MHI logo AR rifles causes CHORF butt hurt!

Yesterday I posted a link about how I’ve teamed up with JP Enterprises to offer MHI and MCB logos on AR-15 and AR-10 lower receivers and complete rifles.  http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/11/30/jp-enterprises-is-now-offering-mhi-and-mcb-logo-ar-15-lower-receivers/

JP MHI

Then this morning I discovered that my offering custom rifles with my logos on them have caused outrage among the CHORFs at File 770. Apparently besides hating wrongfans having wrongfun, they also hate guns. This is my shocked face.

Because Glyer 50 Hugos’ 50 Hugo winning site gets a pathetic number of hits he is always desperate for some controversy, and it isn’t Sad Puppy season, so now he links to like every single one of my blog posts. It’s kind of pathetic and sad. Usually I just delete the track backs and ignore them, but today one of my fans copied over some of their outrage into the comments for our amusement.

They reminded me that the thing I miss the most about being a gun dealer was pissing off angsty, hand wringing, progs.

“tintinaus on December 1, 2015 at 12:19 am said:
Larry Correia offers you custom rifles.

For f*s sake! Tell me Larry, how many n*grs, Ayrabs, or school kids will your gun be able to take down before you need to reload?”

 

On the contrary, my tribe is the one who stops the school shooters, terrorists, and registered democrats off their meds. Considering a big chunk of my—admittedly less than 500 person—book signings is made up of vets and cops, and a giant percentage of my fans are permit holders, who’ve jumped through a bunch of hoops and background checks to stop that sort of thing, that’s offensively dumb. But to answer your question, technically thirty, only most of us train to do controlled pairs, so more like fifteen. But with the beveled mag well on these, speed reloads are a piece of cake!

 

“Shao Ping on December 1, 2015 at 12:35 am said:
This has probably been brought up before, but are there racist undertones to the Monster Hunter books? They sound like the sort of books Norman Spinrad parodied in The Iron Dream.”

 

No, quite the opposite actually, but don’t worry, it has been brought up many times. Because screeching racism at the slightest provocation without any evidence is sort of a stimulus/response kind of thing with you dimwits. In fact, the Guardian’s village idiot once crowd sourced a witch hunt to find anything in all of my many prolific writings that could be construed as racist or sexist, and the best thing they could come up with was my teaching armed self-defense to women so they could shoot rapists was “victim blaming”.

Don’t worry. I’m sure those ladies were just compensating for their tiny uteruses.

 

“Aaron on December 1, 2015 at 5:23 am said:
Is there actual evidence of something he’s written or said that is racist in content?

I can’t speak to the Monster Hunter books, but his Grimnoir books relied upon some pretty tired racist stereotypes.”

 

I would love to hear what those “tired racist stereotypes” were. It was probably how I didn’t sugar coat the 1930s so that Imperial Japan was totally cool to people and didn’t make Chinese ear piles. Or it might have been the part where I portrayed Jim Crow style segregation as a bad thing, and we know that modern SJWs are all about having their racially segregated “safe spaces”.

 

“Ed on December 1, 2015 at 5:33 am said:
In light of current events, I’d like to shove that custom rifle up Correia’s backside.”

 

Well, you could certainly try that, Anonymous Internet Pussy, but I’m the one with the guns. 🙂

However, these poignant, informed, heart-felt, articulate, well researched accusations have given me pause, challenged my world view, and forced me to ask myself some important moral questions, like…

Can someone ever truly own enough AR-15 lowers?

Obviously not.

Or…

Could I fit another gun safe in here?

Probably. But I’d have to move some furniture. Maybe I should just use my giant royalty checks I get for being a popular, commercially successful author, and buy an even more gigantic house in which to store my massive gun collection? (man, after all these years of being told how I’ve irreparably damaged my career for disagreeing with them, that just has to annoy the CHORFs)

The top 10 bestselling fantasy authors on Amazon for Black Friday weekend. Yep. Witness the inevitable career death that occurs when you upset TRUFAN.
The top 10 bestselling fantasy authors on Amazon for Black Friday weekend. Yep. Witness the inevitable career death that occurs when you upset TRUFAN.

Anyways, for those of us who understand personal responsibility and the founding principles of America, we known that firearms are a vital self-defense tool and are among the fundamental building blocks of liberty. Not to mention the part where they are awesome and we enjoy them.

Now we can buy more of them, only with super cool Monster Hunter logos on them!

And for the idiotic gun and fun hating denizens of Vile 770, you can kiss my unabashedly gun toting, flag waving, free speechifying ass, you wretched little shit stains.

Yep, I'm not wearing ears. .300 subsonic with can. This thing was ridiculously quiet.
Yep, I’m not wearing ears. .300 subsonic with can. This thing was ridiculously quiet.

 

 

482 thoughts on “MHI logo AR rifles causes CHORF butt hurt!”

      1. Pshaw to Habanero peppers, the truly hot pepper is the Carolina Reaper at almost two million Scoville heat units. 3:) 🙂

      1. Who would want the one with the MCB logo? That’s worse than being a Red Shirt in Star Trek.

        I’ll take mine with MHI

          1. He would shoot it until it ran out of bullets, then smash the face in of whoever was left alive with the butt of the rifle.

          2. Hey, Agent Franks is so cool he got a dusty Colt Commando carbine to keep firing after thirty years without cleaning!

        1. MHI in .556, MCB in .300 Blackout for discreetly handing inconvenient eyewitnesses.

          Larry, you’re missing a marketing opportunity here. You should contact the Pow’rBall people if they’re still in biz or one of the boutique ammo manufacturers for a run of .556/.45ACP MHI Ammo with a faux-silver (stainless steel) subcaliber bearing swaged in the hollowpoint. That way folks who cannot afford another shooty thing can get in on the fun!

          1. Remember that the G3 was designed to be the go-to weapon when the Armies of Mordor were storming over Germany’s eastern border. There’s nothing wrong with the machinery itself- it’s the fanbois and the company management that’s crappy.

    1. I want two – one for me and one for my hubby, but I’m in Australia. He has a license for a bolt-action rifle though, and working on getting the civilian pistol license. Hmm.

      1. Get a Ruger Scout or Mossberg Patrol tactical bolt action and get an MHI logo stamped on the stock, It’s the spirit of the thing!

      2. You should move, America is nice the freedom to own a vast area of firearms is just the icing on the cake.

      3. Good luck with that. I know a number of Aussies that come to the States every year to compete in the Bianchi Cup. The process you guys have to go through to purchase any firearm is a travesty.

        1. Canadians have it much better. Not as good as some places in the US (but still far better than certain others), but better than the Aussies for sure. Been in both those Commonwealth countries. Done that.

          I wonder if these MHI/MCB guns are legal here in moose land (no full auto ever, limited magazine capacity).

  1. Not just quiet – RIDICULOUSLY quiet. I’m in the middle of building one myself. I’m looking forward to the ridiculousness!

    1. *shrug* anonme? That might be part of it I suppose. It has more to do though, I believe, with that they are professional victims. They have to be , for the sake of their fragile namby pamby, hanky stomping, ‘oooh everything that offends me is eebil, but look I’m more caring and understanding then you’, cry baby, take a punk to lunch bunch’ egos. Also because some of these morons are famous for and making bank off of being professional faux outragers. Creating controversy where there is none through spreading willful ignorance and stupidity. I still contend that the fault for this lies with the rise of federally mandated warning labels on every single fucking thing in existence.

      1. in other words, the “pussification of society”:
        why should I have to look out for myself, it’s the gubmnts job to protect me from my own stupid actions & enact laws “for my safety”

    2. Pretty much. Probably the same type of people who decided to get a free Yoga class banned from a Toronto University. Reason? “cultural genocide due to western supremacy”.

    1. The funny thing is, if they could see the friggin’ rainbow coalition of people I’ve armed, trained, or signed off for CCW it would blow their tiny little minds. 😀

      1. They couldn’t see them. Their eyes would slide off to the side in sheer reflex like an infant refusing to see something it doesn’t like.

      2. They would say you are trying to hide being a white supremacist by pretending not to be a white supremacist.

    2. SJWs make a lot more sense when you realize that most of the accusations they level against their opponents are actually meant as virtue signaling for other SJWs. It’s precisely this type of behavior that gives rise to their Orwellian doublespeak and makes them the useful idiots that they are.

      1. Personally, I prefer Social Justice Bullies (SJBs), as it’s a more apt description. The Chicks on the Right tend to refer to them as the Cult of Social Justice, which works just as well.

    3. Wait a minute here. If they really believe that the population of Americans with privilege (aka white men) are irredeemable racist & homophobes with genocidal desires, and that a majority of American Law Enforcement Officers are irredeemable racist & homophobes with genocidal desires, and a majority of American Servicemen are irredeemable racist & homophobes with genocidal desires- if they believe all that, why the hell are they pushing for Gun Control???
      If anything, they should be encouraging minorities to buy guns and get training!

      1. Because magic. Also, they aren’t strong on logical thinking. If the Patriarchy that’s hiding under everyone’s bed–when it isn’t skulking in closets–were truly as evil and vile and bloodthirsty as they say it is, there really wouldn’t be any minorities around to oppress.

      2. If you want to watch gun-grabber heads explode, accuse confiscation proponents of the same racist motives that they claim were behind bans on Saturday night specials.

      3. It does seem rather desperate really. They are painting themselves as a small minority… an UNARMED small minority. That doesn’t seem wise.

    4. I think if Larry posted a picture of him eating breakfast, they’d still find someway to twist it into racism claims.

      1. My eating ham and eggs is proof of my bigotry and insensitivity toward Muslims prohibition against pork, and also people who identify as chickens and bird-kin.

    5. As we saw in San Bernadino, the initial report of “white suspects” triggered the usual slew of “must be a white supremacist Rethuglican Nazi teabagger anti-abortion NRA supporter” from the media and the Left… and then they had to turn on a dime when the perps names (Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik) came out (new story: normal workplace violence, nothing to see here, back to the important news on climate change).

      Because only racists own guns, ya see.

  2. I’m a bit disappointed by File770’s decision to climb on the Crazy Train. I used to read it regularly and typically found it quite informative.

    Then again, there’s that “used to” in there…Just noticed that. I honestly did not make a conscious decision to stop going there, I simply just found less and less compelling reason to go. Now I can’t remember the last time I visited.

    Still kind of a pity, since if there’s another site that aggregates SF&F content the way it does — or used to do — I’m not aware of it.

    1. Glyer himself doesn’t go in for the slander and lies. It’s his groupies and hangers-on who have a permanent hate-boner for everything that Larry, myself, Sarah Hoyt, et al., do in public. If one of us so much as peeps from our blogs, Glyer will link it — knowing that les gerbiles will begin to squeak noisily down in his comments section.

      1. Yep. Glyer is a jackass. He just posts everything any of us do, hoping to get some more of that sweet outrage traffic so he can be relevant for another minute or two. The thing is, File 770’s traffic is so pathetic that if it wasn’t for the track backs that appear in the comments for me to delete, I wouldn’t even know, because his blog doesn’t even show up in the top ten referrers on any given day.

        1. He is in fact a jackass. The other day he linked to some wise male feminist post at Book View Cafe which ended with the usual comment about Gamergate, rape on college campuses and the gender pay gap. Glyer added the comments were “good.” That was before I left 3 things:

          1. A list showing high profile Gamergate gals outnumber anti-Gamergate gals.
          2. Stats showing that if the 200-250 in 1000 rape stats were true, there’d be a sexual assault on a college campus somewhere every minute.
          3. Dept. of Justice rape and sexual assault stats which showed the true number is 6 in 1000 and that included “verbal threats.” A legally required reporting that showed 91% of college campuses reported 0 rapes in 2014.

          Naturally my total of 3 comments were deleted. That’s so comments would remain “good.” In other words, the wise male feminist high school teacher teaches lies and bullshit.

          1. I’m just as happy to use their inflated statistics. The 1-in-4 plus their insistence that a woman’s dress, behavior, location, age, and looks are irrelevant to her likelihood of being raped, gives me the perfect justification (vetted by their own gurus!) for concealed carry.

            And any counter they make only destroys their credibility.

        2. Of course File 770 won’t show up as a referrer: Do you imagine for a moment that the outrage monkeys even bother to read what you (or Sarah, Brad, etc.) actually wrote before they comment on it?

          1. See the response I just posted to Christopher. I looked at the numbers. They’re even more pathetic than I imagined.

        3. Glyer doesn’t post everything you do. He made a point of not linking to *this* post, for instance . . . 😉

          1. Heh. 😀

            Out of curiosity I clicked on Other Sources under Referrers to see how many hits came from File 770 from that post in question (it’s too little and sad to make the top 10). Yesterday, 48. Today, 29. Holy shit, his traffic is even more pathetic than I thought. So out of the 9,793 views yesterday, a whopping .005 of my traffic came from Glyer 50 Hugos.

            No wonder he keeps linking, dropping some snark to his gerbils, and then hoping for controversy. Maybe I’ll be “thin skinned” enough to disagree when somebody says I want to shoot black kids and Arabs. Now that it isn’t Puppy season his traffic must really be in the toilet.

            Don’t worry, Glyer. I’m sure the Nielsen Haydens will pat you on your tender fat head and grant you a couple more Hugo nominations next year.

          2. Having been reading scifi & fantasy for longer than I like to admit, I have never heard of File 770 or the Glyer non-entity before reading these comments. Not being an enlightened Social Justice Hypocrite, I guess he must be too relevant for me to comprehend his existence.

            Completely unrelated to this, since I’ve no idea where else to post it. If you read this comment Larry, you might find this interesting. A site that fan translates Chinese Wuxia and Xianxia web novels has been working with the Chinese publisher and author to start professionally editing and releasing his work on Amazon. As part of the agreement the author has no problem with them keeping the original translations up on the site for anyone to read. If you’re interested any links, let me know where to post them or how to get them to you. I don’t want to just post links for work belonging to someone else in your comments section.

          3. “Don’t worry, Glyer. I’m sure the Nielsen Haydens will pat you on your tender fat head and grant you a couple more Hugo nominations next year.”

            And they did.

      2. “…les gerbiles will begin to squeak noisily down in his comments section.”

        Is that what all the hip young musophiles are calling it these days?

    2. There is some puzzlement that none of their favorites finished in the top three on Goodreads, with a grudging nod or two about pup logic. I am stoked that both Gaiman and Stephenson won.

  3. I just love the whole “anybody who believes in the Second Amendment must be a card-carrying KKK member, Nathan Bedford Forrest-loving, gay-bashing, woman-hating, Islamophobe troglodyte” thing. It’s so nuanced and balanced.

    On a slightly different note, I’ve reluctantly come to the conclusion that anyone who disagrees with me on any subject matter must be a Stalinist Nazi pedophile. And racist; musn’t forget racist. So don’t disagree with me or you’ll suddenly turn into a racist Stalinist Nazi pedophile, and who wants that?

    1. Simple people need the world to be simple. Doesn’t get much more simple than slavish adherence to dogma, or the belief that something’s either entirely good or entirely bad.

      1. There was a bit of built-in malice in my choice of bogeymen. Of course, most of them wouldn’t get it.

  4. Just out of morbid curiosity, I’d like to see the blog post “in the raw”. I can’t find it on Glyer’s blog homepage. Can someone point me at it?

    BTW, did you notice that SFWA just put out a “reading guide” for the Nebulas?

    Oh, and congrats Larry on the “branded” receivers. Do you get a percentage?

    1. It is Item (8) in Pixel Scroll 11/30.

      Not sure if I’m permitted to do links here, so I’ll pass on a direct link.

      1. Links are fine, though WordPress automatically sticks them in moderation until I manually approve them.

  5. “Don’t worry. I’m sure those ladies were just compensating for their tiny uteruses.”

    Sexist microaggression!

    But seriously, it’s always hilarious to watch how feminists rage against firearms, one of the technologies that levels the playing field between men and women. But I guess that’s inevitable, with feminism being completely taken over by the far Left. They can’t support something that would help them because it’s not part of their ideology.

    1. But if enough women actually did things to level the playing field, then they (the feminists) wouldn’t be able to claim victim status any longer. Kind of hard to scream oppression if a sizable number of your own kind are taking responsibility for their own safety and protection instead of scapegoating men.

      1. In a strange way, the SJW’s have drifted full circle into being a white male power fantasy. Notice how the solution to all the world’s social ills involves giving power to white males? Think about it. Rape culture? The SJW solution is not empowering women to defend themselves, but instead hope that men can be taught not to rape- leaving the power in the hands of white men.

        1. Yes. It kind of drives me crazy. The only thing that makes sense to me is that having power requires a person to take responsibility. And taking and accepting responsibility is so hard and frightening to these people that they’d rather huddle in the dark than risking the scrapes and bruises that comes from living. You can lead a dwarf to a feast . . .

          1. But it would be for their own good! Don’t tigers know that meat is carcinogenic? There have been *studies*.

          2. If you strap the broccoli to your leg the tiger will eat it and eventually develop a taste for the broccoli, too.

    2. You’ll also notice feminist cricket sounds surrounding the recent Holly Holm-Ronda Rousey MMA championship match which headlined UFC 193, including a championship undercard between two women. Record crowd, record pay-for-view. According to lesbian emancipation theory the patriarchy wouldn’t even have 2 women’s weight divisions let alone have Rousey as the biggest star mainstream crossover attraction in MMA history.

        1. Lots of left hooks by Rousey and straight southpaw leads by Holm. Knocked Rousey out with a kick to the head.

  6. Gotta love SJW “projection”. No wonder their not making comment on the sizes of our collective manhoods

  7. Wrah hah hah oppo researchers gone wild!

    About that Amazon screenshot: if you are on Windows you may want to try the included “Snipping Tool”. Just click on the “Windows” button and type “snip” in the “Search programs and files” panel. I use it all the time, no need to take photos of the monitor.

    1. Thanks, but long story, short. That got pulled up on an iPad while visiting family, so I just snapped a picture of it.

    2. FWIW, typing “Alt-PrtScn” will copy an image of the currently active window to the clipboard, which you can then paste to any program that can accept images. (I have to do it that way at home because I use an ancient pre-Windows IBM keyboard. The thing’s built like a tank.)

        1. Hit both the lock button and the main button at the same time, and it will take a picture of your existing display, putting it in your “camera roll” or whatever it’s called on there.

        2. If you hit the power button and the Home button at the same time, it will give you a screenshot that you can crop however you want in Photos.

  8. Every once in a while I am reminded that File 770 still exists. This is a good reminder about why I no longer bother going there anymore.

    1. Actually, I’ve come to read it more often in the last year. It collects all kinds of stuff that I wouldn’t otherwise know about, like Kaley Cuoco’s PSA about Slave Leia costumes. Why is it a problem that Glyer links to the announcement about offering the logo rifles? I’m not going to blame Glyer for having nitwit commenters. Glyer himself does seem to oscillate between covering Larry as straight news and inserting snide commentary into everything. He can’t quite seem to decide if he’s a newspaper or something else, but I suppose he’s not doing worse than TV news coverage these days.

      1. As stated above, what is wrong with it is that he is doing it to get his comments section to slander Larry for him.

        1. I hope he keeps doing it, because I feel sure it will backfire. Not everyone who navigates to that site is a CHORF even if most are.

        2. I don’t know that we know why he does it. This sounds almost to me like an argument that Glyer should police his comments section which doesn’t seem consistent with the scorn we have been heaping on other SF bloggers for the way they curate their comments.

          1. The issue is he does police his comments section. And opposing views are deleted, while the rabid gerbils are allowed to do as they please.

          2. If he policed his comments section he wouldn’t have one.

            Feminism in SFF consists of mentally ill and fanatical serial liars. There is nothing behind any of their stupid myths. There is no racist man-hating bigot they don’t call a social justice leader and support, there is no piece of shit conformist SFF trash literature filled with their lucky leprechaun PoC and lesbians they don’t promote and throw to each other like valuable jewels. There is no innocent demographic of ethnic European men they don’t see as a woman-hating KKK.

  9. You *could* build a bigger house, or you could just emulate the fine folks from Paradise, NV in the movie _Tremors_, and build a very well-stocked rec room:-).

    1. Ah, the Gummers, Burt and Heather. Someday I want to have an 8 gauge Darne elephant gun like Burt.

  10. Hmmm… Now I may have to buy one of those lowers, and form 1 myself an SBR.
    Because the only thing better than a regular AR(*), is an good ol’ NFA registered SBR AR!
    Yes indeed, yes indeed…

    (*) That I can easily afford. A select fire, suppressed , SBR *is* better, but unlike certain ‘failing authors’, I’m not swimming laps in an Olympic-sized swimming pool chock full of wrongfan wrongbucks… 🙂

  11. Miguel, don’t forget that we need to make it suppository form with the option of a speed loader for those days where the inflammation of the ass is particularly harsh.

  12. Warning sorta spoilers

    But Larry, how can they not find you r offensiveness in print. Your books drip in content for the people of pulselessness including zombies, wights and vampires. Your hatred just drips off each page. Heck, you even committed genocide of the undead, lupine-americans using snow removal equipment. You are the real monster.

    If I need a /sarc tag for that, does Nurse Rachet know you are on the internet.

    In seriousness, these are idiots. Hope they sell well cuz I want them still to be available when I can justify another one.

  13. I’m going to let my lack of knowledge show, but what does CHORF mean?
    I wish I could afford one of those JP’s but they are out of my reach at this time.

    1. Cliquish, Holier-Than-Thou, Obnoxious, Reactionary Fanatics

      Created by Brad because we couldn’t keep using SMOF (Secret Masters of Fandom) to talk about the puppy kickers, because there are lots of really good people who are SMOFs, and lots of them supported SP. Not all SMOFs are CHORFs, but all CHORFs think they’re SMOFs.

        1. The plural is Trufen, Brad; Trufen. I’m not sure about “Wrongfans” vs. “Wrongfen”, though; if we’re wrong, we might as well use the wrong plural form.

          1. Since the point of the term is to call out the well-worn patterns of some fen, I think you can make good argument that it should be wrongfans.

        2. Is there anyone who uses Trufan non-ironically ever. No one describes himself as one. The term exists to make fun of the notion.

        3. The whole Hugo thing involves quite a snow storm of labels.

          SMOF is only taken semi-seriously in fandom. Anyone calling himself a SMOF is joking, even if he really is a SMOF, but there are people who will refer to others as SMOFs and mean it, and SMOFing as a verb is a thing that people who organization conventions do and will admit to doing.

          Trufan — is even less real than SMOF. Anyone calling himself a trufan is joking, and unlike SMOF, there isn’t really a non-ironic usage. It’s used quite a bit like the way Brad uses it.

          CHORF — I appreciate the effort to change the term to avoid dragging SMOFs into it, but it really does sound contrived.

          SJW — I know this one predates the whole Hugo controversy by years, but it confuses people who don’t understand the usage. Eric Flint even claimed to be one because he actually used to go out and fight for social justice, even though he isn’t really, because the term has always been used ironically, and that’s just confusing.

          SJB (social justice bully) — Wasn’t this John Ringo’s attempt to clarify SJW? It was a valiant attempt, but I haven’t seen much evidence that it caught on.

          Puppy Kicker — This one I think was pretty clever, clear, and mostly unambiguous and much better than a contrived acronym.

          Flaming Rage Nozzles of Tolerance — Brad’s creation to the best of my knowledge and I stand in awe. It so beautifully encapsulates the behavior of so many, in so many fields, far removed from the Hugo awards.

  14. The funniest of all the replies was the guy hissing at you for daring to depict a bigoted Japanese empire – and then hissed even louder at making FDR a villain.

    1. Yeah… Only somebody who was profoundly historically ignorant wouldn’t grasp the idea of a deadly, bigoted, Imperial Japan. Meanwhile, back on Earth actual history experts and Japanese people are like, yep. Nailed it.

      Here’s a hint. Unit 731? I didn’t make them up. The real life version was WORSE.

      Rape of Nanking? Ringing any bells? Bataan death march?

      Militarized Imperial Japan did some EVIL SHIT in real life. All I did was give them a leader that made Hitler look like a punk ass bitch. Because I’m such a research nerd, some of the highest praise I’ve gotten has been from Japanese readers and people very familiar with the culture who’ve praised me for getting that militant pseudo-bushido warrior culture right, without going all Otaku fanboy on it. Real life Imperial Japan was fucking cruel, and the Chairman turned it into a modern, mechanized, highly efficient, scientific, get shit done version of that.

      And then I had to go and complicate matters by revealing the Chairman’s justifications for his actions, because the alternative was WORSE. Which most readers who don’t have their sense of fun surgically removed for Social Justice really enjoyed.Then I had to go and introduce Toru as a major character for two books, where he was a bad guy and a hero at the same time, and probably one of my favorite characters ever.

      Speaking of history, funny how I’m getting a Chinese translation this year because they thought it was fantastic. 🙂

      I also got American culture of the time right, which is why there are slurs and people being dicks to people from other groups, and in this series mush of it was aimed at an Okie and an Irishman! I’m terribly sorry I didn’t throw out every single thing that might hurt your modern delicate lilac scented feelings!

      And FDR? FDR was a douchebag of the first order. That part about him sticking over a hundred thousand people into concentration camps and seizing all their property without due process? That part wasn’t fictional either.

      1. Dear Leftist- you are sooo cute when you try to virtue signal in a historic context, because most of you are so very ignorant of actual history.
        First, you with the ‘trendy’ Che shirt and the Mao print on the wall- you do know that the Left has the blood of millions on it’s hands? Yep, from the French Revolution to Stalin’s gulags to Mao’s Cultural Revolution to Pol Pot’s killing field’s. It starts with a desire for Social Justice… but you have to kill off the fighting remnants of the old regime. Then it’s the one’s who won’t go along with your progressive vision of peace on earth… and then you got to kill off the internal factions within the party that may not be on board… and the bloodbath continues.

        And now on to you who once spent a couple of weeks in Europe and would model our nation after the soft Socialist states. To you I’d suggest that much of the generous state programs have been made possible by the generous largess of the USA in providing Europe’s defense. Well, this brief little bit of Pax Americana is about to go away.

      2. Hey, Unit 731 was all white Mormon dudes, just like the white Mormon dudes who’ve shot over 1400 mostly black people in President Pants Crease’s hometown so far this year. Funny how we never seem to have a “national conversation” about that. I guess some black lives matter more than others.

        1. No, no, it was the racist Admiral Perry who infected the pure and noble Japanese with the Eeee-vil Genocidal White Cultural Cooties.

          1. Imagine what would have happened if Tom Cruise wasn’t there in the 1800’s to protect them from Evil White Western-ism!

          2. I KNEW Sarah was involved somehow….. 😉

            But I guess running a “male supremacist organization” (aka SP4) just doesn’t fill up her days.

          3. George Feifer’s “Breaking Open Japan” makes exactly this argument, that Perry damaged their national self-esteem, causing them to lash out at the world.

      3. A friend of mine who worked a year in Japan described it as “the most exquisitely polite blatant racism” he’d ever encountered.

        1. If I’m not mistaken, it’s not uncommon to see “Japanese People Only” signs on businesses over there.

          Then, of course, they have their own home-grown oppressed ethnic group, the burakumin. Then there are the Ainu. Then there are the Koreans who’ve been living there for a century or two, but are still considered to be “foreigners”. Then there are the workers they’ve been importing from South America, who are treated as something like tenth-class citizens, except for the “citizen” part. Then…

          1. The “Japanese only signs” that I saw were mostly on the snack-bars (pro-tip: not a snack-bar like in the US) and the brothels… so not places you’d want to go anyway.

            Most everybody else in the cities is perfectly happy to take your money in exchange for goods. They’ll even show you, the ignorant foreigner, the purchase total on a calculator, so that there are no misunderstandings.

          2. It was less of a “big Irish looking Yankees not welcome” than it was “a big Irish looking Yankee is here, we will depart rapidly with fixed grimaces”

      4. Huzzah! Yes, FDR was a champion douchenozzle, and asshat of the first order, imperial militarized Japan was a parade of horrors, and Toru fekkin ROCKS! I LOVE that guy!

        PS: Son of the Black Sword? How do you keep coming up with new strains of addictive, crack-like literature? It’s unnatural, damn it! *giggles* now, write the next MHI, SoTBS, and Grimnoire books all at the same time! The world might end otherwise! JK. Take your time. The withdrawal tremors aren’t THAT bad… :-P. *ducks*

      5. Sounds familliar…. Neal Stephenson was called racist because Cryptonomicon hinted that Tojo’s Imperial Army did some not very nice things in China, New Guinea and the Philipines. Neither the historical facts, or the fact that the single best person in the book is Japanese, did any good in the eyes of the ”if he is accused he must be guilty” crowd. So Larry, you are in very good company!!!

        1. Cryptonomicon is an amazing book. It is this meandering, crazy, jumble of stuff, but it is so damned well written that you can’t help but love it. Hell, there’s a whole section about the science of eating Captain Crunch and it is fascinating.

          1. For me is the chapter long demonstration of phreaking that takes the cake of non sequitur to its logical conclusion. And it’s hilarious.

          2. What first showed me the deep political idiocy of the modern SF world was the criticism of Stephenson’s next book, Anathem, which is about military applications of Platonic epistemology–an original topic, no? -and the usual suspects called it racist. Why? Because Platonism is a Western Philosophy (gasp!). Really. I’d give references but I don’t want those sites to get clicks.

  15. I see that les gerbiles of Pravda 770 are having another slow week; time to gin up some fake outrage. I especially love the guy who fantasizes about doing violence, because les gerbiles are such a compassionate, caring, loving, peace-centered, truly liberal people. You can just feel the peaceful caring liberalness oozing off their shit-stained whiskers, as their little shit-stained noses twitch with rage and fury. It’s enough to make me suggest to my wife that we take some our Baen royalties — far larger than expected, I might add — and invest them in a brand new AR with an authentic MHI lower. Then we hit the range and take lots and lots and lots of firearms pr0n photos. Post them to my blog. Watch les gerbiles’ heads go absolutely kerplodey.

    1. I refer to them as “outrage flop artists.” They never want to play the game right; they just want to work the refs.

    1. *Yet. Because Capitalism!

      With job no. 2 ticking over and now finding ammo expenses cheaper, there might be another firearms purchase in the future, oh yes indeed there might.

      *grin*

  16. I posted this over on File770. I’m not sure it’ll get through moderation, so I’m re-posting here.

    @Aaron

    Fisk time.

    “In book one of the series, every villain but one is Asian, and the one who is not has adopted Asian culture and attitudes.”

    Gross oversimplification as well as untrue. There are multiple lesser antagonists who are European or American, such as the Shadow Guard that Faye fights near the end of the first book, an English woman. The main antagonist was the chairman of the Japanese empire, which, if you know anything at all of the period, was militaristic and expansionist. Are you up for rewriting history to keep from offending anyone?

    “The story posits a pan-Asian Empire dominated by Japan, and presents it as a nightmarish place where human life is regarded as almost worthless.”

    It posits an authoritarian regime that emphasizes collectivism over individuality. This is taken to an extreme by a brutal ruler whose cause is just, though his methods are not. Most East Asian civilizations have historically been much more collectivist than Western civs, Again, history. Ask the Chinese about Nanking.

    “Even though the series spans the world, with action taking place in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Arctic, there isn’t a single character from South America or Africa in its pages. Its like those continents simply don’t exist.”

    Look, Larry forgot to check some boxes. Oh noes.

    “There is a single black character in the trilogy, and he fits the stereotype of the wise magical black man.”

    Isaiah Rawls? He is magical, like most of the other main characters. He is also black. He is also among the highest ranking members of the Grimnoir. He is wise, I suppose, in that he is intelligent and capable. I guess if you are always on the lookout for how someone different than yourself might be scorned and ridiculed, that is what you will see.

    “He even sacrifices himself to save the heroine.”

    Funny, I do not recall that. I think you are confusing characters.

    “Other than villainous Asians, criminal Chinese, and a few helpful Chinese (who all get killed pretty rapidly), the only other non-white character is a single submissive Asian woman who serves as a love interest for the oafish, vile, and vicious protagonist.”

    You forgot about Tokugawa. The “few helpful Chinese” do some pretty heroic stuff, in particular the scene with the icebox and a flood of water. Nice of you to marginalize them. And calling Jake oafish, vile, and vicious? His oafish appearance and manner of speech is played up throughout the books as not being reflective of his intellect and demeanor. What is vile about him? What is vicious? And are characters not allowed to be soft-spoken without you thinking of them as weak?

    “On the other hand, Correia goes out of his way to cast FDR as a villain…”

    The same FDR who interred Germans, Japanese, and Italians during World War II? Because that’s what Correia was referencing with his relocation communities for Actives.

    1. Wow, that guy is incredibly full of shit and managed to leave out 3/4 of the characters. 😀

      If he has that much of a profound misunderstanding of the character of Sullivan, dude is talking out of his ass.

      I believe the moron is talking about George Bolander as the black man who sacrifices himself. No shit. That’s what bad ass heroes do. He lightning punched a demon so hard he ended a drought and wound up as an Oklahoma folk song. Of course he was magical, considering 90% of the characters in these books are magical. Duh. Was he wise? Bolander got old in a business where the stupid die young, so you tell me in what manner I should have dumbed him down in order to check your fucking box?

      Sometimes heroes sacrifice themselves to save others, that’s what makes them heroes you nitwit. Whisper did something similar, and way more tragic to save the same heroine… That’s kind of important because that heroine SAVES THE WORLD you derpy moron. But the biggest most bad ass heroic death scene self sacrifice came in Warbound, only it was done by a straight white male. Cut his arm off? Fuck ninjas. He’s not done yet.

      Every bad guy was Japanese or adopted Japanese culture? Well, in a book where the Japanese are the primary antagonists, that would be like noting that most of the bad guys in Star Wars were from the Empire. I wanted to write an alternative history, but I was sick of Nazis in every alternative history. So I shot Hitler in ’27, and made the Chairman super bad ass. Plus, samurai power armor. So fuck you is why.

      He manages to forget the Pale Horse, Rawls, and hell, J. Edger Hoover. Not to mention a shit ton of mobsters.

      As the series goes on Anand Siviram was the original Spellbound and all around killing machine nut job who caused the whole Spellbound subplot. Indian. But in that book the real bad guys were the OCI, Bradford Carr, and Mr. Crow who I kid you not, is one hell of a fun bad guy to write. He forgot about all of them apparently.

      All the Asians were throw aways who died easily? Uh huh… Zhao? (not to mention he’s a teenager leading a rebellion, which means he’s young enough that he’s coming back in the 50s trilogy) Shit. I even stuck Yip Man in there with a cameo.

      Origami was submissive? Are you fucking kidding me? Wait, because the escaped slave who lives on a pirate ship and SETS MOTHERFUCKERS ON FIRE WITH HER BRAIN is soft spoken (actually super loud and pushy by ’30s era female Japanese standards) she’s submissive? Who pray tell, does she submit to? She fell in love with the Heavy who reminded her so much of her dead husband?

      Oh, I’m sorry… Were Faye, Jane, Whisper, and Hammer not enough “strong women” to check all your mandatory boxes?

      So you dismiss that one sympathetic Japanese character because of some arbitrary bullshit… Two words. Toru Motherfuckin’ Tokugawa. Major PoV for two books, who is one of my favorite characters I’ve ever written, as both bad guy and good guy.

      Well, and the part where the Chairman was actually a really popular character, kind of like if Darth Vader had a tactical clue and did more than choke people during staff meetings. Not to mention how when I revealed the reasoning behind his plots and that he might be justified because of the greater threat, readers who didn’t have their sense of fun removed to satisfy Social Justice really enjoyed that.

      Hang on… What about the Marauders? Major support for two books of the series? There were only two white Marauders, and that was because Barns and Southunder were both based on real life people I know who made for great fictional characters in those roles. Everybody else aboard the Bulldog Marauder’s race was PIRATE. Recruited from every shifty port in the world. I specifically had Africans, Asians, and a bunch of islanders, usually from places fighting the Imperium, and a bunch of the crew were former Imperium slaves. Duh. Idiot.

      There were Africans, but I can’t think of any South Americans. OH NOES! In a trilogy I failed to represent EVERY SINGLE GROUP IN THE WORLD! Well, no shit. That’s why when I create characters I just create whatever I think makes it interesting, and don’t worry about the bullshit box checking. Because if I’d had somebody from Brazil, this fucker would be crying that I didn’t have somebody from Ecuador. Or worse, how come my Brazilian isn’t a left handed transsexual, because no matter what you do you will never make the box checkers happy.

      Sure, the Grimnoir had groups all over the world, each one mostly made up with locals, and we never actually went to South America or Africa, but hey, fuck it. That’s obvious proof of my invisible racism. Hey, didn’t I do a Grimnoir short story called Murder on the Orient Elite that takes place on a voyage between Casablanca and Argentina? NOOOO! I CAN’T HEAR YOU OVER ALL THE RACISM!

      And FDR really was a douchebag. I used to live by Topaz. That’s why it has turned up in two different series of mine now. You don’t believe he was a douche? Go out to Topaz some freezing winter night, where the desert wind slices right through you, imagine being taken from your home in southern California, no due process, your land given to democrat land developers, and then you get to live in a thin walled shack in the god forsaken desert. That’s douchey.

      The political infighting bits with Francis? I did my homework. FDR was a political pitbull. I toned those down.

    2. Kip Drordy (aka: Aaron) has had a hate-boner for Larry, for years. Sad Puppies has merely taken Kip’s hate-boner from a one-and-a-half-incher to a two-and-a-half-incher. It doesn’t matter what any of us write, Kip’s going to find a way to cram all of our books into his narrative. And because Kip doesn’t get out much — homebody government apparatchik — he’s not exposed enough to people who disagree with him. In true gerbil fashion, Kip interprets all difference of opinion as oppression. To include “oppressive” prose by bestselling authors who love guns, and aren’t affraid to show it.

        1. Lar, I remember Kip (Aaron) only because he’s attacked me instantly, any time I’ve bothered to comment at Pravda 770. One day, back in July, after yet another knee-jerk attack, I bothered to follow his name link back to his blog — who the hell is this dude, anyway? By his own description, he’s a divorced lawyer who works for the feds in D.C. and his kids choose not to visit him much, but he’s got an apartment with 6,500 books, so this proves he is an expert at all things SF/F. He also didn’t like your books much — before Sad Puppies — but Sad Puppies proved to him that you’re not just pure evil, you thoroughly suck as an author (me too; I am terrible, despite multiple Analog readers’ choice awards to the contrary.)

          1. So he’s a loser, who sucks at life, and needs to feel big about something, so he auto-hates us. Oh well, I’ll just go hang out with the same woman I’ve been with for 18 years and our four happy children. 🙂

    3. “The same FDR who interred Germans, Japanese, and Italians during World War II?”

      To be fair, anyone FDR had interred was probably dead. 😉

      It’s also quite common for a belligerent state to intern citizens of nations with which that state is at war. It was FDR’s internment of US citizens of Japanese ancestry that went well beyond the pale.

        1. Of course he’s still around, because he was (unjustly) interned.

          Had he been interred, he would have been spending the past 70 years looking at the grass from the root side….

      1. General rule of Leftist Oppression: All Leftist governments are considered good and their crimes ignored unless expressly denounced by another Leftist government.
        For instance, Stalin was a leftist saint until denounced by Khrushchev.

    4. And threw Jewish refugees back into the sea. Don’t forget that lovely bit of kumbaya multiculti…

  17. I’m sure Larry would like to brag about being able to fit all of his guns into a single box, but then his wife would probably tell him to stop calling their house a box. 😀

    1. Thank the gods wasn’t taking a drink when I read this, otherwise would have to wipe off the screen and maybe the keyboard. 🙂

    1. You can find the AR platform, heck, lots of guns in many colors. Including pink.

      http://gearsofguns.com/pink-guns/

      Yes, that’s a Hello Kitty pink AR-15 there at the bottom. Guy in California had it done for his wife, courtesy of Armory Airbrush.

      Just goes to show, they’re racist… err, color-ist and not very bright. The folks that hate black guns and all, I mean- that pink is *quite* bright, I bet.

  18. Gah, urk! Built an AR-15 this summer and shot it for the first time on Sunday, and THE DAY AFTER there’s news about the MHI lower?! I’m devastated.

      1. The hubby’s already enabling me that direction. But I think it’s ’cause he wants an AR for himself. Or he just wants my AR, whichever. 🙂

        1. Sounds like a Win/Win situation. He gets you current build, and you get to build a new one with the ILoH logo of your choice!

        1. Or the .50 Beowulf. That one apparently is not named for what the recoil does to your arm. I stand corrected.

  19. Some AR doodad ideas:

    Dustcovers outside “EVIL LOOMS” inside “COWBOY UP”
    Mag wraps
    Decals for mags, stocks

    Lower is cool, but the doodads would sell like hotcakes. That way people can accessorize without getting a whole new lower.

  20. Wait a minute, let me see if I have this straight. these idiots, who are SUPPOSEDLY Science Fiction fans, are having trouble with the idea of a Alternate History SF scenario, With Magic, not matching up with their view of reality?

    I feel compelled to question their commitment to Science Fiction.

    1. They’re Trufans, dude. You’re not qualified to question their commitment to Science Fiction. Because they say so.

    2. That’s because their commitment is to faux academic lesbian political social theory. The fact most of them aren’t even aware of that makes it even more wildly stupid.

      “Wittig argues that ‘it is quite possible for a work of literature to operate as a war machine,’ even ‘a perfect war machine.’ The main strategy of this war is for women, lesbians, and gay men—all of whom have been particularized through an identification with ‘sex’ – to preempt the position of the speaking subject and its invocation of the universal point of view… Above all, literary works offer Wittig the occasion to experiment with pronouns that within systems of compulsory meaning conflate the masculine with the universal and invariably particularize the feminine. In Les Guérillères, she seeks to eliminate any he-they (il-ils) conjunctions, indeed, any ‘he’ (il), and to offer elles as standing for the general, the universal. ‘The goal of this approach,’ she writes, ‘is not to feminize the world but to make the categories of sex obsolete in language.'” – Judith Butler in her 1990 book Gender Trouble describing gay French feminist Monique Wittig’s 1969 science fiction novel Les Guerilleres. Shades of Ancillary Justice.

      From Les Guérillères

      “Witchcraft is remembrance. There was a time when you were free. Remember that. You walked alone, full of laughter, you bathed naked in the sunlight – remember. You were wise woman and healer, you were huntress and amazon – remember that. You say you have lost all recollection of it; remember. Your bones remember. When you invoke your past, your heroines, your goddesses, your dreams – it is yourself you call to life. Remember who you are.”

      Wikipedia describes Judith Butler’s views of how fake heterosexuality like this: “The supposed obviousness of sex as a natural biological fact attests to how deeply its production in discourse is concealed.”

      That’s much like saying the fact I never see aliens is a testament to how clever they are at concealing themselves. You have lesbian feminist John Scalzi to thank for all this being in SFF today more than anyone else.

      1. Did Butler bother to check whether “making sex obsolete in language” accomplished anything like what she imagined it would in, say, Finland, or Hungary? (Neither Finnish nor Hungarian has gendered third-person pronouns.) Of course not. That would make too much sense.

        1. That’s the first thought that occurred to me. The other thing is this cult generally asserts the “ideology” of heterosexuality arose simultaneously on all five continents among cultures that didn’t even know the existence of one another. Somehow they all established a taboo against incest in order to facilitate arranged marriages. Nothing these people say makes any sense, and yet they pass it off as biology and history. People like Michel Foulcault, Judith Butler and Jacques Derrida have been roundly condemned by some academics for their lack of intellectual and academic rigor, which is just a way of saying they indulge in semantic gibberish. How seriously am I to take Joanna Russ complaining about the patriarchy stifling women’s writings when she was professionally published as an SF writer before even leaving college? N. K. Jemisin makes the same accusation about herself and Samuel Delany being “strangled” when both were showered with awards from the git-go and Delany published at 20.

          1. So if we’re in a cultural war due in part to the ideology of Judith Butler…

            Is it a Butlerian Jihad?

        2. Some languages, such as Portuguese, have no neuter gender linguistically. So every noun is either masculine or feminine, no matter what it is. A book is masculine, a magazine is feminine, history is feminine, and so is math, science, engineering, and technology. Revolvers and rifles are masculine, but pistols and shotguns are are feminine.

          So, what does this mean? People have no issues separating biological sex and grammatical gender. Grammatical gender is just a syntactic factoid, and reality is still reality. Of course none of those things are actually masculine or feminine. Absolutely zero Portuguese speakers have problems with this idea.

          1. If pistols are feminine howcum I have problems when I limpwrist my .40? And does mean that I have to ask permission every step of the way when I clean its breech?

        3. It’s a plot point in The Water That Falls on You from Nowhere that informal Chinese often dispenses with gendered pronouns. No doubt the Chinese have no notion of gender roles.

          1. Yep, when I think of a nation that has no clearly defined, culturally entrenched, socially accepted, tradition bound, gender roles I think of China!

      2. The main strategy of this war is for women, lesbians, and gay men—all of whom have been particularized through an identification with ‘sex’

        They left the word salad generator on again, didn’t they.

      3. James, I frequently appreciate your giant collection of quotes you’ve gathered from a variety of dranged bloggers over the years, but your “all evil springs from John Scalzi” theory mystifies me.

        1. I don’t think James May thinks this nonsense originated with Scalzi; rather, his theory is that Scalzi is responsible for bringing this nonsense into the mainstream SF/F and giving it respectability. Which is a debatable notion, mind you, but he has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for the movement in the SF/F community.

          1. As best as I can recall, James holds with the ‘not true leftism’ ‘in sff around twenty years’ ‘mainstreamed around ten years’ model. Scalzi is credible as a cheerleader for mainstreaming, as Hayden is for background influence.

          2. That is exactly my theory. Scalzi’s terms as SFWA president exactly coincide with the rise of this cult in SFF. Scalzi’s own site is the highest profile personal blog in SFF and the SFWA the most credible and most high-profile org. Scalzi’s own rise coincides with his opportunistically never saying “no” to this cult, and that is the secret of his success as a “writer.” Let’s be honest about the quality of Scalzi’s work: take out the feminist rhetoric he’s pushed and he’s just another nobody from nowhere pushing SFF no one really cares about. Take the pronouns and feminist boasting away from Ann Leckie and A. Justice is just another Linda Nagata novel no one particularly cares about. Kameron Hurley just recently admitted her feminist non-fiction has been crucial to her rise as an “artist.” These people aren’t totally stupid; they are aware of their own limitations and how to get around them.

        2. Kazlek, It is because he is one of those denialists who refuses to admit that all evil springs from the Democratic Party. Jack the Ripper was a Democrat. Julius Caesar became evil when his politics became like those of a Democrat. The Serpent was a registered member of the Democratic Party of Eden.

        3. It doesn’t need to mystify you. Scalzi is the one who provided a two part guest post on his site by the gay feminist Mary Ann Mohanraj about white privilege in 2009. That’s when all this Third Wave Feminist bullshit was just entering SFF. Mohanraj is the one who created the webzine centered on intersectional lesbian SFF which exists to this day: the racist Strange Horizons. Scalzi sold his first story there and it is the model for others which followed, such as the racist segregationist rags Lightspeed and Uncanny. 3 years later Scalzi published his own white privilege piece both on his site and on Gawker’s video gaming site Kotaku when he was the president of the SFWA. He used his high profile, his site, Twitter feed and the SFWA and its Nebulas to promote and give entry points of encouragement and credibility to this racist cult of lesbianism throughout his presidency. Scalzi is the one who asked us to “bone up” on intersectionality and linked us to an “Intersectionality 101” PDF on his site. He continues to use his high profile to signal boost any Third Wave Feminist talking point there is. No person in SFF has done as much to allow the entry of Third Wave Feminism into SFF as John Scalzi. To my knowledge he has never used the word “no” to any of these nuthatches, no matter how bizarre or hateful their ideas.

      4. Third Wave Feminism was 100% created by lesbians and its most fundamental concept is its opposition to heterosexuality. Next on the list is its opposition to men, “whiteness” and the West. They believe “reproductive heterosexuality” is a “fiction” (Judith Butler) created to oppress women who in their natural state would produce far more bi-sexuals and lesbians. They believe the only way to combat this “compulsory heterosexuality” (Adrienne Rich, Butler) imposed by the fake “performed” (Anita Sarkeesian) masculinity of the Patriachy is through “genderblindness,” mostly through the use of language such as pronouns. Leckie’s A. Justice was promoted through the roof because it was seen to oppose the “gender binary” which produces the marriage and family which keeps women from their true destiny and sexuality, because “one is not born a woman, but becomes one” (Simone de Beauvoir). The idea is to not become one. It is no coincidence de Beauvoir argued that women should not be allowed to raise their own children but they instead should be raised by the state. This “feminism” has nothing to do with equal rights feminism though that is the lie which keeps drawing suckers in. TWF is the default religion of this sick community. End of story.

  21. Speaking as your friendly neighbourhood bleating-heart liberal, I find the SJW’s objection ridiculous. What is it that they are objecting to ? If it’s guns in general, then why do they care what logo goes on them ? If it’s the logo specifically, then it’s still stupid; if I bought a gun, then it’s my gun, I can decorate it however I want. I do support gun control, but this isn’t gun control, it’s just hysteria.

      1. Because guns are a tool used to oppress rapists, of course! Anyone who disagrees is OBVIOUSLY rapeophobic! *can’t maintain straight face* Srsly though, guns are baad, m’kay? (South Park reference. Yes, I went there) 😛

    1. I respect what Kremlin’s it fun said (below); I don’t want to derail the thread. I am usually not shy about sharing my opinion, though, so I’ll do it if people are ok with it… I’m not sure how to gauge people’s opinion though, maybe by counting upvotes/downvotes ?

      1. Maa… were I you, I wouldn’t bother. You can get all of the anti-gun-control arguments by reading any previous gun post. Save yourself and everyone else some typing time.

        1. No, there is a newer one that might’ve gotten missed.

          Private ownership of nuclear weapons.

          Leftist opponents of this might be considered hypocritical, because of their support for ending counter proliferation and anti-proliferation. It has only been fairly recently that their willful and knowing sabotage of counter-proliferation matured to the point of being even more obvious.

          1. I suppose I’m a leftist of some sort or another, and I’m against private ownership of nuclear weapons — aren’t most people ? I’m also against nuclear proliferation in general… am I not supposed to be ? As much as I love my bottlecaps, I don’t want to live in Fallout-land just yet. I am totally for proliferating nuclear power plants, though, FWIW.

          2. The stronger argument is that Obama’s Iran policy is a repudiation of traditional counter proliferation thinking, and was foreseeable as such in 2008.

            The weaker argument is that opposing Bush while supporting Obama’s foreign policy can only be explained by a preference for more chemical weapons being used rather than less.

            This is the condensed version, I can expand. Another weakness is that it makes assumptions about how you voted, and what your foreign policy politics are.

          3. @BobtheRegisterredFool:

            OIC, I can understand the argument better now that you’ve expanded on it a little. But I think that there are some problems with the argument, although maybe these will be resolved if/when you explain more about it.

            * Voting for a politician does not mean that you support every decision he makes after he’s elected (FWIW, both Democrats and Republicans make this mistake a lot, about each other).

            * Similarly, supporting some decision a politician makes does not automatically mean that you endorse all of the negative outcomes of said policy (like “more chemical weapons”). It could be that you don’t believe such outcomes are very likely, or that the total good outweighs the total evil, or that you were not in possession of some key piece of information and made a mistake, etc. Of course, yes, it could be that some specific person who supports policy X is in fact a lover of chemical weapons, but IMO the other alternatives are usually more likely.

            * A “repudiation of traditional thinking” is not necessarily a bad thing (and this applies to everything, not just nuclear deals). Of course, it’s not necessarily a good thing, either.

            * It’s easy to say “this was foreseeable N years in the past”, but hindsight is always 20/20. Furthermore, humanity being what it is, for any given event you can always point to some people in the past who foresaw some specific outcome — even if that outcome is “literal zombie apocalypse”. We could discuss a weaker statement, something like “most people predicted that X would go badly but the politician did X anyway”, but I don’t think this line of argument ever leads to anything productive, since it usually just deteriorates into name-calling.

            Again, it’s entirely possible that these objections don’t apply in this specific case, but it’s hard to say without knowing the specifics.

          4. I can point to myself for that prediction in 2008. Hence it is easy, natural, and wrong for me to expect it to have been as obvious to others.

            Chemical weapons were deployed during WWI.

            Everybody had huge stocks of chemical weapons during WWII, but they were not used. I credit this to everyone knowing that use would be met with use, and that reprisal would make any advantage temporary.

            After WWII, we had so much chemical weapons that we still haven’t disposed of all of them. Germs are messy, and we didn’t want to use them. Chemicals are tricky, and we decided we didn’t want to use them either. So we promised that we would reprise for the use of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons with nuclear weapons.

            A key policy element was discouraging weaker powers without nukes from developing NBC technology. Especially making sure that powers that were crazier than us didn’t develop nukes.

            One could conclude that American adventurism and intervention in the third world is the reason why, say, South America doesn’t have any North Korea scale crazy governments with NBC development programs. Certainly diplomatic and military policy had that as a goal.

            Saddam Hussein’s stocks of binary chemical shells showed up in many IEDs during the recent Iraq war. (Such have to be actually fired to mix well, and produce the chemical weapon.) Perhaps Bush should’ve used nukes, but he was at least prepared to topple regimes to coerce cooperation with his counter proliferation goals.

            Obama has lost most if not all credibility on reprising for the use of chemical weapons. He made a promise, and didn’t follow through. They have been used so much that us moderns have developed a new technology that makes them much more practical. There is a decent chance that they may become a permanent fixture of endemic warfare.

            Obama promised from the beginning that he would only use diplomacy with Iran. Iran has had eight years to refine fissile material, which alone limits the production of nuclear weapons. Iran is going to make them, and will secure them with their most trusted forces. These forces will see that they are used.

            Obama has also decreased the size of our stockpiles of nuclear devices. Having fewer makes it easier for another party to have certainty when they try to show that you can not carry out a reprisal.

            It is credible that the “Peace Movement’s” volume on Bush, and silence on Obama’s similar activities is merely naked partisanship.

            I have neglected to cover the alternative leftist theories of how this stuff works, for space, for being incorrect, and because artificially limiting interpretations is the key to this sort of joking around.

            Seriously, there are many reasons most second amendment advocates think this isn’t the most persuasive argument.

      2. No one here minds you sharing your opinion, as long as you’re prepared to accept the artillery barrage of rebuttal.

  22. With all the things in this world that are genuinely offensive, it seems that some people expend a great deal of effort to find offense in things that really aren’t offensive. Wow! How do they function in real life? It must be terribly stressful just making it though the day.

    Regardless, those rifles look pretty slick.

      1. I went from the AK to the AR and have had not one regret. My first AK like object was a jam-o-matic, and the second was okay. However, I got a Colt 6920, and it is wonderful.
        Usable sights, quality accessories, and awesome accuracy are just a few reasons to switch. Use lots of quality gun lube (he said lube, hur hur hur) and you shouldn’t have any problems- AR’s like to run ‘wet’.

      2. There’s a WAGON? And a BAND?

        Damnit, I’ve been foot-packing this road for ages, and never heard so much as a ukelele…..

  23. You’re pissing off the correct folks. That’s a big chunk of your appeal. You and Donald Trump.

  24. I was not thinking about building an AR, but now…..
    I think I may have to just because it will piss some people off.

  25. Larry, you need to move beyond “more gun safes”. Try turning your entire *basement* into a gun safe, complete with vault door. I know someone who has done this 🙂 Of course, you may have to buy the new large house to pull this off…

    1. But if he did that, where would he put the huge army of figures and vehicles he has for Warmachine?

      1. He lives on a mountain, right? Well, what self-respecting ILoH doesn’t lust after an underground, mountain lair? He just needs to carve an entryway that looks like a giant skull.

        Lots of room for toys in underground, mountain lairs…

  26. That’s what frosts my balls about the whole SJW thing. Not content to do their thing and let us have our thing. They want to rifle through my hobbies and interests and tell me what I can and cannot have. (Pun fully intended)

  27. I think you should do a JP MHI giveaway. Not that I want a chance to get awesomeness for free or anything. I’m just trying to think of the children. And Manatees.

  28. I have to admit that I’m new here and haven’t read any of your books yet….but after reading this post,
    I LOVE YOU, DUDE!
    Rock on!

    1. There’s a tab up top there that says ‘free samples’ or ‘first time is free’ or something. Click it and enjoy…

  29. I am a dedicated long time AK man, but you are putting a lot of pressure on me to build me an AR with your awesome AR lower…..
    It is getting hard to resist.

  30. And they keep coming!

    “Aaron on December 1, 2015 at 11:43 am said:

    Just as a general note, citing “history” as a justification for perpetuating racist stereotypes in fiction doesn’t actually make your argument stronger. It just demonstrates that you don’t actually have a grasp of actual history, which is much more nuanced than saying “the Japanese were expansionist and militaristic” as a justification for making virtually all of your villains Asians”

    Reality is no excuse!

    “Cat on December 1, 2015 at 3:42 pm said:

    @ Mike re Meltdown

    Well, you know, insecurity is a scourge among creative types. “Lash out publicly” is a coping strategy that the Dignity Culture appears to have been working on for some time.

    @ Mark re Bestseller lists

    The Monster Hunter web site regularly hosts “book bombs” which are an attempt to get books higher Amazon sales rankings than they could earn on their own by persuading a couple of dozen people to buy on the same day. It would surprise me very much to discover they hadn’t tried something of the sort for Correia’s own book. However I don’t know the full story of this particular attempt”

    Larry’s not a real bestseller!

    “Mike Glyer on December 1, 2015 at 3:02 pm said:

    McJulie: I had been thinking all this was merely in response to the little four-line news item in the Scroll, but I learned the real reason a little while ago when someone sent me the link to Correia’s colossal meltdown. Does anybody in sf have a thinner skin than Larry Correia?”

    Lest anyone think that Glyer is an innocent in this.

    1. Nah. TNH’s almost immediate nominating Glyer for best fan writer after the Hugo Carnival of Assholes pretty much cleared that away. Can’t wait to make the rubble bounce next year.

    2. “Does anybody in sf have a thinner skin than Larry Correia?” That is just plain classic Leftist behavior. The Leftist slanders, twist, distorts, and then when one responds to defend themselves, the same Leftist blinks in an innocent way, and says some variation of “Why are you so angry/thin skinned/ect”.

        1. “Humans don’t fight back! Humans don’t FIGHT BACK!!! That’s how this WORKS!!!!”
          -the leader of the Monsters of the Week objects to Buffy the Vampire Slayer interfering with their nefarious plot.

          I always think of that line when SJWs whinge about someone not letting their lies go unanswered. 😀

          1. Yeah, they love screaming about how the Republican presidential candidate of the current cycle will put all the gays in death camps if elected, etc. but at the same time, the same Republicans are the pro-gun side and the hardest thing for a Nazi is to make the midnight knock on the door of an armed Jew.

            These people are not stupid or ignorant; they are malicious liars.

      1. I would say the entire cult which supports the idea of trigger warnings and PTSD for reading Mark Twain not only defaults to far worse but is demonstrably insane.

    3. Glyer and his peeps are the congregation. Third Wave Feminism is their clergy. They cannot breathe a word about SFF without filtering it through that lens. They are the most bizarre cult in the history of SFF.

      1. Because, in a twisted way, 3rd Wave Feminism is all about telling Western White Men how powerful they are, mixed with a generous helping of the Noble Savage mythology.

    4. “Just as a general note, citing “history” as a justification for perpetuating racist stereotypes in fiction doesn’t actually make your argument stronger. It just demonstrates that you don’t actually have a grasp of actual history, which is much more nuanced than saying “the Japanese were expansionist and militaristic” as a justification for making virtually all of your villains Asians””

      Did…did he even read the book? I mean, the fact that only one of the four main villains was racially Asian, while one was racially European but culturally Asian, and the other two could have competed for the Europeanest European award, surely couldn’t have escaped him if he had, right?

      1. I’m going to guess he did about the same amount of research that Veerhoven did before making the film version of “Starship Troopers”

        1. Hey, it was fun movie. That shouldn’t have been called same as the book, but man, it was fun movie with quite a lot going for it. And I love it to bits, I usually sit down with some beer or whisky and watch it with friends and we have a blast.

          1. I really can’t drink that much without endangering my brain function permanently. But I love one of the last lines of dialogue: “You’re a SMART bug, aren’t you…?”

            Neil Patrick Harris put exactly the right amount of ham/corn into that delivery.

            Applies equally well to SJW’s…..

        2. So… he didn’t read it at all and used what other people claimed was in the book to make his judgements?

      2. Read!!!! Don’t you know that your not suppose to read a book before judging it. Your suppose to make your judgement of the book based on what other progressives who have not read the book said about it.

      3. Shrug.

        It is a rule of publishing, you can never make the box checkers happy. They can always find something to bitch about. Writers can either tell them to fuck off and write what you feel like, or you can suck up and hope they don’t target your works.

        Now, back on planet Earth, regular readers who just like to read books for entertainment enjoy the Chairman because he’s a fucking bad ass, competent, deadly antagonist, and the Imperium made for great villains.

      4. Where’s the nuance in the Bataan death march?

        Where’s the nuance in the comfort women?

        Where’s the nuance in the vivisection of prisoners?

        Where’s the nuance in all the non-Japanese Asians they were killing?

        1. The funny thing is in the series, I did get into “nuance” when I introduced Toru as a major PoV character.

          Damn it, Correia! Quit interrupting the witch hunt! Defending yourself from stupid accusations means you are “thin skinned”!

    5. Nuke it from orbit; it’s the only way to be sure. 😛

      (Just to clarify to any Vile770 denizens that might read this: I am joking. The joke is that your collective level of stupidity is as dangerous as a xenomorph from “Alien” and that, as such, the only way to save humanity is for the Space Marines to engulf your enclave in a storm of nuclear destruction from orbit. Ya follow?) 😀

    6. “Well, you know, insecurity is a scourge among creative types. “Lash out publicly” is a coping strategy that the Dignity Culture appears to have been working on for some time.”

      Wait wait wait.
      The only way I can possibly read that is that Cat has not only adopted the language of Dignity Culture vs Victim Culture (aka I have rights vs I’m being opressed) that some commentators have used to describe the protests like BLM & the college complaints. But she is explicitly identifying with Victim Culture and the argument that ones worth is measured by the number of one’s grievances.

      Holy fucking shit.

      1. Well of course she is. If she joined the Dignity Culture, she’d actually have to do something with her life.

      2. Yep, if there’s one word that would describe Larry Correia, the guy who has blundered through multiple careers, taking on every ridiculous challenge or stupid fight, in public, without hesitation… It would be insecure. 😀

          1. Normal folks who aren’t afraid of.hard work, and in fact, consider a willingness to work one’s ass off to improve one’s (and one’s family’s) lot in life to be a virtue. IOW? Ants. Not grasshoppers. Cat, in her usual delightfully delusional, lack-witted way, is expressly claiming to be a grasshopper, aka a useless, worthless, pitiable leech. It’s beautiful.
            😀

    7. He’s busy “moderating” the discussion so that the LC IS A RAAAACIST comments stay and mine get removed, because I said “show me”.

      1. Oh, Glyer likes to act like he’s above the fray, sanctimonious trufan, but he’s a shit stirring weasel parasite desperate for relevance.

  31. That same Glyer round-up also mentions Gawker is merging the anti-white, anti-male SFF site io9 with Gizmodo. The other good news is the Annalee Newitz who penned such classics there as “When Will White People Stop Making Movies Like ‘Avatar'” is leaving.

    The latest SFW Twitter feeds are also pushing the NBC News piece that since 9/11 19 vs. 7 domestic terror attacks have been by “non-Muslims. They conveniently leave out the fact non-Muslims outnumber Muslims by 150 times.

  32. D@mn you for posting this. You actually got me to go over there and look even though I know what I will find. The comments are literally criticizing you from all possible angles.

    -He doesn’t have enough homosexuals in his work

    – He has black people in his work but he concentrates on their skills and value to the team rather than how they are oppressed for being black . This is clearly a make believe world.

    – He uses racist language (in his 1930s period piece)

    -He book bombs other authors who might not get the attention on their own

    It hurts my head to see a group of people that are so insulated into their own safe spaces talking about what “the real world” is like. The proof of how utterly clueless they are is the fact they are complaining about under-representation of a demographic that makes up 1-2% of the population in books that contain ~30-50 total characters.

    As for criticizing the Larry for book bombs? I am awaiting their criticisms of file 770 for featuring works of lesser known authors.

    Then they actually have the audacity to go on and complain about political messaging ruining the Larry’s books. The VERY PEOPLE who nominate books for awards based on the political messaging contained in those books. The VERY PEOPLE who loudly support Scalzi and the Nielsen-Haydens who spend most of their time writing political commentary on the internet.

    When someone challenges them they simply say “no your wrong” and then move on with their complaints. There is no pause for thoughtful debate or reasoning, it’s all just a constant echo chamber chant of the approved narrative.

    1. >>”He has black people in his work but he concentrates on their skills and value to the team rather than how they are oppressed for being black . This is clearly a make believe world. ”

      This was written by a person who has never truly befriended, worked with, or even known a black person on any meaningful level. Like any functional psychopath, they can only view individual humans through the prism of racial caricatures.

      1. Well, he was like totally friends with the one black guy he went to school with… well, not like best friends or anything, more like they’d do that cool nod thing when they passed in the halls, you know? Anyway, he TOTALLY knows what the minority experience in the US is like, because he read those books by Zinn, and that totally opened his eyes to his white privilege and stuff!!

        1. A classic moment from ALL IN THE FAMILY, where Lionel Jefferson confronts Meathead for only discussing black issues with him.

          Lionel: What’s the first thing you say whenever I see you? Always something about the “black problem”, right?
          Mike: Well, what do you want me to talk about, the weather?
          Lionel: Well, sometimes, yeah! I mean, black people have weather, too!

          1. Y’know, you couldn’t even have a show like ‘All In The Family’ or ‘The Jeffersons’ today. It’d be too “triggering”.

            And Archie Bunker was supposed to be the bad guy.

    2. “– He has black people in his work but he concentrates on their skills and value to the team rather than how they are oppressed for being black . This is clearly a make believe world.”

      Is this an actual quote, or is it paraphrasing? I rather not give them the clicks.

      1. It’s paraphrasing but not far off from the exact quote. The exact quote is

        ” In the world Larry creates, there is no racism, Black people are at no greater risk of getting shot by cops than White people, dark skinned Asians are not in any danger of being attacked because of their race, etc. He creates a diverse team, each one with their own unique trait, but their traits are not informed by who they are.”

        Also I hate you for making me go back there.

          1. We’re talking about people who can read Starship Troopers, where the one right guaranteed to *everyone* is that they can earn a franchise, and call it fascist. Comprehension is beyond them.

          2. Not everyone in Starship Troopers can exercise the franchise right away. Active military personnel aren’t allowed to vote. Practically a junta, there.

        1. Huh?

          Is he talking about Grimnoir? Where I had Jim Crow, lynchings, slurs, ghettos, genocide, eugenics, and concentration camps? (you know, like actually happened)

          Or MHI? Because what the fuck does “traits are not informed by who they are” mean? You mean the one narrated by the Other box checking mutt who’s traits are a direct result of his culture being Military Brat, or like the black dude who is the team’s moral compass because he’s a devout Christian (not to mention gamer nerd idealized Paladin with a sense of morality that’s derived from his childhood immersion in things like Middle Earth and Narnia)?

          Nuance motherfucker. Holy shit.

          Black people in my books are at no great risk of being shot by the cops… Because that comes up SO OFTEN for black military contractors battling monsters! Though I did very specifically talk about Trip given “stick time” by federal agents like Rodney King.

          No, seriously… At what possible point would this have come up in the MH series? Owen nearly got shot by a cop, but the cop was Mexican, but it wasn’t racism because the cop thought he was a zombie.

          No racism… So much dumb, because in the D6 series Lorenzo specifically takes advantage of racial identities and preconceived notions of government authorities as PART OF HIS JOB. It’s a weapon. Oh my gosh… The fight scene at the Golden Manatee! Chen had to help provide useful racist slurs for people who lacked imagination! That whole dark skinned Asian thing? Bitch please. Lorenzo spends a big chunk of book one pretending to be named Khalid.

          Holy shit these fuckers are dumb.

          That’s so dumb I can’t even fully articulate how dumb it is, and I make my living with WORDS.

          Their traits are not informed by who they are… Wait… Is that code for I use minority characters outside of their approved boxes? People with certain skin colors are only allowed to fill certain roles based upon their skin colors, and when I write about them, I’m only allowed to do it in context of the hot button social justice issue of the day, and not as, oh… human beings.

          Mind blown.

          1. I only plucked the substantive excerpt and spared you the rest of it. It was much more verbose than that. He went on to accuse you of creating a romanticized 50’s environment etc. etc.

          2. Just for the fun of it here is the rest, and this all is reference to MHI.

            ” I honestly think his psychosexual understanding is more mixed up, as the women are either gorgeous knockouts or tough old broads. In a way, he’s a bit like Webber, in that the perceived morals of the 1950’s are there, with an acknowledgement that there can be loving relationships outside of marriage, but somehow, there are no gay people in the universe. (Webber doesn’t even mention them- with the exception of a single psychotic lesbian, so Correia gets a point, maybe, for that. I’m grading on a 100 point scale here.)

            Maybe I’m being unfair, as I probably would not have been this critical if I didn’t know what an unmitigated jackass Correia is. Just like I can’t watch Woody Allen films without cringing or read Orson Scott Card books without feeling slightly off, Correia’s tantrums have soured me a bit.

            Correia, not a Nazi, but ok with hanging out with one.”

          3. If Correia throws tantrums, I’d love to hear what this guy thinks of K. Tempest Bradford or Jim C. Hines.
            Also, I’m pretty sure that if you’re female, elderly, and alive in the MHI-verse, you have to be tough.

  33. Um, Larry? Some of us train to shoot triples. Mozambique drill. Good idea if your threat profile includes people on PCP -they’re not zombies exactly, but disassociative anesthetics can produce something uncomfortably close to “bullets won’t stop it” barring a CNS or heart hit.

    Otherwise, agreement. By all means continue delivering shocks to their tiny minds.

  34. I found that Amazon ranking pic funny because on one of my bookcases, I have a shelf with all of Larry’s books , then it leads into all of Butcher’s Dresden books, and then my Koontz stuff starts. 🙂

  35. Larry, I didn’t know about the MHI branding with JP Enterprises (both brands I like), until the “controversy”. I’ve been wanting an AR-10 and this is going to finally get me to open the wallet. Thanks File 770!!!

  36. I’ve mentioned before that radical lesbian Liz Bourke’s column at Tor is titled “Sleeps With Monsters.” That’s taken from a poem by the Mad Lesbian Arab Abdul Adrienne Rich where she means “monsters” are “men.” By an odd coincidence SJWs in SFF are Men Hunters, International. They even have a sub-genre where Swirsky’s dinosaurs kill them, Sofia Samatar’s lesbians run away from them, Leckie’s zombies shoot pronouns at them and Alyssa Wong’s character eliminated the entire male side of her family. Award nominations for each one of those.

    Next up: Men from the White Lagoon.

  37. If Aaron’s ‘tired racist stereotypes’ refer to the characterization of IJHQ, does this mean that their handling of ‘comfort women’ is acceptable these days?

    1. Ah, SJWs. Defend 1930’s Imperial Japan, with its comfort women, head pyramids, decapitation races, Unit 731, and the general psuedo-bushido fuckery inherent in that movement, while simultaneously bitching about the barbaric cruelty of every single war the western world has ever been involved in.

      The funny thing is, I respect the real life Imperial Japanese of that time period. They were cruel, but they were warriors. Those fuckers were in it to win it. Doesn’t mean they weren’t wrong. Doesn’t mean they didn’t do some evil shit.

      So Nazis? Super evil, okay to have as bad guys in fiction. Imperial Japan? Super evil, but NOT okay to have as bad guys in fiction. Stalinists? Hmmm… They were mostly white, but unclear, because SJWs are basically Communist Puritans, that could go either way. However I’ve already written Nazi bad guys (Jaeger) and Commie bad guys (Nikolai), but the Imperial bad guy (Tokugawa) was super bad insensitive racist hate-speechery.

      1. And not a single one of the Filers realized your latest book is set in a fantasy version of India. Though if they had, they would have accused you of making all the villains Indian . . .

        1. CULTURAL APPROPRIATION!

          Meanwhile, it turns out I’m doing pretty good in India’s English language fiction market. 😀

          1. Did you see the news article yet about how the University of Ottawa is banning a free Yoga class because it was considered cultural appropriation. It’s slightly funny because that’s usually a leftist activity. The serpent is eating its own tail.

      2. Third Wave Feminists have this weird idea that when European nations wage war on, enslave or colonize each other, they do it for totally different reasons when they do that in the Americas, Africa or Asia. And there is no such thing as a post-colonial Greece or Spain because they were under Islam. That goes into the memory-hole. It’s just another example of what serial liars this cult is.

      3. Why did we attack the peaceful Co-Prosperity Sphere? Did we not understand what co-prosperity means? It’s like happiness wall of fun.

        1. In fairness to nuance, Chung and Halliday’s Mao: The Unknown Story claims that the Soviets engineered the, IIRC, Marco Polo Bridge Incident, because they wanted the Japanese deeply committed to fighting the Chinese. Which might make the Soviets largely responsible for WWII, except that they didn’t actually force the Japs to do their part.

          1. The Soviets were meddling in China throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Everyone knows about the Japanese occupation of Manchuria; few know about the Soviet occupation of Sinkiang and Mongolia, as well as their support for the ChiComs.

            And yes it is definitely true that the Soviets wanted the Japanese bogged down in China. There is an article that discusses this in Vox Day’s “Riding the Red Horse” anthology.

      1. Perhaps then we should have an option for Rabid Puppy full auto lowers for those with the appropriate legal boxes ticked.

  38. David Gerrold is angry that we portray “SJWs” as a “monolith” which marches in lockstep and we are against them as “advocates for change.” Let me tell you the by now familiar buzzwords I ran into the most in doing over 2 years research into this bizarre crusade in the SFF community:

    White male privilege, misogyny, patriarchy, Bechdel Test, cultural appropriation, rape culture, transphobia/homophobia, marginalization, white racism, male sexism, heteronormative, cis privilege, slavery, genocide, colonialism, white tears.

    By an amazing coincidence Gerrold manages to touch on and racially and sexually segregate virtually every one of those in his high-pitched whining, and I have never seen any SJW who is not completely on the same page when it comes to those things. And that is not advocacy for change. Unless you are amazingly naive, those are demonization theories meant to smear every single member of a targeted group; in other words, exactly what Gerrold claims SJWs are against. That’s aside from bringing up such a bizarre obsession in SFF in the first place, which in itself is a huge red flag. For some reason, SJWs know exactly what it is when people exaggerate black crime stats by 100 times. Do that to men concerning rape and their eyes roll up into their heads.

    Larry says “Hey, I’ve got my logo on a gun” and by another amazing coincidence all those buzzwords are unfurled and put out on display. SJWs are parrots who march in lockstep as one mind and they are amazing serial liars.

    There is only one racist, sexist and supremacist cult in SFF and it is the lesbian race cult we have often called “SJW” as an easy identifier. An affirmative action division of the KKK would be more accurate. There is no anti-white racist man-hating heterophobe in SFF these sick people have not dug up, given a platform to and put on a pedestal. The SFWA has a new theme song; it should be “Tomorrow Belongs to Me” from the film Cabaret.

    1. There is a “Tails I win, Heads you lose” aspect to all SJW criticism. Write a white male main character? Racist power fantasy. Write a non-white minor character? Tokenism. Write a non-white main character? Cultural appropriation.
      No matter what you do, there’s a SJW buzzword to make you look bad for the occasion.

      1. I ran across that again and again. They’ll claim diversity should be in fantasy to reflect the real world. If you point out armies are male they’ll say if you can have dragons you can have women. No matter how many millions of words they write the bogey man is always the straight white male. There is no reason and logic involved in hatred. The bottom line is these naive social justice clods have never quite figured out their ideology is rooted in hatred. You have to wonder about people who use air quotes and fake statistics, delete real quotes and statistics and generally don’t seem to mind being caught out publicly as liars. Glyer’s comments section is like a Liar’s Club or an echo chamber where they reinforce each other’s mass hysteria about the evils of heterosexuality, ethnic Europeans and men. I’ll tell you this: when Gerrold has K. Tempest Bradford congratulating him that’s like getting a high five from David Duke. And when you look up to an unprincipled Facebook fop like Gerrold, you must be laying face down in dirt below sea level. If that man’s ever accomplished anything in his life to justify his massive arrogance I have no idea what it would be. He’s been living off a single TV episode for half a century and otherwise seems as dumb as a sack of rocks.

        1. Exactly this. They claim everyone else hates and they are rooted in love. All you have to do is listen to them in person to figure out who is rooted in hate. My girlfriend was on the fence over gay marriage when the pizza shop incident occurred in Indiana. I told her to listen to the tone of voice of the people denouncing the pizza shop and the tone of voice of people defending it. She immediately said “you’re right, I never noticed how hateful they sound until you pointed it out”. The people defending the shop were calm and rational in their responses. Those condemning it were seething with rage and you could hear it in their voices. This is the side that is supposedly supporting love.

      2. Well yeah, like I got criticized that Bolander fit the “magic wise black man” trope.
        1. There’s a trope for everything. So you can always find something that fits.
        2. Yes, he was magic. As were 95% of the other characters in the book… which was about magical people having magical adventuresw.
        3. Yes, he was smart. As were most of the heroes. Should I have made him stupid instead?

        You know you’re boned when Trip and Holly are “tokens”… Major recurring, vital, fleshed out supporting characters with complex back stories? Tokens. 🙂

        1. You can tell Aaron Pound is a lawyer when he makes claims like that. It’s true that Bolander is a “magic wise black man”, but it’s only a piece of the truth.

        2. Speaking of Holly, I found out there’s a Holly Newcastle who has some Amish romance books on Amazon. Friend of yours?

        3. That’s because they can find fault in anything.
          If there are no black characters: racism by exclusion.
          If you have a black character who is, say, an educated doctor: racism because he’s clearly a white character in blackface.
          If you have an unemployed black criminal: racism because stereotype.
          If you have a perfectly nuanced black male character developed after painstaking research: racism because as a non-black you have no business delving in such things.

          When I wrote my first novel I naively thought I had a good mix of characters from diverse backgrounds (I wasn’t marking a checklist or anything, it just turned out that way). A SJW reviewed it and denounced me because all viewpoint characters had green or blue eyes (untrue, btw, but why bother even denying it?), which meant I thought the majority of humanity with brown eyes (like, say, me) were inferior.

          I don’t have the energy to engage them like you do Larry, but I definitely love watching you making them squirm.

      3. Naturally. The purpose isn’t to resolve the issues they cite, but to use them to demonize opponents and signal each other that they are part of the same tribe. Combination shibboleth and emotional appeal.

    2. I used to like Gerrold’s writing. I even enjoyed writing a licensed RPG based on the Chtorr series. But now I can’t even look at his work anymore. His hateful screeds on FB are masterpieces of bigotry thinly disguised as fighting for justice. And the worst part, he’s not even the worst of the lot; by comparison, he comes across as a moderate (he’s even had nice things to say about Heinlein, which puts him firmly to the right of the mainstream SJW movement).

    1. Didn’t bother to read this track back. I’m not sure about the fantasy part, since we’ve allowed CCW in schools my state for a long time now, and I personally signed off on a bunch of teachers and school employees.

      1. I think that the fellow writing is saying that the idea of an armed teacher stopping a school shooter is fantasy.
        Why the author finds this to be a fantastical notyion, I don’t know, but I think the phrase “projection on the part of the author” comes into play.

        1. “Why the author finds this to be a fantastical notyion, I don’t know, but I think the phrase “projection on the part of the author” comes into play.”

          Well I explain why in the post that Larry suggests you don’t read. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘projection’ in this context. If you mean that I would be ineffective with a gun then you would be quite correct – poor reaction time, poor hand-eye coordination and my eye sight isn’t so great. I’m not sure what that has to do with the argument I made though. It works out the same regardless.

          1. Well, Larry said I could read it so I did. Your article isn’t as original as you think. You kill a lot of words saying two things. First, the teacher would probably be slow to react so he couldn’t stop the active shooter. Second, there would be accidental shootings.

            In your first argument you forget: 1) it is not always fatal to be shot so even if the teacher fires second they might still stop the incident. 2) the second teacher on the scene would be arriving with knowledge of what they were walking into. 3) A slim chance of the teacher defending their classroom is still better than nothing.

            You somewhat deal with the fact that a slim chance is better than nothing by posing a cost in accidental shootings. At first you postulate that these will occur 1% of the time. I don’t know, maybe that’s reasonable! I don’t carry or even own a gun, but Larry does. As I understand it he’s almost always armed. So, Larry, do you shoot 1% of the people you meet? Is that a reasonable estimate of your false positive rate on the decision tree for “people I need to shoot”?

            Camestros anticipates that people might not like his numbers so he walks it back. Perhaps our hypothetical teach only erroneously kills .01% of the people he meets. How about that Larry, do you shoot around 1 in 10,000 random strangers upon first meeting? It probably takes you a while to meet 10,000 people, but you do go to those cons, so I assume you’ve shot at least 3 or 4 innocents people by now. You’ve also trained and armed teachers, so they’ve probably shot some people by now as well. What would you say the false positive rate is? Is it tens, hundreds, or thousands killed by now?

            Honestly it doesn’t matter; the math is clear! We need a false positive rate of nearly 0 if lives are to be saved in the aggregate. How could such inhuman perfection be achieved in assessing someone’s intent? Why, you’d have to wait until they actually did something harmful before confronting them and no one with a gun can be expected to live up to that mad standard.

      2. The fantasy part is the notion pushed by people like Wayne LaPierre, that it is an effective response to school shootings. It isn’t for the reasons I gave.

          1. I have read that article of yours before and I re-read it. It doesn’t deal with the argument I made.

          2. “The argument you made” is an innumerate pile of flaming horseshit, using assumptions pulled from the filthy heat of your own ass.

            Better?

          3. Let me put some meat on the bones, then.

            Your statistical analysis is predicated on a cleanroom scenario in which a potential bad guy enters a classroom and an armed teacher is forced at that moment to make a snap threat assessment, such that there’s a small but non-trivial risk of mistake. It does not seem to have occurred to you that mass shooters almost never present themselves in ways that leave any doubt about whether they’re bad guys (shooting or threatening to shoot people being pretty unambiguous markers for “asshole who should be put down with extreme prejudice”). As such, your cleanroom scenario is divorced from reality, and the statistical analysis that flows from it is manure.

          4. Teachers with clue and gun = Speed bump.

            Anything that interrupts a mass shooter = good.

            Hypothetical bullshit guesswork about scenarios < actual real world examples of people carrying guns in school for years. Gun free zones = target rich environment with delayed response. Immediate violent response = fewer casualties. There done. See? I didn't even need to read your thing.

          5. Do they really have a child’s grasp of the subject, or are they simply lying goalpost shifters with an agenda? Sometimes it is more correct to first assume malice than incompetence.

        1. Let’s see… Larry has only been using and training others in the use of firearms for defense for what- two decades, now?
          You are some random loser from some tiny corner of the internet who thinks his opinion counts for more than facts .
          Who to believe who to believe…?

          1. I am quite certain Larry has a vastly more encyclopedic knowledge of the types and manufacture of guns than I do – but as a counterpoint to my argument it is rather like saying that Larry is the world’s most accomplished cobbler and therefore his shoe lace can’t be untied.

          2. Types, manufacture, use, tactics, strategy, odds… face it, to quote a book current many years ago: you sound like a nerdy dolphin discussing hang gliding.
            Or in you own metaphor: a slug criticizing a cobbler’s opinion about shoes.

          3. Nerdy dolphin discussing hang-gliding is an apt description of my post, I’ll concede that.

          4. Camestros, Usually the active hostile is nice enough to have his or her weapon out and using it. It dose tend to make target identification easier at that point. Regrettably that means that a few end up bleeding or dead. Better than a lot ending up on the ground to be fair though. That being said if the hostile knows that this is a armed area they tend to seek targets elsewhere. A reminder to the rest of MHI, I know that we are used to a fairly aggressive amount of cry bullying from folks like Cametros but lets try to educate nicely until he proves worth fragging

          5. A gun is a tool- an equalizer that can allow the small and the weak to defend themselves at a distance. As such, it give people a better chance to defend themselves than nothing at all.
            Expecting gun legislation, buybacks, registration, ‘gun free zones’, bans and the rest to proved safety is naive in the extreme. Funny how the people that think that abstinence only sex ed is foolish, or that “just say no” unworkable will have absolute faith that gun control will somehow work out better than the War on Drugs.

          6. Your assumptions founder on the the premise that everybody is carrying a weapon all the time in the sort of world where teachers have concealed carry. Sorry buddy.
            Furthermore, you reveal yourself way too early in your post. “This is transparently nonsense”? At that point, I can jettison any assumptions you’ve made about guns and the people who wield them right off the bat.
            That may play in Portlandia, but it won’t play here.

          7. That is just a starting point to help identify parameters for the model. Change the proportion and the numbers change. Is there an optimum number? Doesnt look like it but I’m happy to take suggestions.
            As for giving myself away, I don’t make any secret of my very leftwing politics. It doesnt require detective work.

          8. Well, that would be pertinent if my shoe laces were untied, but since we’re talking about guns, gun laws, their use, and tactics, and the brief version of my resume on those topics takes five paragraphs and yours comes from watching an episode of Law and Order once, it is more like saying I’ve got a clue and you don’t.

          9. If background on the issue is a factor, then what exactly is your background in the use of force or the use of firearms? Have you had any training in shooting? Heck, have you ever shot a pistol for time or in competition?

          10. Zero. It would be madness to put me anywhere near a loaded weapon. Nerdy dolphin discussing hang gliding – as was aptly put earlier.

          11. “…madness to put me anywhere near a loaded weapon”- Does that also apply to other potentially dangerous items like automobiles, gas grills, lawn mowers, or powertools?

          12. Do you cook? Use fire? Go camping or boating? Play sports?
            Seriously, your background to be arbiter and judge of this topic is to be questioned.

          13. @ Camestros I am glad you have displayed yourself to be the fool you are. Based on your responses I am going to guess you aren’t very much of a fighter either. Here is a fun what if scenario since you appear to be into those.

            Lets say the school decides to stop fighting by tying everyone’s hands behind their back. You, working at the school and being a good harmless employee readily agree.

            Now your arrogance has pissed me off so I decide I am going to punch you in your face until the police show up. Would you regret not having your hands untied even if you aren’t as good of a fighter as I am? How many more teeth do you think you would have when the police show up if you were able to at least slow me down a little by pushing me away?

          14. So in this scenario you are the kind of person with such anger issues that you will repeatedly hit somebodyin the face who can’t hit back, and you will keep going until the police arrive and stop you? Hmm. Seems to me there is a much better chance of this disturbed individual you describe being locked away for a long time in your scenario – something the whole community would benefit from, no?

          15. An honor I treasure all the more given all of the stiff competition for the award from the regulars. 🙂

          16. And in your answer you ignore the here and now. How would me getting locked away for a long time after beating your teeth out help you in the here and now? Are you willing to be the toothless martyr just so I can go to jail and get out on parole in 5 years?

            Similar to the school shooter scenario any LEO activity after the fact does exactly 0 to help the people being victimized.

          17. So, if you’re completely ignorant of firearms and their use, why do you assert your opinion is more valid than someone who knows a great deal on the subject?

          18. As far as I know he hasn’t even read my argument yet. Given its content, yes I put more value on his accountancy skills than his firearm skills.

          19. In a discussion about the use of guns, you’re more impressed that a guy is an accountant, than a CHL instructor…

            QED

          20. In a numerical argument? Yes. Perhaps Larry is so good with a gun he can shoot his way out of a maths problem – in which case I will change my mind 🙂

          21. You’ve admitted that the context, impact and interpretation of those numbers is something you’re unable to do, yet you still insist that your judgement is better than someone with an understanding of the context, and a superior knowledge with which to interpret and judge the impact.

            It doesn’t sound like a good foundation.

          22. No. I got paid six figures to be the finance manager at a defense contractor because I’m so bad with math.

            Basically you’re a dude who admittedly knows nothing about the topic, making up imaginary hypothetical situations, assigning arbitrary numbers to them that you pulled out of your ass, who is now upset that an actual subject matter expert who argues this shit with important people won’t bother to come and pay attention to your little blog?

            Got it. Moving on.

          23. “No. I got paid six figures to be the finance manager at a defense contractor because I’m so bad with math.”

            Like I said, I’m impressed by your accountancy background.

            “Basically you’re a dude who admittedly knows nothing about the topic, making up imaginary hypothetical situations, assigning arbitrary numbers to them that you pulled out of your ass, who is now upset that an actual subject matter expert who argues this shit with important people won’t bother to come and pay attention to your little blog? ”

            I’m not even remotely upset. I’ve got nothing to be upset about – the negative comments aren’t directed at things that upset me*. What I do note is that repeatedly on a number of blogs which, for want of a better term, I’ll call ‘puppy’ blogs, in place of substantive arguments a common riposte is a claim that a person is wrong *because their emotions are wrong*. I do not find that upsetting, I find it *fascinating*. It is fascinating because it appears to be the flip side of what underlies a lot of the positions advanced – i.e. opponents are characterized as having wrong-‘feelz’ because (and I’m speculating) the ‘right’ position is based on the group having right-‘feelz’. Really hard to establish this so it is just a working hypothesis but it does help explain some of the odd leaps of ideas unsupported by facts or logic (or in some cases elsewhere the almost overt rejection of logic).

            “Got it. Moving on.”

            OK, I’ll move on. A genuine thank you for allowing my comments through. Other blogs are distinctly less respectful. TTFN 🙂

            *[I’m not emotionless, it is just the silly sort of ‘you’re-stupid’ forms of insult aren’t upsetting.]

          24. Incorrect. People here and on “Puppy” blogs make fact-based arguments to rebut “feelz”. All you’ve done here is expect people give you traffic on your blog, and triumphantly strut about proclaiming the strength of an argument that you have not made here. You could have attempted to make your argument in the same time it took you to mount this “I know you are, but what am I?” response.

            When you demonstrate the ability or even desire to make a fact-based argument here, you will get the same in return

            Until then, you will receive the mockery that you deserve.

          25. An accountant can do more harm to society. That’s why Hillary hires more accountants than gunmen…

          26. Camestros, I broke down and gave you the traffic you so obviously crave and couldn’t get past the second sentence:

            >>”The idea is this – when a school shooting occurs the buy-more-guns lobby places the blame on the teacher not being armed.”

            Your weak snark aside, pro-constitutionalists place the blame on the shooter. Period.

            Now since you open that post with such window-licking stupidity and choose to forcefully opine on a subject in which you have admitted a lack of credibility, please explain to the class why anyone – especially your host – should take you seriously. You got his attention and promptly squandered it.

            Then, perhaps you could cut all the superfluous crap out of your argument, tighten it up, post it here, and then you might get an actual response.

            But that’s not what you’re after now, is it? Be honest with yourself, because no one is buying the bullshittery here.

          27. I really don’t mind one way or another whether you take me seriously or not. The question is what kind of substantive arguments you can deliver.

          28. >>”The question is what kind of substantive arguments you can deliver.”

            Oh, terribly sorry old boy. The point that you missed was that you have not delivered anything substantive or non-substantive. You’re just begging for traffic.

            Now you can continue to flounce about the comments and thinking that suffices for an argument, but we’ll continue to laugh at you.

            Carry on.

          29. I really don’t mind one way or another whether you take me seriously or not.

            Boy, what a shocker.

            The question is what kind of substantive arguments you can deliver.

            Your ability does not need to be questioned. It’s obvious you cannot, but mistake your feelz and opinions for one.

          30. “Your ability does not need to be questioned. It’s obvious you cannot, but mistake your feelz and opinions for one”

            Cheers Patrick. I was a bit disappointed that nobody had yet offered ‘feelz’ as an attempt at insightful counter-argument. Well done – you didn’t let the team down.

          31. Pretty much.
            “Click my link and debate me!” “No.” “You can’t argue substantively!!” “You never started.” “Dance for me!” “No.”
            -the usual pattern

          32. >>”I was a bit disappointed that nobody had yet offered ‘feelz’ as an attempt at insightful counter-argument.”

            Ok, fewer words and syllables for you this time:

            Begging for page hits is not an argument.

          33. Are you just really sad that you posted a link to a more popular site, but way down in the comments of an only tangentially related post, and nobody is bothering to give you any traffic?

          34. I’m quite happy thank you both in terms of the level of response I anticipated and the ‘traffic’ that may have arrived. Not surprisingly I don’t imagine that your regular commenters are likely source of regular readers. It is interesting to see what kind of response and arguments people can come up with.

          35. The question is what kind of substantive arguments you can deliver.

            We’re all wondering that same thing about you. Tell you what, you go first.

          36. I don’t doubt that you are better at guns. I look forward to you demonstrating that you are better at numbers.

          37. I look forward to you demonstrating that you are better at numbers.

            And here I thought you respected his accountancy cred.

          38. Sorry, I only do math when I feel like it or I’m being paid large sums of money.

            Got to love the audacity of this guy. Comes in, no talent, skills, knowledge or resume, and then spends the day demanding that everybody pay attention to his little blog. He’s got spunk. He’s dumb as hell, but spunky. 🙂

          39. And you just intentionally ignored COMPLETELY the most pertinent part: “and training others in the use of firearms for defense for what- two decades, now?”

            You are now firmly in the category of ‘wilfully ignorant jackass’.

            You don’t even really rate on the Troll Scale.

          40. He’s not worth debating. He is either genuinely stupid or willfully misunderstands the meaning of words in English in order to provide the appearance of never being wrong.

          41. He’s rule #1 and #2 in action. I’ve seen him post elsewhere. He’s not out for honest debate or seeking truth, only looking smarter than his opponents by moving goalposts and talking around responses. Notice that he has not directly responded to any question so far. He only posts to stroke his own ego. Nothing more.

          42. Thanks James. You are welcome back to comment on my blog so long as you keep the direct ad-hominem’s to other commentators in check.

        2. I posted an example where it was an effective response in your comments, Camestros, that wasn’t a fantasy. It only takes one to falsify your premise.

          Be interesting to see if the comment and the other links make it out of moderation. I won’t hold my breath.

          1. *eye roll* Not from you, Larry. I meant the comment I left on HIS site that was in moderation THERE.

            Sheesh. 😉

            Next time I’ll be more specific. *grin*

            I’m always a bit dubious when I see comment moderation on a leftist site like camestros’: I’ve had posts go into the memory whole far too often.

            To date, I don’t think I’ve ever had a comment drop down the memory hole on a right, conservative, or libertarian site.

          2. I approved your comment as soon as I saw it and replied to it. Just one a side note two of your examples are the same example from different sources [that isn’t a counter argument – just an observation. Kind of error I’d make.]

          3. Good for you. Nice to see there’s at least one leftist out there that’s at least semi-honest. Take one atta boy out of petty cash. Your Official No Prize is in the mail.

            Yeah, that one incident got covered in a LOT of different news sources. Not surprised I grabbed two versions by mistake.

            Either or. It only takes one IRL example.

            If there’s a real life example where an armed teacher, principal, or school employee stopped a potential mass shooting (or any shooting on school property), then it is no longer a “fantasy” as you termed it. It’s a reality.

            It *might* be an aberration, but it’s *not* a fantasy.

            And if that sounds like I’m splitting hairs? It’s because I am. Semantics matter. Words mean things.

            You could have done the five or ten minutes googling it took to find that one example – but then it would have obviated your post by making it obviously disingenuous out of the gate, rather than merely disingenuous to anyone knowledgeable who read it.

            S’all right. I know – ya gotta keep the narrative going. You might be able to sucker in someone who doesn’t know better.

        3. “The fantasy part is the notion pushed by people like Wayne LaPierre, that it is an effective response to school shootings. ”
          Fortunately, this scenario has been tested, demonstrating that Mr. LaPierre’s view has some substance:
          http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/01/foghorn/ttag-simulated-school-shooting-experiment-results-and-analysis/
          Their conclusions mirrored those of other studies about guns in schools: If the bad guys don’t know who’s armed ahead of time, armed defenders can be very effective. If the bad guys know who is armed (such as uniformed service officers), they are ineffective.

        1. And how in the name of Offler can we trust this guy to teach kids if we can’t trust him with a deadly weapon?

        2. Regrettably I did the same… took a quick look… when he (?) recently trolled for traffic over at Mr. Wright’s blog. Precocious if 17, solipsistic, HPD indicated.

  39. Just read that there have been record gun sales this month. One gun dealer quote that I like, “When Americans get scared they buy guns. ” Looks like they are pretty scared these days. I see that England has been playing with their gun crime statistics. It seems the bad boys have no problems acquiring AK’s.

    1. When Americans get scared they won’t be able to buy guns in the future, they buy guns. Sandy Hook didn’t prompt the increased sales, it was the politicians rattling their gun control sabers afterwards that started the stampede.

  40. Hmm, if all I buy is the lower, I can just make things fit without buying another (badly needed so I can have more toys) safe. And it’s well within my budget. Darn you Larry!!!

  41. I’m having trouble believing some of the comments below. I grew up in a super leftist household and it never would’ve occurred to any of us to maintain that Imperial Japan was a nice place or that FDR was a saint. My parents are former Black Panthers who grew up in South Central Los Angeles. This means they knew a lot of Japanese families who were “relocated.” And they had a firsthand exposure to the Che-worship. As my dad was fond of saying, “Che would take all those dope smoking liberals wearing his face and shoot them first.” And this guy is a self-labeled “radical.” If you’ve done nothing else than watch one PBS doc on WWII or read a Wikipedia entry on Che you should have at least an inkling of the reality behind these events. I read the entire Grimnoir series and loved it. But I never once thought it was inaccurate or racist. So my question is, are these ahistorical readings of these books perhaps a symptom not of politics but simple ignorance? Or failure to do the required reading in school? You’ve got to be a dedicated party member to miss the wealth of info out there on imperial Japan and communist Cuba. Or even just the commonsense implications of war and armed revolution! Can any adult really think that countries are taken over by pillow-wielding pacifists??

    1. I’m with you, but in these guys’ case I wouldn’t call it simple ignorance. It is more like a massive, all engulfing, super ignorance. 😀

      1. It’s certainly not normal ignorance. Normal people usually think about things and manage their feelings to fit the conclusions they come to, but SJWs use what reasoning skills they have to justify what they feel. It’s willful ignorance, ignoring whatever contradicts their feelings, which is why it seems like they’re not taking facts into account at all. They aren’t. They just use whatever they can come up with to justify their outrage. Mr. Wright wrote an excellent post a while earlier about how people can slip into such a state, and it’s really quite sad.

    2. It could only be intentional ignorance as, if you attempt to correct them gently, they immediately cast you into the Venn diagram of “hatey people”, no matter what political aisle you generally shop in.

    3. Ignorance is the inevitable and intentional product of Leftist control of the curriculum. They must destroy the past, because any objective analysis of the track record of their preferred policies leads to the conclusion that they are insane and should never be in any position that allows them to make decisions.

    4. “Or failure to do the required reading in school?”

      In order to do the required reading in school, one has to be exposed to the materials first.

      If my godkids textbooks from the late 1990’s are any example, kids in public schools are no longer exposed to source materials that do anything but reinforce the narrative and the approved versions of history.

  42. More Glyer. Dude is totally to blame for the content of his comment section:

    “Mike Glyer on December 2, 2015 at 1:06 pm said:
    airboy:

    Mr. Glyer – you allow some very vile posts on your blog – one of which Larry made fun of and directly quoted.

    All I ever need to do is quote Larry — particularly his recent plug for MHI logo rifle parts, made immediately after the latest murders by a lone gunman — “While certain other bestselling novelists are writing sanctimonious ignorant tweets bleating for more gun control, Larry Correia offers you custom rifles.” No File 770 commenter is going to surpass that.”

    I say they already do — daily.

    1. In fairness to the denizens of File 770, surpassing that doesn’t take much effort. Personally, I don’t see any problem with that.
      In point of fact, I have a problem with the fact that Glyer has a problem with it.

    2. I posted the airboy comment at 770.

      Glyer does allow some quite vile posts. However, Larry in his original post noted that what he was commenting on was not Glyer himself – but a 770 commenter.

      But Glyer managed to trump that with his response to me.

      I do believe Mr. Glyer has a serious problem with grasping double-standards and irony. At least when his political ox is gored. But ideologues often have humor impairment when it touches anywhere close to their ideology.

      Larry – I don’t own an AR-15. Don’t plan to buy one since range shooting does not excite me and I don’t hunt wild pigs. AR-15s are great for a pig hunt in Alabama.

      I wish I could buy a MHI piece for one of my shotguns. One in cammo for my Super Black Eagle 2 12gage would be wonderful!

      But better yet, why not sell MHI gun straps? Lots of your readers own shotguns or rifles. A carry strap would fit a wide variety of long guns – far more so than a piece for any particular firearm.

  43. I want one REALLY bad….unfortunately I’m stuck in “SAFE” Act NY for the moment…and I’m a poor, struggling biologist. I deal with wildlife depredation (birds feeding on airports and landfills and such), so I’m kind of like a monster hunter :-p

  44. Hmmm. And yet, the SJWs seem to give Tor’s “Destroyermen” series (which has a crazy Japanese dude as one of the most evil and twisted of the myriad big bads) a free pass.

    Those books totally appropriate the culture of humanoid sentient lemurs, too!

  45. “Mike Glyer on December 1, 2015 at 4:50 pm said:
    Lurkertype:

    @Peace: Larry posts thin-skinned meltdowns all the time, it’d be easy to miss one.

    And you can imagine how much it helps for someone like Larry to have commenters who harvest anything negative said about him here and scurry back to post it at Monster Hunter Nation. Everyone turn and wave at Christopher M. Chupik! ”

    No, if I did that, it would be my full-time job. Trust me, most of the crap spewed about Larry isn’t worth the bandwidth to share. But tintinaus’s remarks were so over-the-top in their nastiness that I felt compelled to repost it here.

    In other news, I’m known at File 770. Does this mean I’ve arrived?

      1. I will be living rent-free inside their heads from now on. And why not? There’s plenty of room they aren’t using.

        1. You mean there’s still room left over in those heads after the ILoH’s palatial mansions and the entire countries given over to Vox Day are accounted for? Scary.

    1. They kinda sorta made a weak attempt at Doxing me when I was arguing over Gerrold, pointing out that while I use Dr. Mauser as an internet identity (I’ve used Mauser on the internet since 1991) since my real name is on my book, it’s not like I’ve gone to any lengths to conceal my identity.

      They also argued that it was impossible for me to be right about not being able to see Gerrold’s facebook, until he came along and admitted that he had me blocked. And also that I had to be lying about him sanitizing his posts.

  46. What?!?!? No dust cover? How can it be an AR without a dust cover with a rude message on it…? You’re missing out on a good marketing opportunity big fella.

  47. I’m late to the discussion, but I have a question:

    If Larry is racist for pointing out Imperial Japan’s racism, are Bile 770 commentators rcist for pointing out his racism?

    Uh, am *I* racist for asking this?

    My head hurts.

      1. You only say that because you can’t stand the thought of a black president.

        — Chris Matthews

          1. No…I’ve seen some of the pubic confessions. It’s pretty much what the whole “acknowledge your privilege” thing is about.

          2. So it’s, “I’m a terrible person, so everyone else must be also!” What a warped perspective.

    1. This seems very complicated, but all you need is Correia’s Simple Rules For Understanding Racism that I wrote way back in 2010. http://monsterhunternation.com/2010/01/13/correias-simple-rules-for-understanding-racism/ 🙂

      Is it racist for me to point out actual racism, or is it racist for them to point out my imaginary racism? The real question to ask is which one of us votes for democrats and which one votes for republicans! Once you know that, then it is obvious. Whatever the democrat does can’t be racist, not matter how racist it is, and whatever the republican does is automatically super racist.

        1. For Democrat, read also black person. Additional insert pairs include woman and sexist, gay and homophobe, and so on.

      1. Sort of like the patriotic or racist nature of dissent is entirely dependent upon political affiliation.

  48. Anyways, for those of us who understand personal responsibility and the founding principles of America, we known that firearms are a vital self-defense tool and are among the fundamental building blocks of liberty.

    Are they? Well, let’s take a look at that proposition, shall we?

    http://www.freetheworld.com/2015/freedomIndex/Human-Freedom-Index-2015.pdf

    As of the 2012 ranking, and in order, the twenty freest countries in the world in terms of personal liberty (Appendix H) were:

    1 Denmark
    2 Sweden
    3 Norway
    4 Austria
    4 Finland
    6 Switzerland
    7 Iceland
    8 Netherlands
    8 Luxembourg
    8 Germany
    11 Ireland
    12 Australia
    13 United Kingdom
    14 Canada
    15 Belgium
    16 Malta
    17 Czech Republic
    18 Hong Kong
    19 Slovenia
    20 Poland

    The US came 31st, just above Japan and just below France.

    If firearms are “among the fundamental building blocks of liberty”, then why does the country that has so many of them rank so far below countries that restrict them? And if they’re necessary for self-defense, why are you more likely to be murdered in the US than in most of those other countries (the US being ranked 98th in homicide rates)?

    It’ll be interesting to see who here actually engages with an objective assessment of the facts, and who simply resorts to insult and derision to avoid dealing with reality.

    1. Hey, look at these totally arbitrary rankings based upon… Stuff! Because these states are more free because… Reasons!

      I don’t know… How are Sweden’s women free to defend themselves from their sky rocketing rape numbers? Oh, wait. They’re not. Let’s see, the list leads with a bunch of euro-socialist states with insane tax rates. I’m going to go out on a limb and take a wild ass guess that maybe what this list considers “freedom” is a teensy bit different than most of our definitions.

      And I said building blocks, as in when when we built the place. We’re considerably less free now. Mostly because we keep electing democrats.

      Homicide rates? Weak. Okay, let’s humor you. Pull out a handful of America’s hellish inner cities (all run by democrats for decades, all with super strict gun control) and suddenly for the rest of us our rate is similar to Canada.

      Yes, the most well armed parts of America? Least violent. Utah and Idaho per capita gun rates are absurd (not to mention under reported!) yet our crime rates are very low. You want apples to apples, try Houston versus Chicago, or El Paso versus Detroit. Similar populations, the Texan cities are actually more socially, economically, and racially diverse, not to mention they border hyper violent narco-trafficante revolution Mexico rather than big peaceful Canada, yet El Paso and Houston, with their huge gun ownership rates and easy concealed carry, are far safer than Detroit or Chicago.

      Go figure.

      So hey, if you like to boil down incredibly complex things into stupidly simple things, don’t be surprised when we “resort to insult”.

      But even leaving out the fact that your apple to oranges comparison of murder rates is stupid simply because tiny, socially, ethnically, economically homogeneous euro states don’t compare to the US at all with our historical, cultural, racial, and economic issues (again, strangely, mostly related to democrats) we’ve also gone through here many times showing that the way we calculate our violent crime rates is drastically different, with many of those ideal “free” societies of yours vastly under reporting.

      But don’t worry. They’re importing new social problems now, so they’ll catch up.

      And since we’re 400 posts down in the comments of a tangentially related thread, and internet arguing is a spectator sport, I’m done. Your argument is old, tired, and been beaten before. If the regulars are bored they can fight with you. If not, save your tired shit for my next gun control post and maybe I’ll work up the energy to care.

      1. It’s a classic tactic. The people who made this list up are likely the same ones who generated the list that showed that the USA was 30 something in healthcare back in 2008. The create BS metrics where socialist policies are part of the ranking criteria. They generally have nothing to do with the actual quality or effectiveness of what they are supposedly measuring.

        1. Or the thing about how America’s life expectancy is so horrible compared to other developed countries because of our awful healthcare!

          Until you look at the actual numbers, and realize that it is only a couple of years, and the reason is that there’s a horde of countries tied for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th all within that same narrow window of years. But by golly, crisis, better get the government up in our healthcare… By the way, how did that ever work out? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

      2. not to mention under reported!

        Just the way we like it.

        And there are plenty of lakes in which to have “tragic canoe accidents” with your entire reported armory.

          1. To be fair, if you were to load all of your guns in a canoe, you probably would loose them in a tragic canoe accident.

          2. First he must find a canoe large enough.

            Second, reference to canoes is triggering to Native Americans/Canadians/Amazon rainforest dwellers etc. and constitutes cultural approriation of all these groups. :p

      3. “If the regulars are bored they can fight with you.”

        Oops.

        I’m not a regular. If you want me to stop snacking on the forum weasel and leave him alone, just say the word.

    2. Did you notice 10 of the first 11 countries have populations smaller than the greater Chicago area, and sometimes approaching only half of that? Did you notice they don’t have the 13% of the population which commits half our murders? It’s easy to brag about “nations” which are little more than expansive city-states and who don’t have our problems. I didn’t add up the figures but we have about 5 times as many people as those 10 countries alone. Try managing that and with an endemic culture of criminality and Sweden will suddenly look a lot like America, but with no guns when Muslims start raping their kids. Sweden’s rape stats have suddenly gone off the charts. I wonder why? Take Vermont and turn it into a city-state nation and it will look just fine.

    3. This list is based on the faulty assumption that socialism = freedom. Therefore, there is little reason to engage it.

    4. Hey, cpaca. Here’s a little tip for ya. Read the entirety of your source before you post from it.
      Because, curiously enough, the US of A was tied for 17th back in 2008, which means we’ve slid down 14th places over the past seven years.
      Hmm. I wonder who’s been in charge here…

      1. It’s the Tea Party’s fault for holding back the great socialist utopia, don’t you know?

    5. >>”It’ll be interesting to see who here actually engages with an objective assessment of the facts, and who simply resorts to insult and derision to avoid dealing with reality.”

      And it’s interesting to see that you’ve already won the debate by making a claim upon “reality”. Your intellectual honesty is already suspect.

      I notice in your cite that page 12 is where the agenda really kicks into high gear. By including statistics on violence when it comes to “freedom”, that makes it very easy to promote the usual Western Leftist self-loathing trope. “See? The US sucks!” It seems outside the scope of this study/survey to determine the causes of this violence, which – as your host and others have already pointed out to you – are a result of democrat policies. Now if you’d like to acknowledge that those policies make us less free, I doubt you’ll get much argument here.

      As has also been pointed out, this survey/study does not factor in demographics or even regions, but lumps everything together nationally in aggregate scoring. This is just not useful for realistic comparison. So if you’re going to demonstrate any sort of purchase on reality, you need to provide some. (And here I’m conceding the fact that the numbers for these scores are arbitrary see Appendix C where they begin to convert numbers from previous sources to 0-10 scale. But your host already pointed this out.)

      I found the first paragraph under the “Relationships” section on p.14 to be utterly laughable. The United States ranks a 10 out of 10 on this scale according to the criteria in that section. I don’t even have to get into the wildly skewed results of the family court system in general here. The fact that there are significant variations in family law between the states which produce varying results in gender parity for child custody renders this 10 score absolutely ludicrous. At best, this illustrates the inability of this survey to adequately measure the United States, and at worst it calls into question the methodology of the entire study.

      Did you have more useful data?

      If you’d like, I can relate this to the argument that you’re trying to make, but my Spidey senses tell me that’s not what you’re here for.

      I guess we’ll see.

    6. For certain values of “freedom”, certain values of “objective”, and certain values of “fact”, you could be right, cpaca.

      That said, to answer your question, I’d have to stipulate to the criteria used in the rankings, the weights given, and the source of the information. Forgive my cynicism, but I suspect that my definition of “personal freedom” varies considerably from that of say, the International Gay and Lesbian Association (source for “Same Sex Relationships”) or the OECD (source for “Parental Rights”)

      It goes without saying that UN and European agencies are going to use definitions at variance with common understandings in the US (that is, outside the academy and certain political parties). It also goes without saying that UN and European agencies will be operating from an ideological and political POV well to the left of the American center.

      UN and European assumptions about things like the ownership of banks, collective bargaining, mandated cost of worker dismissal, minimum wage, etc., are also very likely to be well to the left of the American center.

      That doesn’t necessarily make them wrong, but it does make them suspect from an American’s centrist’s point of view.

      So, your question is really a sophisticated version of, “Are you still beating your wife?”

      I don’t just reject your (implied) argument, I reject the entire premise of your question.

      As far as the statement with which you originally took issue goes, the historical and legal basis is currently beyond dispute, from the personal and public statements of the Founders to several recent Supreme Court decisions. (Yes, there is still a dissident minority, and there are still people who haven’t gotten the Heller memo, and – cleverer than they are intelligent or informed – try to “prove” the 2nd Amendment protects a “collective right”…)

      So, let’s review: You took one linear ranking out of a report that uses data from multiple sources (that many mainstream, centrist Americans would reject) on multiple social issues and asked a tendentious question about a specific issue not addressed in said report, and whose answer requires the answerer accept your premise.

      Is that “factual” and “obective” enough for you?

      Given the delay, I suspect you’re drive-by trolling. Glad to help you with your virtue-signalling. Go back to File770 and have some more laughs about Larry’s “meltdown”. We’re having a few laughs of our own.

      1. I think “drive-by troll” is most likely accurate given that most of these clowns hardly ever read their own sources, let alone critically examine the data within. “By golly an ‘ologist’ said it, so cast it in stone!”

        Their sourcing usually amounts to Abstract surfing for conclusions that comport to their own biases and they expect that their opponents will be as baffled by bullshit as they were.

        This seems a good place to link this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-find-a-link-between-low-intelligence-and-acceptance-of-pseudo-profound-bulls-a6757731.html

    7. Just one fun fact from the reams of truth I’ve turned up to answer those who want to compare our homicide statistics with tiny, wealthy, racially-homogenous Denmark, et. al:

      It’s very difficult to compare US crime and injury statistics to other countries, or to stats collected by the UN, because the reporting and classification are not uniform. (One ends up comparing apples to oranges to orange juice to a socket wrench with an orange handle.)

      Just one example: “Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction” (See Appendix 8, paragraph 35.)
      http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm

      So, in most of the UK, it’s not a “murder” unless they’ve caught, and convicted, the murderer. The FBI is much more straightforward: We’ve got a body, and it’s obvious he/she died of violence. It’s a homicide.

      Smarter people than me have crunched the numbers and estimate that the reported UK murder (by US definition) figure is about 15-20% higher than is reported. This is also consistent with repeated news stories about UK cops cooking the crime statistics to make them look better than they actually are. (That’s never happened before. It’s also a violation of #1, #5 and #9 of Sir Robert Peel’s Nine Principles of Policing.)

    8. As with virtually all of such comparisons, they depend greatly on the assumptions made by the list compilers, and as such only show what those compilers value most rather than any objective ranking.

    9. Pfui.

      Mr. Correia gave you a much more thoughtful and eloquent rebuttal. (More thoughtful and reasoned than you rate, in my opinion, but he’s a much nicer man than I am, I’ll wager.)

      For my part? We may be the first pro-gun people you’ve ever argued with.

      I can’t and won’t speak for Mr. Correia but, you are not the first, nor the only anti-gun person I’ve argued with.

      I no longer bother.

      I have yet to ever, in more than thirty years of discussion guns, gun rights, and gun control, ever met an anti-gunner who is capable of arguing in good faith. I have yet to *ever* meet in IRL or online discussion an anti-gunner who is actually capable of engaging “with an objective assessment of the facts”.

      Any facts.

      In fact, facts and honest engagement seem to be like sunlight to a vampire.

      And once more, I no longer bother.

      Leftists always lie.
      Leftists always argue in bad faith.
      Leftists always project.
      Leftists always double down.
      And leftists always evade and weasel.

      At this point in my life, after having waged this particular battle with words in more arenas than I care to remember – I don’t bother. I’m just eating popcorn and waiting for the point where leftists begin decorating lamposts and utility poles from coast to coast and border to border.

      Insult and derision are all that you rate.

      In deference to our host, who’s blog this is, I’ll refrain from demonstrating what “insult and derision” actually *look* like when practiced by someone who cut their teeth in alt.rec.flames back in the days when you hadn’t yet dribbled and mewled your way down Sarah Brady’s leg.

      Clue: that wasn’t it. 🙂

  49. I would like to nominate “Well, you could certainly try that, Anonymous Internet Pussy, but I’m the one with the guns.” as the Internet Quote of the Year.

  50. There is no doubt that were the Southern Poverty Law Center to apply their usual standards evenly the SFWA would qualify as a hate group. Their obsessive and massive bigotry selling racial myths and unflattering groups stereotypes would attract the attention of any anti-defamation league with neutral principles. Outside the SFWA there is plenty more; the insane Twitter feeds of K. Tempest Bradford, Cecily Kane, Mikki Kendall and Requires Hate are typical of the hateful and neurotic screeds of supremacist groups.

    The idea Larry’s books are in any way racist is laughable. It’s typical of this mentally ill cult of white-hating lesbian-worship and heterophobes that they would see racism where there is none and ignore it where it is.

      1. This comment alone would have made all the scrolling worth it. Beautiful. (I’m on a cell…looots of scrolling) Yes, SPLC is a hate group. A vicious one.

      2. Slight correction, “He is a hate group.” SPLC is basically a guy with a Fax Machine. (CSPI is basically TWO guys with a fax machine.)

  51. Dear Larry,

    Are my eyes deceiving me, or does this rifle lack both a dust cover AND a forward assist?? I’ve been informed by several definitely probably knowledgeable people on the internet that owning a rifle without those two critical features would result in “my funeral”. Have you noticed any detriments to your health as a result of Upper Parts Deficiency?

  52. So every time you check to see if a round is chambered you can think ‘I wonder why that penguin is so angry.’

  53. [I’m sure those ladies were just compensating for their tiny uteruses.]

    I think you mean, “willfully barren uteruses”.

    WATYF

  54. I hadn’t had a chance to read this until recently. Were you over in Hugo shooting at Bald Eagle Sportsman’s Association? Also what did you think of the Cerakote on those rifles. I’d like to think I did a good job. And yes I have proof to back up my claims of doing their Cerakote.

    1. The Cerakote was great looking. You’ll probably be doing a JP for me pretty soon. I was talking to Jesse about it yesterday.

  55. “When terrorists are engaging in mass butchery, it is difficult to make that worse. At best, you might end the threat. At worst, congratulations, you were a distraction or a speed bump. It beats hiding under your desk praying to God that you’re not the next one to die.”

    This is the thing that gets me. The antis are fine with 20 children and 6 teachers dying over a 5 minute period, but worried that one person with a gun that might stop such butchery could, perhaps, miss the shooter and hit someone else. God forbid, but if they stopped the shooting with one mistake would that be worse than letting 26 get killed at the shooter’s leisure?

    “Its going to erupt in a gun fight and innocents are going to get killed.” Yep. Good argument. Teach your kids to cower and say their prayers I guess.

  56. I’d love a lower like that. I have a lot of guts and match triggers and so on that want to have a stripped lower. Hmmm…

  57. Whenever I see you or Sarah Hoyt say “This is my shocked face” (usually in response to predictable SJW outrage) I can’t help that the phrase needs a little more flare.

    Next time you use the phrase, why don’t you do it like this?

    “This is my shocked face: (:-p)”

    (This is still lacking: I really wish there was a way to stick thumbs in its ears, wiggle the fingers, and say “neener neener”.)

Comments are closed.