.

Judging by the stomach on most Americans, I'm just damned glad they're not using it for violence.

" another incident of senseless violence today, nearly a dozen people were gut butted in a Wal-Mart parking lot. Many of the victims were being treated for blubber burns."

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:35 | 864079 absinthejo
absinthejo's picture

They can't live overseas. More likely, they'll have to give up their god-given rights to own a gun. Freedom goddammit

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:36 | 864081 TheGreatPonzi
TheGreatPonzi's picture

"A shooting took place this weekend in Arizona which was devastating, to say the least... but in my mind, no more or less devastating than any other murderous rampage, whether in the United States or anywhere in the world."

Most ZH readers have unfortunaly fallen for the hype Sunday. It was very saddening.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:50 | 864109 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture

You are such an ignoramus, its frightening; these murders were a potential game changer for America, the country is close to boiling point, and lets hope cool heads prevail.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:53 | 864122 TheGreatPonzi
TheGreatPonzi's picture

Hum, Sir, you have not understood.

The hype on Zerohedge was this: "The poor Congresswoman, firearms are shit, violence is horrible, I'm crying, etc."

It was not: "This event is very convenient for the current agenda pushed by the MSM, the TBTF and the government".

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:09 | 864189 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture

Here we go again "convenient for the current agenda pushed by the MSM"... like stopping random and pointless slaughters? ummm those eeeevil media types, at it again. This is the type of paranoid bullshit that's going to rip America to bits from the inside, everyone's off they're rocker, uptight and freaking out about fuck all.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:15 | 864215 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Here we go again "convenient for the current agenda pushed by the MSM"... like stopping random and pointless slaughters?


MSM agenda is unilaterally tied to stopping random and pointless slaughters?

It can be remembered how the MSM lined up as one man to support the invasion of Iraq, how they fed misinformation on links of Iraq to 9,11 etc


The MSM is a business: like any business, they are driven by one agenda, expansion. Acquiring new markets, preserve older.

If they assess that supporting random and pointless slaughters goes their way, they support them.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:31 | 864286 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture

"If they assess that supporting random and pointless slaughters goes their way, they support them." That’s just another ill-informed crock of shyte, you're only another windbag who likes to hear himself talk.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:39 | 864318 weinerdog43
weinerdog43's picture

...spoke the windbag.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:01 | 864427 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

MSNBC was a huge cheerleader in the buildup to the war with Iraq.  Agree or disagree?  If you agree (I would suggest the evidence is clearly on this side)... how did such a thing come to be?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:30 | 864592 scratch_and_sniff
scratch_and_sniff's picture

There were very few against the Iraq invasion at the time actually, it wasn’t just the American media, most of the European press was behind the war too. They obviously made a decision based on the intelligence available to them at teh time, and were more than likely sucked in by the momentum of the events unfolding, like everyone else. I am pretty sure it wasn't a case of rubbing they're hands in glee at the prospect of futile slaughter, just to further they're media empires...gibberish, just utter gibberish. Everything has to be a big fucking nightmare with you lot.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:11 | 864471 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

That’s just another ill-informed crock of shyte,

I know some people have a selective memory, only memorizing events that serve their point.

But still is the MSM behaviour to the war against Iraq not a bit too young to indulge in that kind of behaviour of yours?

How is it ill informed?

The MSM behaviour during the period before the war against Iraq was plain to see to every TV viewer.  And again, too fresh to deal it the way you chose to.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:27 | 864268 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:43 | 864090 Maos Dog
Maos Dog's picture

I don't want to get political about this, but, the shooting represents another failure of big government. We spend 1/2 hour waiting for the background check at the gun shows when buying a weapon, only to find out that on the other end of the line are empty promises of BATF actually doing their jobs and rejecting applications of known psychotic people that want to buy a gun.

That is the outrage.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:23 | 864256 MrPalladium
MrPalladium's picture

Bingo! It is illegal for a person who has been diagnosed with mental illness to be in possession of a firearm. Yet the NICS background check only checks for criminal convictions. Madmen with multiple arrests by mental health deputies and multiple involuntary committments because they have been a danger to themselves or to others can waltz right into a gun store and buy a weapon just like Loughner did.

If I were conspiracy minded I would be tempted to conclude that this omission of paranoid schizophrenics from the NICS database checks is a deliberate ploy to foster the most bizzare and frightening gun crimes so as to stir up gun control fever.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:44 | 864337 weinerdog43
weinerdog43's picture

Now wait a minute here.  If this is the failure of the government, aren't you saying that we need more enforcement?  I for one have quite enough gov't enforcement thank you.

Wouldn't a simpler solution be a small restriction on magazine size?  A 31 round clip is BIG.  I have a Glock 19 as well, but with a standard magazine.  I've got a couple of spares too, but a 31 magazine sticks way beyond the butt of the weapon. 

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:13 | 864489 Maos Dog
Maos Dog's picture

No, I ma not saying that we need more laws, my point is that there are already laws that could prevent this violence that are not being enforced. 

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:07 | 864746 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Given the laws on privacy of health information (I would think would be even more necessary given the likely fight over jobs in the future), gun control laws hoping to tap into a database of the health information are frowned upon to say the least.  The fact is, there is not a repository for this information...  not yet anyway...  I suspect there will be shortly.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:19 | 864530 Agent P
Agent P's picture

How long does it take you to change out a mag on your G19?  Three 10 round mags with one in the pipe is just as effective as a 31 round mag...especially if nobody is shooting back at you.  

Mental capacity trumps magazine capacity when it comes to controlling gun violence.   

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:24 | 864549 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

I can back up ten steps and change mags faster than you can charge me.  Restricting magazine size does nothing..  It was not so long ago and you could buy anti-tank gund "solothurns" and thompson MGs mail order..   By turning this into another restricting our rights to be safer trap you solve nothing.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:25 | 864565 Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

"Mental Health deputies???"


Do they exist?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:19 | 864811 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"We spend 1/2 hour waiting for the background check at the gun shows when buying a weapon, only to find out that on the other end of the line are empty promises of BATF actually doing their jobs and rejecting applications of known psychotic people that want to buy a gun."

See the information I pasted below:


The National Instant Criminal Background Check Improvement Act has serious implications for persons with mental illness with regard to the ability to purchase firearms. Federally prohibited persons include those who have been adjudicated as mentally defective, or have been committed to a mental institution, or are unlawful users of or are addicted to a controlled substance. The legislation was intended to expand the reporting practices of states by providing significant financial incentives and disincentives for releasing all relevant records, including those contained within mental health databases, to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). As of April 2007, only 22 states were voluntarily submitting records from mental health databases to the NICS. The legislation was introduced following the Virginia Tech tragedy, when public opinion favored tightening control over access to firearms of persons with mental illness.

The catch is, you have to have been found to have had a mental disorder in the past, and then reported by your state.

On another note, why would you insist on buying from a dealer at a gun show?  Always  buy private party, no trace!

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:44 | 864098 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Amazing how much advice the cowards who cut and run have for the rest of us living here in freedumb's land.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:57 | 864146 TheGreatPonzi
TheGreatPonzi's picture

Your ancestors were cowards, who fled their country of origin to immigrate to the USA. Why did they immigrate? For the same reasons stated here: lack of future, socialism, poverty, corruption, persecution, statism, totalitarianism. 

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 22:30 | 866016 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

And your ancestors were inbred morons who were too stupid and lazy to figure out how to get the hell out. So what's the point here other than proving to those few of us who didn't already understand that you're a raging, sociopathic asshole?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:05 | 864172 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

You can call it "cut and run" while you remain in the Gulag. Some of us call it "an exit strategy". (which is yet another thing America lacks)

Sometimes you gotta know when to fold em...and as I look around...everything I see tells me, in no uncertain terms: It's time to get the fuck out of Dodge.

When stupidity is considered patriotic, it is unsafe to be intelligent.

Americans have a hard time letting go of things. You cling to what America was while closing your eyes to what it has become. When you stop looking at what this country was and start seeing it for what it has become...maybe then you'll begin to make reasonable choices. Until then...just keep "buying the fucking dip". No doubt it'll work out just grand for ya.

I'll be watching...and laughing...from a safe distance.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:45 | 864099 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

And for just $2500 you can attend one of his conferences and find out where this utopia is..  as you said in your article these type of rampages happen around the world not just in the USA.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:48 | 864104 Maos Dog
Maos Dog's picture

You get all of the same information, access to conference calls, and access to the private boards too for  only 200 USD

Just saying

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:45 | 864100 Popo
Popo's picture

"Violence is the answer for those who lack the intellectual merit to win a battle of ideas and can only resort to more animalistic behavior to impress their point."

Ring. Ring. All the revolutions of the 20th century just conference-called, and they want to know why you don't love them anymore.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:59 | 864151 Printfaster
Printfaster's picture

I wonder if Hitler would have been intellectually overwhelmed.  Or if he would have responded to more animalistic behavior?

Egad.  At the bottom of all disputes over resources is violence.

We in the US must accept that violence is part of freedom.  We need to accept it, and take personal action to make violence available  to others that might offer violence to us.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:58 | 864705 BigJim
BigJim's picture

He (Simon Black) explicitly states he abhors Non-retaliatory violence.

Did you genuinely miss that, or are you a troll?

Thu, 01/13/2011 - 13:51 | 873453 Printfaster
Printfaster's picture

Simon is talking about group retaliation and abhors individual defense.  He comes from the British mentality that individuals have no rights.  Only the group does.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:26 | 864264 cxl9
cxl9's picture

Exactly. Why is it so difficult for people to simply admit that sometimes violence is indeed the best solution for a problem? I suspect many people believe it but are afraid to say so publicly, for various reasons:

(a) May turn-off many readers to the points they are trying to make.

(b) Fear of prosecution for "inciting violence" or some other made-up crime.

(c) Fear of being labelled a "terrorist".

(d) Employment problems.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:20 | 864822 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

We kill daily to eat.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 22:31 | 866019 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

Yeah, but there's a down side to that as well!

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:49 | 864101 Printfaster
Printfaster's picture

And 51 dead in Mexican drug wars last weekend, 15 beheaded in Acapulco.\

Coming soon to the American Southwest.

A few killed in Tucson, is but tiny taste of what we face in the US.

And changing the gun possession laws will make no difference.  Except for honest citizens who try to stop the carnage.  The criminals will have no problem getting all that they need.  I am sure that the drug cartels will support any laws that prevent citizens from arming themselves.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:27 | 864572 Agent P
Agent P's picture

"And changing the gun possession laws will make no difference.  Except for honest citizens who try to stop the carnage.  The criminals will have no problem getting all that they need.  I am sure that the drug cartels will support any laws that prevent citizens from arming themselves."

+1 (in the pipe)

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:20 | 864816 ronin12
ronin12's picture

Jeez - just peruse those headlines and the Good Ole US of A doesn't look so bad anymore.

Tue, 01/11/2011 - 01:19 | 866380 cxl9
cxl9's picture

But wait. Read the article: "15 decapitated bodies were found on a walkway to an Acapulco beach with notes claiming the men had intruded on a drug cartel’s turf".

The lesson is, don't be involved in the illegal drugs trade. Most of the violence in Mexico is drugs-gang versus drugs-gang, and against the police (which, really, is just another gang). If you are not involved in the illegal drugs trade, you have very little to fear from the violence in Mexico. It simply will not involve you, just as for the most part the drugs-gang violence in Detroit or Los Angeles will not involve you if you are not part of that subculture.

I speak as an American expatriate living in a violent Mexican border city.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:39 | 864906 Andy_Jackson_Jihad
Andy_Jackson_Jihad's picture

Weekend plans just changed to "attend gun show" instead of "go to coin shop for another krugerand"

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:46 | 864103 laughing_swordfish
laughing_swordfish's picture

+ 1

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:51 | 864113 redpill
redpill's picture

"Never let a crisis go to waste."

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:53 | 864125 ReeferMac
ReeferMac's picture

This is going to continue, and the gobermint will eliminate many of our rights very soon.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:57 | 864145 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Don't take this the wrong way, but no government can take away your rights.  Governments don't grant rights and they can't revoke them.  All they can do is trample on them. 

That may seem like a minor pecking point, but it's central to a concept of whether rights exist naturally or not.  People believe rights are granted, so they don't truly feel violated when governments stomp on them.  That's part of the problem, and one reason that there's not likely to be a solution aside from using the laws of various nations against each other and becoming a sovereign individual.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:20 | 864235 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Don't take this the wrong way, but no government can take away your rights.  Governments don't grant rights and they can't revoke them.  All they can do is trample on them. 


Maybe, but groups can take away the entitlements they provide their members with.

Guess what? The US is a story of entitlements. Biggest entitlements story ever. Just like the government handed out stolen land to its citizens through entitlements policy, the government can take it back if it can not afford to support the entitlements policy.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:31 | 864283 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

I agree entirely.  My point is a bit different.  It's one of enforcing the idea that government doesn't grant people the right to live, the right to their property, the right to privacy, etc.  It's easy to be sarcastic about this issue, but if Americans (as an example) recognized that their country was founded on the basic idea that rights don't come from the government, I believe we'd all be in a much different place now.  People accept government as the authority--people have given government its power.  Until they change their mindset (which is likely never), government will remain their master.

There is another way to live.  That's what people like Simon are trying to say.  You can use governments against one another and live outside of their means.  It's possible, but it requires thinking differently

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:55 | 864391 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

There is another way to live.  That's what people like Simon are trying to say.  You can use governments against one another and live outside of their means.  It's possible, but it requires thinking differently



I agree with many of your points ...Simon..... but you can never live outside of a governments means unless you live on your own island for no matter where you find yourself you will find a government structure trying to oppress you.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:05 | 864173 Thoreau
Thoreau's picture

Wow, I still have a right? I feel better already! Thank you!

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:24 | 864839 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

Yup!  You have the right to pay your taxes, and on time dammit.  Wait, you're not Turbo Tax Timmay, are you?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:54 | 864127 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Governments are controlling--that's the definition of government, "the body that governs." However, some governments have lesser means that others.  The risk in the US is the combination of indemic nationalism, high degree of electronic surveillance, and (at least until the collapse comes) virtually endless "wealth" at the government level (there are no real financial constraints on the US Govt, at least not yet).  In many other countries, while their governments are equally tyrannical, they haven't the means.

From wherever you are a citizen, that is the worst place to be a resident, a business owner, etc.  Black's commentaries are about risk reduction.  It's difficult for many people, especially Americans for some reason, to see that being a citizen, resident, property owner, business owner, and bank account holder in the same place is a high risk recipe.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 13:56 | 864138 Oquities
Oquities's picture

as someone who has had a gun pointed at him (armed holdup) and had to point a gun at someone else (home invasion), i will defend my right to defend myself and my family in any way i see fit.  i own personal protection weapons now, and will not cede them if legislation demands.  who will join me?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:00 | 864154 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

How do you intend to respond if/when the door to your home is suddenly kicked in with local police/military and they demand your weapon on the spot (ala New Orleans/Katrina)?

Even if you decide to fight it out until the cold, bitter, dead end, I suspect that you will be in the minority of people that do so.  It's unfortunate, but it's likely to be that way.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:04 | 864166 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

and this will only happen in the USA??

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:34 | 864291 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

The US government is the most powerful government in the world with the largest number of resources at its disposal.  In the US, to bribe the government, it takes millions of dollars and an army of lobbyists.  In most places, it take hundreds of dollars and cash on the spot.

Again, what we're really referring to is the means at the disposal of some governments is substantially above the means of others.  Perspective is everything.  There is no utopian government--they all seek control.  Some are better at it than others.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:39 | 864324 Oquities
Oquities's picture


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:53 | 864383 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Very clever.  Did you use spell check for that?

Enjoy your "freedom."

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:00 | 864418 Oquities
Oquities's picture

enjoy giving yours up.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:07 | 864745 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Actually, it looks like that between the two of us, I'm the only one that has acted to defend mine.

I own land and pay no property taxes (as taxes are a form of theft by the govt).

I have several passports and can move around the world to wherever the opportunities are best.

I own hard assets in places with lower risk of confiscation because the governments are weaker and are not at risk of defaults.

I own firearms in places where firearms are legal (including the US).


Instead of feigning bravado, perhaps you should act.  If you believe that blazing guns are the way to freedom, then let's see you defend your ideas.  I submit that this is more talk than real.  The best way to secure freedom today is to diversify your risk.

If poisoning the water, stealing property, taking money, and enslaving future generations is not enough reason for the populace to fight back, then what will be enough?  Sorry, but your strategy appears to be a bit delusional.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:16 | 864799 Oquities
Oquities's picture

did Simon Black pay you to log on here today, or are you simply a bored international hipster displaying his broad-minded savoir-faire?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:34 | 864887 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Sorry that your sensibilities are offended.  Truth hurts.

I have no affiliation with Simon Black.  I've simply followed a similar path.  Most people don't really seem to "get it."  They're trapped in their delusions of grandeur and fail to see that this is simply history repeating.  Instead of taking actionable steps to help themselves, they fall back on delusion and attack the only historically proven solution to the problem--diversify your risk and stop kidding yourself about the likely outcome.

It's no different from trading.  Don't fight the trend and don't believe this time is different.  The likely direction here is pretty clear.  Some people are trying to show there are options.  There are.  It is possible to have much more freedom than most will ever know, but it takes looking at the world less as a nationalist and more as an opportunist.  Use what's beneficial out there, discard the notions of the way things "should be," and forget about "hope" that things will change.  History doesn't support that idea and the opportunity costs are high.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:33 | 864878 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"I own firearms in places where firearms are legal (including the US)."

I had a feeling that there are other nations where gun ownership is not taboo, which places are you referring to?  Now, I am not talking about those places in Europe or Australia where you can own a firearm, as long as it is not pump-action, semiautomatic or chambered for a military use round - oh, and registered with the local law enforcement officers for later confiscation.  Are there such places?  I am not trying to bust your chops, but I would rather own a Saiga-12 than a double barreled bird gun.  Twenty rounds of interspersed #1 buckshot and 1 ounce slugs tends to be a bit more effective that just pop-pop with a 28 gauge engraved over/under sporter.

"I have several passports and can move around the world to wherever the opportunities are best."

Do you have your own airplane to escape from any place to go to the other?  I would be interested to know how you plan to "bug-out" to the next safe zone.  Mentioning multiple passports signals to me that you intend to maybe use public forms of transportation?  That (IMO) may not always work as planned.  Just askin', I want to make sure my own plans will hold up to all supposed events.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:45 | 864926 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

I own a Saiga-12 and two in .308 myself...  Have you modded the triggers for better pull?  It helps a lot, IMO.

You can buy full autos from street vendors in a few large cities I know.  It's technically not legal, but governments don't police it because it's too big for them.  Don't try it in Chicago or D.C., though.

It's an issue of what's possible and where.  So far, US ownership of firearms hasn't restriced government invasion at all, has it?  Like a few other posters, I doubt the US will ever come after firearms--I was using a hypothetical earlier.  There's no reason to make an outright assault on people if you can whittle away at the definition of freedom, restrict ammunition, and generally create a social attitude that owning firearms is bad.  Guess what--that's what's happening.

I have gold and silver to bribe the guards.  I have and continue to build on various skill areas that can help in a worst case scenario.

My goal here is not to attempt to defend every conceptual argument that anyone can throw out regarding how something can go wrong with a scenario.  Nothing in life is guaranteed.  My point in posting is to introduce the idea that diversifying risk is a better alternative than keeping all eggs in one basket and **hoping** that things end up the way you envision.  Hope is not a strategy.  Those attacking the "spread your risk" philosophy have all of their assets--money, property, etc--in one place and are surrounded by a largely ignorant, goverment-dependent populace and expect that they will shoot it out when the time comes.  It's a bit naive, at best.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 17:37 | 865120 Iam_Silverman
Iam_Silverman's picture

"Have you modded the triggers for better pull?"

Snap-caps.  Wearing in the moving parts makes all the difference in the world!  It also helps you work with presentation and operation (think clearing jams while keeping on-target, as you cycle the bolt to clear a no-fire).

"You can buy full autos from street vendors in a few large cities I know"

Foreign cities (such as those where you have bugout plans)?  Just curious, but I believe it is possible.  In Central America, there are lots of untraceable AK variants available, or so I hear.


"restrict ammunition"

Yup.  That's why I reload.  I can see inthe future where you have to turn in your expended casing in order to purchase your next "ration" of government approved "sporting use only" ammunition.  The range where I live allows me to "clean" their stands for them!  For free!  We Americans are quite wasteful, leaving perfectly good brass laying around like that!  I heard the recurring theme in the congresswoman McCarthy's diatribe about folks not being allowed to "buy stockpiles of ammunition" like the shooter did.  Jeez Louise, what's a stockpile?  Thirty two rounds?  BTW, did you know that tire shops have to pay to get rid of used tire weights?  Yup, they're considered hazardous waste!  I plan to make them even more hazardous.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:06 | 864176 Oquities
Oquities's picture

i will use my brain to plan for such contingencies, but ultimately i hope i have the courage to die a free man rather than live as a slave.  will anybody else join me?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:12 | 864201 Kaiser Sousa
Kaiser Sousa's picture


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:37 | 864306 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Best of luck to you.  I doubt many other martyrs will show up when the time comes, regardless of their rhetoric.

As for being free, you're not free now.  You can't protect your property (stop paying taxes and let us know how it goes), you can't keep your children from being groped (unless you stop flying--and eventually taking the bus or going to the mall--what freedom!), etc.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:42 | 864331 Oquities
Oquities's picture

acquiescence guarantees subservience.  was your single mother overly strict with you?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:55 | 864397 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Who was the last policitian you shot down to preserve your rights?  None?  That's what I figured. 

All talk.  That's the problem with too many movies for your generation.


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 15:07 | 864441 Oquities
Oquities's picture

huh?  defending one's inherent rights (self defense in this case) is the OPPOSITE of the taking of anyone's life.  murder is not civil unrest.  self protection is not assault.  a murderer is defending nobody's rights.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:13 | 864785 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

I'm saying that you are not as free as you believe, so for all of the grandstanding about defending your rights, you have not acted.  You're just talking.  What are you DOING?  Are you just waiting around preparing to defend the rights that are being trampled upon daily?  Or is gun ownship equivalent to freedom in your mind, even as your property and privacy rights are ignored consistently?


Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:21 | 864827 Oquities
Oquities's picture

and you owe no allegiance to any person or place it seems.   how is it living in "van down by the river?"

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:51 | 864959 EvryInternational
EvryInternational's picture

Your insults need some work, buy I have no doubt that you'll continue working on them. 

I owe allegiance to those I choose to owe allegiance to.  I believe, like America's Founding Fathers, in individual sovereignity. I believe that rights are natural--my right to life does not exist because of government.  My property is not mine by the grace of Obama (or Bush, or whomever).  Any entity that puts my natural rights at risk is not an entity I want to put trust in.

I *hope* that America makes good decisions.  I refuse to be dependent on hope.  History is not kind to those that do.  I am responsible for taking care of my family--that is a resonpsibility imposed on me by me.  My goal is to minimize risk.  It turns out that it's less difficult than it sounds, but it involves thinking about things in a different way.

People are their nationality by accident of birth.  One can choose to cling to that idea--to make nationality their identity, or one can choose to recognize that one's life, future, and opportunities are not defined by accident of birth.  That's a choice, and that's the point in its entirety.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:47 | 864350 LFMayor
LFMayor's picture

+1 Standing by.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:49 | 864940 Andy_Jackson_Jihad
Andy_Jackson_Jihad's picture

I guess I'm game.  I don't have enough assets to relocate and my wife is a cunt so why not?  Do you recommend buying thousands of rounds of ammo or body armor?

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:24 | 864251 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

You may not realize it but the southern states pretty much all had to pass laws after New Orleans saying that even if martial law is declared there will be no attempt to disarm the citizenry.  It was a big issue down here, not sure the northeast and left coast even noticed.  Alot of law enforcement was equally horrified- they know that this is one thing in big urban areas where most are sheep; out here in the boonies where someone not armed is a rarity confiscation is a recipe for suicide and the cops are not part of a culture that applauds such things anyhow.

Should federal authority try such a thing, local and state law enforcement would not be on their side, at least in my neck of the woods. As far as the urban areas go if things come unglued they're all toast anyhow.

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 14:59 | 864412 Weimar Ben Bernanke
Weimar Ben Bernanke's picture

States like Montana,Idaho,Iowa,Colarado,and the rest of gun loving states distrust the Feds,and will not impose mortial law. Martial Law is very difficult,be it impossible to implement in the US.It would be very difficult for the U.S. military to successfully implement martial law throughout the entire country at any given time. This would mean that they would have to secure hundred of thousands of neighborhoods, while securing all major airports, power stations, communication towers, water facilities, nuclear power plants, military bases, food distribution center, grocery stores, government official buildings and highways while keeping everyone in their homes after 6pm. You would need a hell of a lot of manpower to do this. And 3 millions men in uniform is not enough to do it. 

Mon, 01/10/2011 - 16:26 | 864825 Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

They're going to try it, very soon.



Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!