A lot of people say Obama is anti-business, but there’s one part of the American economy that is delighted that he got reelected.
No, I’m not talking about bankruptcy lawyers or corrupt lobbyists, though those would be good guesses.
The real winners from Obama’s re-election are America’s gun manufacturers and gun sellers.
Not that I’ve looked at any data. I’m just basing this on the comments I’ve heard over the past few years and the up-tick in such comments in the past 36 hours.
But I’m quite confident that the overall firearms industry has profited from Obama’s tenure.
Anyway, the great economist Frederic Bastiat teaches us to look at both direct and indirect effects (or, as he put it, the “seen” and “unseen”), so I want to highlight a disadvantaged group that will suffer as a result of the Obama-induced increase in gun sales.
Yes, I’m talking about criminals.
To understand the point I’m trying to make, we’re going to do a thought experiment.
Start by closing your eyes and thinking about someone you know who has worked hard, saved some money, bought a nice house, and filled that house with nice things for the family to enjoy.
Now tell yourself, “I want those things as well.”
But you also think, “Damned if I’m going to wake up early every day like that chump and bust my rear end to earn a good life.”
Instead, you decide it’s okay to take things that don’t belong to you, even if it involves some coercion.
No, this isn’t a thought experiment about voting for Obama. Besides, the election is over.
Close your eyes again and think about how you would obtain things that don’t belong to you and without using the government as the middleman.
What would you do? Well, you might beg the person to give you things.
But that might be a bit awkward or demeaning, and the person might say no.
That leaves burglary as your only option. Sort of a private sector version of income redistribution.
Now we get to the key point in our thought experiment.
You sneak up to the house with the nice things and you suddenly see a sign.
Here’s a quiz. What do you do after seeing this sign?
a. break into the house because you once heard a politician or journalist assert that gun ownership doesn’t deter crime?
b. decide after a bit of reflection about potential costs and benefits that it might be more prudent to find another house to rob?
If you need some help with the answer, think about the meaning of this cartoon.
If you’re still having trouble grasping the concept, this Chuck Asay cartoon might be worth a look. Or this post has some signs that may help your understanding.
And if you still don’t comprehend, then congratulations. You deserve a starring role in this video.
[…] Moreover, criminals will have more incentive to engage in thuggish behavior once the law-abiding population is disarmed (as explained in this “IQ test“). […]
[…] third item reminds me of my “IQ test” for […]
[…] third item reminds me of my “IQ test” for […]
[…] Call me crazy, but that doesn’t seem like a good idea. […]
[…] Call me crazy, but that doesn’t seem like a good idea. […]
[…] For what it is worth, this issue is sort of like an IQ test. […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] remember that life is much better for criminals when there are fewer guns in the hands of law-abiding […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] As you might suspect, those friends also haven’t been able to get a passing grade on the gun control IQ test. […]
[…] The serious point to be made, of course, is that bad people are less likely to engage in criminal behavior if the potential costs of such misbehavior are higher. […]
[…] cost-benefit analysis for criminals. If bad guys have to worry that good guys may be armed, that significantly increases the potential cost of illegal […]
[…] the obvious, looters are unlikely to go after this neighborhood and they’re going to be far more likely to cause mayhem in a place like New York City, where an incompetent city government basically gives crooks a free […]
[…] In either case, life is more difficult for criminals. […]
[…] in 2012, I asked readers to pretend they were criminals and to contemplate whether they would want to rob a house with armed […]
[…] Back in 2012, I shared an IQ test for criminals and liberals. The test had only one question, which was whether criminals would be more likely to rob the house […]
[…] Though it’s really an issue of common sense. […]
[…] that Baltimore politicians and bureaucrats want law-abiding people to give up guns, which will make life easier for […]
[…] private gun ownership because I want a safer society. Criminals and other bad people are less likely to engage in mayhem if they know potential victims can defend themselves. And I also think that there’s a […]
[…] close on a humorous note. Here’s the visual version of my IQ test on […]
[…] support private gun ownership because I want a safer society. Criminals and other bad people are less likely to engage in mayhem if they know potential victims can defend themselves. And I also think that there’s a […]
[…] This next image arrived in my inbox a few days ago. I imagine the women calling the cops also failed this IQ test. […]
[…] I offered an IQ test on the issue for liberals and criminals, and this set of cartoons and posters takes an amusing look at the issue of gun-free […]
[…] give your leftist friends this IQ test on gun control and see if they can figure out the right […]
[…] laws (and hopefully they won’t), that will encourage more criminal activity since bad people will be less worried about armed […]
[…] laws (and hopefully they won’t), that will encourage more criminal activity since bad people will be less worried about armed […]
[…] laws (and hopefully they won’t), that will encourage more criminal activity since bad people will be less worried about armed […]
[…] laws (and hopefully they won’t), that will encourage more criminal activity since bad people will be less worried about armed […]
[…] politicians to reduce government is like asking burglars to be in favor of armed homeowners. …we know politicians generally have bad incentives. But […]
[…] vez propus um “Teste de QI para criminosos e progressistas“. Pedi para que imaginassem que eram ladrões. E então perguntei: se vocês estivessem […]
[…] vez propus um “Teste de QI para criminosos e progressistas“. Pedi para que imaginassem que eram ladrões. E então perguntei: se vocês estivessem […]
[…] course, I won’t be surprised if the people who can’t pass this IQ test argue instead for more gun […]
Try breaking in here and be immediately dead
[…] anybody capable of passing my IQ test for criminals and liberals understands that the title should be changed to “Lower crime because Swiss have more […]
[…] will be disarmed. And that rubs people the wrong way because they’re smart enough to pass the IQ test that causes such angst for our left-wing […]
[…] victims will be disarmed. And that rubs people the wrong way because they’re smart enough to pass the IQ test that causes such angst for our left-wing […]
[…] will be disarmed. And that rubs people the wrong way because they’re smart enough to pass the IQ test that causes such angst for our left-wing […]
[…] by convincing politicians to change policy. Yet asking politicians to reduce government is like asking burglars to be in favor of armed […]
[…] any event, terrorists surely would have an incentive (if they’re capable of passing my IQ test for criminals and liberals) to seek out a “gun-free zone” if launching an attack in […]
[…] by convincing politicians to change policy. Yet asking politicians to reduce government is like asking burglars to be in favor of armed […]
[…] any event, terrorists surely would have an incentive (if they’re capable of passing my IQ test for criminals and liberals) to seek out a “gun-free zone” if launching an attack in […]
[…] reduce their power or weaken their chances of being reelected. That’s about as likely as burglars being in favor of armed […]
[…] second one reminds me of my IQ test for criminals and […]
[…] Which is the point I made when putting together my IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
[…] proposed an “IQ Test for Criminals and Liberals” back in 2012 which asked readers to imagine that they were […]
[…] proposed an “IQ Test for Criminals and Liberals” back in 2012 which asked readers to imagine that they were thieves. And I then asked them, as […]
[…] proposed an “IQ Test for Criminals and Liberals” back in 2012 which asked readers to imagine that they were […]
[…] proposed an “IQ Test for Criminals and Liberals” back in 2012 which asked readers to imagine that they were […]
[…] that bad guys probably avoided, at least if they passed the famous IQ test for criminals and […]
[…] the way, if you disagree with the message in this image, please take this IQ test for criminals and liberals and reconsider your […]
[…] the way, if you disagree with the message in this image, please take this IQ test for criminals and liberals and reconsider your […]
[…] sure I would want one of these, but I bet the answers to my IQ test for criminals and liberals would be even more interesting if homeowners added some their […]
[…] take the IQ test for criminals and liberals and decide whether this means more crime or less […]
[…] I pointed out in my IQ test for criminals and liberals, even stupid criminals don’t want to get shot, so they are less […]
The government is all for safety.
Whose safety is of no concern to the uninformed law makers and Liberals and anti gun nuts and is left up to the decision of who has the most expensive lawyer…
Fair and equal treatment is the governments goal.
Gun control does have a safety element built in.
It will make the criminals work environment safer.
Now we are all interested in a safer and less intrusive work environment for every one.
So I suggest using hollow points to avoid inflicting a second painful wound on the criminal that is only trying to better him or herself by using the redistribution of wealth concept offered and preached by anti gun nuts and Liberals. YOURS.
Remember this shooting tip. !! Aim for body mass. No sense in wasting good ammo on second or third shot.
[…] I have a snarky IQ test for criminals and liberals, but I also have a serious poll asking people why they oppose gun […]
[…] I have a snarky IQ test for criminals and liberals, but I also have a serious poll asking people why they oppose gun […]
Lol
Bloody hell you guys are more right wing than the fucking BNP!
[…] as I explained in my IQ test for liberals and criminals, bad guys also will be less likely to commit crimes if they know there’s a non-trivial chance […]
[…] as I explained in my IQ test for liberals and criminals, bad guys also will be less likely to commit crimes if they know there’s a non-trivial chance […]
[…] like someone took the IQ test I devised for criminals and […]
[…] I’ve shared lots of gun control humor, such as this IQ test that I posted for liberals and criminals, this very effective neighborhood watch group, and several amusing videos linked at the end of […]
[…] Criminals are obviously big fans of gun control because they prefer unarmed victims. […]
[…] of the same message I had in my IQ test for criminals and liberals. In simpler terms, would you go looting in the neighborhood pictured at the end of this […]
[…] oldie came in fifth place with this 2012 post featuring – you guessed it – gun control […]
[…] Returning to satire, the Houston-Chicago comparison reminds me of this IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
[…] 2. Do Silverman and the other characters in the video really think that criminals are impacted by gun control laws? Do they have enough sense to understand that the bad guys prefer when law-abiding people are disarmed? […]
[…] An IQ Test for Criminals and Liberals […]
[…] info is very powerful. The bad guys are more afraid of armed homeowners than the police. Surely, as I explained here, that tells us that gun ownership lowers […]
[…] I’ve shared lots of gun control humor, such as this IQ test that I posted for liberals and criminals, this very effective neighborhood watch group, and several amusing videos linked at the end of this […]
[…] I’ve shared lots of gun control humor, such as this IQ test that I posted for liberals and criminals, this very effective neighborhood watch group, and several amusing videos linked at the end of this […]
[…] Returning to satire, the Houston-Chicago comparison reminds me of this IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
[…] Returning to satire, the Houston-Chicago comparison reminds me of this IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
[…] Returning to satire, the Houston-Chicago comparison reminds me of this IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
[…] Returning to satire, the Houston-Chicago comparison reminds me of this IQ test for criminals and liberals. […]
What is the real reason governments take guns away from law-abiding citizens?
Hint: Hitler
Why did our forefathers give citizens the right to defend themselves?
Hint: England
[…] give your leftist friends this IQ test on gun control and see if they can figure out the right […]
Burglars: Please carry identification so your next of kin can be notified without delay. The people next door will not shoot you if you break in; for your own safety, go there.
[…] give your leftist friends this IQ test on gun control and see if they can figure out the right […]
[…] give your leftist friends this IQ test on gun control and see if they can figure out the right […]
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
[…] this is like the IQ test that I posted for liberals and criminals. The answer should be […]
[…] info is very powerful. The bad guys are more afraid of armed homeowners than the police. Surely, as I explained here, that tells us that gun ownership lowers […]
The “Nothing in his house worth dying for” might also say “No weapons to steal here. They’re all on my person where they belong.” That’s why MY burglar did not get MY gun.
[…] politicians don’t like spending caps for the same reasons that burglars don’t like armed homeowners. As Veronique de Rugy notes, if we imposed a spending cap, they would be forced to reform […]
[…] I offered an IQ test on the issue for liberals and criminals, and this set of cartoons and posters takes an amusing look at the issue of gun-free […]
[…] politicians don’t like spending caps for the same reasons that burglars don’t like armed homeowners. As Veronique de Rugy notes, if we imposed a spending cap, they would be forced to reform […]
[…] have a more sensible approach to thwarting crime. Some of them apparently took my IQ test, which asks whether murderers prefer armed victims or unarmed victims, and they wisely concluded that the ability to shoot back is a lot better than cowering in a corner […]
[…] is very powerful. The bad guys are more afraid of armed homeowners than the police. Surely, as I explained here, that tells us that gun ownership lowers […]
[…] info is very powerful. The bad guys are more afraid of armed homeowners than the police. Surely, as I explained here, that tells us that gun ownership lowers […]
What wrong, Sir Bill? Me think you not cope well with the irony of the gunhugger, our heroic homeowner, being tossed into the street by a few of his own heroes.
Well, maybe that wasn’t enough to motivate your response. Instead, you were angered by the suggestion that Dan Mitchell carries water for leftists, who have written too much of his glossary of political terms.
Now, Mr. Bill the Funnyman, what would be wrong with depriving you of the protections of the secret ballot? What do you have to hide? What personal responsibility would you like to shirk? And what would be wrong with counting both leftwingers and rightwingers as illiberals?
Try to think before typing your next response. I promise that you’ll experience no more pain than you deserve.
@Paul T
WOW !
Me think your mind is working overtime. Maybe time to chillax.
Re: Paul T
Wha? Did you forget a /sarc tag?
crisbd, the gun-free neighbor mocked the gunhugger with the claim that the gunmakers and ammomakers are funneling cash to the campaigns of the Democrats’ worst gungrabbers. Then the antigun neighbor called the cops and told them that a moron next door is menacing him and trying to incite violent aggression. The cops figured out how to use asset seizure laws to grab the gunhugger’s house and to kick that lover of paternalistic government into the street where it belongs. In fact, the cops had a big three day party with drugs and hookers. It was rumored that numerous local Republican businessmen showed up, and the place was trashed.
Now, why shouldn’t there be a database to keep track of our rightwing, gunhugging friend’s whereabouts? It could include all Americans like him, even those still in their homes, and be made available on the Internet. Of course, ALL cops, judges, prosecutors, and military personnel, too, need to be included. This crowd of government employees cooperates in taxation and other evils, esp. when it’s time to collect a paycheck or a benefit like a pension. In fact, the database should include all lawyers, too, for they swear oaths to uphold the alleged laws called statutes and constitutions.
Furthermore, voter information needs to be compiled and published so that it will be easier to hold troublemakers accountable for cooperation in electoral politics. Criminals who vote should not be able to hide behind a system of secret ballots.
It’s by the way, however, that leftists aren’t liberals. Instead, they’re illiberals, like the fool who left his sign on the cops’ lawn, much to the amusement of the cops who let the hookers use it for target practice from the living room.
The “My next door neighbor” cartoon is absolutely wonderful.
Would love to know if it’s ever been implemented, and what the reaction of the gun-free neighbor was…