Is Willis Hart Water Tower Material?

This commentary concerns an 9/29/2015 post by the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart which he deleted on 10/1/2015.

Willis Hart: Water Tower Material? Let us surely hope not. (9/29/2015 AT 7:58pm).

The odd thing about this post, and the reason I decided to comment on it, is the picture of the individual Willis was asking the "water tower material" question about (see below). Who is this person, I thought? So I clicked on the picture, and the URL that opened suggests that Willis believes this is a picture of me.

I say this because the URL identifies the picture as wd.jpg. "wd" is short for my old Blogger ID w-dervish and is how Willis refers to me. He used to allow me to comment on his blog and that is when he came up with the "wd" abbreviation for my blogger ID.

Question is, if Willis believes this to be a picture of me, where the hell did this idea come from? I have never posted a picture of myself online. The picture is not of me, by the way. Which might be why Willis deleted the post. He realized the picture was not of me. Or he started to doubt it might be me. But why did he think the picture was of me to begin with? And where did the picture come from?

Or perhaps Willis realized that this post accusing someone of being "water tower material" simply because he does not like the person was in bad taste? Given how common these shootings are becoming, I mean. But I seriously doubt it, due to Willis being on the side of those who believe nothing can be done legislatively to reduce gun violence.

Also, in regards to Willis worrying about me being water tower material because I submit unwanted comments to his blog... what's the correlation between submitting comments (comments Willis refuses to publish) and shooting people?

I have no desire to shoot anyone, BTW. I do not own a gun. I have never shot a gun. I'm not even sure if I could figure out how to use it. If I did, I'm positive I'd be a bad shot. I think I'd need a rifle with a laser sight to hit anyone. Not that I want to shoot anyone. I absolutely do not, being the kind of person more likely to kill himself than anyone else (if I decided I needed to harm anyone).

Willis Hart, on the other hand? I think it is possible that Willis might be capable of huring others. Perhaps it might be "necessary" for Willis to shoot dead one (or more) of the violent Blacks he refers to frequently? If Mookie or Ray Ray were to attempt to mug Willis or break into his house?

I think he would feel justified in shooting them dead. As his Libertarian buddy Constitutional Insurgent sez, doing so would result in one less "oxygen thief" and therefore be a GOOD thing.

Certainly this scenario is a lot more probable than "wd" buying (a likely expensive) firearm, ascending a water tower, and killing people by shooting them. Especially considering the fact that I find gun violence abhorrent and am in favor of stricter gun controls.

But Willis is generally opposed to more gun control. He refers to such proposals as being "much more for for solace" than for actually reducing gun violence. This he sez in a commentary where he cites the gun nut John Lott! This Lott nutter authors works of fiction such as More Guns, Less Crime and has been dubbed (by Newsweek) "the gun crowd's guru".

Yes, Willis says "I'm not a gun owner myself and don't particularly care for them", but just because he does not currently have one (if he's telling the truth) does not mean he couldn't go out and buy one.

I mean, I told him I have no desire to own a gun (and, in response he said "I dare wd to put a sign on his lawn that says, gun-free zone"). Yet he thinks that I (as a non-gun owner) might be "water tower material"?

Willis obviously thinks that guns work as a deterrent... so much so that he sez if I put a sign in my yard indicating that I do not own a gun - I'd be certain to get robbed (I do not believe this). So wouldn't it be better to actually have a gun than rely on people not breaking into your home because they think you MIGHT have a gun?

Given Willis' belief in guns deterring violence (in agreement with the nutter John Lott), how can he justify NOT owning a gun? Isn't he just asking to get robbed? Which is why I'm not at all convinced that he isn't a gun owner. And, if he does have one, surely he'd use it to shoot a robber.

So, in regards to killing someone with a gun - while there is a zero chance that I will ever take a life by shooting someone, I'd say the chance that Willis might is higher. How much higher I can't say, but I'd wager it's quite a bit higher. Because, while Willis is probably NOT "water tower material", I could absolutely see him killing someone with a gun during a home invasion.

Heck, Willis might put the "gun free zone" sign in his yard to fool Mookie and Ray Ray into breaking into his home so he could shoot them dead, thereby ridding the world of TWO "oxygen thieves".

By the way, I forgot to mention that this post is yet another example of Hart putting up a post that likely makes sense to absolutely nobody (except him). I mean, I had to click the image and examine the URL to determine who the hell was in the picture (or who he THINKS is in the picture). Anyone else viewing the post was probably confused, wondering WHO Willis was worried about being "water tower material".

But Willis does this quite frequently... simply expects people to know what the hell he's talking about, even when his commentary contains minimal facts (in this one the crucial missing piece of info is the "who" of "who, what, when, where, why"). Yes, this absolutely says Willis would make a terrible journalist... but does it also point to Willis being afflicted with the "brain disease" he frequently accuses others of having? Yeah, I think that's a possibility.

In any case, it is the Hartster who is the gun nut, not I. So, if either of us were to go postal because we're "water tower material", I say the evidence shows that person is FAR more likely to be Willis Hart and FAR less likely to be Dervish Sanders (AKA "wd").

Image Description: Not a picture of wd, although Willis apparently believes it is (at least at the time he posted it, although he may have changed his mind, explaining why he deleted it later).

OST #73