The Smallest Minority |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. That psychic discomfort is the price we pay for basic civic peace. It's worth it. It's a pragmatic principle. Defend everyone else's rights, because if you don't there is no one to defend yours. - MaxedOutMama I don't just want gun rights... I want individual liberty, a culture of self-reliance....I want the whole bloody thing. Kim du Toit
|
. . . and so are you Wahabism Delenda Est      Hey, FEC!  BITE ME! I'm a Member of the McCain-Feingold INSURRECTION!    "Jeez, Kevin... calling you an asshole would be a huge understatement, wouldn't it?" -Jack Cluth, The People's Republic of Seabrook (Coming from you, Jack, it's an honor.)  email: gunrightsAT comcastDOTnet INVITATION: If you have never shot a firearm, regardless of your position on the right to arms, and if you live near or visit the Tucson, AZ metropolitan area, I invite you to go shooting for a day. I will provide the arms, ammunition, targets, safety equipment, range fees and instruction. All you have to do is show up. 6 Takers To Date DO YOU LIVE SOMEWHERE ELSE and want to try shooting? Click HERE  Proud Gun-blogging member of the Pajamahadeen since May, 2003!
Debates: "The Commentary" A OLD discussion on gun control between me and an Irishman living in London Start here. UPDATED! Now with archive! Post #1 by Alex, a Guest A multi-post discussion hosted here at TSM My short exchange with Professor Saul Cornell of the Second Amendment Research Center Best Posts: The "Rights" Discussion: What is a "Right?" What is a "Right"? Revisited, Part I Part II Rights, Morality, Idealism & Pragmatism, Part I Part II Part III Part IV The United Federation of Planets Is the Government Responsible for Your Protection? Part I & Part II 1975 in Washington, D.C. vs. 2004 in Canton, Ohio Go Ahead, Rely on the Government for Your Protection The Other Side Liberal vs. Conservative: Both are Necessary The Mystery of Government The Blog that Ate Poughkeepsie Updated and restated as: Of Laws and Sausages Militias A Mistake a Free People Get to Make Only Once The George Orwell Daycare Center This is NOT What I Wanted to Read TRUST The Lying "News" Media, Pt. II Say WHAT? Bias? What Bias? Agenda? What Agenda? The Church of the MSM and the New Reformation Let's See if I Can "Germinate an Intelligent Thought" Here The ACLU Hasn't Changed its Tune They Never EVER Stop It is Not the Business of Government Five Reasons Why It ISN'T They Keep Making Better Fools Five Month Investigation, 10 Tracer Rounds, Two Felony Convictions That Sumbitch Ain't been BORN! On Guillotines and Gibbets England Slides Further Towards Bondage Pressing the "RESET" Button Freedom's Just Another Word for Nothin' Left To Lose A Terrible Resolve The Courts Will Not Save Us Trilogy: The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions "Game Over, Man. Game Over." An Important Question And the denouement: Hudson Was Wrong The Dangerous Victims Trilogy: "(I)t's most important that all potential victims be as dangerous as they can" Violence and the Social Contract Governments, Criminals, and Dangerous Victims In the same vein: Those Without Swords Can Still Die Upon Them The True Believers Trilogy: True Believers March of the Lemmings Reasonable People Also in the same vein: Tough History Coming The Culture Trilogy Culture Hubris Weltanschauung And its follow-on: In Re: Culture Technical Dissertations Why Ballistic Fingerprinting Doesn't (And Won't) Work Spin, Spin, Spin Speaking of Teddy Kennedy... This is the Kind of Thing That REALLY IRRITATES ME Questions from the Audience?
BLOGROLL:
PROTESTWARRIOR Some people who are taking the fight to the Left. And some GREAT T-shirts, too. DAILY READS I need a longer day! Day by Day InstaPundit Lileks' The Bleat Mostly Cajun View from the Porch Of Arms and the Law TFS Magnum Ravenwood's Universe Irons in the Fire Say Uncle The Adventures of Roberta X TRUE EXCELLENCE American Digest The Belmont Club Boobs, Injuries, and Dr. Pepper The Volokh Conspiracy Michael Yon Varifrank Eject!Eject!Eject! Eternity Road Oleg Volk ON INDEFINITE HIATUS USS Clueless The Safety Valve Ipse Dixit The Lopsided Poopdeck Acidman (RIP) Skywritings Publicola D.C. Thorton Kim du Toit Personal Effects Smoke on the Water OTHER GUN/RIGHTS BLOGS Airborne Combat Engineer AlphaPatriot Alphecca American Dinosaur A Day in the Life of an Ambulance Driver The Anarchangel Mrs. Anarchangel The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler Argghhh! The Bitch Girls Boots and Sabers The Breda Fallacy Gun Nuts Media Carnaby Fudge Clayton Cramer Cogito Ergo Geek Countertop Chronicles Cowboy Blob Critical Mastiff Cryptic Subterranean Found: One Troll FreedomSight From the Heartland Fun Turns to Tragedy!!! The Geek with a .45 Gunwatch Heartless Libertarian Hecate's Crossroad Hell in a Handbasket Individ Justin Buist's Blog The LawDog Files Lead and Gold Les Jones Live from the (upper) Texas Gulf Coast Mad Ogre The Michael Bane Blog Moral Flexibility Mr. Completely Murdoc Online The Munchkin Wrangler Ninth Stage No Looking Backwards No Quarters Oscar Poppa Outrageous Malfunction Pass the ammo Posse Incitatus Random Nuclear Strikes Reasonablenut Resistance is Futile! Sandcastles and Cubicles SlagleRock's Slaughterhouse Snowflakes in Hell Surly Curmudgeon Texican Tattler The Ten Ring South Park Pundit Triggerfinger The View From North Central Idaho Vox The War on Guns Weck Up To Thees! Wince and Nod Xavier Thoughts .45 Caliber Justice BLOGGERS I'VE MET A Keyboard and a .45  
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2003 I Could Quit Chocolate...But I'm No Quitter! When I got home tonight I asked my wife how her day went. She said "I think I'm allergic to chocolate." "Why?" I asked. "I gave the kids some this morning, and they drove me nuts all day." True story. | No Blog for You! (Again) I'm going to be very busy the next couple of days. I'm working on a long, involved, link-riddled post inspired by this Samizdata post about international crime rates, but it will be the end of this week at the earliest before I have it completed. In the mean time, I probably won't be posting at all. Sorry about that. If you're a new visitor, please read the archives. If you're one of the six or so regular readers, well, Nothing to see here, move along. Move along. | Monday, August 18, 2003 Movie Review: Bad Boys 2 Yesterday my wife asked me if I wanted to go out and see a movie. I asked her what she wanted to see. "Bad Boys 2" she said, "I feel like watching a blowup movie." Yes, I married the right woman. We'd actually tried to catch BB2 on the opening weekend, but the theater was so full we couldn't get seats anywhere but the front row, so we exchanged our tickets and saw Tomb Raider 2 instead (woe unto Hollywood should someone have an idea for an original film. All the money seems to be tied up in making sequels.) Usually Sunday afternoon is pretty slow at the theater, but BB2 was still pretty full. And now I know why. I like Will Smith. He doesn't act so much as be the same character in every role (and he was excellent in Independence Day) but he and Martin Lawrence are outstanding together. The critics panned the movie (for obvious reasons - it is, after all, a blowup movie) but it was a lot of fun. I just had one problem with it. There is one scene where a boy comes over to pick up Martin Lawrence's daughter for her first date. He is met at the door by Lawrence, then Will Smith comes to the door. In the subsequent hazing of the date, Will Smith's character threatens the kid with his pistol - finger on the trigger. Repeatedly. The audience thought the scene was funny (it was, actually) but the gun handling bothered the sh!t out of me. It reminded me of the scene in Pulp Fiction where the kid in the back seat of the car was killed because the moron in the front seat pointed his gun at him and unintentionally pulled the trigger. Look, I know it was Hollyweird, where there is little to no association with reality, but a lot of people (especially when it comes to guns) don't. Just another example of "guns are toys" that kids (and there were a lot of kids watching this R-rated movie) will emulate. Repeat after me: Guns are not toys. Don't point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy. Treat all guns as if they are loaded. After you pull the trigger, all the "Oh sh!t, I didn't mean to's!" in the world won't bring that bullet back and make the world right again. Other than that, if you want to watch a good, mindless blowup movie, I recommend it. Best line: "You guys look like you've decided to do something stupid. We want to help." | Our Collapsing Schools Dept. - Humor (In relation to the previous post.) Teaching Math in 1950: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit? Teaching Math in 1960: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit? Teaching Math in 1970: A logger exchanges a set "L" of lumber for a set "M" of money. The cardinality of set "M" is 100. Each element is worth one dollar. Make 100 dots representing the elements of the set "M." The set "C", the cost of production contains 20 fewer points than set "M." Represent the set "C" as a subset of set "M" and answer the following question: What is the cardinality of the set "P" of profits? Teaching Math in 1980: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20. Teaching Math in 1990: By cutting down beautiful forest trees, the logger makes $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the forest birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down the trees? (There are no wrong answers.) Teaching Math in 2000: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $120. How does Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $60? How many documents were shredded to achieve this number? Teaching Math in 2010: El Loggero se habla with the truckero y se ponen de acuerdo con otro driver de la competencia y etc... | Our Collapsing Schools Dept. Fox News comments on this New Orleans Times-Picayune story concerning the failure of the class validictorian at Alcee Fortier Senior High School to graduate because (wait for it...) she failed the math portion of the required exit exam. Five times. The exam tests at a 10th grade level. She got an 'A' in algebra. As Fox put it: "They were giving her As for being a good kid. But they weren't teaching her."I'm sure she felt good about herself. Until the real world reared up and smacked her in the face as it has a habit of doing. Of course, The principal blames the test.It couldn't be the fault of the school system, could it? Read both pieces. The Fox bit has a lot more on other education topics. The details in the Times-Picayune piece will make you want to burn the school down so we can start over from scratch. Nod to Ravenwood for the pointer. UPDATE: Commenter Teri brings up something that I should have noted: You didn't point out the absolute worst thing about this situation:Yup. Infinite feedback loop. With the kind of grades she's received, most people would expect to be able to do well. But earned? I think not. And if she goes to a college that actually requires her to learn, she might discover that those grades she "earned" have less value than the paper they're printed on."With the kinds of grades she's earned, Green said she doesn't have any doubts about her abilities to do well in college. If she passes a summer retest, Green said she plans to enroll at Delgado Community College and pursue an elementary education degree."Makes me want to scream! And she wants to inflict her educational experience on our kids. You're right, Teri, I missed that opportunity. Good catch. And educators wonder about the people who home-school. | Well, THIS Should Stir Some Interest Do you read Silflay Hraka? It's a multi-contributor blog that originated the Carnival of the Vanities (the August 20 installment to be hosted by Outside the Beltway). Well, now they've started what is sure to be a controversy. Contributor Captain Holley is going to recommend the four basic guns he recommends "to anyone beginning a gun collection." The first recommendation: A bolt-action centerfire rifle in .308 Winchester. Allow me to weigh in here. I think there are actually six firearms anybody who shoots should have. These are: A .22LR caliber rifle A .22LR caliber handgun A centerfire bolt-action rifle A "sport-utility" rifle or, as I call it, your Militia rifle - semiautomatic, detachable magazine fed, in a military caliber. A shotgun A centerfire handgun Of course, you are more than welcome to own more than one of any of these six, but one of each is a minimum. In my case, I have a 10/22 for the rifle, a Ruger MkII and a Contender for the .22 pistol (and I have a serious jones for a Ruger Single-Six), I own several centerfire bolt-action rifles (mostly military surplus sporters), an AR-15, a Mossburg 590, and my Kimber Classic Stainless round out the collection. (I have more than that, but I'm not going to give a complete inventory.) I'm far from completing the collection, however. Next up, when I can afford it, will be a Contender rifle barrel, stock, and forend to give me my first single-shot rifle, chambered in the wildcat Tactical .20 caliber (33 grain Hornady V-Max bullet with a muzzle velocity of 4,000fps.) And eventually, I'd like an FN-FAL, and I'm still looking for a S&W 25-5 .45 Long Colt with a 5" barrel, and.... Well, you get the idea. I fully agree with Captain Holly's recommendation of a Savage Model 10 with a 3-9x40 scope in .308, though. Inexpensive and accurate. But I'd recommend starting with a .22 rimfire. You'll shoot more and learn more starting with something that doesn't kick. Recoil is an individual thing, but I'm convinced it's something you can learn to ignore (up to a certain point, and given reasonable ergonomics of the weapon.) If you start off with a rifle that whacks you pretty briskly, it's decidedly off-putting. I'm now to the point where I can run 100 rounds through my 1917 Enfield (.30-06) off the bench with very little discomfort, but lot of people complain that the .30-06 kicks too hard. If I hadn't spent a lot of time firing a No. 4 Enfield (.303 British) and a 96 Swedish Mauser (6.5x55) first, and just jumped in with the 1917, I might feel the same way. (I'm looking forward to getting my 48 Yugoslavian Mauser finished. The original military stock with the steel buttplate was a stout kicker. Perhaps with the new Richard's Microfit stock with a recoil pad it will be just as comfortable as the 1917. So, if you're going to start your collection with a centerfire rifle, the Savage Model 10 is an excellent choice - but get it in .223 caliber. Ammo is dirt cheap, and recoil is very light. Reading the rest of Captain Holly's recommendations should be interesting. | Sunday, August 17, 2003 Next Time, Stick it in His EAR Via MadOgre comes this story of a man in North Carolina who came to the defense of a woman being robbed at an ATM. His weapon? A North American Arms .22 magnum mini-revolver.
Bystander shoots suspect during robbery at ATMOh, the irony. The incident occurred a few minutes before 9 a.m. in front of the Bank of America branch at Clayton Corners Shopping Center in the western part of town.You can tell this is not a "big-city" paper. The word "hollered" would never be seen in the New York Times unless it was a quotation. "He still wouldn't stop," Strickland said. "I was standing beside the car, and he tried to run me over.Just a bit of advice, but if you stuck the barrel in his ear he might hear you better. When police arrived, Strickland told them he was sure he had shot the man in the right leg, and police notified area hospitals to be on the lookout for a patient with such a wound, said Lt. Bill Newsome of the Clayton Police Department.And this is the South, where people aren't punished for doing right. "If the suspect in this case was attempting to run over a person, then that person could use deadly force to resist the assault," Lock said.Just have to get that "vigilante" word in there, don'tcha? Strickland, who does not have a permit to carry a concealed weapon, said the gun had been lying on the dash of his car.Yup, that's the South. I do miss it sometimes. | Saturday, August 16, 2003 Just Fvcking Marvelous Looks like we've got another random serial killer. Excerpt 1: Serial sniper suspected in convenience store killings in W.Va.Excerpt 2: Sniper suspect is large white manPlease, let some armed citizen whack this nutcase. | Frank J. Continues his Firearms Tutorial Money quote: 500 S&W Magnum: After caving in the anti-gun nuts, Smith & Wesson had to win back the heart of their consumers. They did this by making a freaking huge handgun caliber. If someone is robbing the house four houses down from you, you can shoot through all the houses and hit him with this.Go read the rest here. Hurry. Frank has declared WAR!! on Glenn Reynolds. His site could become a smoking radioactive crater at any time. | Friday, August 15, 2003 Another Friday Five 1. How much time do you spend online each day? Way, way too much. 2. What is your browser homepage set to? I have a version of John C. Dvorak's Personal Portal installed on my harddrives both at home and at work. I like it. 3. Do you use any instant messaging programs? If so, which one(s)? No. I use the IM feature over at AR15.com occasionally (when the site is up - the servers are in NY and are still down.) 4. Where was your first webpage located? You're lookin' at it! 5. How long have you had your current website? Let's see...Since Wednesday, May 14, 2003 at about 1:00 PM. (First post was 1:39, but I managed to wipe my first contribution without posting it. Newbies, sheesh.) | More on the Gun Industry Bankrupting Lawsuits From that font of information, Jointogether.org, comes this update on the D.C. sniper lawsuit against Bushmaster: Denied Again: Judge Refuses Bushmaster's Plea In Sniper LawsuitReally? "Charged with supplying...?" Bushmaster isn't charged with anything. That implies that there is a criminal "charge" layed. Bushmaster is defendant in a lawsuit where it is accused of negligence. Bushmaster supplied the gun? It was my understanding that Malvo admitted to stealing it. And if Bushmaster "knew or should have known that Bull's Eye was a reckless and incompetent dealer" then why isn't the BATF being sued for not pulling their Federal Firearms License? Bull's Eye, if you weren't aware, was connected to Buford Furrow in 1997 when one of the guns he possessed was traced back to that shop. Bull's Eye had been investigated by the BATF for some time prior to Malvo's five-finger discount, according to this story. In fact, Bull's Eye could not account for 160 firearms two years prior to the theft of the Bushmaster rifle. So, who really is responsible? Sure as hell not Bushmaster, but they'll pay through the nose to defend themselves from this ridiculous lawsuit. Question: Does the BATF tell gun manufacturers that licensed dealers are "reckless and incompetent?" If not, how else would they know? Question 2: If the BATF can prove a licensed dealer is "reckless and incompetent," why don't they pull the license? The DC-area sniper suspects, who were prohibited purchasers, obtained their assault rifle through the negligence of Bull's Eye Shooter Supply of Tacoma, Washington, one of Bushmaster's handpicked gun dealers. The gun lobby is attempting to override the judge's decision in this case and other gun related lawsuits with federal legislation immunizing the gun industry from liability in virtually all civil suits brought by gun violence victims.So, according to the Brady Center (source for this "release") theft = negligence. If someone steals from you, you were obviously negligent and it's all your fault. All actions involving the stolen property are also your responsibility. Therefore, by this logic, if someone steals my truck and uses it in a drive-by shooting, I am liable and can be sued by the victims and their families because I was negligent and allowed the vehicle to be stolen, and both the dealership and Ford are liable because they knew they were selling a vehicle into a high-theft area. Makes sense to me. (Not!) Daniel Vice, an attorney for nine families of victims of the DC-area snipers said, "Any Senator who honestly reviews this case of negligent and reckless behavior by these gun sellers would immediately work to defeat the special interest legislation that seeks to strip away the rights of gun violence victims. The gun lobby's mission to protect bad apple gun sellers and take away victims' rights is absolutely detrimental to America's public safety." Mr. Vice is a Staff Attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.That fisks itself. I can't do it justice. The suit was filed on January 16, 2003 against Bushmaster Firearms, Inc., the distributor and manufacturer of the Bushmaster XM-15 E2S .223 caliber semi-automatic assault rifle used by the snipers and against Bull's Eye Shooter Supply, the gun dealer from which the Bushmaster mysteriously "disappeared," ending up in the hands of the snipers. A total of 238 guns have "disappeared" from Bull's Eye's store in three years - an average of more than one gun per week. Bull's Eye's guns have been traced to more than fifty crimes. The suit also names as defendants the two individual owners of Bull's Eye, Brian Borgelt and Charles N. Carr, as well as sniper suspects John Muhammad and Lee Malvo.If they could prove that Bull's Eye sold the gun "under the table" to Muhammed or Malvo, then they have a case - against the shop. If an employee of Bull's Eye ripped it off and sold it, they'd have a case against that employee. But in no way could it be the responsibility of Bushmaster. Again, if Bull's Eye was known to be "reckless or incompetent" to the BATF, then they should have yanked the license (which they finally did.) Why isn't the BATF being sued? Oh, right - in order to sue the government, you have to get its permission. Not bleeding likely. The suit charges Bull's Eye with operating its gun shop in such a grossly negligent manner that scores of guns, including the high-powered Bushmaster, inexplicably "disappeared" from the store. The suit asserts that Bull's Eye took the gun into its inventory in July 2002, that both sniper suspects visited the store after that date and that Muhammad practiced his sharpshooting in the store's shooting range. Because both sniper suspects were legally prohibited from buying guns, they could not have obtained the gun without the gun shop's negligence. Bushmaster Firearms is charged with negligence in continuing to sell high-firepower assault rifles through Bull's Eye even though government audits of the store had revealed hundreds of "missing" guns.Government audits from before the theft of the gun. Again, since when is "theft" equal to "negligence?" And why is it BUSHMASTER's fault? (Because they are eeeeeeevil and have the deepest pockets - conditions which to liberals are often one and the same. But we are talking a gun manufacturer here. They're especially eeeeeevil.) Legislation to grant the gun industry unprecedented immunity from legal claims passed the House of Representatives on April 9 of this year. It is currently pending in the Senate with 54 cosponsors. Several Senators have vowed a filibuster against the bill should it move to the Senate floor. The National Rifle Association has declared that the immunity legislation is its top legislative priority in Congress.And this case is a perfect example of why. | Thursday, August 14, 2003 The NRA Gets Off its Ass and On the Silveira Bandwagon After opposing the Silveira case in the California court system, the NRA files an amicus brief in favor of the case being heard by the Supreme Court. It's a good one, too. Go read. My favorite part? They hammer on the "incorporation" question right off the bat. That one's been my particular hobby-horse since I started studying gun "control." Here's hoping. | And This is a Bad Thing...Why?
I don't think that's supposed to be my reaction to the cartoon, but it is. It's also my reaction to this one, also by Mr. Sheriffus:
Good for me. | Things That Make You Go "Hmm...." On the way in to work this morning, I was behind a car that had a standard 8.5x11" piece of paper taped up in the hatchback window. Printed on it was a quotation, apparently printed on an ink-jet or laser printer in a bold, legible font: Well, isn't that profound. But what was the point? Of course, my first thought was "This person is a But it took violence to oust him. What we're trying to do in Iraq now is non-violent - the reconstruction of a nation and the establishment of representative government. Gandhi said some other things, too, one of which was: "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."Gandhi had a lot to say about the use of violence, but what it seems to boil down to is that initiating violence is evil, responding to it is not. The difference between those who oppose and those who support the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq is the understanding that those invasions were a response to, not an initiation of violence. This is why I find the liberal desire for the U.S. to intervene militarily in Liberia so hypocritical. They expect us to go in there and bang heads in order to stabilize the country, but they object to our military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's use of violence in all three cases. The only difference is that Liberia has essentially zero U.S. national security implications. The same cannot be said about Iraq nor Afghanistan. The funny thing is, the use of non-violent protest in the mode of Gandhi would probably be effective in Liberia - assuming you could get the international press to pay much attention. The use of non-violent protest in Iraq and Afghanistan would only have resulted in a lot more mass graves. Often non-violence doesn't work. Ask the victims of Tiananmen Square. | "We are Kevin of Blog. You Will be Assimiliated. Resistance is Futile." (Thanks to Kevin Schaum of Lazypundit for the title of this post.) Kevin of Whizbangblog has this week's Blogging Kevins post up, and I'm a contributor. Damn, there are a lot of us! (I almost used Kevin McGehee's post title: "My God! It's Full of Kevins!" but that would be unethical.) | Wednesday, August 13, 2003 OK, THIS is Interesting... Steven "Spock" Den Beste has a three part essay up on the difference between Europe and America, and some predictions as to what the future holds for Europe. In particular, I found this passage fascinating: (T)he general trend in Europe is to continue to reduce the work week while continuing to implement policies which give businesses a disincentive to invest and hire. If there's any way out of this trap, I haven't seen any discussion of it.As I've noted, I'm slogging through Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged for the first time, and that is her entire premise in a nutshell. I've said in here before that she never made a point she wasn't willing to beat to a bloody pulp, but that doesn't mean she was wrong. I disagree with a lot of the Objectivist philosophy, but when it comes down to describing the behavior of socialist governments and the people willing to live under them, she was, apparently, spot-on. Steven concludes, though, with this cheery prediction: So in the end what you'll get is economic collapse. There are various ways in which this can play out, but none of them are good. And as long as Europe is locked in this economic death-spiral, they are unlikely to be a military threat to us, and at least that's a blessing.Which doesn't give me the warm fuzzies for the future my grandchildren will be living in. But I think Steven makes a very strong case, the same as that made by Alexander Tytler. I just hope that we are able to avoid the same fate here. A lot can happen in 50 years. | This is Too Cool Aaron the Liberal Slayer has put up the 2008 Blogger Ticket on the right-hand side of his blog so it's always on the front page. Thanks, Aaron! | Bring 'Em On Instapundit has been covering the "flypaper" theory of the American occupation of Iraq acting to draw Islamist militants into conflict with our military there, rather than our civilian population over here. His coverage started back in July, and here's some more evidence. A New York Times article describing exactly what's going on: Iraq luring militants eager to fight U.S.That's the idea. Violence against U.S. troops continued Tuesday. One soldier from the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment was killed and another wounded when their convoy struck three improvised explosive devices while driving near Ramadi, about 60 miles west of Baghdad.I believe, however, that these men have died doing what they volunteered for - defending their nation. At least they often get the chance to capture or kill the people trying to kill them. Well-organized fightersAs opposed to slipping over America's largely unpoliced borders in small groups and doing the same thing over here, but to civilians. Flourishing amid chaosBut for how much longer? The extent of their activities remains cloudy. But Web sites believed linked to al-Qaida are clear enough about the envisaged fight: "The struggle with America has to be carefully managed, the 'electric shock method' must be applied, relentless shocks that haunt the Americans all the time everywhere, without giving them a break to regain balance or power."Last shocks of a dying electric eel? We'll see. The difference between the Russians in Afghanistan and the Americans in Iraq is that we're trying to make their lives better, and the majority of Iraqi's seem to know this. But you wouldn't know that from the reporting the major news media is giving us. | Tuesday, August 12, 2003 If You Really Think Public Health-Care is a Good Idea, Consider Public Housing, Public Restrooms, and Public Pools.
| Monday, August 11, 2003 Talk About Standing Up for Your Beliefs! Via SayUncle, comes the continuing saga of Francis Warin, a Frenchman who moved to the U.S. in 1961 at the age of 30 so he could be a weapon designer. Peripherally involved in a BATF entrapment case (imagine that!) in 1970, he studied the Second Amendment and concluded (as have a large number of gun rights proponents) that it meant what it said, and not what the politicians and the judges said it meant, he first filed a class-action lawsuit that was denied. Then he got serious. He manufactured a machine gun (weapon designer, remember) and refused to pay the $200 'tax.' When that didn't get him arrested, he took it physically down to the local BATF office where they not only didn't shoot him or stomp on his pets, they didn't even bother to arrest him. He finally had to embarrass the government by telling his story to a newspaper before they arrested and charged him. Let's just say it didn't turn out like he wanted. The case was U.S. v Warin, and it was one of the worst cases for gun-rights supporters we've seen. It was, in fact, a textbook example of the "collective rights" interpretation of the Second Amendment based on U.S. v Miller and other cases subsequent to Miller. (Remember, this was 1975 - as the gun-control movement and the "collective rights" argument was approaching its zenith in the post-60's, post-Nixon era.) Mr. Warin was convicted of a felony and received probation with an interesting stipulation: He had the permission of the court to retain his right to arms even though he was a convicted felon because otherwise he'd be out of a job. So Mr. Warin went back to his job. In 1999, now retired, Mr. Warin tried to buy a gun from a dealer. He filled out a Form 4473 and, in accordance with the requirements, indicated that he was a convicted felon, but thought that the court decision allowed him to purchase a gun. Wrong again. And he couldn't get a hearing on it, either. So he apparently intimated to the FBI that he could "bring a bomb" to them. They were not amused. They raided his home (I don't know if any kittens were stomped - this was the FBI) and took 22 weapons. But didn't press charges. He fought for return of his property, and lost. So this time, he manufactured a suppressed .22 pistol and sent it via registered mail to the U.S. Attorney’s office in Toledo. He got arrested again and thrown in jail where he is now on a hunger strike. I will grant that Mr. Warin has courage and is resolute in his quest for justice. Unfortunately, I don't expect him to fare any better than John Lee Haney did when he essentially repeated Mr. Warin's original argument. What Mr. Warin did, and is doing again is tilting at windmills. Now, at 72 and starving, he looks the part of Don Quixote. We need people willing to tilt at windmills. We need people to be unwilling to move to the back of the bus. We need people willing to stand up for their rights. And we need to spread the word when they do, not let it languor on page 6 of section Q of the local newspaper. Make no mistake, this is civil disobedience by someone convinced he is right, and who is willing to pay the consequences of, well let Voltaire say it: It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.As for me, I'm an reminded of Claire Wolfe: It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.It might not be too late. The next test is Silveira v. Lockyer. Will the Supreme Court hear it? And if so, how will they decide? Mr. Warin is a brave man, and I honor his grit. I just don't hold much hope of him winning against this particular windmill. | The Power to Tax = The Power to Destroy From Keepandbeararms.com comes the link to this story: Feeling salty over pepper spray(All emphasis mine.) There's much more. Here are some appropriate quotes: Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. - Louis D. BrandeisSorry, but that's my way of ranting. Or one of them, at least. | Sunday, August 10, 2003 If I Had Emotions, I'd be Pleased According to this quiz I'm Data:
A controlled personality with a vast range of skills and behavior, you are often intrigued by the people and places surrounding you.Can't say I'm surprised. | Saturday, August 09, 2003
Frank J. Gives Basic Gun Instructions You've GOT to read this! Excerpt: Here are the different types of guns:Sometimes Frank just slays me! | I Wish MY Job Application Looked Like THIS One! Just received this in e-mail: WAL-MART Job Application: This is an actual job application that a 17 year old boy submitted to Wal-Mart in Florida .. and they hired him because he was so honest and funny! He now works in loss prevention...Well, I don't know if I believe THAT, but it reads good! NAME: Greg Bulmash. | Friday, August 08, 2003 Photoshoppers RULE One of the guys on AR15.com created this faux movie poster, and I just had to put it up here:
| Pass a New Gun Control Law, Make Lots of New Criminals Out of Good Citizens Australia has "tightened" the "loopholes" in its gun laws again, and is about to engage in The money quote? Geelong Gun and Rod Association president Miles Hodge said most antiques were harmless because ammunition was unavailable ``or they're so ancient they're more likely to blow up in your face than they are to kill someone''.That's because it isn't about safety. It's about control. | The Friday Five 1. What's the last place you traveled to, outside your own home state/country? Portland, Oregon. That's where I was Tuesday through Thursday. Actually, Forest Grove, but it's a suburb. 2. What's the most bizarre/unusual thing that's ever happened to you while traveling? On my honeymoon my wife and I got the last room at the Holiday Inn in the town I grew up in - and a hurricane came ashore right on top of the town that night. Wasn't much of a hurricane, though. I'd been through worse. 3. If you could take off to anywhere, money and time being no object, where would you go? The Alpha Quadrant. Warp factor nine. 4. Do you prefer traveling by plane, train or car? If I have my druthers, I'll drive. 5. What's the next place on your list to visit? I'm planning to spend my tenth wedding anniversary on a beach in the Lower Keys. But that's just under two years from now. | Please, Allow Me to Fisk... Instapundit pointed to this USA Today piece on the political third-rail that gun control has become. I thought it was interesting, but (of course) I had some comments: Gun-control debate gets muzzledThat's a point I made in an earlier essay. Democrats, who believe that their calls for gun controls might have cost them the White House in 2000, are less willing to take on the gun lobby. Polls suggest that public fears about terrorism have helped mute the debate.I certainly hope so. I was pissed off enough when it passed. I'd really be P.O.'d if Dubya signed the renewal. And now, gun rights supporters are closing in on what probably would be their most enduring victory.Which would be a pretty fair gauge of just how at-risk Daschle thinks his seat is. The political divide over gun control has long cut geographically: Rural areas generally oppose greater controls on firearms, and urban areas generally favor them. Republicans usually oppose restrictions; Democrats usually back them. But Democrats in rural areas where hunting is a tradition have a tough time winning elections if they are seen by voters as anti-gun.Let me interject something here: I know that the term "anti-gun" is just shorthand reporterese, but realistically the term successfully redefines the issue. It isn't that the electorate thinks the politician is "anti-gun," but that the electorate believes the politician wants to disarm law-abiding citizens. That isn't anti-gun, that's anti-citizen - and the electorate has generally known it. Since 911, a lot more of the electorate has woken to that fact. That longtime party dilemma came into sharp focus after Democrat Al Gore, a supporter of gun controls, lost the key states of Arkansas, Tennessee and West Virginia en route to his narrow defeat in the 2000 presidential election. Some Democrats believe Gore's stance on guns was to blame.Some Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents thought so too. Democrats became even more reticent after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, made improving security a national priority.And didn't that shock their socks off! Hell, we've always put it in the context of safety. And for that matter so has our opposition. We say it increases your safety, they say it increases your risk. Looks like the soccer-mom contingent has made its choice. Immunity legislationSo sayeth the mouthpiece of the organization that promotes the book Every Handgun is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns by Josh Sugarman, executive director of the Violence Policy Center. What do you expect him to say? The Brady Center, which is providing legal assistance in about two dozen lawsuits against the industry, says the bill would stop a lawsuit filed by relatives of those slain in a series of attacks that included the sniper shootings last fall in the Washington, D.C., area.As well it should. The whole point of these lawsuits is to bankrupt the manufacturers since the gun Representatives of the firearms industry say legitimate businesses that sell guns legally should not be held responsible when the guns end up in criminals' hands. They say the legislation before Congress is needed to protect gunmakers and dealers from bankruptcy, which has become a threat as the number of lawsuits against the industry increases.Now, it might be that my tinfoil hat is on a bit askew, but was it an innocent mistake to screw up Lawrence Keane's position? He's Vice President and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. So, he represents sport shooters, not gang-bangers. OK? "If a dealer sells a legal product to a consumer who has undergone a criminal background check and filled out the federally required forms, and (who) later gives that gun to someone else to commit a crime, that dealer should not be sued," Keane says. Dealers or manufacturers who violate gun laws should be subject to lawsuits, he says. But Henigan counters that if the federal bill becomes law, the victims' families in the sniper lawsuit would have to prove that the owner of the Bull's Eye Shooter Supply in Tacoma, Wash., willfully violated gun laws involving the specific gun used in the slayings.Well, HORRORS! Apparently Mr. Henigan believes that, simply because the owner of Bull's Eye Shooter Supply should pay regardless of the facts. That could be difficult to prove in court, Henigan says. The shop owner, Brian Borgelt, has claimed that the rifle allegedly used by John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo was shoplifted.The facts are that Brian Borgelt ran a shoddy operation, that the BATF knew he ran a shoddy operation, but the BATF only recently yanked Mr. Borgelt's license because of all the publicity. It would seem to me that the party that needs to be sued for not doing their job is the BATF, but we know how likely that is. According to a Seattle Times report, Lee Boyd Malvo confessed that he stole the gun from the gun shop. (Original story is not available on-line, but reference to it is in this one.) Yes, by all appearances, Bull's Eye was badly run, but it's the job of the BATF to control that - not stomp kittens. If Malvo had fingered Borgelt for selling the gun under the table, then there'd be grounds for a suit, and the "immunity" legislation wouldn't save him. But somebody please explain to me why (other than perceived deep pockets) Bushmaster is being sued? How is it their fault? The bill to shield gunmakers and sellers from lawsuits was passed by the House in April, while much of the nation's attention was focused on Iraq.With the unspoken: "Those sneaky bastards!" In the Senate, sponsors quickly signed on. Opponents, led by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., promise to filibuster the bill to try to prevent it from coming up for a vote. But sponsors need just six more votes, for a total of 60, to end a filibuster and force a vote.From an industry that can support those kinds of losses. The gun industry in America is not so large, regardless of our love of guns. The tactic isn't to milk the companies for everything they can, it's to bleed them to death through lawsuit after lawsuit, regardless of the outcome. That's why the legislation is necessary. In 1998, Chicago, which had banned the sale of handguns, sued the firearms industry. The city claimed that the industry had created a public nuisance through sales patterns that allowed guns to be diverted to criminals. Within two years, 33 other cities and counties sued on similar grounds.And they can still sue for unsafe design - but not if the gun goes off when the trigger is pulled. Negligent distribution? That one doesn't fly anywhere. So far, none of the lawsuits has been successful.Gee, I wonder why? Suits in New Orleans, Miami, Atlanta, Wilmington, Del., and Camden County, N.J., have been dismissed. Boston and Cincinnati voluntarily dropped their claims, in part because of cost.And remember, they're doing it on the taxpayer's back. The gun industry isn't. About a dozen of the local lawsuits are still working their way through the courts. Henigan says he is heartened by several appellate decisions that have allowed suits in Ohio, Illinois and New Jersey to go to trial. But he believes that much of the pending litigation could be dismissed if Congress passes the immunity bill.Perhaps because they can't? And they know it? Labels: fisk, gun control, media | Mike Ramirez Responds to the Secret Service In case you weren't aware, Pulitzer Prize winning political cartoonist Mike Ramirez got into a bit of hot water with the Secret Service with this cartoon:
Well, now he has a cartoon up in response to the reaction of the Secret Service:
And here's one worth a thousand words:
I really like Mike! | Blogsnot Strikes Again! Apparently Blogger is having a problem with permalinks. Old ones work. New ones don't. Bummer. | The Reynolds/Lucas 2008 Ticket Picks Up Steam! Although there are still a few holes in the proposed Cabinet, the "Elect the Great in 2008" campaign continues. Now Jeff Soyer of Alphecca has gotten Chris Muir, of Day by Day to create the first campaign poster - which kicks ass! Go take a look. I'm still waiting for Cox & Forkum to weigh in. | Thursday, August 07, 2003 "Gun SAFETY" = "Gun ELIMINATION." Just Like "Gun CONTROL" Used to. Via Acidman, I find this Washington Gun violence follyMinimum safety standards that, of course, will need to be endlessly "tightened" to eliminate "loopholes" and "save just one life." Recalls and warnings on guns that have been manufactured for decades, but are now found to be "unsafe" - because they're capable of hurling small metal projectiles at high velocity when someone operates the trigger. And "limit the sale of products" means "limit the sales to zero for the general populace, but let government officials have whatever they deem "necessary." The legislation is backed by a coalition of gun control supporters and liberal groups, including the Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center, the NAACP, the American Bar Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Consumer Federation of America.The usual suspects. A careful reading of the Corzine-Kennedy bill, however, suggests that it would give sweeping powers to an attorney general (particularly if someone like Janet Reno were to assume that position) to make life miserable for anyone involved in the sale or manufacturing of firearms. Title I of the bill would give the attorney general the authority to put forward any regulation he or she deems "reasonably necessary to reduce or prevent unreasonable risk of injury" from a particular gun. Moreover, "any person" would be allowed to petition the attorney general to "require the recall, repair, or replacement of a firearm product, or issuance of refunds with respect to a firearm product." If there are any limits on such powers, they certainly aren't apparent from reading the bill.It is one of my greatest fears that someone like Maryland AG J. Joseph Curran will get appointed to that post under some future Democratic administration. Mr. Curran is the author of the anti-gun manifesto "A Farewell to Arms." Read what he advocates. At least he's honest enough to say it. | Tuesday, August 05, 2003 Another Blast from the Past! A quick one before I head for the airport. Jane Galt had a recent post on "Why can't the Democrats seem to get it together?" and it's stirred a bit of controversy in the comment section over just who actually won the 2000 election. That reminded me of a piece I wrote during the debacle on the lost, lamented Themestream.com site (which was also picked up by Keepandbeararms.com - this is the piece that got me banned from posting at Democraticunderground.com. Can't imagine why.) An Uncomfortable ConclusionI still stand by this piece. Back to posting Thursday night or Friday. | Monday, August 04, 2003 History Calls - Will We Answer? Throughout history, man has made advances that were the result of individual genius, and advances that were the result of the joint work of many. Each advancement made has been, goes the cliché, on the shoulders of the giants that came before. The concept of democracy as first practiced by the Greeks can be argued to be the result of the genius of one man. The creation of the theory of relativity by Einstein was the work of a singular genius. More often, though, the same great stride is made - almost simultaneously - in many places around the world. When that happens, it is the result of a confluence of ideas that together affect the consciousness of many and that lead almost inexorably to one conclusion. Darwin's Origin of Species was a new idea, but it wasn't his alone. The accumulation of biological and archaeological knowledge, plus the weakening hold of religious dogma around the world was leading many people down the same path. Darwin merely had more and better firsthand knowledge and the brain required to put it together - and publish - first. The United States of America was the result of the confluence of many ideas, and some lucky accidents of geography, and psychology, and timing. It was, in fact, one of those rare, low probability events that just happened to work. Beginning with John Locke's Two Treatises of Government in the late 17th century, great thinkers were publishing works on the inherent rights of man, and the ills and excesses of government. America became, during that time, the place that those who didn't fit into their own societies could go and be free to do what they wanted, rather than what society dictated they do. It was a place for the religiously oppressed, the economically restricted, the nonconformist. Mix a population of that type with a burgeoning philosophy of self-reliance and individual rights, economic freedom, the autonomy that a a new land and 3,000 mile of separation provides, add a dash of tyrannical rule by a monarch on the other side of the ocean and not right in the head, stir vigorously with an iron military fist, and we got the American revolution. That part's not surprising. What is surprising is that we won, and even more suprising is the government that came out of that victory - the first government to recognize, in writing, the danger of government. Throughout the writings of the Founders, it is apparent that they all understood that government is the concentration of power. That government, always and everywhere, tends to grow at the expense of those it governs. "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government" said Thomas Jefferson. "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty" said John Adams. "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one" wrote Thomas Paine. "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master" said George Washington. Government, like fire, is a tool we cannot live without, but a tool that can wreak destruction if it's not carefully controlled. Destruction on a small scale, like "no-knock" raids on the wrong house, or destruction on vast scales like World Wars, and on medium scales like Stalin's purges and the Killing Fields of Cambodia. In democratic governments the accumulation of power is usually gradual and slow, not noticed generally. In fact, major accumulations are often greeted with the approval of the populace, because these accumulations must be accomplished with the cooperation of the governed. Almost never is there recognition that power accumulated by government is done at the expense of the individual, nor is there much consideration of the possibility of future abuse. Power is yeilded most often for what are considered the best of reasons - the promised betterment of others, or the defense of the population against some new threat. Don't misunderstand - I'm not here shouting "Conspiracy! Conspiracy!" I'm fully aware of Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by human stupidity." But Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis illuminated the problem: "Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent."and "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."Henry Louis Mencken described the mechanism: "The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods." So, knowing these things, why does government still grow? Because of human nature. Greed. Selfishness. Fear. Hate. Charity. Compassion. Love. Honor. And it does so because of ignorance. Because not everyone does know these things. Our democratic form of government offers almost universal suffrage. The only requirements are citizenship and the age of majority. The only disqualifications: a criminal record or mental incompetence. (Which, were there any justice, would bar most politicians from office.) There is no requirement - nor should there be - that voters actually have any knowledge of that on which they are voting. Like all rights, the right to vote comes with a responsibilty to exercise that right intelligently, but there cannot be any law to force one to do so, and most don't. And why? Because staying current is damned near impossible for any one person to do. It's too much work. And if you depend on someone else to do that work for you (as we've depended on Big Media to do for decades) how can you know you can trust them? I read an interesting essay a couple of days ago that helped inspire me to write this one. That essay was The State of the Republic, written in May of this year by Barry Hirsch. In it were these thoughts: Democrats in general, and progressives in particular, are hell bent on converting our democratic republic into a quasi-socialist state. Everything they think, say and do supports this. Republicans in general, and conservatives in particular, espouse preserving the republic as close to its original concept as possible, yet, for years they've been merely leaving ruts in the dust with their heels as the country is dragged ever closer to socialism.Recent history being our guide, I think the first sentence is essentially accurate. The second sentence is half-truth, as while the Republicans talk a good game, those heel marks appear awfully light to me. But I fully agree with Mr. Hirsch's last statement - embarking on a path to restoration, or to any path other than the one we're being led down is, indeed, a tall order. How do we accomplish this reversal? Mr. Hirsch advises: First, the generations now of the age of exercising civic power are products of incremental miseducation, and those presently in the government indoctrination system will be worse off than their predecessors. At least the majority of adult Americans now in the civic loop can read and comprehend basic principles. Those in the pipeline will not be able to do that effectively, because they aren't being taught the tools necessary to think comprehensively; they are instead being brainwashed. The current crop of adults has been conditioned in the mindset that things are more or less as they should be. This makes them unreceptive to ideas that would place their emotional comfort in jeopardy. That is the first hurdle that must be cleared, and they must then be convinced to replace their local, state and federal representatives with people who are dedicated to restoring the republic. They must see to it that their kids are either placed in private schools with civics curricula that accurately impart the principles upon which the nation was founded, or commit to teaching their kids the truth themselves.Mr. Hirsch has the key - education - but while he sees the problem, and he sees the solution, he recognizes the barrier, the hurdle, that must be overcome before the solution can be implemented. How do we overcome that hurdle when it will make people uncomfortable and "place their emotion comfort in jeopardy?" What would it take to engender the "outrage of betrayal" in the majority of the population? The attack on Pearl Harbor awoke America to an uncomfortable reality. September 11, 2001 did too. What would it take to make the majority recognize the danger of government again and do something about it? Some overwhelming travesty of justice? Well, we've seen several travesties in recent years, but none of them awoke the populace. At least, not the majority of the populace. But, as Jesse Jackson once said, "In politics, an organized minority is a political majority." Nothing illustrates that better than the power of the merely (yes, merely) 4 million member NRA - recognized as one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington. The NEA holds similar power, as does the AARP. Education is the key, but Mr. Hirsch, I think, sees the wrong lock. Not the population at large, but a segment of it is all that is truly needed, and it can stop the apparently inexorable slide toward statism. Last week, Jeff Soyer of Alphecca wrote, tongue-in-cheek, that we needed libertarian bloggers in high public office. (Small "l" libertarians.) And he said this: "The fact is, us(sic) bloggers have some power now. We really are the new media. Let's get cracking!" And you know what? He's right! He's just aiming too high to start. A number of us have experienced the outrage of betrayal. Our emotional comfort is worn thin. And we're more than just the "new media" - much more. The internet is the most important step forward in human communication since moveable type. It is, arguably, the most important invention in history. Steven Den Beste lists it among his four most important inventions in history: "spoken language, writing, movable type printing and digital electronic information processing." These technologies, in conjuction with other advances, allowed man to spring ahead to greater individual power and freedom. As someone said, were it not for moveable type, Martin Luther's 95 theses, and Luther himself, would have disappeared into the maw of the Catholic Church. Instead, the printing press spread his ideas throughout Europe and fomented a revolution. The people of that time used the technology, then not 100 years old, to educate themselves. Thus it is now with the internet, raised to an exponential power. Not only can we learn, we can discuss, argue, and fact check - and we can do it across the country in realtime. Fact and truth, reality and reason rule on the Web. "Idiotarians" don't fare well here because illogical or mendacious appeals to emotion can be (and are) exposed with ease, and the information is disseminated with almost no effort whatsoever. We represent a minority, but an organized, informed, intelligent minority - and that can make us a political majority. One problem, though, and it's illustrated by another quote: "It stands to reason that self-righteous, inflexible, single-minded, authoritarian true believers are politically organized. Open-minded, flexible, complex, ambiguous, anti-authoritarian people would just as soon be left to mind their own fucking business." R.U. SiriusAin't it the truth? We are living at one of those historical confluences of technology, thought, and opportunity. The possiblity exists that we, the denizens of the internet, the anti-idiotarians, could be the spark of a revival of the rights of individuals in opposition to the creeping statism that we see every day. "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty," is the inscription on the National Archives building in Washington. We've fallen down on the job. Time to pick up the (much lighter) burden, and get back to what made this nation great. Let's not let this opportunity slide by, and descend again back into bondage. | Not Much Blog for You! Sorry, but I'm not going to be posting much this week. I'm busier than a one-armed paper hanger, and I'm going out of town on business Tuesday. I'm going to try to get an essay post in tonight before I leave, but that will be it until Friday. In the mean time, read some of my blogroll: Say Uncle Publicola Ravenwood Ipse Dixit Lead and Gold The Feces Flinging Monkey The Winds of Change AlphaPatriot | Sunday, August 03, 2003 Guns for Me, But Not for Thee? According to this NY Post article, it looks like NYC is "tightening" the already python-like permitting system, and (Horrors!) reviewing the permits of celebrities and officials. ARMED AND FAMOUSI would infer that they have not applied for carry permits then. Not that they were denied same. Their "premise" permit allows them to keep a gun in their homes and demands that when they travel with their weapons, the guns must be unloaded and locked in a safety box, with the ammunition kept separate.I bet that's going to change shortly! Bruno is the only state pol to have one. But plenty of judges have them.Don't you feel safer already? Knowing that Joan Rivers doesn't have a gun will help me sleep better at night. </sarcasm> (UPDATE) Kim du Toit comments: "The power to 'license' means the power to deny." Amen. And if it requires a permit IT'S NOT A RIGHT! | Friday, August 01, 2003
First Rule of Reloading: DON'T RELOAD WHEN YOU'RE TIRED OR DISTRACTED! Here it is about 10:30 and I'm finishing up after reloading 100 rounds of 7BR, 50 rounds of .357 and 150 rounds of .45ACP, and what do I do? Dump about 500 grains of Unique out of the powder measure into the nearly full bottle of 2400! (Idiot! Idiot! Idiot!) Hey! They're the same shape and size, right? So I dumped half the bottle of 2400 in the back yard and torched it. I'll check tomorrow to make sure I got all of the Unique out of the 2400, or I'll just have to burn the whole thing and get a new bottle of 2400. At $19.99 it's a cheaper lesson than loading .357 Magnum 180 grain silhouette loads with mixed powder. (kaBOOM!) | Last Post for a Bit: The Friday Five 1. What time do you wake up on weekday mornings? Depends on work. Recently 5:45 2. Do you sleep in on the weekends? How late? Depends on whether I'm going shooting or not. Tomorrow I'm getting up at 5:00 so I can pick someone up and be at the range by 7:15. Sunday I'll probably sleep in until 10:00 or so. 3. Aside from waking up, what is the first thing you do in the morning? Answer the call of nature. 4. How long does it take to get ready for your day? About 45 minutes, usually. 5. When possible, what is your favorite place to go for breakfast? My kitchen. | Refrain of the Great American Ostrich: "They'll Never Outlaw MY Guns!" More gun-grabbing going on in Australia, according to this report Firearms fixed in Government's sights(All emphasis mine.) So now the Aussies are worried about black-powder handguns? And all they have to do to get rid of them is make it obnoxiously difficult and expensive to keep them. May I suggest something to American gun owners? How about purchasing one of these:
Just a thought. UPDATE: I knew somebody had to be fighting to "close" this "loophole." | Thursday, July 31, 2003 NO BLOG FOR YOU! Really busy today, and I'm going shooting this weekend with someone who's just getting back into it, so I'll be loading ammo tonight (and probably tomorrow). No new posts for a bit. Sorry. | Wednesday, July 30, 2003 This Pretty Much Ends Whatever Hope I Had for Middle East Peace (Via Lileks) Go watch this slide show and then tell me that the Islamicists want peace. When dogs are rabid, you put them down. I hope Iraq is acting like flypaper to these wackos, I really do. | Sorry if I'm Late But I just found Steven Den Beste's Amazon Wishlist. 
Damn, I knew the guy had a sense of humor to match that intellect! I'm not sure why he'd want a Demag AC650 construction crane (perhaps to drive through a downtown area with the boom swinging freely as in Terminator 3?) I do see the attraction of a personal submarine, however (at only $4*10**7! [that's $40,000,000 to non-engineers] what a bargain!) And I certainly can understand the Warp Drive upgrade for the Clueless, but Britney Spears in a bikini?? That's bad enough, but the associated pint of maple syrup just puts it over the top! Oh, and Steven? You're getting your 16 minutes of fame. Just in random 30-second increments. | Just So You Don't Think I'm Only a Fan of Modern Guns While I do like the FN P90 for its futuristic looks, I'm also a fan of older guns (though I personally draw the line at the front-stuffer charcoal burners). In fact, like many, I've lusted after one of these
It is a beautiful piece, isn't it? Wish I had a spare $3k. | Can You Say "Double Standard?" In conjunction with the story of the officer who shot a handcuffed suspect in her cruiser - but wasn't prosecuted because it was "an accident," here's another case of preferential treatment for law-enforcement. It seems that Multinomah County, Oregon Sherriff's Dept. Sergeant Patrick Coffeen had an unregistered machinegun. Now, this will normally land your butt in Club Fed, but not Mr. Coffeen. No, in a plea agreement Sergeant Coffeen plead guilty to attempted unlawful possession of a machine gun, a Class C felony, rather than actual unlawful possession. He had to pay a $2,500 fine, and has lost both his job and his right to arms (which means he won't be working in law-enforcement again.) Money quote: "You can't have that weapon unless the federal government gives you permission, and he didn't have that permission"And the gun If you have to have permission, IT'S NOT A RIGHT! | Happy Birthday, Gnat! Lileks announces Gnat's 3rd Birthday. (Bottom of the page) You're going to have to watch that one, James. She's BRIGHT (and by that I don't mean atheist.) | Tuesday, July 29, 2003 Kim du Toit Needs Help! Kim ran National Ammo Day last year, and was disappointed in the result. So, as he says in this post, if he's going to fail, he's going to fail BIG! And he needs our help to do it. I suggest that all of us gun-bloggers go sign up and go spread the word. Now it will be National Ammo WEEK, and involve two weekends in the fine political tradition of stretching the facts. Let's get moving! | ALREADY the Reynolds/Lucas Ticket has Competition! Mark Byron has thrown his hat into the ring for the 2008 race. With Rick Santorum as his VP! Go read his cabinet appointments. He's stealing from us! | This is Why My House Has Guns, but NO BARS (Third story on this page.) SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. - Single mother Tina Marie Satterfield tried to make her home safe from crime, but she died early Monday, trapped inside the burning house by window security bars. | Sweet Freaking Jebus, Doesn't ANYONE Take Responsibility for Their Actions Anymore? City of Madera, police officer sue stun gun maker over death The city of Madera and a police officer who killed a suspect after drawing a handgun instead of a Taser device, have put the blame on the manufacturer of the stun gun, alleging the company failed to provide appropriate training.Sounds like the fault of officer Noriega and her training to me. How in the hell can it be Taser's fault? Torres had been arrested on suspicion of resisting and delaying police as they tried to quell a loud party.Oh for jebus's sake. The POLICE DEPARTMENT is at fault for improperly training the officer. They APPROVED it. They also claim say it wasn't the first time law enforcement had mistakenly fired bullets instead of an electronic charge, pointing to allegedly similar incidents in other states.The first time I saw this was at the Sacramento airport - two apparent handguns, one on the belt, one lower down on the leg in a "tactical" holster - and I said right then that they were begging for a negligent discharge. The Taser looked very similar to the duty Glock, and under pressure you're going to draw the gun you're used to drawing. But Taser isn't at fault here - the officer is - the Department is. Oh hell, let's sue the gun manufacturer. It went "BANG!" when the officer didn't really mean for it to. (Department of "Kill all the Lawyers.") | Past Time for Some Gun Stuff During the effor to pass the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act Representative William Hughes ( As a practical matter, this didn't make any difference where criminal use is concerned, but it did have two interesting effects. First, manufacturers scrambled to make and register as many new full-auto receivers as they could before the ban took effect, and the existing pool of full-auto weapons suddenly skyrocketed in value. The result was that, essentially overnight, the pool of civilian possessable full-auto weapons doubled. And a lot of people who didn't want one before, did now. Economics 101 - supply and demand. Now, I'm not really a full-auto fan myself. They're a lot of fun, but horrendously expensive to shoot much (and if you shoot a full-auto, any range time qualifies as "much.") I've always wanted a classic Thompson, though. The Tommy-gun has always seemed a beautiful weapon. The original 1928 model, deeply blued, with a 50-round drum:
I wouldn't pass up a belt-fed, either, and for that my tastes run toward the H&K MG3, which was an updated and rechambered MG-42 of WWII vintage. Instead of the original 8x57 round of the MG42, the MG3 fired the standard NATO 7.62x51 (.308) round - at 1200 rounds per minute. That's a sound that has been described as "God tearing phonebooks." Here's a pair on a pintle-mount:
But my real interest in a full-auto weapon is modern. I'm a science-fiction fan, and I like to watch Stargate SG-1. In recent seasons the stars have been carrying the Fabrique Nationale (FN) P90 submachinegun - this little beastie:
However, with the double-whammy of the Hughes Amendment and the fact that FN doesn't sell that weapon on the civilian market, I'll never get one it seems. (Edited @13:30 to correct the Lautenberg/Hughes amendment error. Specifics of this legislation can be found here and here. I've got no excuse - I'm currently reading the last cite. Thanks to Publicola for setting me straight on that one.) UPDATE: 13:50 - I swear this is a coincidence (great minds and all that) but Hell in a Handbasket made a post on the P90 Sunday. He even mentions Stargate SG-1. Is that weird or what? | Thirty-five States Now, and They're STILL Predicting the Wild West? MSNBC weighs in on Missouri's renewed attempt to join the majority of the nation in "shall-issue" concealed-carry legislation. So of course we get to read things like this: The bill's champions say that allowing concealed weapons could make things safer because criminals would have second thoughts about holding up a store where other customers and maybe even the clerk are packing. Opponents, on the other hand, foresee a Wild West mentality and warn against the increased presence of firearms in the workplace.Right. The "No Guns Allowed" signs do such a marvelous job of keeping crazed killers out. "The fact that concealed weapons are currently outlawed in Missouri creates an incentive for businesses looking to expand or relocate in Missouri by increasing safety in the workplace," said Kristi Wyatt, senior vice president for government relations.Riiiiight. How, exactly does not allowing law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm "increase workplace safety?" Time for another cartoon:The article isn't completely anti-gun, but I am constantly amazed by gun- | "To Stop Gun Violence, Go to the Source" That's the title of this Washington Post column by Jabari Asim. There's more than a little common sense that you hardly ever hear in this piece. Such as: In between going to work and teaching my sons to duck and cover, I never paused to think about gun-control ordinances, and I doubt the predators who tormented our block did either. It was hard to get worked up about such laws, which clearly had little relevance where we lived.Go read the whole thing. | New President, Military Occupation of a Foreign Nation, Deposed Dictator Not Found, Sporadic Resistance... Where have we seen this before? Rand Simberg has an excellent satire up. Go read. | More Cartoons
As an aside, Robert L. Bartley has a column up from Monday's Opinion Journal concerning press objectivity. Here's the money quote: The opinion of the press corps tends toward consensus because of an astonishing uniformity of viewpoint. Certain types of people want to become journalists, and they carry certain political and cultural opinions. This self-selection is hardened by peer group pressure. No conspiracy is necessary; journalists quite spontaneously think alike. The problem comes because this group-think is by now divorced from the thoughts and attitudes of readers.Truer words... (Link via Instapundit.)
I'm not sure if Jim's cartoon was supposed to be approving, but many haven't yet figured out that to the majority of us in the red states, "Cowboy" isn't an insult. | Cognitive Dissonance I read Steven Den Beste's USS Clueless pretty religiously. He is, as James Lileks put it, the Spock of the Blogosphere, with a keen, logical mind. Quite often I will read something he has produced that resonates with me well apart from the topic on which it was written. That was true of today's essay, Fan Mail from Flounderers. Today's column was about the anti- When someone tries to use a strategy which is dictated by their ideology, and that strategy doesn't seem to work, then they are caught in something of a cognitive bind. If they acknowledge the failure of the strategy, then they would be forced to question their ideology. If questioning the ideology is unthinkable, then the only possible conclusion is that the strategy failed because it wasn't executed sufficiently well. They respond by turning up the power, rather than by considering alternatives. (This is sometimes referred to as "escalation of failure".)Thank you, Steven, for putting it so succinctly. Insanity has been described as "repeating the same behavior while expecting a different result." Or, as I've described it, "That didn't work, so we must try it again only harder!" This is otherwise known as cognitive dissonance, but Steven describes it perfectly in a paragraph. | Monday, July 28, 2003 Invitation to my Readers With the latest Instalanch from the "Elect the Great in 2008" hoopla, I've gotten about 1500 hits over the last two or three days, many of which are people who have not read my blog before. From perusing Sitemeter from time to time, I see that many of you are spending some time reading more than one page of this site. While I do this largely for my own entertainment, I wouldn't do it if I didn't have readers, and I'm not doing it exclusively for my entertainment. I'm an advocate. This is my soapbox. It is my goal to make the undecideds, the people who don't think much about their individual rights - particularly their right to keep and bear arms, think about them. But it's a one-sided exchange for the most part. I became an activist about 1994. I got on the internet in 1995. I discovered that I liked to write, and that I'm pretty fair at it. (I'm no Steven Den Beste, but hey, who is?) I wrote for the late, lamented Themestream.com for several months, and had some excellent exchanges with people who agreed and, more importantly, disagreed with me. Then it folded, and I stopped writing for a while. Then I found AR15.com, but that's not preaching to the choir, that's me standing in the audience while the Mormon Tabernacle is at full pitch. Some of those guys make me look like Diane Feinstein. Via AR15.com I was introduced to the Democratic Underground (no link - on purpose), and I went there, read for a while, picked my jaw up off the floor and started posting. It was, as they say, a target-rich environment. I lasted several months and just over 1800 posts. Just before I was booted (by the SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR) one of the lower-level administrators said to me: "Dear PITA:" (Pain In The Ass) "Don't shut up. I wildly disagree with most of your positions on this subject, but you are a damn fine advocate. And you make me think. And that is important." I like to think so. I could have cobbled up another e-mail address and returned, but as Robert Heinlein said of visiting Russia: "Once is educational, twice is masochism." Going back under a pseudonym would have gone against what I believed. I stand here, as I did there, using my own name. Again, I stopped writing. Then I found the Blogosphere, and I was tempted. I was finally enticed to start this blog by agreeing to discuss gun control with Jack of The Road Not Taken at his alternate site The Commentary. So here I am, spending far more time than I should. So, an invitation: if you've read something here you disagree with, send me an e-mail. I'd be happy to discuss it with you either on this forum or privately. Do try to be civil, though. This topic (like abortion) tends to raise blood pressures, tempers, and voices. But it CAN be discussed in normal tones, and it should be. Emotion got us where we are today. Only logic will suffice to correct that. If you agree with me, then point your anti-gun and undecided friends and relatives to this site. (I know you've got 'em.) The more the merrier. People are afraid of what they don't understand. Education is the key. Thank you for your attention. We now return you to your regularly scheduled blogging. | You'd Think It Would Be Obvious... VP nominee Rachel Lucas has this bit of advice for crime-beleaguered citizens of London. I won't spoil it - go read! | Payback is a Bitch, Isn't It? I mentioned this as an aside in a post on the status of another gun industry bankrupting lawsuit back at the end of June, but it's starting to make more headlines now. Valor Corp., the distributor that orignially sold the Raven .25 caliber automatic pistol that 13 year-old Nathaniel Brazill stole from a neighbor and used to shoot teacher Barry Grunow is now suing Grunow's wife for recovery of legal fees after the jury finding of 5% liability was thrown out on appeal. Ms. Grunow sued the legal owner of the gun for the previous EIGHT YEARS, the pawnshop that sold the gun 13 YEARS BEFORE THE CRIME, Valor - the distributor that sold the gun originally, and the school system. (Edited to add: The gun was the same age as the shooter. Kinda makes you wonder which was the "defective product" doesn't it?) She settled out of court with the gun's legal owner for $300,000, with the pawn shop for $275,000, and with the school system for $245,000. Valor was originally slapped with a $1.2 million judgement. She refused an offer from Valor to settle for $200,000, so they decided to countersue after the judgement was thrown out and Ms. Grunow appealed. Good for them. The widow claims that the estate has no money, and that she's afraid she'll lose her house. So, what happened to the $820,000 in settlement money? My guess is that Bob Montgomery (who prior to this headed the Florida lawsuit that resulted in a $13 billion settlement against the tobacco companies) took most if not all of it in expen$e$ and court co$t$. I would be quite curious as to how much money the widow actually ended up with, and how much now lines Mr. Montgomery's pockets. Not that he needs it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the widow actually still owes money to the lawyers for costs and expenses. Those "contingency" based lawsuits often don't include costs and expenses. If you win the lawyer gets a percentage plus those costs. If you lose, you still owe. Fairly complete coverage of the story can be found here. ("Fairly" as it relates to "complete" - the coverage is hardly "fair." But I loved it when one article refers to the VPC as the "Violence Poverty Center." Would that it were true, but the VPC seems well-funded.) | The Strategy is Working According to this report, anyway. Shootout in Saudi Arabia Kills EightAnd why did the terror raids occur in Riyadh? BECAUSE SAUDI ARABIA ASSISTED IN THE INVASION OF IRAQ. The raids also followed repeated calls from the U.S. government for Saudi Arabia to do more to curb Islamic militancy after Sept. 11. Of the 19 hijackers in the attack, 15 were Saudi.For some reason, a lot of people tend to ignore that fact. One raid, announced last week, yielded the arrests of 16 suspects linked to al-Qaida _ the terror network blamed for the Riyadh bombings and the Sept. 11 attacks _ and the seizure of a buried arsenal that included 20 tons of bomb-making chemicals, (!) detonators, rocket-propelled grenades and rifles.Gee, ya THINK? The unclassified version of the report also said that one suspected organizer still at large paid many of the expenses of two Sept. 11 hijackers and "had access to seemingly unlimited funding from Saudi Arabia." It did not say if Saudi government funds were involved.I'm shocked, I tell you! SHOCKED! "We are confident about ourselves and it is just a matter of mere talk," Defense Minister Prince Sultan was quoted by the official Saudi Press Agency as saying Sunday night. "The American administration under the leadership of Bush has declared officially that the kingdom is not a party in these issues."It IS working! | Sunday, July 27, 2003 Denizens of the Blogosphere! I Present to You the Nominees for the 2008 Administration as Selected by YOU! (Subject to changes and additions without notice. No warranty expressed or implied. Not valid in some areas. Check your local laws.
(Nominations are still being accepted.) Last updated 7/31, 17:48 | Saturday, July 26, 2003 More on the Dime's Worth of Difference And why Glenn Reynolds and Rachel Lucas should be elected in 2008! Kevin Tuma's take:
| Friday, July 25, 2003 A T-Shirt You Probably Won't See Elsewhere I'm not connected to this venture in any way except I'm buying one, but if you're interested, these are for sale (the shirt, not the girl)
Price is $20.00 for any size from Child's Medium to Adult XL plus $4 shipping on the first shirt, $2 for extra shirts. Adult 2XL is $21.50, and 3XL is $22.00. All shirts are white. NO exceptions. (For some reason, my wife won't let me get one for my granddaughter.) UPDATE: Eric is only accepting orders through 8/3/03! E-mail him if you want yours! Labels: Kalashnikitty | THIS is the Funniest Thing I've Seen in a While Link via Common Sense and Wonder - The Difference Between Italy and the EU, a short film. My wife, who has worked with all manner of Europeans, says it's bang-on accurate. | Glenn Reynolds for President! And Rachel Lucas for VP! Jeff at Alphecca states the case plainly: I mentioned that both the Democrats and the Republicans suck and we need something, someone in-between -- a libertarian -- to promote for president.I've said for a long time that the only way to get really good people into office anymore is to draft them. "Greetings! For the next (2, 4, 6) years you will be serving as (Representative, President, Senator). Please report to the Public Office Registration Center by 12:00 on such-and-such date." And anybody who actually wants to run for office above City Mayor should be immediately disqualified for mental reasons - they're either power-hungry or just plain nuts. But that'll never happen, so what we have to do is draft the candidates and run a And hack the vote counting machines. Great idea, Jeff! I can see the cabinet now! Eugene Volokh for Attorney General! Kim du Toit for Secretary of Defense! Bill Whittle for any damned position he wants! Who can name the other cabinet candidates? Poster art! We need poster art! Where's Cox & Forkum when you need them? Let's get this thing rolling! (You don't think the puppy-in-a-blender thing will come up during the campaign, do you?) Update: Triticale recommends Jane Galt for Commerce Joanne Jacobs for H.E.W. (I confess, I'm unfamiliar with Ms. Jacobs. Link?) Emperor Misha I for Homeland Security. Let's hear some more! UPDATED: 10:21PM Here's some more recommendations. I WANT FEEDBACK, DAMMIT! Cabinet: Agriculture ? Interior ? Can't we combine Interior and Homeland Security? Call it "Interior Security" or just plain "National Security"? Commerce Jane Galt (Don't know her well enough, myself, but she comes with a recommendation.) Justice Eugene Volokh Labor ? Education Mrs. du Toit - Connie knows education. State Steven Den Beste - he'll reason our enemies into insanity! And outthink them at the same time! And clear out the halls of the State Department in favor of people who THINK! Homeland Security Toss up: Emperor Misha or Kim du Toit - nobody should be able to do it better than a naturalized citizen! Energy Laurence Simon of Amish Tech Support has been recommended. Transportation ? Treasury Mindles H. Dreck from Asymmetrical Information has been nominated. Health & Human Services Two nominations: Joanne Jacobs and James Lileks. I go for Lileks. If he can manage home and Gnat, its good enough for me! Housing & Urban Development Can't we scrap this one? Veteran's Affairs Roll this into WAR! Environmental Protection Agency Scrap this one too. Office of Management & Budget ? I think Den Beste and Sensing and two or three others ought to combine on this one. Chief of Staff BILL WHITTLE! (Or maybe just make him head speechwriter?) Office of Drug Control Policy Another one to scrap. U.S. Trade Representative ? Ambassador to the UN The ambassador to the what? UPDATE! 7/26/03 10:00AM Jeff at Alphecca recommends Bill Quick of DailyPundit for Press Secretary, and has come up with a campaign slogan already: ELECT THE GREAT IN 2008! Scott Ott of Scrappleface has been recommended for Press Secretary, but really, we want to tell the world the truth (only as much as they need to know.) Scott wouldn't be that different from the various previous Press Secretaries, only more blatant. (But it would be fun!) And Bill Quick gets a nomination for the (useless) position of Ambassador to the UN. I think I'd leave him as Press Secretary. I'm going to have to build a spreadsheet, aren't I? I've got one of my own to recommend (a new advisory position?): National Technology Advisor - Eric S. Raymond of Armed and Dangerous. OK, NOW we're getting Ambassadorial nominations! Such as Frank J. as Ambassador to France! (Bejus, I LOVE IT!) Keep 'em coming! This is too good! As an adjunct to this, one respondent informs me: I've heard Glenn Reynolds has a place in Tahoe. Why not give him a warm up for the White House by electing him Governor of California this October 7?I'm not sure I'd wish that job on ANYONE. Fred Pruit of Rantburg has been nominated CIA/NSA director. Keep 'em coming! UPDATE: 11:00PM 7/26 I've got an IHMSA match to run tomorrow morning, early, but tomorrow afternoon I'll try to get a comprehensive list of the nominees for each position. And I'll even include the (immediately disqualified) volunteers. Such as Bill Hobbs who is vying for Press Secretary, too. UPDATE! @2:15PM I finally got the table of candidates up. Some formatting problems I can't figure out, but the data is right. WooHoo! | Here's Something Interesting Ravenwood covers two items: First the Washington Post's reaction to Orrin Hatch's bill to repeal the D.C. gun ban. Money quote: The best way to dry up this supply of guns would be for Congress to enact a federal law extending the District protections to Maryland, Virginia and all other states.Which, if you weren't able to translate that for yourself, Ravenwood puts plainly: In case you were wondering, by "protections", they mean "gun ban", and by "all other states", they mean yours.The second item is the reaction by politicians to the NYC City Council shootings, which I recommend you read. But the money quote here is the one I've been using all along when it comes to the political fear of the .50BMG rifle: Of course, you should also ask yourself just what is it that these politicians are doing, that they are so worried about being dragged out of their offices and shot because of it.Or capped through the armor of their limousines. | Alexander Tytler, for the Three of You Who Don't Know the Name Reader Ray dropped a comment below: So long as the public is stupid enough to think they can get things from the government (politicians) at no cost they will be socialists.This reminded me again of the quotation, popular among conservative sites, that is attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, (1747-1813) Scottish scholar, lawyer, poet and historian who was contemporary with the forming of the United States. (Also often referred to as Alexander Tyler.) I have found no definite link to Lord Woodhouslee for this quotation (and I've looked) but what the quotation says is food for thought regardless of its source: A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship.The only way to stop it that I know of, Ray, is education. It is possible to teach people that there's no such thing as "something for nothing." And that, I believe, is why our education system has been destroyed. | I GOTTA Get Me One of THESE! Thanks to Rachel Lucas for the pointer, ThoseShirts.com (maker of my other favorite - the "Celebrate Diversity" shirt) is selling this Cox & Forkum masterpiece on cotton:
| More Tinfoil! More Tinfoil! Well, THIS is interesting. According to sitemeter today I have received visits from: NIPR.mil (three times)One of those NIPR.mil visits covered 10 pages and took over 24 minutes! (I hope you found it informative.) Comment sections are open for questions, or you can just e-mail me. (Don't you guys have to work?) I'd also like to say Suomi to my visitor from hut.fi and Goede dag to my visitors from xs4all.nl and chello.nl. To the visitor from gc.ca, I say "Get back to work, hoser!" :-) | More Evidence That Our Collapsing Schools Aren't Accidental Also from Samizdata: What 1776 was really about?Neither do I. Read the comments on this one, too. | More on Tony Martin Samizdata has this post up concerning the continuing Tony Martin saga. Money quote: The system is not just broken, it is insane.Go read. And see where we're headed. And don't miss the comments, either. Toren Smith, on hiatus from The Safety Valve makes this perceptive point: I'm beginning to think that one of the ways one can judge the degree to which a society has progressed towards a government-controlled police state is to look at the reaction of the police to encroachment on "their turf." In a free society where the police are truly viewed as the servants and protectors of the citizens, the cops respect the rights of the citizens and see them as partners in the battle against crime. In a place like New York or San Francisco where the government is pressing towards complete control of the citizens, the cops bitterly resent any interference with their monopoly on the use of force and treat all citizens as simply potential criminals. In any citizen-criminal battle, cops in such places are always careful to make sure the citizen doesn't "get away with it" and even in cases of the most righteous shooting, one can expect charges to be pressed as a warning to other uppity peasants. (Always self-righteously defended, usually along the lines of "we can't have vigilantes running around on the streets," as if someone shooting a burglar who broke into their house is the same as some guy hunting down crack pushers as a part time job.) The final corrupt state of such a society can been seen in England, where all pretense has been dropped and citizens who act in a "police-like" manner towards criminals are seen as a much greater threat to the government than the criminals and are thus treated with greater severity than the criminals themselves. The next step is the gulag, although I expect it will make its appearance in a difference guise, perhaps as "sensitivity training facilities" or "community service centers" or some such.Can you say "Ronald Dixon"? "José Acosta"? "Memphis District Attorney Bill Gibbons"? I thought you could. And that argues that the system isn't insane. This behavior is purposeful. And I think he's right. | Do We Have Enough Volunteers to Justify These Restrictions? If so, I'm glad. If not, Donald Sensing is right to be concerned. However, he does point out some odd and apparently illogical barriers to joining the military. More government stupidity (redundancy alert!) | More on Scotland and Guns Just as I expected, the decrease in permit holders in Scotland wasn't enough - they're all concerned over the net increase in legally owned guns. According to this report: Concern over guns amid rise in sale of firearmsFirst point, that's got to be an (innocent?) error. Handguns are banned in Scotland, just as they are in England. I believe the author meant 60,599 legally held shotguns. According to the earlier story there are just under 80,000 firearm and shotgun certificates in Scotland. The overwhelming majority of long arms in the UK are shotguns. Question: Was the shotgun used in the attack legally owned? The latest figures reveal that, although fewer firearms certificates were issued last year, more guns were purchased by licensed owners than in 2001. The same Scottish Executive report has also revealed that the number of registered firearms dealers has risen for the first time since 1994, to 285.In other words, "Our plans for completely disarming the law-abiding are progressing nicely, though we wish we could do it faster." He said: "We must continue to highlight the dangers posed by guns and other weapons and ensure that the bare minimum (Read: "ZERO") are held in our communities. The majority of people in Scotland continue to show a sensible and responsible attitude to the ownership of these weapons, (Read: "They think guns are icky and gun owners are slavering murderers - unless, of course, the gun owner is a government employee.") and are working with the police to ensure that we maintain the progress made since tightening the regulations on gun ownership." (Read: "They're turning in their neighbors for any violation of the law that will result in revocation of their firearm permits, just like good little peons should.")Of course, if the bad guys can't get a shotgun, the market in suppressed Uzi's is, I understand, pretty good. The number of people caught carrying offensive weapons, knives in particular, has risen dramatically across the country in the past four years.Well, if I lived where owning a firearm for self-defense was illegal, and shotgun-toting criminals felt safe enough to blast a cop at the police station, I might give serious consideration to carrying something with which to defend myself. "Better judged by twelve than carried by six" so the saying goes. According to the latest figures from the Scottish Executive, the number of people caught with dangerous weapons on Scotland’s streets rose by 18 per cent between 1998 and 2002 with the number of people caught with knives rising almost 30 per cent over the same period.Ah, yes, the "culture of violence" - that they think they can control by banning weapons. Hasn't worked too well, has it? So let's try it some more, only harder, eh? | Note They Used AR-15's on the Badge Guns they can't (legally) get in the UK anymore.
The design is based on a poster put up by a Fenland landowner with a picture of two crossed rifles and the words: "Warning - This Property is Protected by Tony Martin Security Services."Go read the whole piece. I love the free market! | You've GOT to Wonder How Many WEREN'T Intercepted According to this BBC report, a freight truck was stopped at Dover trying to enter the UK and thirty Uzis were found (along with ammunition and suppressors) hidden in a spare tire. So, how many got through? I believe the estimate for intercepting drugs here is about 10-20%? Oh yeah. Disarming the innocent really cut down on the influx of guns in the UK, didn't it? | Heard About that Berkely "Study" of the Psychology of Conservatives? Jonah Goldberg disassembles it - with great humor - at National Review Online. Link via Dodd from Ipse Dixit. Same place I found the cartoons mentioned below. | THIS is Why I Read Lileks! Today's BLEAT: My favorite article today concerned the French computer game industry, and yes there is such a thing. Turns out that it’s in the pissoir for all the usual reasons - the companies can’t fire anyone when business heads sud, the taxes are onerous, and, uh, the games suq. But the French PM believes that the industry deserves to be subsidized, because French computer games reflect European values. | Thursday, July 24, 2003
I Hope it's a Best-Seller Looks like Tony Martin's going to write a book, and title it My Right to Kill. I expect that will result in a mass case of the vapors. Good. | Another School Shooting In Germany. Four shots fired, one teacher wounded, shooter commits suicide. Yup. It must be the guns. (Link via Keepandbeararms.com) | THIS Got the Secret Service's Panties in a Wad?
Don't those Secret Service guys have anything better to do? | Civilian Disarmament Proceeds Apace in the UK According to this BBC story Gun permits at all-time lowSo there are 4,000 fewer permit holders but more gun owners with "arsenals?" According to the 2001 census, the population of Scotland was about 5,062,000 of which about 3.8 million were above the age of 19 and eligible for a firearm or shotgun certificate. That means the percentage of legal owners is just about 2% of the eligible population. And declining. | More on the NYC City Council Shooting According to this KeepandBearArms.com article, Councilman James E. Davis was carrying a concealed weapon, but didn't have a chance to draw it. The CNN story linked reports Davis was known to carry a licensed gun, but was unable to draw the weapon("See! See! Concealed weapons are useless for self defense!" shrill the gun control groups.) The KABA.com piece does raise the valid question: If Mr. Davis was opposed to gun violence and in favor of gun bans, why did he have a gun? The CNN piece also continues with the comments of Mr. Davis's brother, Geoffrey: "The system killed my brother," he shouted. "Just the same way they killed Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, the system knew that my brother would continue fighting for the betterment to stop violence. That's who killed my brother. The system."No, Mr. Davis. Mr. Askew killed your brother. Unless it was those invisible brain-altering psychosis-inducing waves that guns give off... | More on the D.C. Gun Ban I covered the introduction of Sen. Orrin Hatch's bill to repeal the D.C. gun ban here, and pointed you to Publicoa's coverage of it here. Now the Cato Institute responds. Excerpts: In February, joined by two other attorneys, we filed the Parker case, a civil lawsuit in federal court on behalf of six D.C. residents who want to be able to defend themselves with a handgun in their own homes. When we informed the NRA of our intent, we were advised to abandon the effort. Surprisingly, the expressed reason was that the case was too good. It could succeed in the lower courts then move up to the Supreme Court where, according to the NRA, it might receive a hostile reception.Tuesday in response to a Randy Barnette piece, I said "Perhaps the NRA's maneuverings aren't as self-serving as they often appear to be." Then again, perhaps they are. Hanlon's Razor says "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." However, the NRA leadership has never struck me as stupid. The jury, at least for me, remains out. | Wednesday, July 23, 2003 You Need to Read This I'm STILL struggling through Rand's Atlas Shrugged (after the first 350 pages it's either getting better no other option or I'm getting numb) but one of the points she As you probably know, the idea that truth is “socially constructed” has been in vogue in academia for some time. I never took it that seriously and only mention it in passing in The Structure of Liberty. I did not think very many people could possibly believe it, or at least believe that, if true, it had any practical implications. Hey, even if the world is socially constructed, if we cannot willfully reconstruct it as we prefer, then it’s pretty much as irrelevant as the old speculations that we are just a brain in a vat or that the universe exists in a drop on some cosmic chemist’s workbench.Go read the whole thing. And think. Hard. | Dept. of Our Collapsing Schools I found this by way of Caerdroia. Sung to the tune of Gilbert & Sullivan's "I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major General": I am the very model of an Education Minister;It would be funny if it weren't apparently true. | It isn't Paranoia if They ARE Out to Get Ya! Sitemeter let's you look at quite a bit of data for free. One thing it tells me is that about 1% of my visitors come from the server at Emmet, Marvin & Martin, LLP (Hi there!!) and among the services provided by Emmet, Marvin & Martin, LLP is "Intellectual Property Litigation." In fact, they say: Our litigators also have expertise in the area of intellectual property. Our attorneys in the department have had extensive experience in litigating claims for trademark infringement and unfair competition in both federal and state courts, and claims under the Copyright Act. We have also represented clients in proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark office. In addition, we have developed expertise in the areas of false advertising, trade secrets and theft of ideas litigation, rights of privacy and publicity, and libel and slander (both individual and trade libel or disparagement).Should I be worried? | JoinTogether Really is Shameless In this bit of propaganda, JoinTogether promotes having the Consumer Safety Commission regulate "gun safety" because: more than 20,000 Americans under age 20 (are) killed or injured each year by gunsOnce again, what are the facts? According to the Centers for Disease Control WISQARS tool, in 2000 there were 6,706 unintentional non-fatal gunshot injuries for people 19 years of age and younger, and 193 accidental gunshot fatalities for the same demographic. That's 6,899 accidental deaths and injuries for "children" under the age of 20. If you drop the age of the "children" to 18, the numbers are 5,232 and 174 respectively, for a total of 5,406. The rest of the deaths and injuries are intentional - and "gun safety" won't affect those unless (as I'm sure they mean it) "gun safety" means "guns that won't fire." The blurb also states: The report found that up to one-third of unintentional shootings could be prevented by changing gun designs, or adding features such as devices that keep guns from firing when dropped or indicate when the gun is loaded.Riiiight. One-third (2,922 approximately) could be prevented if all NEW guns had the features they suggest? What about all the OLD guns out there? This is simplistic in the extreme. But then, that's the strategy, isn't it? Take the statistics, warp them to suit, and make simplistic attention-grabbing arguments. Then claim everyone who calls you on it as a heartless gun-lover who wants to see babies die. This is the kind of crap that made me an activist. | BOHICA! (Bend Over, Here It Comes Again) It would appear from initial reports that someone, either a council member or someone accompanying a council member, managed to get into the New York City City Hall and opened fire on one or more councilmembers. Security guards returned fire, at least a dozen rounds were fired, and at least two people were hit. One, councilman James E. Davis has died. Mr. Davis was heavily involved in gun control. According to this Fox News report, he was speaking to the shooter when the man drew and opened fire. According to this MSNBC report the shooter targeted one person and shot him several times (I assume the victim was Davis.) As of this moment, the situation is extremely confused. The second person hit has also reportedly died, and is the shooter. Police are apparently still looking for a man in a blue suit. (In NYC? Please!) Mayor Bloomberg has stated that the act wasn't terrorism, but how he'd know is beyond me. Apparently the shooter was able to sneak a handgun past the metal detectors and kill a gun control proponent. Wanna bet the gun control groups use this incident to fight for renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban? Update: Reports are now that the shooter, one Clarence Askew, is dead, and that Davis shot him, or, alternately, a security guard did. Apparently they came in together, and neither had to go through a metal detector. Odd. I think I scooped Instapundit on this one. Further update. Reports that Davis fired back are apparently in error. The perp was killed by security. More: Here's the AP release on the incident. More of the same. | Oh, Sure. This'll Work. Emasculated England Dept. Reuters reports that those wacky Brits are considering a new tactic in the fight against crime, asking the criminals to apologize in order to avoid court. Criminals could avoid being taken to court if they agree to apologize personally to their victims, under plans outlined by the UK government Tuesday.Doesn't that just make you feel good? Isn't that just caring and spiritual?. The announcement comes just a week after figures showed a 28 percent rise in violent crime in England and Wales over the past year.How about caning for "anti-social behavior." Then the perp can apologize. Spoons was right. | Tuesday, July 22, 2003 Randy Barnett Makes an Excellent Point Randy's been guest-blogging for Glenn Reynolds at GlennReynolds.com over at MSNBC. I commented on an earlier post below. His most recent entry is about "reasonable regulation," and it's a good read. Some excerpts: Several readers have offered comments on the issue of “reasonable regulation,” which I said no individual rights scholar claims to be any more objectionable than time, place, and manner regulations of speech. They only insist that, under the Second Amendment, such regulations would be subject to the same judicial scrutiny as regulations on speech and the press. No more, and no less.That had been my position prior to what it is now: This far, no further until the right is recognized as individual and protected under the umbrella of the 14th Amendment against infringement by the states. Randy has something to say about that, too: There is less gun regulation today precisely because the right to bear arms is not protected by courts. Because prohibition and confiscation are not off the table - constitutionally speaking - gun-rights advocates feel the need to resist politically almost every gun regulation being proposed as a stepping stone toward prohibition and confiscation.And he's right - especially about "even unreasonable ones." If our guard is down, (as it has been regarding the Fourth and Fifth amendments when it comes to "The War on (some) Drugs" and now "The War on Terror") then we'll let our legislatures pass laws that we otherwise would not. It is because the courts have not recognized the Second Amendment as protecting a fundamental, individual right that we are ever-vigilant against ever-increasing infringement of that right. Perhaps the NRA's maneuverings aren't as self-serving as they often appear to be. He has much more to say, especially about registration, but he ignores the sheer logistical idiocy of the task in favor of discussing the risk of future confiscation. (I prefer to cover all the bases, myself. I'll cut him some slack because he did comment about the length of his post.) | Larry Elder Notwithstanding, I Still See Only a Dime's Worth of Difference
And I'm not alone. I'm not yet willing to entertain the idea of voting for someone other than Dubya next year. But it's not a done-deal, either. | I Bet the Decision Gave Him Heartburn, Too. Judge Jack B. Weinstein, after a jury found manufacturers not at fault, rendered his decision in NAACP v. AA Arms Inc. saying (according to this Washington Times report): While agreeing there is "clear and convincing evidence" that gun dealers are guilty of "careless practices," U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein ruled that members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People were not "uniquely harmed" by illegal use of firearms."Pish, tosh! A mere technicality!" squawks the anti-gun crowd. While the defense of this lawsuit cost the defendants upwards of $10 million. This isn't just an effort to legislate through the courts, it's also an effort to bankrupt the manufacturers. If you're interested in reading the decision, it's available here in four parts in Adobe PDF format. I haven't had time to read the whole thing, but these stood out: That the industry has improved its practices in recent years was demonstrated by defendants. The number of individuals and entities licensed to sell firearms at the distributor or dealer level, FFLs, has been sharply reduced, making supervision by the ATF, manufacturers, and distributors easier.That's not an "improved practice" of the industry but the result of ATF rules changes. And yes, it does make supervision by the ATF easier. Supervision by the manufacturers isn't part of their job description. The distributors are supposed to comply with the applicable laws. Then there's this: Members of the industry continue to fail to take many obvious and easily implemented steps, such as requiring retailers to avoid multiple or repeat sales to the same customers. Such steps are an effective way of checking illegal handgun diversion as revealed by the fact that Virginia, which was a major supplier of illegal hanguns to New York, almost immediately largely choked off that supply when it enacted a law limiting multiple sales to the same person.What happened to the BATF investigating multiple sales? Sellers already have to report multiple purchases to the BATF. What the hell are they doing with the information? Wouldn't it be better to investigate multiple purchasers and prosecute them if they prove to be gunrunners? Where is the law enforcement liability here? And finally: In short, the NAACP has demonstrated the great harm done to the New York public by the use and threat of use of illegally available handguns in urban communities. It also has shown that the diversion of large numbers of handguns into the secondary illegal market, and subsequently into dangerous criminal activities could be substantially reduced through policies voluntarily adopted by manufacturers and distributors of handguns without additional legislation.Apparently the good judge hasn't taken Economics 101. The one Father Guido Sarducci sums up succinctly in his "Five-minute University" bit as "Supply and-a Demand. That's it." Ask the English all about Supply and-a Demand, Judge. The market will be served. | Can We Hang the Remains From those Big Swords? According to this AP report: "We are certain that Odai and Qusai were killed today," said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez at a news conference in Baghdad. "The bodies were in such a condition where you could identify them."Well, there goes two biological weapons. | You Go, Girl! - Updated I was going to comment on English farmer Tony Martin's impending release on parole, but Rachel Lucas beat me to it. I can't better that. A "danger to burglars". Heh. I certainly hope so. Update: Reading around, I found Spoon's commentary on this. (Sometimes I wonder why I bother when it's done so much better by so many others.) Money quote: Americans are rightly grateful for the assistance that the British have provided over the past year. It would be a mistake, though, for us to let that gratitude blind us to the fact that Britain is becoming culturally every bit as alien to us as France or Germany. A shared language and a strong leader can slow Britain's drift away from us, but they can't stop it. Britain is a European country. Sooner or later, they're going to give us cause to remember that. Hopefully, when that does happen, our own leaders won't have put us in a position to let that damage America's interests.Go read the whole thing. | Now HERE's an Interesting Idea Randy Barnett, Boston School of Law professor, filled in for Glenn Reynolds for his MSNBC column, GlennReynolds.com. His two posts were about the right to arms, and I recommend you read both as they adress the anti-gun argument that the Second Amendment is meaningless because we don't have a "well-regulated militia" anymore. The first piece is here, and the second is here. Money quote: So what would Congress be able to do, if it wished, to organize the militia? Here is my suggestion:That is an excellent idea. | Well, if the Press Actually Gets it Right, This Time MSNBC is reporting that "Saddam Hussein’s sons Udai and Qusai Hussein were “likely” captured or killed in a U.S. raid in northern Iraq Tuesday." That'd be a relief. Maybe they can tell us what happened to Daddy. Fox News reports: MOSUL, Iraq — U.S. soldiers stormed a house in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul (search) Tuesday, killing four key allies of Saddam Hussein (search) who were hiding inside, and a U.S. official told Reuters there was a "decent chance" that Saddam's sons were inside.So, a definite possibility of a probable maybe? | More Cartoons! (Beats writing another essay!)
And here's what I have to put up with in my local yellow-rag (and just one more reason I don't subscribe): Dave Fitzsimmons, The Arizona Daily (Red) Star
| Monday, July 21, 2003 WoHoo! 10,000 Hits! This morning at about 10:58 Mountain Standard Time (this is Arizona, after all) The Smallest Minority received it's 10,000th hit. Somebody from Virginia Tech's server. I really have to post more, don't I? | Must Be Something in the Memphis Water AlphaPatriot points to this story about the sixth home-defense shooting in five weeks in Memphis. Excerpt: This is what happened about 2 a.m. Friday, according to a police report:Now, let's see what we have here: A 65 year-old woman. A 20-something 200 lb. male. A loaded .32 caliber revolver "unsafely" stored in a china cabinet. (And, being a .32, it would most probably qualify as an evil, useless "Saturday Night Special" with no "sporting purpose.") Per normal police recommendations, the woman tried to comply with her assailant's demands - after all, she gave him $200. It wasn't enough. THEN she resisted. Results? The woman was able to get to her weapon. ("Safe storage" would have made her gun unavailable to her.) A minor injury on the part of the 65 year-old woman. The gun wasn't taken from her by the younger, much larger male. The younger, much larger male most probably has at least one and probably two .32 caliber holes in him. The younger, much larger male left the premises. But we're told that women using handguns for self defense is a myth. Yes, according to the Violence Policy Center "The false message...was clear: the greatest threat posed to a woman was an attack by a stranger and, the best form of protection a woman could rely upon was a handgun." Now, just who is spreading a "false message?" One other thing: Note in the VPC fear-mongering piece that they limit themselves to women killing their assailants. No mention is made of what actually defines a successful self-defense: Making your attacker STOP. Ms. Schaefer's assailant may not (probably will not) die as a result of his injuries. But he was stopped. But to those valiant defenders of life at the Violence Policy Center, that doesn't count. And another: In D.C. what this woman did would be illegal. No handguns are allowed in D.C. In New York she'd have to have a pistol permit - that costs a ridiculous amount of time and money to get. (Read here for a typical example of the costs of getting a permit in NYC.) And she most probably wouldn't get a premises permit. Without that, she'd be in jail today. For defending her life. | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(
