Amazon Deal of the Day: Kindle Fire HD 8.9" up to $50 off

Amazon Deal of the Day: Kindle Fire HD 8.9” up to $50 off

Great deals on Kindles at Amazon

MichaelJ

Great DealsFebruary 2013 • Views: 32,901

Kindle Fire HD vs iPad

Both have stunning HD displays, but Kindle Fire HD is $200 less than the new iPad. See how you get much more for much less with Kindle Fire HD 8.9”

Our highest resolution, largest HD display. It’s much more for much less

Largest screen with highest resolution of any Kindle Fire

Front-facing HD camera for taking photos or making free video calls using Skype or other apps

Ultra-fast web browsing and streaming with built-in dual-band, dual-antenna Wi-Fi

Easy-to-use e-mail, calendar, and contacts for work or home, including Gmail, Hotmail, Exchange, and more

Great selection of free apps, games, and books, plus free cloud storage for your Amazon content

Over 23 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, books, audiobooks, apps, and games. Over a million book titles less than $9.99

Prime members enjoy exclusive digital benefits.

More: Kindle Fire HD 8.9” - Stunning 8.9” Screen and Dolby Audio

Save up to $50 on Kindle Fire HD 8.9”
Through February 8th, 2013, save $30 on Kindle Fire HD 8.9” or $50 on Kindle Fire HD 8.9” 4G LTE. Enter promotional code FIRELOVE at checkout.

Jump to bottom

78 comments

steve_davis Tue, Feb 5, 2013 8:52:51am

I’m just completely happy with the smaller Fire. Ironically, most comments online that I come across state that the smaller version is easier for reading because it isn’t as clunky. I can read with it, with one hand, and maybe the larger one takes two.

darthstar Tue, Feb 5, 2013 9:17:38am

Fuck the motherfuckin’ iPad.

darthstar Tue, Feb 5, 2013 9:18:10am

Behind the scenes of one violent video game.

Youtube Video

makeitstop Tue, Feb 5, 2013 9:32:57am

I got my wife a Kindle Fire HD for Christmas, and she loves it.

If I had the spare dough lying around, I’d go buy one for myself.

Vicious Babushka Tue, Feb 5, 2013 9:34:58am

Zedushka wants a Hebrew Kindle.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:03:21am

The kindle has been my favorite tech thingy of the past ten years, but I don’t feel the need to upgrade. My old touch does me just fine.

Lidane Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:04:15am

I’ve considered getting a Kindle for a while now. Maybe that will be my birthday present to myself this year.

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:13:07am

Glenn Beck calls Obama ‘full-fledged woman’ over concern about football concussions

Former Fox News pundit Glenn Beck dedicated a portion of his online broadcast Monday to slamming President Barack Obama for a pre-Super Bowl interview in which the chief executive expressed concerns about the safety of football. Beck called Obama a “girl,” a “woman” and the “chick-in-chief” for his statements and announced that he was revoking the president’s “man card.”

Beck was referring to remarks Obama made in an interview with “The New Republic” in which he said that, given the rise in concerns about head trauma in football players, he would have to think “long and hard” about letting his own son, if he had one, play football. Obama echoed that statement in an interview with Scott Pelley of CBS on Sunday.

Beck played back sections of the Pelley interview, interjecting the word “girl” and phrases like “He’s a girl!” while the president spoke, then shifted his voice up to a soprano register. At the end of the CBS interview, he lit into Obama with a full barrage of schoolyard taunts.

“His man card has been revoked by me, and that’s saying something” Beck said. “When I’m saying you’re a girl, you are absolutely 100 percent girl power.”

Coming from a whiny little bitch like Beck, that means less than nothing

geoffm33 Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:14:32am

Reposting from downstairs, I may have killed the thread :(

@cohen_elliot For real! That would be like Anthony Hopkins supporting #CannibalismControl
— Geoff Manning (@geoffm33) February 5, 2013

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:15:21am

And the tiny dead babies guy chimes in again;

Swanson: Allowing Gays in Boy Scouts Like Letting Serial Killers Teach Preschool

There was no way that Generations Radio hosts Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner were going to miss out on the debate over whether the Boy Scouts should allow openly gay members. Swanson and Buehner, who previously warned that legal civil unions would allow the government to snatch homeschooled children and give them to pedophiles, have similarly dark premonitions of what will happen if the Boy Scouts allow gay members. Allowing openly gay Boy Scout leaders, Swanson says, is no different than letting convicted child molesters or serial killers teach preschool. The Boy Scouts, Buehner warns, are not far from “opening a new summer camp called Camp Sandusky.”

Targetpractice Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:18:07am

re: #8 Kragar

Glenn Beck calls Obama ‘full-fledged woman’ over concern about football concussions

Coming from a whiny little bitch like Beck, that means less than nothing

Does Beck feel the same way about soldiers diagnosed with brain injuries just from being closed to exploding IEDs? How about the scores of retired boxers who are dealing with neurological disorders like Parkinson’s from decades of blows to the head?

Beck, as usual, demonstrates how he hasn’t a fucking clue what he’s talking about.

Lidane Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:21:24am

This should go over well:

LaTourette: To win women, GOP needs to ditch the NRA tpm.ly/TFOQzo
— Talking Points Memo (@TPM) February 5, 2013

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:24:13am

‘Wild Thing’ singer and frontman for ‘The Troggs’ Reg Presley dies at 71

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:25:40am

re: #13 Kragar

‘Wild Thing’ singer and frontman for ‘The Troggs’ Reg Presley dies at 71

Is there a guitarist out there who did not at one point turn it up to eleven and belt out the chords to “Wild Thing”?

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:27:33am

VIEWPOINT: How A Very Smart Senator Showed Us Everything Wrong With The Modern GOP In One Week

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is an undeniably smart man. Cruz is by all accounts a brilliant litigator, one talented enough in the courtroom to clerk for a Supreme Court justice and win a number of difficult cases as Texas’ Solicitor General. It wouldn’t have been crazy to expect that Cruz would bring a degree of argumentative rigor into the Senate after his victory in the 2012 election.

Well, Cruz had two golden opportunities to showcase his keen analytical mind, as he sits on both Senate committees that held high profile hearings last week, one on gun violence prevention, the other on Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE)’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense. And Cruz distinguished himself alright. Just not in the way one might have hoped.

The Senator misrepresented official documents to the point of falsehood, placed the words of an raving call-in viewer on a television show in Hagel’s mouth, and played “six degrees of guilt by association” with Hagel’s record in a manner that would make Sen. Joe McCarthy blush. And yet, Cruz’ behavior, embarrassing as it was, was by no means irrational. Rather, it’s a perfect illustration of how the Republican Party’s internal structure, particularly its allied media and electoral base, incentivizes the replacement of real policy thinking with fact-free paranoic fantasism.

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:31:24am

‘Don’t Say Gay’ Sponsor Compares Homosexuality To Injecting Heroin

Tennessee state Sen. Stacey Campfield (R) is making the press rounds to stump for the new and worsened version of his odious “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which prohibits teachers in grades K-8 from acknowledging the existence of homosexuality and also requires school officials to out gay students to their families. He has already made it clear he believes homosexuality itself is dangerous, and in an interview with TMZ, he doubled down on that absurd belief. After explaining the AIDS epidemic in Africa by claiming that sodomy was more common there among heterosexuals, Campfield went on to compare being gay to using heroin:

TMZ: If they’re going to engage in homosexual acts anyway, why not teach them how to protect themselves from [HIV]?

CAMPFIELD: You know, you could say the same thing about kids who are shooting heroin. We need to show them the best ways to shoot up. No, we don’t. Why do we have to hypersexualize little children? Why can’t we just let little kids be little kids for a while? Why do we have to have little kids be…?

TMZ: Do you believe in sex education period?

CAMPFIELD: …If you can show me where it works, great.

Show where it works? You mean like everywhere its taught as a real class and not an abstinence only religious message?

A Mom Anon Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:32:36am

re: #8 Kragar

I’m really getting tired of hearing that being(or being like) a woman or girl is an insult of the highest magnitude. TIRED.of.it. Yes, the worst possible thing a man can be is a woman? Nice.

Why oh why hasn’t Glenn Beck been relegated to the garbage bin of history yet? How horrible of a human being do you have to be before you can no longer get rich by being a lying conniving asshole?

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:34:35am

re: #16 Kragar

You know, you could say the same thing about kids who are shooting heroin. We need to show them the best ways to shoot up

He’s being flippant, but he probably opposes life-saving needle exchange programs, too.

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:36:03am

re: #18 wrenchwench

He’s being flippant, but he probably opposes life-saving needle exchange programs, too.

Conservatism: its like freebasing crack cocaine off of zombie Reagan’s ass.

makeitstop Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:37:16am

re: #14 Sol Berdinowitz

Is there a guitarist out there who did not at one point turn it up to eleven and belt out the chords to “Wild Thing”?

It was a pre-requisite where I come from.

Hendrix’ cover of it (with the ‘Strangers In The night’ guitar solo) was also pretty rad.

Youtube Video

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:38:13am

Wow, a Vatican Godwin, is this worth extra points?

Vatican official: The Catholic Church is being ‘persecuted’ due to its anti-gay positions

In an interview published on Saturday by Germany newspaper Die Welt, Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Mueller likened the sentiment directed at the Catholic Church to that of the persecution against Jews in Europe during World War II.

Archbishop Mueller, who leads the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was quoted as saying that those attacking the church borrow arguments used by totalitarian ideologies such as Communism and Nazism against Christianity.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:38:50am

re: #18 wrenchwench

He’s being flippant, but he probably opposes life-saving needle exchange programs, too.

Because junkies, like homosexuals, are an abomination unto the Lord, and deserve to die.

The last thing that Jesus would want us to do is to help them in any way.

A Mom Anon Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:41:28am

re: #16 Kragar

No one is talking about teaching sex ed to “little children” anyway. I spent many years of my life involved in the education of 2 children and never once was sex ed so much as even barely introduced til around 7th-8th grade. These people are perverted and insane, their imaginary sexual scenarios don’t exist anywhere except in a creepy porn movie or a predator’s head.

lawhawk Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:41:50am

Heh.

North Korean Propaganda Video Uses ‘Call of Duty’ and ‘We Are the World’ to Imagine a Brighter World, Without Manhattan nyti.ms/14PAYWS
— lawhawk (@lawhawk) February 5, 2013

efuseakay Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:41:57am

Heck… my Apple dividend check is coming next week (oh how ironic). I hooked you up Charles. I did order the wall plug charger too. :)

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:42:17am

re: #12 Lidane

This should go over well:

Ever see this? Certainly not the NRA making the argument.

A Mom Anon Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:43:17am

re: #21 Kragar

Boo.Fucking.Hoo. Cry me a river. Do something about the child molesters you cover for assholes,before you pass judgement on anyone else.

dragonfire1981 Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:45:31am

re: #21 Kragar

Wow, a Vatican Godwin, is this worth extra points?

Vatican official: The Catholic Church is being ‘persecuted’ due to its anti-gay positions

In related news the Vatican added Fox News to its cable package this past week…

Kragar (Antichrist ) Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:46:24am

Federal Appeals Court Decision Would Have Invalidated Hundreds Of Recess Appointments From Reagan To Obama

The decision in January by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Noel Canning v. NLRB was focused on the three recess appointments that President Obama made to the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012. The court held that none of the three board members was properly appointed, which voided the board’s decision in the case under review by the court. The ruling has thrown a year’s worth of NLRB decisions into question. It has also by extension cast doubt on the actions of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has been headed up by a recess appointee, Richard Cordray, whose appointment also did not satisfy the court’s standards.

But the scope of the appeal court decision was far broader than the particular circumstances of the NLRB appointments. The three-judge panel, each nominated by Republican presidents, re-examined the origins of the constitutional recess appointment power and concluded that the president has the power to make recess appointments only in one narrow circumstance: when the Senate is in recess between sessions of Congress and only if the vacancy arose during that recess.

The Congressional Research Service found a total of 329 intrasession recess appointments — appointments that occurred when the Senate adjourned in the middle of a session — since 1981. By the terms of Noel Canning v. NLRB, all of those appointments would have been invalid.

The Ghost of a Flea Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:46:56am

re: #11 Targetpractice

Does Beck feel the same way about soldiers diagnosed with brain injuries just from being closed to exploding IEDs? How about the scores of retired boxers who are dealing with neurological disorders like Parkinson’s from decades of blows to the head?

Beck, as usual, demonstrates how he hasn’t a fucking clue what he’s talking about.

Glenn Beck longs for a long-ago day when men were men who scoffed at pain and internalized all their issues. Because that always worked out so well.

This comment, like so much paleo-conservative gender stuff, just serves as a vivid reminder that patriarchy hurts men…and in particular, men lower in the social hierarchy…as well as women.

iossarian Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:47:23am

re: #26 Political Atheist

Ever see this? Certainly not the NRA making the argument.

“I asked my friend, ‘If you’d had a gun, do you think you could have stopped the attacker?’” Quigley recalls. “She said yes.”

So, basically, the “I think a gun will make me safer” argument.

Despite the evidence that, in fact, a gun makes you less safe.

The rest of the article doesn’t really improve the case, from a pro-gun viewpoint. The self-defense expert is in favor of banning assault weapons and restricting ammunition sales.

Oh, and if the rapist has a gun too?

“Then you better shoot first,” Quigley says.

Sage, sage advice.

makeitstop Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:48:39am

Donald Trump, still a humorless dickhead.

Interesting Times Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:51:12am

re: #26 Political Atheist

Ever see this? Certainly not the NRA making the argument.

I understand where she’s coming from, but she does make some rather problematic statements in that piece:

She disagrees with the argument that having guns in homes means children will get shot. “Rarely do you hear about a kid getting hold of a gun and shooting it. Three-year-olds can’t pull the trigger,” she says

Funny she should mention that:

Police have released more details about the death of a 3-year-old who was killed by a gunshot wound to the head Friday night…On Monday, police said the child and his 7-year-old sister were playing with a pink handgun, they thought was a toy, when the shooting happened.

Police still haven’t figured out which child fired the weapon, but the fact they’re investigating that detail in the first place pretty much shows her assertion is wrong.

Gus Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:52:30am

Image: Obama-skeet-shooting-figure-jpg.jpg

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:52:47am

re: #26 Political Atheist

Ever see this? Certainly not the NRA making the argument.

She has a financial interest in promoting guns. She also uses bullshit to do it.

However, she says, banning all guns is not the answer.

Who is for banning all guns? Straw men, that’s who.

“Every 2 minutes, a woman is sexually assaulted in the U.S. There are 207,754 victims of sexual assault each year. Eighty percent are under the age of 30,” she says, citing statistics from the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, or RAINN. “That’s a lot of women walking around who are targets. They’re talking on their cellphones or texting, totally unaware of what’s going on. It’s part of the reason why people get themselves into trouble.”

The majority of those assaults are not by strangers, but by friends, relatives, and others known by the woman. Does Ms. Quigley prepare women to shoot their husbands, fathers and uncles?

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:53:11am

re: #31 iossarian

Again with the broad brush stat that people forget is a very low resolution view. *sigh*

The odds vary by circumstance, training and level of threat faced. Paxton is talking about an option for women at risk.

Lidane Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:54:04am

re: #15 Kragar

VIEWPOINT: How A Very Smart Senator Showed Us Everything Wrong With The Modern GOP In One Week

On the flip side, NRO is telling the rubes that Ted Cruz is the future:

The Unconventional Ted Cruz

iossarian Tue, Feb 5, 2013 10:56:07am

re: #36 Political Atheist

The odds vary by circumstance, training and level of threat faced. Paxton is talking about an option for women at risk.

Having a gun on you at all times to defend yourself from your husband by shooting him first sounds like a great option to me. Where do I sign up?

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:01:36am

re: #38 iossarian

ad absurdum arguments like assuming it’s always the husband will not help anyone get to good policy at home or in the legislative discourse.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:03:30am

re: #35 wrenchwench

What Paxton expects would be a question for her. I would just guess that in a violent attack, who it is may not make much difference in how badly you need and want to resist.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:03:33am

re: #39 Political Atheist

ad absurdum arguments like assuming it’s always the husband will not help anyone get to good policy at home or in the legislative discourse.

Take out the words ‘assuming’ and ‘always’, and suddenly it’s not absurd at all.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:04:59am

re: #40 Political Atheist

What Paxton expects would be a question for her. I would just guess that in a violent attack, who it is may not make much difference in how badly you need and want to resist.

You would guess a woman would be just as willing to shoot a husband or boyfriend as she would a stranger in a parking lot?

Now who is being absurd?

iossarian Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:05:51am

re: #39 Political Atheist

ad absurdum arguments like assuming it’s always the husband will not help anyone get to good policy at home or in the legislative discourse.

Nor will willful blindness to the reality that everyone owning guns makes everyone less safe. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck with that, so presumably it’s multiple homicides due to dog poop arguments from here on out.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:06:28am

re: #42 wrenchwench

You say this is if the gun becomes an obligation to use rather than an option. I don’t get that.

Interesting Times Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:06:36am

re: #39 Political Atheist

But the late-night break-in scenario presents a conundrum as well, especially if the woman has kids: any steps to keep the gun locked up and secure make it that much harder for her to get to it fast enough if she ever has to use it, especially against an intruder who’s broken right into her bedroom (consider state of mind, as well - she’s likely groggy and disoriented, attacker’s wide-awake and alert)

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:07:18am

re: #43 iossarian

Nor will willful blindness to the reality that everyone owning guns makes everyone less safe. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck with that, so presumably it’s multiple homicides due to dog poop arguments from here on out.

That’s not an argument I or Paxton made. Stop puttting NRA rhetoric in every pro gun point of view please.

iossarian Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:08:40am

re: #44 Political Atheist

You say this is if the gun becomes an obligation to use rather than an option. I don’t get that.

Seriously, dude. Are you saying that women should keep a gun beside the bed, in case their husbands come home from work in a bad mood and decide to go a bit further than usual?

Or would that be a stupid thing to do?

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:09:07am

re: #36 Political Atheist

Again with the broad brush stat that people forget is a very low resolution view. *sigh*

The odds vary by circumstance, training and level of threat faced. Paxton is talking about an option for women at risk.

No, she’s talking about all women and saying they’re all at risk, basically. Which is true, to a limited extent, though most of the risk comes from family and friends. However, she’s neglecting to deal with the risk that she’s adding to their lives by advocating they own a gun. Including the risk that gun is used to shoot them by a family member or friend.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:09:27am

re: #45 Interesting Times

But the late-night break-in scenario presents a conundrum as well, especially if the woman has kids: any steps to keep the gun locked up and secure make it that much harder for her to get to it fast enough if she ever has to use it, especially against an intruder who’s broken right into her bedroom (consider state of mind, as well - she’s likely groggy and disoriented, attacker’s wide-awake and alert)

That’s why it is critical to look at that as an option, not an obligation. Nobody wants to remember that it seems.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:10:32am

re: #48 Obdicut

No, she’s talking about all women and saying they’re all at risk, basically. Which is true, to a limited extent, though most of the risk comes from family and friends. However, she’s neglecting to deal with the risk that she’s adding to their lives by advocating they own a gun. Including the risk that gun is used to shoot them by a family member or friend.

In that little article, yes. And some of us prefer the high resolution view rather than the flat broad brush view of risk assessment.

iossarian Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:10:36am

re: #49 Political Atheist

That’s why it is critical to look at that as an option, not an obligation. Nobody wants to remember that it seems.

Your option is my obligation. That’s the key point here.

I don’t want to be worried that the guy leaving dog poop in the park might have a gun. But I am obliged to do so because he has the option to have one.

And that’s why people keep on getting shot.

BBL

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:11:39am

re: #44 Political Atheist

You say this is if the gun becomes an obligation to use rather than an option. I don’t get that.

Try reading it again, in the context of being a response to what you said.

A gun is not any kind of protection against rape if the woman is unwilling to kill the rapist before he rapes her.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:14:13am

re: #50 Political Atheist

In that little article, yes. And some of us prefer the high resolution view rather than the flat broad brush view of risk assessment.

Well, she doesn’t, apparently. That article, to me, is a good example of a ‘responsible’ gun person— advocating ‘all day’ training and practice at the range— who is really anything but. That she is lying to these women who may be young mothers and telling them a 3 year old can’t pull a trigger is fucking reprehensible and I’m really surprised you’re not castigating her for it.

[Link: detroit.cbslocal.com…]

Police say a 3-year-old boy was hospitalized after accidentally shooting himself in the face with his father’s gun at their home in Pontiac.

Deputies from the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office say the incident happened around 4:40 p.m. Thursday at a house on J. Hubbard Court, near Whittemore Street.

According to police, the boy was apparently playing in his parents’ bedroom where he found his father’s 40 cal. Glock in a holster under the bed and shot himself in the mouth.

And, for visual proof:

Youtube Video

I know very little about guns, but even I know a 3 year old can pull a trigger.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:15:13am

re: #49 Political Atheist

That’s why it is critical to look at that as an option, not an obligation. Nobody wants to remember that it seems.

Your option/obligation phrasing is ignoring the real argument. The real argument is that a gun is more likely to be used against her or her family than it is to be used to prevent a rape.

There is no ‘high resolution view’ that makes this untrue.

Interesting Times Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:18:59am

re: #52 wrenchwench

A gun is not any kind of protection against rape if the woman is unwilling to kill the rapist before he rapes her.

Or unable to. A gun would have done nothing for this woman, even if she’d had it right under her pillow:

She ate, showered, read a book, and took a sleeping pill. For weeks she had left her kitchen window open because her small apartment was prone to getting stuffy. She would cover the open window with a canvas painting of “starry night” so that her neighbors could not see into her home. That night, someone climbed the building’s fire escape and was able to get into her 5th floor apartment through her opened window. He quietly walked into her room, climbed into her bed, and taking advantage of her deep slumber, raped her.

The only thing that could have prevented this assault (aside from the man choosing not to be a rapist creep in the first place) would have been bars on the window.

The Ghost of a Flea Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:22:03am

The expert quoted in the article is ridiculous because of statements like this:

“That’s a lot of women walking around who are targets. They’re talking on their cellphones or texting, totally unaware of what’s going on. It’s part of the reason why people get themselves into trouble.”

It’s high-order victim blaming.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:23:52am

re: #54 wrenchwench

Your option/obligation phrasing is ignoring the real argument. The real argument is that a gun is more likely to be used against her or her family than it is to be used to prevent a rape.

There is no ‘high resolution view’ that makes this untrue.

Not ignoring anything. The presumption that a violent rape should not be stopped by any means at hand seems odd. (which includes any weapon or anything used as one like a hammer or kitchen knife) all those possibilities face that same realty. So, what of the rest of the time? What of the break in that we hear coming and the cops are slow?

Edited to fix poor sentence structure, my bad…

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:26:27am

re: #57 Political Atheist

Not ignoring anything. The presumption that a violent rape should not be stopped by any means at hand (which includes any weapon or anything used as one like a hammer or kitchen knife) all faces that same realty. So, what of the rest of the time?

What about this woman’s assertion that a 3 year old can’t pull a trigger? You’re kind of promoting her piece, and it has an insanely dangerous lie in it, man. Shouldn’t you be putting some sort of disclaimer when citing the article, especially if you appear to be supporting the article, noting that that is a dangerous, dangerous untruth?

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:30:48am

re: #58 Obdicut

If I were promoting it it would be a Page. It’s a fair argument for some womens desire for handguns for self defense. One disputable fact does not remove the value of the rest. And she advocates fast release gun safes. I know people that can not pull a revolver trigger through. My wife is one of them.

The argument need not be so one sided on the anti gun side as some would like to see. Too much rhetoric applied in the wrong places.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:33:21am

re: #56 The Ghost of a Flea

The expert quoted in the article is ridiculous because of statements like this:

It’s high-order victim blaming.

No. Daydreaming in public or being distracted is something predators take advantage of. Texting gets people in all kinds of stupid trouble. Like walking into poles and water features at malls.

These kind of practical arguments are widely accepted on the anti gun side. Why is it any different on the other side?

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:33:38am

re: #57 Political Atheist

The presumption that a violent rape should not be stopped by any means at hand seems odd.

Who said a violent rape should not be stopped by any means at hand? Nobody, that’s who.

Rape is always coercive, but not always violent. The stats cited by that woman in the article you linked don’t make a good case for a gun as rape prevention.

If a woman keeps a gun in her house, it is more likely to be used in a way she does not want it to be used than it is to be used to prevent a rape. So do you think she should get a gun anyway?

From your comment to Obdicut:

It’s a fair argument for some womens desire for handguns for self defense. One disputable fact does not remove the value of the rest.

It’s a crappy argument, not a fair one. If the disputable fact is that she’s more safe when actually she is less safe, it removes ALL value of the rest.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:33:55am

Damn work calls gotta go.

Sorry.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:36:05am

re: #59 Political Atheist

If I were promoting it it would be a Page. It’s a fair argument for womens desire for handguns for self defense. One disputable fact does not remove the value of the rest.

Fuck, dude, it’s not disputable. 3 year olds can pull the trigger. I even included a video a 3 year old pulling the trigger. It’s a stupid, dangerous thing to say, and it makes her credibilty go to shit as an advocate of safe gun ownership.

And she advocates fast release gun safes. I know people that can not pull a revolver trigger through. My wife is one of them.

That’s great. I used to design educational children’s toys, you may remember. I know the grip strength of kids. The average 3 year old can pull a trigger on a modern gun. Rusty old revolvers will resist them— unless they get a pencil or a lever. You do not want to ever, ever tell a person that a kid can’t get a gun to go off. It is massively, stupidly, assholicly irresponsible for her to be saying that they can’t pull the trigger.

The argument need not be so one sided on the anti gun side as some would like to see. Too much rhetoric applied in the wrong places.

The proper response to that isn’t just a one-sided, inaccurate polemic, though. It’s time for real responsible gun owners to talk honestly about guns, about guns being dangerous. It will mean advocating against sales sometimes, telling some people they don’t actually need the gun, that unless they’re prepared to be super-conscientious or are facing grave risk, that having a gun is more likely to wind up harming you.

This woman is scaremongering about violent assault and overselling the utility of a woman carrying a gun in self-defense. All-day training and time at the range aren’t nearly enough training, either.

I am all for having some rational, middle-of-the-road gun advocates, but that would involve them acknowledging that guns are dangerous and risky and all the pro-gun people, even those I otherwise find reasonable, seem to start breaking down and feel like they acknowledge the obvious, that guns are dangerous objects with inherent risk, that they somehow give the whole argument away.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 11:36:18am

re: #62 Political Atheist

Damn work calls gotta go.

Sorry.

I WIN!!!

////

Maybe you can come back later…

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 12:27:07pm

re: #64 wrenchwench

Back for a sec., I’m sure we will have occasion to chat about this again.

steve_davis Tue, Feb 5, 2013 1:14:13pm

re: #14 Sol Berdinowitz

Is there a guitarist out there who did not at one point turn it up to eleven and belt out the chords to “Wild Thing”?

Youtube Video

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:32:59pm

re: #48 Obdicut

re: #61 wrenchwench

If a woman keeps a gun in her house, it is more likely to be used in a way she does not want it to be used than it is to be used to prevent a rape. So do you think she should get a gun anyway?

From your comment to Obdicut:

It’s a crappy argument, not a fair one. If the disputable fact is that she’s more safe when actually she is less safe, it removes ALL value of the rest.

If we want to talk about big statistics like what is more or less likely, let’s also then include the most likely outcome of them all. The most likely outcome is a gun will be owned and kept without an accident ever happening. Or it being needed in a defensive act. Even police rarely need the gun except as a precaution. But we (as a society) sure want them to have it.

So sure lets educate the gun owner with all the likelihoods. Along with those responsibilities like safe storage and an abundance of training and practice.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:42:06pm

Are these numbers in dispute?

Various sources-
Data recently released by the National Center for Health Statistics shows that in 2008, the number and per capita rate of firearm accident deaths fell to an all-time low. There were 592 firearm accident deaths (0.19 such accidents per 100,000 population) in 2008, as compared to 613 accidents (.20 per 100,000) in 2007. In 2008, the chance of a child dying in a firearm accident was roughly one in a million.

Firearm accidents accounted for 0.5% of all accidental deaths; well below the percentages accounted for by motor vehicle accidents, falls, fires, poisonings, and several other more common types of mishaps.

Firearm suicides rose in 2008 because total suicides rose, but the percentage of suicides accounted for by those misusing firearms remained steady, at just barely over half. This is down from about 60% during the 1980s and early 1990s. The firearm suicide rate remained at just under 6 per 100,000, as it has been every year from 1999 forward. Contrary to claims made recently by some gun control advocates, firearm suicides among children are extremely uncommon, and in 2008, fell to an all-time low.

Firearm homicides (including self-defense, but excluding lawful shootings by police) declined in 2008. More recent data reported by the FBI, shows that criminal homicides declined in 2008, again in 2009, and again in 2010, to a 47-year low.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:43:33pm

re: #67 Political Atheist

re: #61 wrenchwench

If we want to talk about big statistics like what is more or less likely, let’s also then include the most likely outcome of them all. The most likely outcome is a gun will be owned and kept without an accident ever happening. Or it being needed in a defensive act.

Sure. Let’s do that. That’s the good, sensible middle ground. It’s not an advocacy for gun ownership. It’s much harder to make sales when you say something honest like that.

Even police rarely need the gun except as a precaution. But we (as a society) sure want them to have it.

Actually, I wish we had such low levels of gun ownership that our police didn’t need to be armed.

But that’s a forlorn hope.

So sure lets educate the gun owner with all the likelihoods. Along with those responsibilities like safe storage and an abundance of training and practice.

And let’s not tell them stupid, idiotic shit like saying a 3-year old can’t pull the trigger.

I am really shocked that you presented that article without pointing out how wildly dangerous that piece of advice from this woman is. I am weirded out you think she’s any sort of good gun advocate worth citing when she says something like that. That could really, really, really end up in a tragedy.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:45:22pm

re: #67 Political Atheist

re: #61 wrenchwench

If we want to talk about big statistics like what is more or less likely, let’s also then include the most likely outcome of them all. The most likely outcome is a gun will be owned and kept without an accident ever happening. Or it being needed in a defensive act. Even police rarely need the gun except as a precaution. But we (as a society) sure want them to have it.

So sure lets educate the gun owner with all the likelihoods. Along with those responsibilities like safe storage and an abundance of training and practice.

So, most likely outcome: no bad incidents with gun present. Second most likely outcome: bad incidents that would have not happened if the gun weren’t there. Third most likely outcome: gun’s presence does not prevent bad incident. Fourth most likely outcome: gun prevents bad incident.

Sounds like a good argument for not getting a gun.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:49:53pm

re: #69 Obdicut

Sure. Let’s do that. That’s the good, sensible middle ground. It’s not an advocacy for gun ownership. It’s much harder to make sales when you say something honest like that.

Even police rarely need the gun except as a precaution. But we (as a society) sure want them to have it.

And let’s not tell them stupid, idiotic shit like saying a 3-year old can’t pull the trigger.

I am really shocked that you presented that article without pointing out how wildly dangerous that piece of advice from this woman is. I am weirded out you think she’s any sort of good gun advocate worth citing when she says something like that. That could really, really, really end up in a tragedy.

Actually I’m contacting her to insist she retract that. Would you please send me your video link and anything you have to help me get that message across? Now, beyond that error she makes some excellent points. To my email if you please. I’ll include you in the correspondence. I think we can get an important retraction.

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:52:20pm

re: #71 Political Atheist

Now, beyond that error she makes some excellent points.

Also some lousy points.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 2:56:09pm

re: #70 wrenchwench

So, most likely outcome: no bad incidents with gun present. Second most likely outcome: bad incidents that would have not happened if the gun weren’t there. Third most likely outcome: gun’s presence does not prevent bad incident. Fourth most likely outcome: gun prevents bad incident.

Sounds like a good argument for not getting a gun.

Which of course is why most people don’t have one as I would hope. But that argument fails for police. They face a higher threat. Like some ordinary citizens do if for other reasons. People will choose based on their circumstance. And of course those odds are highly variable based on behavior. No gun ever shoots anyone just sitting there actually untouched. Good storage and the rest dramatically alter the odds. So does place of residence and occupation.

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 3:19:09pm

re: #72 wrenchwench

Also some lousy points.

I just sent her an email, I’ll share the results if i get any. I should, Pax and my wife and I worked as safety officers together at a couple Hollywood celebrity shoots in LA.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 3:21:53pm

re: #71 Political Atheist

Actually I’m contacting her to insist she retract that. Would you please send me your video link and anything you have to help me get that message across? Now, beyond that error she makes some excellent points. To my email if you please. I’ll include you in the correspondence. I think we can get an important retraction.

I am fine with getting her to retract that but I really don’t think she makes excellent points. She throws around out of context statistics in the same way that you’re complaining about from the anti-gun side. I think it’s generally very hard for people whose business it is to sell people guns and gun training to work against themselves, so I’m not surprised that she promotes gun ownership in the way she does but it makes her a very poor advocate for responsible gun ownership. I don’t get what points she makes that aren’t utterly pedestrian that you feel are excellent— why is this woman a good spokesperson?

wrenchwench Tue, Feb 5, 2013 3:25:21pm

re: #74 Political Atheist

Hollywood celebrity shoots

Political Atheist Tue, Feb 5, 2013 4:43:45pm

re: #75 Obdicut

Obviously we just see her work differently. I’ll just say a little more by way of hoping you see how i got to my conclusions through your disagreement.

Her work with women has been a fine example of what defensive skills and counseling can do for those who face a threat or who have been victimized and fear another rape or attempted killing. That is an advocacy I share. An advocacy tempered by long effort & study. Today that is about guns. On other days it has been about a small man charged with excessive force to thwart another devastating punch from a very large man. In the past, other challenges to people just trying to go home unhurt with a violent predator on their ass somehow. Gun or not, many of the questions & answers are similar in the aftermath.

None of this is easy to teach. None of us who try are perfect or have the perfect curriculum. And I at least do feel the gravity of this stuff. I think nearly all who teach defensive skills do too, but I can only hope so. Any of us can say something dumb at some point.

You found a big flaw in what she said. Heh, maybe I should send you my study materials for review. Check that I prolly already have a piece at a time in the last months.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Feb 5, 2013 7:38:33pm

re: #77 Political Atheist

Her work with women has been a fine example of what defensive skills and counseling can do for those who face a threat or who have been victimized and fear another rape or attempted killing.

Or who haven’t, but have been scared by her out of context statistics into buying a gun or training from her, enriching her in the process.

I am really surprised you’d point to this woman as any sort of advocate. This is not the direction responsible gun owners need to go. It’s going to be a tough road, because capitalism gets in the way— it’s pretty hard to be principled and not make the salesman’s pitch for a gun, which involves selling the gun myth of gun ownership always equals increased safety.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Amazon Deal of the Day: Kindle Fire HD 8.9” up to $50 off

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud