Why knowing a second language is a good thing.

In this case, the person should learn American Sign Language (ASL)

Because the gesture he is making is the one for "asshole" in American Sign Language.

We can only hope that he has realised he is an asshole, but I seriously doubt he has the intelligence.

Well, we're having a laugh at you.

What fools these gun nuts be...(or Totally Texas).

The Texas Legislature has decided one of the best ways to commemorate a mass shooting now that we know that we can only tell if someone is a mass shooter is when they actually open fire.

The Texas Legislature passed a Campus Carry law that will allow concealed handguns in classrooms, offices, and dormitories. This law will go into effect on 1 August 2016.

This date happens to be the Fiftieth anniversary of the University of Texas Mass Shooting where Charles Whitman killed 14 people and wounded 32 others in a mass shooting.

At first, I was willing to write this off to ignorance.  It seems this is more of a case of straight out stupidity.  The choice of date was no coincidence since the legislators who passed this law believe that if more people on campus had been armed, that tragedy could have been mitigated or averted all together.

The absurdity of such a position seems even more extreme when you consider that Whitman, a U.S. Marine trained sniper, was shooting from the bell tower. He chose this location because he knew that he'd have an excellent vantage point to shoot his victims, and he'd be able to defend his position. He was able to hold his position for 96 minutes despite counter snipers on the scene.

Police handguns and shotguns were utterly useless. What makes these legislators think that a civilian with a handgun would stop a similar situation, if not make the situation much worse.

There is at least one building on that Campus which bears the scars of Whitman's bullets, yet the memory of this event has been lost to the point that the Texas Legislature unwittingly stupidly allowed for guns to be allowed on Campus.

The gun free zone being a target is a myth.  The FBI tells us that active-shooter scenarios occur in all sorts of environments where guns are allowed—homes, businesses, outdoor spaces. 

Umpqua Community College (UCC) wasn’t a gun-free zone. Oregon is one of seven states that allow guns on college campuses—the consequence of a 2011 court decision that overturned a longstanding ban. In 2012, the state board of education introduced several limitations on campus carry, but those were not widely enforced.

School policy at UCC does ban students from carrying guns into buildings except as “authorized by law,” but at least one student interpreted his concealed handgun license as legal authorization.

John Parker Jr., an Umpqua student and Air Force veteran, told multiple media outlets that he was armed and on campus at the time of the attack last week. Parker and other student veterans (perhaps also armed) thought about intervening. “Luckily we made the choice not to get involved,” Parker told MSNBC. “We were quite a distance away from the actual building where it was happening, which could have opened us up to being potential targets ourselves.”

It seems most of the "good guys with guns" have similar cases of cold feet, which is good since they will probably cause a total clutterfuck should they decide to get involved.

Politico has a good article on how the "good guys with guns" turns out to be a myth with seriously detrimental consequences.

The upshot of this is that the tide has to change or 1 August 2016 may be the date of more than one mass shooting.

And the Texas Legislature may truly regret this action.

Gun rights activists threaten Maryland Gun Shop Owner

And while we are on the topic of "getting away with murder" laws and gun fanatics who want to test the limits of those laws: let's look at the case of Andy Raymond, owner of Engage Armaments, who wanted to sell the Armatix iP1 handgun, but ended up backing down due to threats made against him, his girlfriend, and even his dog.

Dude, I can relate.  Although, I have to admit that actual threats of physical violence from the "pro-gun" crowd don't reflect well on them.  And it would really hurt the "gun rights" cause if they decide to "Second Amendment" on of their perceived enemies.

And in the case of Andy Raymond, he is indeed a perceived enemy since this is a person who sells custom assault rifles.  In fact, his reason for selling the iP1 was that he thought people should have that option.  In fact, he thought more people might warm up to gun ownership if the possibility of accidental injury were reduced.

Of course, that's not how the "pro-gun" side sees this whole thing. Anything which might infringe the right of a disqualified person from access to a firearm is something which should be viewed with suspicion: even if it comes from someone who is so obviously "pro-gun" that you would need to be a total gun loon to not see it.

In fact, Andy may just have learned the difference between a gun loon and a responsible gun owner.

The problem with this topic is that some people are too swayed by their emotions (gun loons) that they cannot tell the difference between reality and their fears.

And, boy are they one crowd who is scared shitless.

And they have guns.