Saturday, December 22, 2007
Bryan deleted that post as well as the first one. Here's his response:
Well, I'm going to take down your latest, too. Why? Because you must be confusing me with someone else. I am the ED of Ceasefire NJ, as in New Jersey. And, the person you viciously attacked is not on the Ceasefire NJ Board or affiliated with it in any way. As I wrote above, your comment "has not a thing to do with anything I wrote. It also gratuitously attacks someone not associated with this blog." So, take your nastiness elsewhere, it is out of place situated under my blog.
But, as I've also written before, I do not intend to edit or delete comments that are in response to what I've written, even if they are as foul as that posted above by kels94. I love it when such as kels94 demonstrate for readers their relative class, or lack thereof.Yep, keep those cards and letters coming!
Catch that? He claims that CeaseFire PA is not affiliated with CeaseFire NJ "in any way". I guess that's why Bryan co-founded, used to be the director of and still works directly with them to pass legislation. He states in a previous article : And, energetic and strategic leadership has emerged at CFNJ's sister organization, CeaseFire PA,
I guess that's not "affiliated with" in Bryan's world.
I didn't have to "attack" him Bryan. All I had to do was link to the various statements he's made and which he is proud of. This is the kind of person you have as "energetic and strategic leadership" and we're going to make sure everyone knows it, no matter how much you try and distance yourself from it.
So Alex, how does it make you feel that your associates are denying you already? Why don't you link to the blogs making what you claim are slanderous statements about you? Are you afraid of people reading what you wrote and later defended? Are you afraid that people won't see your claims of racism or supposed death threats because they aren't there?
Friday, December 21, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
I ain't hiding ANYWHERE. I'm out in the world defending my ideas in a community of other people who have actually done their homework and working politically to protect children from you lot.
Yet, when all is said and done, ATR the Culturologist, deleted his blogs filled with hatred, bile, and attacks against gays, Catholics, Muslims, parents, gun owners, sociologists, and anyone he felt wasn't up to his moral standards, just before he became a board member of CF PA.
Why would he do this? Could it possibly be to keep people from reading his ideas about violently assaulting people on the sex offender registry because he considers them a direct threat to his family? Or that he feels parents who let their children play w/ toy guns should be imprisoned? Or howabout his opinions of gays:
"There is a LARGE literature in the medical health field demonstrating the specific health hazards homosexual men run by their behaviors. If you don't know it, you would do well to start reading some of it. I would happily send you pdfs of articles documenting higher anal cancer rates in homosexual men and higher rates of other anorectal disease as well as general anorectal dysfunction. And what about the well-known Cophenhagen study that showed clear and significant differences regarding rates at which the homo- and heterosexual populations they looked at showed evidence of various health problems? To quote it: ”The total burden of infections expressed as the actual number of infections was largest among homosexuals, 40.4%, 22.4%, and 5.3% having one, two, and three infections respectively.”As I said, I have a good deal of stuff in pdf form, should you actually be interested in looking at it. It's a grave mistake to imagine that simply waving your credential and your opinion is enough to settle the question of what the medical literature does or does not show. I've certainly never claimed that the sociological argument is settled simply by me noting that I'm a sociologist and I happen to think X. The material still has to be INVESTIGATED."
or his feelings on "Womens Studies":
WHen I finished, a young woman in the audience (a Womens' Studies major, I learned later) raised her hand to ask a question/respond. Within about 30 seconds of her response, and without having said the slightest coherent thing, she was in tears, crying that people like me were ruining everything, blah blah blah....
In Womens' Studies 81% of all students in all courses receive an A. EVERYONE knows what that is about, whether they will admit it or not--ideological correctness is the grade requirement there, not any actual argumentative or rational prowess. Line up on the 'right' side, learn to hate the 'wrong' side, and fall into hysterical tears as a 'response' to it whenever you come into contact with it, and you get your A."
Or howabout on gays again:
"As for medical evidence, there's a good deal of that showing that homosexual men suffer risks for STDs and other health hazards well above and beyond those that non-heterosexual men face. This topic has been discussed here before. People who engage in anal intercourse open themselves to all sorts of additional health hazards--this has something to do with the actual primary function of the anus, which doesn't involve shoving objects up it over and over again.Those mundane facts of the human body don't go away just because some people decide they want to express their romantic attractions to others by doing such things."
"There's also a good deal of evidence challenging the image you are trying to construct of the 'monogamous homosexual man.' All the data suggest that the average homosexual man has at least several times as many sexual partners as the average heterosexual man. Even people like Jonathan Rauch realize they can't deny this fact--although they work themselves into a sweat trying to shrink the margin as much as they can. It seems pretty clear that this subculture has a strongly entrenched element of promiscuity and there's little reason to believe that allowing them to 'marry' will change that."
A walking talking stereotype of the loud shrill feminist know nothing.
I'm sorry, I'm not speaking your language. GRUNT! GRUNT! UGH! UGH!
Or when he deliberately misstates opinions to demonize others:
The real problem is that the Guav’s of the world consider it a dead heat when you stack up a little girl’s LIFE with somebody’s stereo or TV (what the burglar is looking for).
Like his most recent distortion of the facts against a speech by Mike Adams that he (Alex) didn't even attend.
Just one of the blatant misrepresentations:
(e.g., he advocates, one can only hope jokingly, the replacement of Martin Luther King Jr. Day with a day celebrating America’s real “greatest civil rights leader,” John Browning, who Adams apparently believes deserves that title for inventing a kind of firearm that allowed hunters to “kill…more deer in North America than any other model before or since."
When in reality what was said was along the lines of:
He tried to suggest that my reasoning for Browning Day was based solely on the fact that he invented a firearm responsible for killing more deer in America than any other. He failed to mention that my reasoning was also based on the fact that Browning’s inventions helped us preserve freedom (read: civil rights) for all by winning two world wars. This is approximately two more world wars than MLK helped us win – although I do acknowledge that he was our second greatest civil rights leader.
There's more from him in comments, have a read about his opinions of Christians.:
"And this pathetic soul dares to claim he was denied because of his belief in an imaginary SuperMan with a beard?"
Maybe it's comments and actions along those lines that Alex Tristan Riley is trying to now hide from the world since he's become a public figure for the gun banners.
Isn't it ironic that the person who refused to allow anonymous comments on his blogs because he considered anyone who refused to let their name out for their politics to be cowards, deleted his blogs to hide his real feelings on politics?
We all see who the true coward is.
Update: In one of those bizarre timing coincidences, Alex, who now claims to hate blogs even though he used to have three of them, has become so unhinged at Adam's countering his outright fabrications that he started a new one just today for the sole purpose to attack Mr. Adams and all the posters at Townhall.com:
Mike S. Adams Is Vermin
and he lives at the bottom of the festering dung heap that is townhall.com
Here are the headers:
- Dissecting the Fecal Deposit of the Vermin II
- Dissecting the Fecal Deposit of the Vermin
- Other Vermin Squeak II
- Other Vermin Squeak
- The Facts
- A justification for this blog (and if only all blo...
This is the voice of Ceasefire PA and Bucknell University.
Update 2: I posted this link over on Bryan Millers blog as CF NJ and PA are partners. He deleted it.
Here's his reasoned discourse:
I've never before edited or deleted any of the noxious comments you and your pals have posted, as I want 'normal' readers to read them. You guys make me look so wise.
But, I'm taking down your comment posted at 1:56am today, as it has not a thing to do with anything I wrote. It also gratuitously attacks someone not associated with this blog.
Interesting that you should accuse me above of ad hominem attacks and then embark on same yourself. You'd call that 'rational discourse,' no doubt. Normal folks would call that dishonest. But, such is life, eh?
I don't plan on editing or deleting any further comments, but let's keep it to what I write. OK, fellas?
Keep those cards and letters coming...
The links have also been deleted on both Sugarmann's and Helmke's blogs.
Read Alex's reply in the comments.
Brady Campaign [logo]
Victory! U.S. Congress Strengthens Brady Background Check System
Bill Now Moves to President's Desk: Please Call Today
draft VT quotes
Great news! Last night, Congress passed a bill that will strengthen the Brady background check system. It will help ensure that fewer guns end up in the hands of dangerous people like felons and those who have been found to be a threat to themselves or others because of mental illness.
After the Virginia Tech tragedy, with your help, we asked our national leaders, "What are YOU going to do about gun violence?"
The tide is turning. Yesterday, Congress passed the first major piece of legislation to reduce gun violence in over a decade — and congratulations are in order: you, our donors and activists, helped make this victory possible. Thank you!
The "National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007" (H.R. 2640) was passed by unanimous consent in the U.S. Senate and House, and now goes to the President's desk for signature.
PLEASE CALL PRESIDENT BUSH TODAY AT 202-456-1111
Urge Him to Sign the NICS Improvement Act Immediately
Give the Virginia Tech families this victory before the New Year
This legislation was passed in response to the Virginia Tech massacre. The killer was able to arm himself because the court order that should have blocked his gun purchase was not reported to the national Brady background check system.
We deeply appreciate the courage and strength of the Virginia Tech victims. On October 16, many of the Virginia Tech families joined Brady President Paul Helmke and me on Capitol Hill calling for passage of this legislation — the efforts of all the families involved were crucial to this victory.
Our special thanks go out to Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) for their work on this legislation.
Much work lies ahead with the implementation of this legislation and our efforts to make the Brady background check system as strong as it can and should be. I know I can count on you to help us make future victories possible.
Click here for more information on the NICS Improvement Act.
Thank you again and happy holidays.
Sarah's Signature [image]
Sarah Brady, Chair
If this e-mail was forwarded to you, click here to sign up for your own Brady Campaign alerts.
Donate to Support the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
You can also mail a check to:
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
Click here to update your e-mail preferences.
Last night Congress passed the "NICS Improvement Act," a bill that in prior incarnations was designed to improve the records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)--the national system used to screen gun buyers.
Really Josh? And what incarnations would those be? You've opposed this bill from the beginning.
Hell, even Rep McCarthy told you off:
In listing the three anti-gun violence organizations that have reservations about my bill, Mr. Sugarmann inadvertently addresses why the NRA has such power while the efforts of organizations working to prevent gun violence have been futile for close to a decade.
Wonder how long he spent on Google for his information.
Note: I don't know if it's a HuffPo glitch or intentional, but most of the comments for his preceding posts are gone.
As an aside, "Realitytrumpsbull" sounds like he's living in his own reality.
the easy access disturbed teens have to assault guns
You can buy Armored Vehicles easily?
For pro-gunners it's about arming everyone to the teeth.
Really? Source for this besides your own imagination?
to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible (the purpose of assault weapons,
Is that their purpose? I guess I'm using mine incorrectly then, or it's broken.
This, of course, ignores the likelihood that a general gun battle will then ensue, as none of those armed citizens will know who is a good guy and who isn't.
Like in Colorado, right? Any evidence for this or did you just make it up?
, sadly, have a little more experience with overwhelming firepower than do the pro-gunners seeking to rationalize their petty personal fears and desires by pretending that they're seeking to defend the rest of us. My only brother, FBI Special Agent Mike Miller, was one of three law enforcement officers killed (a fourth was grievously wounded) by a lone gunman wielding a concealed assault pistol at Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Headquarters in November 1994.
So you have some emotional baggage that you should seek therapy for. What does that have to do w/ the other 80 million individuals that own firearms? Oh, right. Nothing.
Seems there is a relationship between the presence of guns and the prevalence of gun violence.
And yet there isn't. There is a relationship between illegal guns held by criminals and gun violence. You don't like to hear about that though.
The secret to societal safety is not more firepower in civilian hands. Quite the opposite.
Proof of this, or just another conjecture?
(BTW: I urge readers to check out some of the 'you can't make this up' nuttiness that will undoubtedly appear in the Comments section below and has followed each of my earlier entries.
Who do you think your readers are Bryan? How many posts do you get supporting you? There's a reason for that.
Yes, you are.
-Tom Hanks in an interview w/ Readers Digest
I agree. They would rather rely on soundbites and press releases in order to garner sensationalist headlines instead of actually trying to report the facts.
So, will we hear rails against this from Laura Washington, Jessi Jackson, or Al Sharpton? Or will they just continue to blame Rural White Males for all the crime? I'm betting the former.
I have contacted you in the past over your attacks on firearm owners and your assertions over whose fault it is for the high crime levels in urban areas. I was wondering, then, what your reaction and response would be to the fact that the group that had previously released the "Stop Snitchin'" DVD, threatening violence and retribution to those who assist the police in solving crimes, has released a sequel which continues to glamorize and encourage violence? Are these the same "People of the Gun" from your earlier articles?
Peoples Soviet of Illinois
Her previous articles provide an interesting juxtaposition to another statement she made:
Thanks to Bill Cosby, more of us are saying the excuses just don’t cut it anymore.
You know that old saying about what the truth can do? Come on, people—set yourselves free.
Will she continue to provide her own excuses for urban crime levels or will she read her own article and set herself free with the truth?
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, "It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced the Senate into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need."
While at the same time, Paul Helmke is challenging politicians to support it:
I challenge the candidates to support the NICS Improvement Act of 2007. The Virginia Tech shooter was able to buy his guns because Virginia didn't put his information in the system used to check gun buyers. We should do all we can to encourage states to supply records of the dangerously mentally ill and other "prohibited purchasers" (felons, domestic abusers, etc.) to the Brady background check system. Now is the time to pass this bill and send it to the President for his signature.
Will wonders never cease.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
The primary thing that discredits the work? It relies heavily on claims and citations by everyones favorite author Michael Bellesiles.
I don't think anymore needs to be said.
Instead of facing repeal, D.C.'s laws should be a model for the nation. How is it possible to think that Americans are free when they must fear being gunned down at their local mall, church, school or workplace because most of the U.S. refuses to implement effective gun laws?
When DC's murder rate is 5 times that of the rest of the nation. Yep, I want to see over 85,000 murders per year. And MD has "much weaker laws". Sure, in comparison to outright bans.
And the usual spin:
Likewise, after 112 people were killed in 11 mass shootings in a decade, Australia collected and destroyed 700,000 firearms determined to be designed to kill many people quickly. Australia has not seen another mass shooting while its firearm homicide and firearm suicide rates have declined.
But total suicide and homicide rates stayed the same. That sure worked.
Along with the usual lies of "AK-47 Assault Rifle".
I've noticed the whole "2nd Amendment is racist" thing pop up more often as of late. I haven't looked to deeply into it but I'm sure it's "Strong Scholarship" along the lines of Bellisiles.
I'm also wondering who's computer they typed this on as the VPC can barely afford their electric bill.
She is right on one thing. The DC gun laws have saved "countless lives". Zero.
Monday, December 17, 2007
I challenge the Brady Campaign to stop misrepresenting what different firearms are capable of.
I challenge the Brady Campaign to address the issues that are holding up the NICS act.
I challenge the Brady Campaign to acknowledge that basing restrictions off of error-ridden lists is irresponsible and unconstitutional.
I challenge the Brady Campaign to stop trying to ban private purchases of firearms by connecting them to FFL dealers that they are at the same time trying to drive out of business.
I challenge the Brady Campaign to find any evidence that limited purchasing laws have in any way effected crime.
I challenge Paul to read the responses on his linked Op-Ed and figure the ratio of his supporters to those who support the rights of the populace.
I guess this is Paul's lame attempt to get the candidates to pay attention to him. Anyone want to lay odds on it working?
It must suck for an organization that once stood next to presidents as they signed bills named after their leaders to become inconsequential.
"And then the NRA supports California’s “microstamping” technology that marks spent shell casings."
Really? Care to explain this:
|URGENT: Vote on California Microstamping Legislation Imminent!|
|Thursday, August 16, 2007|
Please Contact Your State Senator Today!
Assembly Bill 1471 could be voted on as soon as the Senate returns to session on Monday, August 20.
Oh, right, you believe in 911 conspiracies and the Illuminati as well. Never mind.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Romney also told Russert he had "the support of the NRA" and "received the endorsement of the NRA" as governor, but the gun-rights group did not endorse him during his 2002 gubernatorial campaign. Romney received a "Grade B" from the group, but his opponent, Democrat Shannon O'Brien, received an "A."
His spokesman is now attempting damage control ("I voted for it before I voted against it") over at WaPo:
"The NRA did not endorse in the 2002 campaign," said spokesman Kevin Madden, when asked about Romney's comments. "Mitt Romney as a candidate received a respectable B grade rating from the NRA, and when he was governor he had the support of the NRA and the Gun Owners Action League in relaxing some of the state's burdensome licensing regulations."
What Madden didn't say was that Romney's Democratic opponent in the governor's race, Shannon O'Brien, was given a more than respectable "A" grade by the NRA, according to its website.
Here are the names:
1. .22LR F
2. 8mm Mauser A
3. 7.62x39 C
4. .223 D
5. .45 E
6. .30 cal B
Now which Anti can tell me which are the most common in "Assault Weapons", which are closest to the ones Cho used at VT, and which are the most common in hunting?
Not that I really expect an answer.