Rahm Emmanuel:

“I don’t mind being yelled at, like verbally abusive, fine,” he said. “But I think the mayor — and I made this point in an email later to his staff, clearly crossed the line by grabbing me.”

Hastings said that he has interviewed “terrorist leaders…dictators…a lot of politicians…a lot of angry people,” but that no one had ever put their hands on him. The journalist also claimed that Emanuel didn’t seem to be “in full control of what he was doing” during the exchange.

I’d love to see him charged with assault. But you know the cops would ignore it.

And I agree with Glenn: “I think one reason why these people support gun control is that they assume everyone else is as unstable as they are.”

Nicholas Johnson writes that the agenda is to take all the guns, regardless of their lies (and many of them remain quite up front about it). And it’s aided by the sophistry and ignorance of the media:

I disagree with his premise, though, that the president is smart. On some things (e.g., economics and business), he seems unremittingly stupid.

And there’s this:

If you listen just to media reports, you would think that guns used in crimes come mainly from straw sales or the “gun show loophole”. But these sources account for only a small fraction of the illegal gun supply. Most crime guns come from a black market that is supplied by theft. On average about 500,000 guns are stolen each year. So publication of gun owners’ addresses is a wonderful public service …. to gun thieves.

As demonstrated by this:

Thieves ransacked a house that features on the gun map published by the Journal News, just days after another home on the list was also targeted.

Burglars broke into the house in New City, New York, on Wednesday and pried open two safes, before leaving with another one.

The criminals escaped with two handguns, two pistol permits, cash, savings bonds and jewelry. The firearms were in the stolen safe.

I hope they sue the paper, and take them to the cleaners.

Ummmmm…no.

I suppose I should be amazed at the cavalier attitude such people take toward basic constitutional rights, but I’m not really any more.

They’re as pointless and stupid as ever:

The inescapable conclusion is that the Obama administration’s gun-control proposals are not really intended to do anything about the problem of violence — which is, by the way, steadily declining in the U.S. Perhaps this is not surprising, as neither the ban on “military-style assault weapons” nor the magazine limitation has any chance of getting through Congress.

So why has the Obama administration come up with these tired, already-failed proposals? Not so that they can pass, and certainly not so that if passed, they would be effective. Rather, Obama’s gun-control initiatives are part of his permanent campaign. The objective is to rile up the Democratic party’s faithful so they will be motivated to turn out in November 2014. President Obama has always been more interested in campaigning than governing. Beyond that, he knows he can do little to transform America unless the Democrats capture the House next year. So today’s proposals, pointless as they may seem, are part of a political strategy — not to convert the majority, but to motivate the minority.

Here’s hoping it will be insufficient.