Guns make colleges safer

Day, Liebowitz and Pirrong: Guns make colleges safer | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Opinion: Viewpoints

In an April 22, 2009, Opinion Article in the Dallas Morning News, three college professors challenge the popular prejudice that allowing Concealled Carry licensees on a College or University campus is a recipe for disaster.

Pirrong: Guns make colleges safer

04:56 PM CDT on Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Mass public shootings are a horrific feature of modern life. Many of the bloodiest examples of this scourge have occurred on college campuses. As professors, we are particularly sensitive to this danger.

Despite this -- no, because of this -- we support a bill currently pending in the Texas Legislature that would permit the concealed carrying of firearms on college and university campuses in the state by holders of concealed-handgun permits.

Any public policy involving matters of life and death should be decided only after weighing carefully the competing risks. Examining the relevant facts and data indicates that permitting Texas permit holders to carry weapons on college campuses would improve safety because:

* The best available empirical evidence shows that concealed-carry laws reduce the incidence of mass public shootings.

* Mass public shootings occur almost exclusively in places -- like universities -- where concealed carry is proscribed.

* There are numerous examples of firearms owners acting to disarm would-be mass murderers, thereby saving lives.

* Concealed-handgun-permit holders are overwhelmingly law-abiding individuals.
If gun bans truly reduced the risk of mass public shootings, then gun-free zones would be refuges from such havoc. Sadly, the exact opposite is true. All multiple-victim public shootings in the United States with more than three fatalities have occurred where concealed handguns are prohibited. Moreover, the worst primary and secondary school shootings have occurred in Europe, despite its draconian gun laws.

Furthermore, peer-reviewed research demonstrates that the passage of a concealed-carry law reduces incidents of mass public shootings. Tellingly, those episodes that have occurred in states allowing concealed carry overwhelmingly happened in places like schools and malls, where concealed carry was prohibited.

These facts should not be surprising. Gun-free zones are magnets for killers bent on maximizing their body count. They know that they face far less risk of quickly being stopped there. There are numerous cases in which private firearm owners have disarmed or disabled those attempting to murder indiscriminately in public places.

In such circumstances, police officers and other "first responders" are anything but. The true first responders are often armed citizens who are in the line of fire. The possibility that a legally armed citizen could distract or disable an assailant could be the difference between life and death for potential victims.

It's no secret that I have long been a proponent of Concealed Carry, especially in "Gun Free Zones" ... such as College and University campuses.

And the concept that responsible gun-owners can save lives in a gun-free zone is also a 'trusted friend' here.
But it is rarely expressed so eloquently, nor so authoritatively.

About the authors:

Theodore Day is a professor of finance and Stan Liebowitz is the Ashbel Smith Professor of Economics, both at the University of Texas at Dallas; Craig Pirrong is a professor of finance at the University of Houston. The three may be reached through stan@liebowitz.biz.

(H/T "The Shooting Wire" (Subscribe HERE ... I won't always be the first to read it)

Stumble It!

YouTube - Debate Over 'Assault Weapons'

YouTube - Debate Over 'Assault Weapons'

Wayne Lapiere and Pennslvania Governer Ed Rendel debate "Assault Weapons" on"Face the Nation".

Rendel's basic argument is "What honest citizen needs and Assault Weapon?"

hen pressed, Rendel changes his argument to "What honest citizen needs more than ten rounds in a magazine?"

LaPierre has little time to respond in this TV "Debate" to get to the nitty-gritty of the question. I wish he had said something like: "Why should we deny an Honest Citizen the right to use any magazine?"

In the actual fact, he (LaPierre) made the point that the defnition of "Assault Weapon" is ot appropriately applied to semi-automatic ... with the implication that laws which restrict access to "Ugly Guns" apply equally to almost ANY Semi-Automatic gun.

Another wish: LaPierre (given time) may have said something along the lines of
"The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was established with the provisio that, after 10 years in effect, it could be statistically proven that the restriction had reduced crime, homocidem or other violence. When the law was reviewed, NOBODY was able to step to the forum and confirm that it had made ANY difference in terms of reducing crime. President Bush confirmed that he would sign any bill which Congress could pass; but Congress could not pass a bill to continue the Assault Weapons Ban. In the final analysis, it did NOT meet its stated goals, and the only effect was to emplace unreasonable restrictions on law-abiding citizens ... who for their own, perfectly legal reasons, choose to purchase semi-automatic firearms and magazines with greater than a 10-round capacity."
He never said this. He could have, but he did not have to.

In all, I think LaPierre held his own in a strictly formatted forum. I couldn't have done so well, when I had to know the answers before the questions were asked.

Stumble It!

Going Home

I'm not much for Spectator Sports ... generally speaking, I'd rather play a sport poorly than watch one played well by others.

There are great moments in competition. Usually, they are considered "Great Moments" because one player, or a team, has performed some exceptional feat of athletic prowess.

But what do you call it when it goes beyond athletic prowess?

Watch this video, and find your own answer.



Sometimes you can win more than a game, whether you win or lose the game.

That's the true Spirit of Competition.

(H/T: The Hobo Brasser)

Stumble It!

ARPC Points Match (11-APR-2009)

No match this weekend, but here's a video of how one squad handled Stage 6 ("Walls & Barrels") last weekend.

The first and last competitors shown are both juniors. The first, Chase, is safely completion his "Certification" match. He was actually in the squad before us, and we were lucky to watch him shoot this stage because it was the only chance I had to see him compete in this crucial (to him) match. The last, Dontae, has already certified. I listed them both as "10 years old", but that's a guess.

At my age, anyone under five feet tall appears to be 10 years old.

And yes, that IS Ageism.
The video lasts 4:57 minutes.
_________________________________

TECHNICAL NOTE:
You will see my (gloved) hand over the top of the image when FISH starts shooting. This is to provide a hood, keeping the morning sun out of the lense.

In the next segment (GEEK), the lens is not shaded; the bright sunlight washes out the image in a Purple Haze, until the view shifts further to the south.

I take pride in timing the musical lyrics to that portion of the video:

"Sometimes the light's all shining on me,
Other times I can barely see"

Well, we take our successes when we can.
______________________________________
UPDATE: 23 April, 2009

The original video included the song "Truckin'" by The Grateful Dead.

YouTube took exception to this, probably because the owner of the song asked them to disallow "their" music on embedded videos. Consequently, the original is without any soundtrack at all.

(See the COMMENTS section)

I've republished the video without the music, but with the full-volume soundtrack of shots fired, range commands, and incidental comments from bystanders. Perhaps it's a more realistic appreciation of the actual experience.

But I hate giving up the music, which not only provides an 'extra dimension' to the vide but also introduces a great song.

Besides, I worked so hard to choreograph the music to the visual images. What a waste.

Stumble It!

The Way Of The Gun

The Way Of The Gun - CBS News Video
From the April 12, 2009, 60 minutes program, the following is a segment by Leslie Stahl titled: The Way Of The Gun

Watch CBS Videos Online


For more background, (H/T) Opposing Views: Breaking Down 60 Minutes' Anti-Gun Bias

_____________________________________

It's not just C BS!

CNN has been jumping the shark with anti-gun stuff (regularly). Case in point, this (March, 2009?) video of an Anderfson Cooper article about .50 Caliber Barrett Rifles ... and other Evil Guns imported from America to Mexico.
xxxxx
This is part of the now-infamous "90% of Mexican Crime Weapons Come from U.S." MSM-generated Urban Legend which I discussed last week. (CNN Quote: "America is still a major source for powerful weapons which are being used by Mexican Drug Cartels.")

.50 Barrets are hard to come by ... and they're expensive (you're looking at $7,000 to $8,ooo ... if one is available).

So where are those fifties coming from? Best guess: the Mexican Army, which the US has shipped a number to within the past few years, and WE don't have any idea if they're still in control of the Mexican Army.

Mexican Police are being slaughtered by Drug "Cartels", and one of the most constant sources of their weapons are Mexican Army troops who are deserting with their weapons ... no figures are available on the number of deserters, those who took their personal weapons or other weapons, or what weapons are missing from inventory. You would expect that either the Mexicans, who are pointing fingers at Americans, or the Amreican Government would have those figures, wouldn't you?

I mean, if Mexico claims we are the source of guns for criminals, our government would at least require them to account for the guns we have provided for their military, right?

If anybody has asked question, I haven't heard about it.

The Obama Administration (and Obama, personally), seem to have bought into concept and are reacting as if tahe accusation was true:

US President Barack Obama has admitted that America shares responsibility for Mexico's violent struggle against its drug cartels. On his first official visit to Mexico City, President Obama vowed to support Mexico's fight, promising to slow down the number of US guns being smuggled across the border.

Without hard facts from the Mexican Military (for just one example of accepted minimal documentation of the accusations) on Missing Firearms, the American government can't accept responsibility for the inability of the Mexican Government to keep track of their own arsenal contents.

Obama seems to have willingly skipped this step. He could have learned from Ronald Reagan, who espoused the policy: "Trust, then Verify".
_______________________

So we have CBS, CNN and ABC coming down on the side of "The Day of the Evil Gun". Add to that the Obama administration, and the American Citizen has no hope that the Second Amendment will survive the next four years without experiencing some major predations.

Foreigners, MSM, Politicians and Liberals constitute the Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse.

Stumble It!

Internet Interruptus

Once again I'm forced to blog on the LapTop.

I tried to get my Local Area Network (LAN) going again tonight. I actually had it running thru the router for a few minutes, but I was trying to get smart and re-establish the WiFi Network, and I followed the instructions instead of my instincts, Bad, Bad Idea.

uring the reconfiguration process, I decided to move the desktop CPU out of the knee-hole of my desk. Another bad idea; Ibumped the power cable and the whole system went down.


By using the laptop, I've established that the Cable Modem and the yellow LAN cords can make a connection. Later I'll try to reconnect the desk-top computer.

I suspect that the problem is in the cable connections. Since this cord connects the laptop with the modem, I'll try to use the same cord to connec with the desk-top computer.

But I probably won't do that tonight. It's now 1am and I need to get some sleep so I can go to work in the morning.

I'll take a few minutes to check my email, but if I don't answer you tonite, it's because I don't have theenergy to fight this teensy keyboard with all of the keys in the wrong place.

Stumble It!

Heller v DC: commentary from CATO

Cato Unbound : Blog Archive : If this Is Defeat, We’ll Take It

I found an interesting commentary on the Heller decision from last year.

This is, obviously, "dated". But it's still pertinent considering that the District of Columbia, smarting over the Heller Decision, immediately attempted (and is still attempting ) to weasel-word itself out of the Supreme Court decision which REQUIRES the municipality to recognize Second Amendment Rights.

Cloaking himself and the Brady Center in the mantle of "reasonableness,” Dennis Henigan disclaims the statement of Brady co-founder Pete Shields and asserts that it "has never been” and is not now the policy of his organization to "make possession of all handguns . . . totally illegal.” Perhaps so. Perhaps, as Henigan says, Brady supports even laws, like the D.C. gun ban, that the organization "does not favor as a policy matter,” because "legislators should not be constitutionally barred from enacting the gun control laws they think necessary.”

If that's the view of the Brady Center, I respectfully disagree. A principal purpose of our Constitution is to restrain the excesses of the political branches and secure key rights against temporal majorities. But let's not quibble. Let's accept Henigan's statement that, from a policy perspective, Brady opposes the D.C. gun ban. Is it too much to ask for a citation to one corroborating article, one radio or TV appearance, one web posting, or one quoted statement by any responsible Brady official that says, in essence, "We think D.C. should repeal its gun ban, even though it is constitutional, because it is bad public policy”?

Now that D.C. officials, trying to circumvent the Heller decision, have proposed new rules that still ban all handguns except revolvers, still require all weapons in the home to be kept in a dysfunctional state, and still make D.C. residents endure a months-long process to register a weapon, can we count on the Brady Center, in a show of reasonableness, to publicly oppose those rules on policy grounds? Will the Brady Center support a temporary suspension for D.C. residents of the federal ban on interstate handgun sales because, otherwise, until D.C. licenses dealerships, residents cannot obtain a handgun either in or out of the city — a situation that is self-evidently unreasonable.

I mention this only to emphasize that there are still governmental organizations (municipal, state, federal) who are determined to undermine our Second Amendment rights.

Our High-School Civics Classes taught us that we, as Citizens rather than as Subjects, have both the right and the obligation to protest laws which undermine our constitutional rights.

But what it didn't teach us was that our Governmental establishments will almost inevitably fight our protests, and spend our (taxpayer) dollars in the effort to deny us (taxpayers) the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.

In the current administration, we see citizens frightened into a panic mode because of our justifiable fear that our government has a private agenda divorced from the Constitution and from our expressed will.

We are fortunate that there are lone citizens who will act as proxy for us all by standing up for THEIR individual civic rights ... such as Mr. J. Heller.

What are YOU doing this week to speak out for your civil rights?

Stumble It!

American Gunfighter!

"Within weeks of getting the gun, Lance found ... he needed it."

The Ayoob files; An urban gunfighter: The lessons of Lance Thomas

American Handgunner , March-April, 2002 by Massad Ayoob

Over a period of less than 3 years, Thomas was involved in four gun battles against a total of 11 known suspects. He shot six of them, killing five. The watch dealer himself was wounded on two of these occasions, taking a total of five rounds. There are many lessons that the rest of us can learn: Lessons of long-term strategy and short-term tactics; of gun selection and ammunition effectiveness; and, above all, of courage under fire in the moment, and of determination over the long haul.

August 10, 1989. Like so many storekeepers, Thomas feels his watch shop would be a safer place if he had a gun with which to fend off armed robbers. He has acquired a Model 36, a five-shot Smith & Wesson .38 Chief Special. He keeps the snubnose revolver where he can reach it easily. On this day, he'll be glad he did.

Two men enter. One appears to have some sort of weapon, and the other pulls what Thomas recognizes as a 9mm semiautomatic pistol. Thomas knows he can just give the man his money and goods, but he also knows that to do so is to trust his life to the whim of a violent man unlawfully wielding a deadly weapon. Instead, Thomas chooses to fight.

His hand flashes to the Chief Special, and he comes up shooting. The little revolver barks three times. Two of his bullets miss, but one smashes into the gunman's face, putting him out of the fight.

The merchant swings toward the accomplice, but cannot see a weapon at the moment, and so, does not fire. Instead, he orders the suspect to leave. The now-compliant accomplice does so, dragging his wounded comrade with him.

The robber will survive. Lance Thomas is unhurt. His decision to be an armed citizen, to fight back, has been validated. The wounded robber will be charged, and the armed citizen has the sympathy of the authorities. Thomas has won in every respect.

West L.A. Watchmaker (and small businessman) Lance Thomas has fought, and survived, four gunfights against robbers who would threaten him and his business in a "High-Crime Area". He has since closed his store and semi-retired to an undisclosed location'. He continues to perform repairs on watches, but only for those who make appointments.




Quotes from the Video:

Interviewer: "So why do anything?If you hadn't have reached for your gun, maybe you wouldn't have got shot. Maybe you would have lost a few of your watches, but it would have been over."

Thomas: "I refuse to be a victim of violent crime."
"There's not negotiation; my life is too precious for that."


"They pretended to open the front door to leave, turned around, 'You're Dead!', and fired their weapons. .... I killed them both."

LAPD Detective: "All of the criminals had extensive records. They knew what they were doing, the just didn't know what they were doing it against."

Thomas: "It's kind of made old man out of me. ... It's Hell, it's something to be avoided, but if you have to do it you must be responsible."

Stumble It!

Turbo Tax!

It's Tax Time, and I've been a Bad Boy.

There are two more days before the deadline, and even though I expect that I've overpaid my taxes (and am qualified to have some money returned), I haven't submitted my Tax Returns for Federal and State taxes yet.[

That's not a problem, right?

I use Turbo Tax, and have for the past four years. I'm comfortable with it.

The problem is, I failed to record my password for Turbo Tax last year, and so I had to ask the TurboTax.com website to remind me of/reset my password.

So I did ... several hours ago.

Guess what? They're so busy, they haven't managed to get around to me yet.

---

I blame myself. Which is a helluva not, compounding the indignity of giving the Feds a third of my income with the necessity of begging them to give my overpayment back.

There's a lot of stuff I can be doing while I wait, so I won't be too upset if I don't get my password before, say, "tomorrow". Which could be any time during the day. And if you (as a TurboTax Subscriber) don't sign on with your new password in 24 hours, it expires. You have to start the whole process again.

Pause while I kick my own bottom one more time for procrastinating. I may have to write it up in hardcopy and submit it via email. Oh, the indignity for a self-professed "Geek".

The good news is ... well, there is no good news. They're gonna take my money, and keep it, ans spend it on efforts which I don't believe in. What's good about that?

In the meantime, I belive I'll spend some time correlating my videos from last weekend's ARPC match and producing some excellent match videos ... which most of you won't watch.

I am so "Eeyore".

Stumble It!

SWMBO REPORT: More Good News

A month ago I wrote that SWMBO was feeling well enough to go to the range ... not to shoot, but just to visit her friends. And she has many friends who tell me at every match to relay their support and comfort to her. That trip gave them the opportunity to tell her in person.

Two weeks ago she went in for CT scan, which was used (in comparison to her Initial CT scan about 9 months ago) to determine the growth rate of the tumor in her lung.

A week after the CT scan, the assistant at her Oncologist's office phoned her with the results: no change.

That's both good news and not-so-good news. The good news was that the tumor doesn't seem to be growing. The not-so-good news was that it doesn't seem to be shrinking, either.

We decided that the good news was the important thing, so we were pleased with the report. No, it wasn't what we wanted to hear. We wanted them to tell us that the 'maintenance' chemotherapy was starving the tumor. Since that isn't happening, we're almost as pleased to learn that the therapy was retarding the growth.

Today she had her monthly visit to her Oncologist. She said: "I want to look at the original CT scan and the last scan, so I can see what it looks like."

It turned out that the assistant at her Oncologist's office had missed one important point.

Her Oncologist pointed it out:

"See this area on the original scan of your cancerous lung? Now compare it with the same area on the latest scan. See the clear imagery? That's healthy tissue!"

I didn't know about that until I stopped by to see her after work tonight. We were talking about incidental stuff when she interrupted me with a two-word surprise:
"Good News!"

That good lady had been sitting on the results of the CT scan all afternoon, just so she could watch my face as I assimilated the implication of those results.

I have to tell you, this absolutely made my day (my week, my month ...)

Whether one can draw any conclusions from this information is beyond me. I don't know if it's the first or second step on the way to full recovery, but this is the first indication we've had that Cancer is not necessarily inevitable.

Our thanks to all of you who have been praying for Sandie. I choose to believe in the Power of Prayer.

Stumble It!

ARPC April 2009 Match - One Video

I'm pleased to announce that I went to a USPSA match this weeked, and even though I wasn't at the top of my game the gun (STI EDGE) worked just fine,

After shooting almost entirely the Open Gun for the past four years, I had some problems with Sight Picture and Sight Alignment.


Specifically, I realized (after the match) that my orange-painted front and rear sights encouraged me to unconsciously adopt the sight picture in Limited that I had in Open Division.

That is, if the front sight is on the target, I just ... pulled the trigger and expected the shot to be On Target.

Here's a link to one of the videos. Rocky's Theme ("Gonna Fly Now") is just too kewl to resiste the temptation to use it One More Time!


That didn't usually happen. Add to that, by the end of the match I was getting very tired, and my hands were hurting me due to the decreased skin-resilience on my fingertips. Yes, this IS an excse; I take 'em where I can.

Still, in even the most difficult stges, and at the end of the match, I found a way to "Look Good On Video.

Fortunately, the video doesn't show the three misses ... on static targets.
I have GOT to practice.

Stumble It!

We're Back!

As of this date (Sunday, April 12, 2006) the Cogito Ergo Geek website/blog is officially back!

I mentioned last week that my personal work station was experiencing "trouble", and it cost me abotu $316 to correct it.

Besides the problem that my CMOS (and battery) was usable to know what time it was, there were some other problems as well... problems that I had not identified.

First, when they ran a check on the hard drive, they noticed over 100 errors. I got a new hard drive, because their components were under warranty from the manufacturer.

the good folks from Belleveu Computers, where I bought The Monster after the Blue Bird of Paradise trashed my old computer by inconsiderately flying into the local power junction, managed to completely rebuild my computer and to also enhance its power to edit Videos in the meantime.

Problematic resolutions:

• replace old Motherboard battery, reset CMOS (yes, this was the source of the primary problem);
• They discovered that the fan wasn't working to full potential, so I asked them to replace the fan and power supply;
• They found over 100 errors when they scanned the hard drive, so they cloned the data onto a new hard-drive (on Warranty from the manufacturer);

Also, because I tend to edit a lot of video clips and Windows Movie Maker runs out of memory, I asked them to swap my two 1-GB memory strips for two 2-GB memory strips, giving me a total of 4GB RAM.

To enhance the Video process, they also loaded a Video Chip with 1-GB internal memory.

All of this required 1.75 hours of their time. I couldn't even begin to accomplish the same even without dealing with the CMOS resets, so it's a net (no pun intended) gain for The Geek.

I've just edited one video from the April ARPC match (see above) and the experiece was much better than what I had experienced before. Essentially, I could edit one file without rebootimg to recover memory.

I'm so glad that I went to Computer Professionals to fix my computer rather than try to fix it mself.

Stumble It!

Free Market Cure - A Short Course in Brain Surgery

"Private health care is outlawed in Ontario. ..."

"Isn't it ironic, that while the Canadian monopoly on health care is slowly crumbling in the face of widespread suffering, [American] Liberal Democrats are pushing to adopt a system much like the one which has failed so miserably in Canada."

What does Nero Obama have to offer which is superior to the health care provided in Ontario, Canada?

Nothing.

Stumble It!

USPSA Videos! Get your USPSA Videos right here!

Here is the link to all of the Geek internet-access Videos from past matches. (You Tube, of course.)

I try to provide as many helpful Internet resources as possible to students in the Introduction to USPSA" classes.

This is one good way to show what a Practical Pistol match looks like. Obviously, the selection-for-publication process usually serves only to show events which are intrinsically interesting. IPSC is not, after all, a Spectator Sport.

As an example, here's Yong Lee on "The Doors" stage from a Croc Dundee Banzaii Ballistic "You Got Bullets" match (from 2005)

If you don't think his 21 second time is impressive, I offer that I took 70 seconds to complete the same stage, and I breezed right past one entire target array AND I was cautioned by the Range Officer that I 'almost broke the 180) when engaging the back-leaning targets behind the barrels ... which are the last targets that Yong Lee engaged in this video.

Did I mention that Yong Lee was the Stage Winner?

Stumble It!

You're A Pig!

That's no way to talk to a lady.

Stumble It!

Basketball Full Court Shot

Incredibly (?) the ref calls "No Basket".

(A feature presentation of "I Am Bored".

Stumble It!

What IS "The Government" In Charge Of? (The Wisdom of Horation Bunce)

I was surprised to see that my recent rant on governmental excess and the current Administration ("So You Think You Like The Idea Of National Health Care") reaped a couple of comments. This was just a way for me to express my distaste on several topics, but it seems to have pushed some buttons for some readers.

TheGunGeek responded:

While you listed a whole bunch of things that our government is in charge of, you managed to leave off the most important ones:

- Medicare
- Medicaid
- VA Health care

Nobody but nobody would choose any of these if they had any other choice for their health coverage. What does that tell you about how well the gov would handle national health care? ...

That got me started thinking a bit harder about just what issues The Government (we're talking about the Federal government here) has assumed responsibility to administer ... and to impose.

My thoughts turned to a story about Davy Crockett. No, not the Davy Crockett portrayed by Fess Parker, but the Davy Crockett who was, among his many accomplishment, an elected member of the Federal Government. (He famously said: "Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have." We should remember this.)

You can read the following story in great detail in Lew Rockwell's article "Davy Crockett vs. Welfare", and if you get nothing more from this I hope you read that illuminative lesson.

A brief summary of the story is that Crockett once voted in favor of a bill to provide Federal money to fund a worthy charitable effort. Later he discussed this allocation with a constituent, one' Horatio Bunce', and he was taken to task for his vote. The gist is that his constituent pointed out that Congress had no constitutional authority to spend tax money on this sort of effort. Certainly it was a worthwhile cause, but the nation did not OWE a debt; further, if the nation owed this debt to designated the recipients, then every other person in similar circumstances was owed the same debt. Finally, the amount of funding was arrived at arbitrarily, setting an unhealthy precedent for similar excesses in the future.

_____________________

Think back again on the list that TheGunGeek provided:

• Medicare
• Medicaid
• VA Health care

Because the Federal Government is constitutionally obligated "... to provide for the common defense ..." (and Congress can "declare war"), it seems reasonable that The Nation should be obligated to pay ALL the costs of War, including providing medical care for military members who are wounded. But should this be accomplished by establishing a Veteran's Health Care system including the construction and administration of hospitals? Or should it be limited to paying the bills for a Veteran who can choose his own physician(s)? This is a question which one might honorably argue either way.

But Medicade and Medicare? Sure, it's "nice" that this is an option for indigent and elderly citizens, but the administration of such is a bureaucratic morass. And besides, does the Constitution authorize it?

In fact, many of the Departments of the Federal Government are not obviously constituted for the purpose of addressing a Constitutional debt. The Department of Education comes to mind.

Besides Defense, there are some other issues for which the Federal Government is Constitutionally obligated. With a few significant exceptions, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America does a fine job of enumerating the powers and obligations of the Federal Government.

Most of the rest of the Constitution (including the Amendments) is generally characterized by enumerating the things which the Federal Government can NOT do! (There are some powers accorded to the individual States. )

Interstate Commerce:
Over the years, many of the Constitutionally assigned Powers and Obligations have been warped re-interpreted by successive Presidential Administrations and Congresses. Not least is The Commerce Clause (also found in Article I, Section 8):

... "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"...

Various administrations and Congresses have interpreted this clause (a subset of a Section, itself as a subset of an Article) to provide them with the power to regulate the interstate transfer of firearms. These are currently in force, as we are 'generally' forbidden to purchase firearms in any state except our state of residence. (We get around this by purchasing by mail or internet, etc.; but the firearms must be shipped to a Local Licensed Dealer who performs the now-necessary function of accomodating the National Instant Check System verification of confirming that the end-user is legally permitted to purchase a firearm.) In fact, there is a declared intention of the Party in Power to re-impose not only restrictions on the purchase of firearms due to "firearm type", but to also require registration and to dis-allow transfer of some firearms across State lines.

(See also commentary by Michael Bane)
_________________________________

Excesses of Government have reached a new high ... or a new low, depending upon your point of view.

The Federal government receives something on the order of 500 billion dollars annually from Income Taxes. Yet this administration has, in the short span of 3 months (and without giving the Legislators sufficient time to properly review the Bills), obligated this nation to accept the fiscal obligation of over TWO TRILLION DOLLARS of new fiscal obligations. These are in excess of the 'normal' issues which must be paid for by our Nation.

And, finally completing the circular route of my reasoning, what are included in the "normal issues"?

• International Disaster Relief. A noble cause, a worthy charity. Not included in our Constitution.
• Foreign Aid. A noble cause, a worthy charity. Not included in our Constitution.
• Educational Grants (eg: "No Child Left Behind"). A noble cause, a worthy charity. Not included in our Constitution.

Note that all of these are described as "Charity". Actually, some of the examples given are not in fact "Charity", but an effort to position our Nation as a "responsible" member of an informal World Power.

Perhaps a good idea. Perhaps to our benefit . Not included in our Constitution.

Education? Used to impose Federal influence on Local and State Educational priorities.

__________________


I'm not saying that all of these allotments of your money aren't a good idea. I'm just saying that the Constitution does not enumerate them among the Powers and Obligations of the Federal Government.

Congress, and Presidential Administrations through the year, have imposed these tax burdens on our Nation for, ultimately, the sake of expediencey.

But they have never addressed these issues in a manner which would make them legal. Namely, a Constitutional Amendment which would permit these bureaucratic entities to decide who gets how much of your tax dollar.

Going back to the Davy Crockett story:

"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

I think we have reached that point. And I think that we should all stop a minute to consider the wisdom of Horatio Bunce.

Stumble It!

Little Red Riding Hood ...

... in a YouTube World


H/T: Jigsaw Thoughts:

Stumble It!

So, you thinkyou like the idea of National Health Care

President Nero Obama has included National Health Care as the primary plank in his platform during the Presidential Election in 2008. He won both the Democratic Nomination (over Hillary Clinton, author (along with her husband Bill the Philanderer) of HillaryCare in 1994. Well, Obama is prettier than Hillary so we can't disagree with the Democrats on that point.

But I digress.

If Obama is successful in placing the Federal Government in control of our Health Care ... we're screwed.

Remember, "The Government" (at various levels ... Federal, State and Local) are the people who are in charge of:

• The U.S. Postal Service
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Tax and Explosives
• The Department of Environmental Quality
• The Department of Education
• Congress
• The Justice Department
• The Department of State ("HillaryCare Part II")
• The Department of Motor Vehicles
• The Internal Revenue Service
• Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
• Congress, which approved --- and The President --- who initiated T.A.R.P.
  

In the words of Yul Brynner: "Etcetera, Etcetera, Etcetera".

Are these the peoplewho should be in charge of your Health Service?

No. They're politicians and Bureaucrats, whose only priority is either getting re-elected or Empire Building ... or both. These people would screw up a Wet Dream; I dn't know abut you, but I don't want them to decide whether they should allow their limited resources to be allocated in relief of my medical miseries.

Here's a Case in Point, from our British Cousins:
GP refuses stroke call out

A FAMILY whose father died after medics misdiagnosed his stroke three times and refused a home visit have won an out of court settlement.

... Jeffery Wingrove, 48, died in hospital less than 48 hours after collapsing at home with severe vomiting and crippling headaches.

Too ill to move, his wife Isabelle, 52, rang her out-of-hours GP service run by a privately contracted firm who twice refused a home visit despite her pleas.

Claiming he did not qualify as he was not elderly, they instead offered to fax a prescription for pain killers to her local pharmacy for her to collect.

Paramedics were called as his condition worsened but they misdiagnosed Jeffery with severe vertigo and gave him paracetamol instead.

By the next day Jeffery was in so much pain he was rushed to hospital by ambulance where a scan revealed an infarct on the left side of his brain.

Part of his brain had been severely damaged by a stroke. Doctors attempted surgery but he died the following morning.

‘ All they had to do was come and see him, which my usual GP would have done at the drop of a hat. But it was too much trouble for them. ’

During the subsequent investigation harrowing call recordings were released of Isabelle pleading with the doctor to come and help him.

Isabelle, of Braintree, Essex, said: ”If he had been ill in on a weekday he would still be alive today. They held a gun to his head and they pulled the trigger. He was never given a chance of survival.

”All they had to do was come and see him, which my usual GP would have done at the drop of a hat. But it was too much trouble for them.

”I told the doctor he couldn’t lift his head off the pillow and I had no chance of moving him as he was 6ft tall and I’m only 4’10”.

”I was just ignored no matter how much I pleaded. The hospital told us if he had been treated sooner he would have survived.”

Was this a case of "We're not interested in moving from our comfortable chair", or "Judging from your description, there's no major emergency here", or "We don't have the resources to respond to EVERY call, and we have other things to do right now"?

It's impossible to tell from the limited information given in the article.

One thing is clear, though: the National Health Services is controlled by Bureaucrats and Accountants, not by Medical Experts. Certainly, the people in charge are neither Philanthropists nor Care Givers. If they were, their priorities would have generated a certain sense of Urgency after the second call, certainly after the third telephoned plea for help.

The family won a six-figure out-of-court settlement for clinical negligence from the East of England Ambulance Service and the GP involved last month.

...

The family - Isabelle and sons Marc, 14, and Danny, 23 - intend making a complaint to the General Medical Council about the GP who has not been named.

It is understood the GP no longer works for Primecare.

A spokeswoman for the East of England Ambulance Services NHS Trust said: ”We have co-operated fully with the investigation and do not feel that it is appropriate to comment at this time."

A spokesman for Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust said he could not comment on the specifics of what was a ”terrible tragedy” as the matter was still subject to possible future actions.

Swell. The government (or NHS, which is the same thing) threw the doctor under the bus and washed their hands of all responsibility.

The lesson here is that the poliiticians make the rules, the Doctors are required to abide by them ... and when anything goes wrong, the Doctor gets the axe. Notice that the article does not mention a review of Governmental Policies or Procedures in an effort to prevent recurrence of this kind of tragedy.

Oh, let's call it what it really is: a screw-up of monumental proportions, because England cannot actually afford to run a National Health Service.

This should serve as a warning to we who are about to allow Obama to implement a similar bureaucratic quagmire on we, the Citizens of the United States of America.

Since Obama has saddled us and our children with (more or less) NINE TRILLION DOLLARS of debt (borrowed from the Chinese, who have no love for us), which is (more or less) equivalent to our Annual Gross National Product ... and in the process doubled our National Debt during the First One Hundred Days of his reign administration ... America also cannot afford to fund a National Health Service, either.

Sure, he claims that it will be 'an option', and that it is not intended to replace Private Medical Insurance plays but to supplement those plans available to those who can afford to pay for private insurance.

On the other hand, this is the same President who promised "The most transparent administration in American History", and that he would personally evaluate every bill which was presented to him "line by line" ... and then pushed for T.A.R.P., which was a 1600 page bill, before the members of Congress had time to read it. And doubtless before he had time to read it and discuss it, either. Not that he really cared; the bill fit his personal agenda, and that's the important thing.

---

Judging by the preceding editorial comments, one might arrive at the conclusion that I am becoming increasingly disillusioned about the leadership provided by Obama.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Obama has never served in an executive position in a company which actually produces a product, which is accountable to stockholders (or employees), yet he has the unmitigated gall to presume to take over some of the biggest corporations in the country (eg: General Motors) to the extent that he has arbitrarily assumed the right to fire the CEO, set salaries, and determine the product line which that and other companies can produce.

Obama has committed to the establishment of a "Civilian Corps" with funding comparable to the American Military, with goals and directives which have not yet been determined, which is not accountable to anyone other than Obama, and the membership of which currently seems slated to be obligatory, rather than voluntary.

Hell, even our military is an "All Volunteer" organization, but not the Obama-Crats.

I do not trust the man. He is committed to tax rules which are specifically and clearly designed to accomplish his personal goal of "Redistribution of Wealth". He has established 'forgiveness' tax rules which establishes a Dolist population greater than the producing tax-payers. In fact, those who pay NO taxes will be rewarded with a 'tax rebate', taken from tax-payers.

Does this sound like the actions of a man whose intention is to provide quality Medical Care for lower-earning, retired and otherwise indigent Citizens?

Or does this sound like the actions of a man who wants the Government to control every aspect of our private lives?

I know what I think.

What do YOU think?

Is "The British Model" of Health Care appropriate to a bankrupt First-World Nation?

Stumble It!

The British Want Their Rights Back

While I was researching the last article for this blog, I happened upon this YouTube video.

I've posted it before, but it bears repeating because I so often write about the Rights which the British People have given up in the pursuit of A Peaceful Society,s which they clearly do not enjoy today.

The British have lately yielded their Rights in pursuit of a "Peaceful Realm", and have reaped the consequences of a realm which is not only NOT peaceful, but NOT cognizant of a Nation of Free Men.


Those of us who have read the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes are aware that Holmes frequently cautioned his Boon Companion, Doctor Watson, to "Bring your Webley with you, please." Holmes recognized that there are some situations in which possession of a firearm was necessary to the SAFE completion of a legitimate endeavor.

Brits today must acknowledge that, according to their Elected Government, there is NO situation which justifies the possession (let alone the use of) a Firearm. This includes the protection of property, neighbors, family or Self. That is to say, if you resort to a Weapon of any kind to protect these priorities, you place yourself in hazard of legal proscriptions which are legally equivalent to "Assault with a Deadly Weapon?" ... except that if you are the Victim, you have fewer rights than you would have if you were the Aggressor.

To their credit, "The Brits" are not entirely (or universally) ignorant of this distinction. And so a few of them have demonstrated in support of their Civil Rights ... which are NOT supported by current British Law. and has NOT provoked Parliament to adjust current British Law to the default position that a person who is physically attacked has a legal right to defend him/herself.

Parliament has ignored the British Demonstration, and they ("The Brits") continue to find themselves in the unenviable position of NOT being legally permit to defend themselves.

If we (Americans) do not insist that our Second Amendment freedoms are acknowledged and supported by our Government, we may find ourselves engaging in similarly unproductive demonstrations.

Is THIS what we really require from OUR government?

Stumble It!

"90% of Mexacan Crime Weapons Come from U.S."

I've never been a fan of Wayne LaPierre, but he said something last month that struck a sympathetic chord in my psyche:

"If the only guys with guns are the bad guys, we're screwed!"

It doesn't get much plainer than that.

Lately, we've heard that ""90 percent of the guns used by Drug Cartels in Mexico came from the United States". (CNN is touting that message.)

Here's what it looks like on You Tube:

Perhaps it's passe' to contradict CNN, but Fox News did just that last Thursday:

There's just one problem with the 90 percent "statistic" and it's a big one:

It's just not true.

In fact, it's not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

What's true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency's assistant director, "is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S."

But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

Fox News goes further to suggest:

In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced -- and of those, 90 percent -- 5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover -- were found to have come from the U.S.

But in those same two years, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes.

In other words, 68 percent of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. And when you weed out the roughly 6,000 guns that could not be traced from the remaining 32 percent, it means 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.

So if they don't come from the U.S., where DO they come from?

Fox lists "other sources", including:

• The Black Market
• Russian Crime Organizations
• South America
• Asia
• The Mexican Army
• Guatamala

Ed Head, a firearms instructor in Arizona who spent 24 years with the U.S. Border Patrol, recently displayed an array of weapons considered "assault rifles" that are similar to those recovered in Mexico, but are unavailable for sale in the U.S.

"These kinds of guns -- the auto versions of these guns -- they are not coming from El Paso," he said. "They are coming from other sources. They are brought in from Guatemala. They are brought in from places like China. They are being diverted from the military. But you don't get these guns from the U.S."

Some guns, he said, "are legitimately shipped to the government of Mexico, by Colt, for example, in the United States. They are approved by the U.S. government for use by the Mexican military service. The guns end up in Mexico that way -- the fully auto versions -- they are not smuggled in across the river."

Many of the fully automatic weapons that have been seized in Mexico cannot be found in the U.S., but they are not uncommon in the Third World.

The Mexican government said it has seized 2,239 grenades in the last two years -- but those grenades and the rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) are unavailable in U.S. gun shops. The ones used in an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Monterrey in October and a TV station in January were made in South Korea. Almost 70 similar grenades were seized in February in the bottom of a truck entering Mexico from Guatemala.

Here's the way the subject is parsed by Wayne LaPierre, spokesman for the National Rifle Association:

Jim Shepherd, of The Shooting Wire, offers his observations:

Yesterday, I was pleased to notice that "mainstream" media had begun to question the absurd statements being made by US officials concerning the "iron river" of firearms flowing from the United States into Mexico.

For the past weeks, we've heard politicians, bureaucrats and supposedly informed law enforcement officials blame the flow of US firearms into Mexico for that country's reversion back into its old, violent, ways. Today, the other side of our long, common border with the United States looks like some backwater dictatorship. Violence is no longer the exception, it's the rule, with drug cartels fighting it out with each other -and occasionally a corrupt Mexican police force.

Infuriatingly, high-ranking US officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have continued to spout inaccurate statistics that blame the US firearms industry and our retail system for the Mexican violence. They say ninety percent of all the illegal guns in Mexico come from the United States, purchased in legal or illegal transactions, then smuggled into Mexico to arm the cartels.

That is not a statistical fib, it is an absolute bald-faced lie. To repeat something you know isn't true makes whomever repeats it a bald-faced liar as well.

Unfortunately, it demonstrates this new administration's complete and utter disdain for the rest of us. They believe we're as incapable of questioning them as we are of deciding our own futures.

Fortunately, not everyone is buying into the lie.

With Mexican cartel battles involving full-auto rifles, grenades and other military-style weaponry, even the most naive reporter should eventually question officials saying they're being procured in the United States. A reader's note the other day asked "can you get me an address on those Texas gun stores where I can get the machine guns and rocket launchers that are being smuggled into Mexico? I'd like to have some of that for myself."

Finally, some hard questions are being asked.

In San Diego, KGTV television's investigative unit used a forensic firearms consultant to inspect a Mexican army cache of seized weapons. Based on those findings, it was obvious to consultant Marc Halcon that what was being stated by government officials as fact and parroted by reporters was not accurate. In fact, he reported that while US gun shops were getting the blame for supplying the cartels with weapons, the real fact was that many of the high-powered weapons the criminals were using come from the U.S. government. They had been given to the Mexican military to fight the cartels. Instead, it appears they were taken to the cartels by the more than 1,200 soldiers per month who go AWOL from the Mexican army - apparently taking their firearms with them. Since 2000, an average of 16,000 soldiers have deserted.

You do the math on the number of military firearms that could put into circulation.

Thursday, Fox News reported the government statistics, were simply wrong. More disturbingly, they reported, ATF officials didn't seem to be interested in doing anything to correct the inaccuracy.

Truth be told, only a small percentage of the tens of thousands of illegal weapons seized in Mexico each year come from the United States.

The statistic being quoted doesn't refer to the total number of weapons seized, only the ones with marking that allow them to be traced. Tens of thousands of illegal military weapons aren't traced, they're warehoused.

As the old expression goes, there are three kinds of lies: plain old lies, damned lies and statistics.

Still, the Obama Administration (in the person of A.G. Eric holder) seems determined to use this Not Ready For Prime Time moment to build momentum for a rejuvenation of the Assault Weapons Ban. This assumption is based on Obama's past history of support for Gun Control measures which would restrict Second Amendment rights ot by restricting access to firearms per se, but by restricting ammunition availability by enacting laws (eg: Microstamping and Bullet Encoding) which are prohibitively expensive to establish in an industrial manufacturing process.

Even if the Obama administration is too shy to prohibit access to firearms, this might seem to be an attractive alternative to meet the same end. That is, the practical imposition of legal means to meet an illegal objective: "imposition of laws to restrict firearms ownership" by "other means".

Essentially, making ammunition prohibitively expensive has the same effect on Firearms Ownership as making gasoline prohibitively expensive has on Automobile Ownership: if you can't buy gasoline, you can't use your automobile. Similarly, if you can't buy ammunition, you can't use your firearm.


It may be that this entire thesis is flawed; Obama may have no intention to restrict the private ownership of firearms, nor to impose such legal access to ammunition as will render the firearms useless.

Still, the American Public seems convinced. Political Pundits have often expressed the homily that Americans "Vote with their wallets". This is a reflection of the basic tenets of Capitalism (a dirty word in the Obama Admistration.)

What we have seen in the ten weeks since the enshrinement of Barack Obama is that the American Public has rushed to buy guns and ammunition, to the point at which the Manufacturers have been unable to supply the Retailers sufficiently to meet the spike in Consumer Demand.

If all those people who are rushing to buy guns and ammunition had voted AGAINST Nero, he would today be nothing more than than the Junior Senator from Illinois.

Why didn't they "cleave to their Guns and their God" in November?

Stumble It!

It's 8pm ... do you know where your Boot Disk is>

When I got back from my Weekend with SWMBO, the first thing I did (after unloading the car) was to turn on my computer. Then I unpacked while it was booting up.

Only it didn't boot up. Instead, I got a message from Norton GoBack (which takes checkpoints during the time the computer is operating) saying that the last checkpoint was 4.3.2009 and the system date is 1.1.07 at 12:39 am. It asked me if the GoBack checkpoint timestamp should be updated, or the system date?

So I updated the system date (today at 5:26pm).

When I confirmed the new system date to be correct, I expected the system to reboot at the last checkpoint version.

Instead, I got a "Load Error! Press a key to reboot ..." error message on the Black Screen of Death.

Pressing a key returned:

DISK BOOT FAILURE, INSERT SYSTEM DISK AND PRESS ENTER

What boot disk? My puter has gone for 30 months without a hiccup, and now I'm dead Dead DEAD!

I have Norton 360, antivirus and GoBack installed, so I invoked GoBack on the reboot. The oldest goback checkpoint it was able to find was last Friday ... which was when I turned the computer off. I haven't turned it on between Friday Morning and Sunday Evening,'

Still, my desktop computer will not boot.

Fearing that it had something to do with either the Conficker worm, or the cable modem, I turned off my computer and also turned off (and disconnected) my cable modem "for at least two minutes".

Then I connected my laptop, which has not been connected to the Internet since last September, to the cable modem.

The laptop booted right up.

So for tonight I am able to post to the Blog, and also check my email.

Of course, not all of my bookmarks are available because they are on my desktop computer ... or they are six months out of date.

My agenda for the rest of the night is to (a) do whatever I need to do on my blog, (b) catch up on my email, and (c) disconnect my desktop and put it in the car so I can take it to the local Computer Doctor to see what can be done to 'fix' it.

The good news is, in the final analysis the worst that can happen is that I will lose a little data. Much of the data on my hard-drive is backed up on my external hard-drive.

The bad news is, I haven't backed up the hard-drive for several months. I've been unwilling to crawl under my computer disk to re-connect it, so I can't say that I have less than 1 month new data missing on my backup.

(My data is fully backed up at last monthly on my workstation at the office. I have my priorities.)

If there is a moral lesson here, it is that it is insufficient to have the resources to back up data. We also need to do the actual backup on a regular basis.

The only consolation I have here is that at least two of my 'favorite bloggers' ... Michael Bane and Xavier Thoughts ... have reported computer crashes lately. Both websites reported system outages lasting for several days. It isn't The Geek who experiences Schadenfreud when SHTF. [Shit Hits The Fan]

At least this disappontment provides another excuse for me not to complete my tax return for a few more days.

Oh, yeah, I almost forgot.

I really don't like my laptop, because the keyboard is so ... tiny. And the function keys aren't where they belong.

Still, I'll do my best to keep up, and to serve as a Bad Example to the rest of the world.

'>Stumble It!

Fire Sale ... NOT!

Okay, so nobody values my most precious possessions as much as I.

I won't sell my stuff for one cent on the dollar (I'll ignore the "Monopoly Money" bid as despicable), I won't leave SWMBO to move to San Francisco (she wouldn't go there any more than I), and I won't vote for Nero for dog-catcher, let alone Leader of the Free World.

On the other hand, it's good that my little April Fool's Post served to show me who my friends are.

Stumble It!

Fire Sale

I'm tired of struggling with my reloading press.


I've fought it for months, and the alternative is just not working for me. When it takes me longer to load up enough ammunition for a match that it takes to shoot the match, it verges on more effort than it is worth.

Anybody want to buy a slightly used progressive loading press? Dies and turret assemblies set up for 10mm/.40S&W, .38 super/9x19, and .45ACP. I also have dies for .38 Special, plus an entire turret assembly to go with it (including powder measure). Make an offer.

I don't want to reload any more. The last time I tried it, I tore up my hands ... just when I thought I was past the whole eczema thing. Every time I handle a pistol or try to reload, it just aggravates the condition. A week ago, my hands looked fine. After reloading a lousy 200 rounds, my hands look worse than ever.

Don't need the pistols, either. I have several appropriate for USPSA competition ... write for details and be prepared to make me an offer.

Since I won't be competing in Practical Pistol any more, I won't need this BLOG. I'm shutting it down. This is the last post ... you won't have Jerry The Geek to kick around any more.

Speaking of which, since I won't be competing and I won't be blogging, I won't have my old friends any more. So I won't need this computer -- I won't be getting email. It's probably infected by the Conficter worm anyway. Make me an offer?

Won't need those two Digital Cameras, either. I started the blog, and took the pictures, to illustrate Practical Pistol and Rifle competition, where you won't see me again. Besides, I've lost my Server Host and all the stills and videos from years gone by. One camera is 7MB and one is 10MB density, both are pocket-size Hewlett-Packards with video capability: make me an offer.

Write to me at The Usual Email Address. But write soon ... when I sell the computer, I'll hold a garage sale to get rid of the furniture, move to San Francisco and change my registration from Republican to Democrat so I can vote for Barack Hussein Obama's Second, Third and Fourth term as Dear Leader!

Life's easier, when you're a sheeple.

Stumble It!