Roman Holiday - from morality

Driving home from work, I heard on the radio that a bunch of "entertainment industry" creepezoids had initiated & signed a petition to "Free Roman Polanski!"


It's all over the internet, Google listed 65,700 hits on "polanski petition" and as nearly as I can tell the petition just hit the news yesterday (28-sept-2009). The petition is posted here, but I can't get it to load. Perhaps it's just overwhelmed, or perhaps it's just a matter of technical incompetence on the part of the webmasters: the website is French. Now, why does that not surprise me. (My visceral disdain for the French is the reason I make it a rule to never blog about them. Folks take me to task for talking so often about "The Brits" and their failing culture, but I actually like The Brits.)

Fortunately, some energetic blogger named fkacharietrout over at Community.livejournal has the full text of the petition (in English), along with a list of the signers. Hardly the Declaration of Independence, except in a very limited way. Many of the "organizations" which support the petition have names beginning with "Le" ("le Festival de Cannes"), "La" ("la Cinémathèque Française"), or "L' " ("l'Union des producteurs de films"). Notable exception: "Scott Foundas (LA Weekly)" [Translation: Left-Coast Liberal Useful Idiot]

Number one on the Google Hit-list was this article from The Guardian ("The Brits"):

Woody Allen, David Lynch and Martin Scorsese today added their names to a petition demanding the immediate release of Roman Polanski from detention in Zurich. The director was arrested on Saturday over a three-decade-old underage sex case when he arrived to receive a lifetime achievement award at the city's film festival.

"Film-makers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision," says the petition, which is co-ordinated by the Société des Auteurs et Compositeurs Dramatiques (SACD), a film industry organisation which also represents performance and visual artists.

"It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary film-makers, is used by police to apprehend him," it adds.

The petition has now been signed by more than 70 film industry luminaries, including Polanski's fellow directors Michael Mann, Wim Wenders, Pedro Almodóvar, Darren Aronofsky, Terry Gilliam, Julian Schnabel, the Dardenne brothers, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Wong Kar-Wai, Walter Salles and Jonathan Demme. Actors Tilda Swinton, Monica Bellucci and Asia Argento, as well as producer Harvey Weinstein, have also put their names on the petition. Yesterday, Weinstein stated he was "calling on every film-maker we can to help fix this terrible situation".

What is "this terrible situation", anyway?

The FOX article from Los Angeles incudes this summary from the LA Times:

In 1977, when Polanski was 44, he lured Geimer *, who was then 13, to actor Jack Nicholson's home on Mulholland Drive, saying he wanted to take photographs of her for a magazine. During the shoot, he gave her champagne and part of a Quaalude and forced her to have sex. After spending 42 days in a prison hospital ward for a mental evaluation, a deal was worked out for him to plead guilty and be sentenced to time served.

Geimer* has said that although the sex was not consensual, she wants the matter dropped.

"He should never have been put in a position that led him to flee," she wrote in 2003. "He should have received a sentence of time served 25 years ago, just as we all agreed."

Polanski had been trying to get his Los Angeles County arrest warrant dismissed. In July, lawyers for Polanski appealed Los Angeles Superior Court Peter Espinoza's denial of his petition to have the charge dropped.

* "Samantha Geimer, who is now 44, married and living in Hawaii, [and who] has previously said she wished the matter would be dropped ..."

There are commentaries (see here and here) which suggest that it was Polanski's lawyers who triggered a renewed determined attempt by the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office to arrest Polanski.

The accusation that the Los Angeles County district attorney's office was not serious about extraditing Polanski to face sentencing in a child sex case he fled in 1978 was a minor point in two lengthy July court filings by the director's attorneys.

He had left France, where he had been living since he skipped bail in 1978(?) after pleading guilty, in order to accept a "Lifetime Achievement Award" in Switzerland. And in fact, LA County had made numerous attempts to arrest Polanski every time they learned that he may be traveling outside of France, which was protecting him from extradition. (Polanski was born in France, of Polish parents.)

The Charges:
Roman Polanski had met the 13 year old Samantha Geiler and convinced her mother to allow her to visit him at Jack Nickolson's home for a "photo shoot". He had promised to build a portfolio and support her desire to become an internationally recognized model. She ended up naked in the hot tub, drugged with Quaalude, and at the mercy of the 40-something Polanski who was accused of rape, sodomy, and other crimes.

The Morality:
Now the international film community, France, and The Huffington Post assert that it is "wrong" to hold him accountable for his confessed crimes. Why is it wrong? Because the victim has changed her mind about prosecuting him, after 31 years of building a private life; because it has been so long since the 'incident' that is should be forgotten; because he is an internationally famous and successful movie director; because the District Attorney doesn't really care; and because there was 'nothing really so wrong about it' or, in the words of Whoopi Goldberg: It wasn't really "rape-rape". (youtube link to "The view" here.)

The woman is a clown; that is her career and her choice. Her opinion should be held suspect on any subject, let alone one so egregious as this.

My Take On It:


The man is scum. He raped a child. He drugged her, with liquor (champagne) and drugs (Quaalude) to undermine her defenses. He took her every way he could think of. He confessed to it, and then instead of taking his admittedly justifiable consequences, he fled to a country from which he could not be extradited. In his arrogance, he left that country and put himself at risk of (righteous) capture and punishment, because he thought nobody cared.

It may be significant that his wife, Sharon Tate, was slaughtered by the Manson Clan while pregnant. If his wife had lived, if his child had lived ... would he have acted differently? As a father, I hope so; as a cynic, I am not convinced.

The man is scum. Enough of that.

Now we see that the Entertainment Industry has rallied in defense of his hedonistic lack-of-defense because they see that their celebrity is no defense against The Law. That does not speak well for them. They are uncomfortable, because they have always believed that their celebrity has put them Above The Law. IF this man can be prosecuted (not "Persecuted") for his sins after a third of a century, to what crimes may they be held accountable?

I can only hope the Polanski is extradited, convicted again, imprisoned and exposed to the same kind of sexual abuse as he has imposed upon his victim.

To me, that would be Justice.

Stumble It!

Brett Favre Incredible TD Pass to Win the game (Vikings/49ers)

YouTube - Brett Favre Incredible TD Pass to Win the game (Vikings/49ers)

I'm not much of a football fan. In fact, I'm not a football fan at. I don't like spectator sports, so even if my television was hooked up to cable (or something other than a DVD/VHS player) I would watch SWMBO's HGDV shows before I would watch football, basketball, hockey, etc. Okay I might be persuaded to watch a little baseball from time to time, but I haven't even done that in over 20 years.

However, I found this video on the internet tonight, and I have to admit that I'm impressed.

I once stopped in the middle of a sidewalk to watch a semi driver back into a very small, awkward mercantile loading dock, and gave him a standing ovation because I was impressed by his professionalism.

It is with the same respect for the skill of a pro that I present this very short video of Brent Favre's game-winning TD pass.

Stumble It!

Reloading Pages of M.D. Smith

It occurs to me that in the construction of this blog I have omitted (a) an important category of links, and (b) a very important link in that category.

The category is "Other Shooting-Related Resources".

The V.I.L. (Very Important Link) is "The Reloading Pages of M.D. Smith".

I've used this reloading resource page for ten of the 14 years it has been on the Internet, and I have found it very useful. So useful, in fact, that I think I may have written about it before. Some years ago, perhaps. (I have written almost 1,000 posts in the five years this blog has been in existence, and I've only referred to it twice: in an August 13, 2007 "August Blogmeat" article, and in the August 17, 2006 "KaBOOM!" article which is one of the most popular articles of this blog.)

But I have never actually put the link on the sidebar.

Lacking an appropriate category, I have placed it under "Reference Sources". If I find another appropriate link, I will build the new category ... but it seems silly to create a new category when there is a single appropriate website to fit there.

In the Blogmeat article, I compare M.D. Smith's website with the highly respected, and venerable (but sadly discontinued) "Jeff Maas' IPSC Loads List". Jeff discontinued maintenance on his website a few years ago, but it still exists and those reloading specification which were in existence the are still available. I suppose I should combine the two and build the new category (he said, musingly), but I'm too tired to do so tonight and I don't know how useful they will be.

Maybe next week; some feedback here would be helpful.

Anyway, the two Internet Resources are subtly different.


Jeff Maas' IPSC Loads List
Maas was aimed (excuse the pun) at what must be considered a "Niche Audience". Specifically, IPSC competition. And because he closed maintenance on the website before 3-gun competition became popular in USPSA competition, he only provided reloading information for pistols which are appropriate to Practical Pistol. competition. He performed a needed service, and one which has been much appreciated. I have contributed load data to, and used load data from Jeff's website.

The Reloading Pages of M.D. Smith
Smith's contribution serviced a wider interest in the Shooting Sports. He apparently spent a lot of time shooting various firearms and working up loads for each. Have you ever known anyone who seemed so knowledgeable about reloading that you found yourself thinking "I wish I could get a look at his reloading logbook"? Smith has made his available on the internet.

Besides loads for a wide variety of pistols (including, for example, the .380 Auto), he also provides an equally valuable set of reloading information for a large number of Rifle calibers.

His reloading data for a specific caliber and bullet weight (and OAL, powder type and weight, primer, etc.) may not be as extensive and varied as Maas' limited selection of pistol calibers, but it is certainly enough to rifle Reloading Manuals from Sierra, Hornady, Nosler, etc.

But Wait ... There's More!
Besides basic reloading data Smith has included sections dealing with 'stuff' that you just can't find anywhere else. For example, he has a "Powder Burning Rate Chart" (from Hodgdon Power Company) which not only compares "pistol Powders" against each other, be even rates Pistol, Shotgun and Rifle powders all together.

Here's an example of the top ten fastest powders rated:

Burning Rate Chart (Courtesy of Hodgdon Powder Co.)

(Fastest to Slowest)
1. R-1 Norma
2. N310, Vihtavuori
3. Bullseye, Alliant
4. N312, Vihtavuori
5. Solo 1000, Accurate
6. Clays, Hodgdon
7. Red Dot, Alliant
8. N318, Vihtavuori
9. Hi-Skor 700X, IMR
10. N320, Vihtavuori
11. Green Dot, Alliant
12. International, Hodgdon
13. No. 2, Accurate
14. N321, Vihtavuori
15. N324, Vihtavuori
16. HP-38, Hodgdon
17. W-231, Winchester
18. N325, Vihtavuori
19. N330, Vihtavuori
20. PB, IMR
21. N331, Vihtavuori
22. No. 5, Accurate
23. Unique, Alliant
24. WSL, Winchester
25. Power Pistol, Alliant

As you can see, there is no effort made to provide absolute burn-rates, but the comparison of relative powder burn-rates is extremely helpful when trying to select a powder for, say, an Open IPSC gun with a compensator. (This is, in fact, one of the reasons why I chose N350 over N330 for my own pistol, and for SWMBO's. It also helps us to understand why Clay's [#6] and Bullseye [#3] are "problematic" for .40 S&W. Faster-burning powders build pressure spikes faster than slower burning powders.)

Oh, by the way: the Powder Burning Rate Chart includes 107 powders. The ten slowest-burning opowders are those which you will probably recognize as been c0mmonly used large-caliber and/or magnum rifle cartridges. I have loaded 4831 (from both manufacturers) in .30-06 ammunition, as it closely matches WWII military loads.

97. IMR-4831, IMR
98. XMR-3100, Accurate
99. H-450, Hodgdon
100. H-4831, Hodgdon
101. MRP, Norma
102. N165, Vihtavuori
103. Reloader 22, Alliant
104. IMR-7828, IMR
105. H-1000, Hodgdon
106. XMR-8700, Accurate
107. H-870, Hodgdon
(slowest burn rate)

I have loaded 4831 (from both manufacturers) in .30-06 ammunition, as it closely matches WWII military loads for the Garand. IMR 4350 (#93) and Hodgdon 4350 (#94) are almost interchangeably appropriate for .25-06 and .270, but IMR 4895 (#71) and Hodgdon 4895 (#72) worked very well for .30-06 ammunition loaded for the 1903-A3 bolt-action rifle.

In the late 1950's, my father bought a 200 pound "Crate" (wooden box, double-layered, 4' tall and 2' wide/thick) of 4895 as Army Surplus; it had been surplussed after pulling the bullets from several thousand rounds of ammunition loaded for the Springfield '03-A* (I think 180 grains ... M1 Garands used 165 grain bullets and a different powder). We loaded a LOT of .30-06 ammunition from that crate. In fact, we used it in the .25-06 rifle which my father built for me from an '03-A3 action and an Oregon Rock Maple stock with ... several custom features.



But I digress.


Another "Special Feature" of Smith's website is an extended discussion of exactly why, and how, "Light Loads in Big Cases Can Explode!".

This is information you can get from other Internet sources (GOOGLE "Light loads in big cases can blow up" and you'll probably be directed to Smith's website ... but you may not even think of researching it. Smith gives it to you with no effort.

Bottom Line:
I like, use and recommend M.D. Smith as a valuable reloading information source. If nothing else, it's worth an evening spent browsing all the information available there. You will learn something valuable in the process, and you may even find yourself coming back from time to time for the "general knowledge" and even "entertainment" values.

UPDATE:
I've created the new category "Reloading Resources" on my sidebar (right after "Competition Shooting Websites" and have included both Maas and Smith's links.

Stumble It!

419

In case you aren't already aware of the Nigerian "419" scam, here's a really good example of it:

Essentially, you receive an unsolicited email from someone you don't know. They are from Nigeria (not essential to the hoax) and they ask you to help them send millions of dollars to America. This is made possible (so they say) for some certain legal shenanigans having to do with with Nigerian banking laws, an odd will, or some other device which allows them to skim the money from either the bank or the Nigerian Government ... which cannot be completed without a confederate in another country.

Whichever country you reside in, that is the government which allows this scheme to work.

SCHEME:
And "scheme" it is. The thrust of the game is that you, as the greed but unsuspecting victim, will be required to provide some small amount of money at first to pay for "transfer Fees" from their bank to yours. Then there are new fees, tithes, penalties, "good faith deposits" and any other monetary requirement the perpetrator can conceive to encourage you to throw good money after bad. After all, you are believably assured to receive millions in return, so why shouldn't you invest your pension in support of this venture?

You'll get your money back, if you are only patient.

Yeah, right.

Even though the email contact assures you of the soundness of the 'investment', it's a scam all the same. If you receive an email which offers you riches in return for a shady "scheme", from/on behalf of somene you have never heard of before .... walk, don't run to the nearest exit.

You will never receive a tenth of your investment, and most likely you will lose every cent in your City Bonds and 401K Retirement Accounts.


Here is a example of the initial contact letter. Note that it's from nobody you every heard from before, but it is crafted by someone with a very appealing personality.

From Miss Jessica Fatu

My Dear, please do not be upset due to the mail I sent to you, also because we have not met before but I know that we do not meet accidentally, rather I meet you by the special grace of God when I found your profile email address and after praying, I just hand over everything to Gods hand believing that you must be a kind, sincere, faithful and understandable person whom will understand me and assist me in this my current situation.

Let me start by giving you an introduction of my self and my family background. My real name is Jessica Fatu. I was born and brought up in Cote d’Ivoire on 03 September 1988 (am 22 yrs old). Also I am the only surviving daughter parents. My mum’s name is Dr. Mrs. Gloria fatu. My mum died when I was four years old (12th dec 1984) and since then my daddy took me so special. But unfortunately, my daddy was killed last year when he attended a ceremony in the village. He was brutally killed and was shut severally by my uncles on his way back. But he do not die instantly and was admitted in a private hospital here and Before the death of my father in a private hospital here in Abidjan he secretly called me on his bed side and told me that he has the sum of Three million, seven hundred thousand United State Dollars.USD ($3,700,000.00) left in fixed / suspense account in one of the prime bank here in Abidjan,which he used my name as his only daughter for the next of Kin in depositing of the fund. He also explained to me that it was because of this wealth that he was shut by his brothers (my uncles).So my dear I am seeking your assistance in the following ways:

1) To help me transfer this fund to your country because I have discussed with the bank about my intensions to transfer my inheritance abroad which they have accepted.

2) To serve as a guardian of this fund since I am only 21yrs old.

3) To make arrangement for me to come over to your country to further my education and to secure a resident permit in your country.

Moreover, my dear I am willing to offer you 15% of the total sum as compensation for your Effort/input after the successful transfer of this fund into your nominated account overseas.

Furthermore, you indicate your options towards assisting me as I believe that this transaction would be concluded within fourteen (14) days you signify interest to assist me.

I am looking forward to your hopeful respond and may God be with you.

Yours Sincerely,
Jessica Fatu.

What a bunch of merde.

Stumble It!

School kids taught to praise Obama

YouTube - School kids taught to praise Obama

Sorry, I have NO idea what these kids are chanting. This is among the worst audio contro of any YouTube video I have seen.

I perceive that I'm suppose to be outraged (according to 'other sources')by this, but the truth is ...
... I have NO idea what these kids are chanting.

Make of this what you will.
It's better to know, than not to know.

Stumble It!

Mayors Against Illegal Guns - NOT!

Shooting Wire ... has an article up which documents that several mayors (especially in Ohio) have been found to not actually be the current mayor, or do not espouse the anti-gun stance supported by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns".

DELAWARE, OH - As a growing number of mayors in Ohio and around the country resign from Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun control group, new evidence suggests some of their names have been added to the member list and used to promote Bloomberg's political agenda without their knowledge or permission.

"Mayor Robert Shiner" (Mentor, OH) was listed in a letter from MAIG to Congress in June 2009 opposing reforms to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), as well as in a full page advertisement opposing nationwide reciprocity of concealed handgun licenses.

However, Council President Shiner hasn't been Mayor since November 2008. His office says he never agreed to be a MAIG member. Despite requesting to be removed from MAIG's membership list in July, Shiner was still listed by MAIG as the Mayor of Mentor, and as a member of MAIG, until just a few days ago.

Mayor Keith Hoffman (East Berlin) said his participation, which began about a month ago, resulted from a misunderstanding of the group's objectives, and he is currently trying to get his name off the list. "It was a mistake really," he said. "They swindle you in and then put your name on the list."

Mayor Dale Strasser (Brunswick, OH) found his name used in MAIG advertising when it was actually the Brunswick city manager, Robert Zienkowski, who signed up for the group.

According to the NRA, at least 28 other mayors have appeared on the MAIG membership list despite the fact they were not mayors of the localities as advertised:

Hmmm ... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns". That doesn't sound so bad. If someone who shouldn't legally be in possession of a gun is found to have a gun, then they should have it taken away, right? After all, most states forbid convicted felons and crazy people from having guns. Just sounds like good sense to me. What do you think?

But wait! There may be a Catch-22. I'm not sure what it is. Maybe it's like Justice Stewart's definition of Pornography: "I don't know what it is, but I know it when I see it".

To understand the philosophical, logical and legal position of MAIG, let's look at the third post on MAIG's website, dated March 18, 2008:

MAYORS AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS HAILS INTRODUCTION OF THE FIREARMS INFORMATION USE ACT OF 2008

Joint Statement from Coalition Co-Chairs New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino on the introduction of the Firearms Information Use Act of 2008.

The bill strikes the Tiahrt Amendment “a rider that restricts the access of cities and states to aggregate crime gun trace data“ from appropriations legislation

"This bill would erase the soft-on-crime Tiahrt restrictions from federal law. We applaud Senators Menendez, Clinton, Feinstein, Kennedy, Lautenberg, Reed and Schumer for putting forward a bill to restore access to the aggregate trace data that police officers, prosecutors, and others use to identify illegal gun trafficking patterns. This bill is exactly what criminals are afraid of: police officers with better information and leads. We hope the Senate takes it up - and passes it - this year.

"Last year, our bi-partisan coalition of mayors waged a campaign on Capitol Hill that resulted in the removal of some of the Tiahrt restrictions and the release of more trace data. This bill (S. 2769 [2008]) goes further, removing the Tiahrt restrictions entirely.

See: S. 2629*

(* yes, similar bills were proposed in both 2006 and 2008, and Schumer either initiated or co-sponsored both bills.)

Uh, wait a minute. Isn't this sort of like the National Instant Check System rules stating that NICS data can't be used by Law Enforcement? (In fact, it must be deleted immediately if a firearms purchaser is found to be authorized to legally purchase a firearm.) It seems to me that there have been several protests against governmental (both Federal and State) abuses of this system.

And what the heck is "the Tiahrt Amendment"?

Most folks who don't have to ask this question generally acknowledge this much of a statement by the NRA-ILA:

For more than five years, cities suing the gun industry and anti-gun organizations have sought access to confidential law enforcement data on firearms traces. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) compiles these records when it traces firearms in response to requests from law enforcement agencies.

Every year since 2003, the U.S. Congress has passed increasingly strong language to keep this information confidential. The legislation—a series of "riders" to the appropriations bill that funds BATFE—is widely known as the "Tiahrt Amendment," after its sponsor, Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.).

The NRA-ILA statement makes several points defending the Tiahrt Amendment:

• Releasing the information serves no useful purpose;
• Traced guns aren’t always "crime guns".
• Trace information remains available for law enforcement use.
• Both BATFE and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) oppose release of trace data
• Even the current language has allowed too many disclosures of sensitive information.

That last segment was predicated on the proposition that the NRA would be the "Right-Wing" argument in favor of the Tiahrt Amendment.

The next segment, referencing "ProtectPolice.Org" was originally intended to represent a "neutral" argument in reference to the Tiahrt Amendment. Unfortunately, after I started looking at the context, I noticed that the website is "©, 2009 ProtectPolice.org, Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund". That is to say "ProtectPolice.ORG is wholy funded, produced and maintained by MAIG.

Which hardly makes it a "neutral argument", but let's see what PPO has to say, anyway.

In regards to the Tiahrt Amendment:

1) Request Denied
Tiahrt blocks state and local authorities from full access to crime gun trace data.
2) Records Destroyed
Tiahrt Requires FBI NICS background check records to be destroyed within 24 hours
3) No Evidence on File
Tiahrt Prevents ATF from requiring gun dealers to perform inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns

Well, that was refreshing.

It seems naive to go to the MAIG website to see what their talking points are, so let's see what MAIG's Fellow Travellers have to say. A third party (The Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner) (January 30, [no year provided; but since the Obama Administration didn't take office until January 20, 2009, we may assume the article was written in 2009] ) has a few words to say about the Tiahrt Amendment and the opposition there-of:

Last month, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sent their proposals for reducing gun violence to the Obama administration. The number one item on the list was repealing the Tiahrt Amendment, which they say...

...severely limits the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("ATF") to disclose crime gun trace data to the public under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), bars admissibility of such data in civil suits against the gun industry, and restricts disclosure of the data to law enforcement.

The first two claims are true, the third a flat out lie. This is the relevant text:

That no funds appropriated under this or any other Act with respect to any fiscal year may be used to disclose part or all of the contents of the Firearms Trace System database maintained by the National Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or any information required to be kept by licensees pursuant to section 923(g) of title 18, United States Code, or required to be reported pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (7) of such section 923(g), to anyone other than a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency or a prosecutor solely in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution and then only such information as pertains to the geographic jurisdiction of the law enforcement agency requesting the disclosure and not for use in any civil action or proceeding other than an action or proceeding commenced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or a review of such an action or proceeding, to enforce the provisions of chapter 44 of such title, and all such data shall be immune from legal process and shall not be subject to subpoena or other discovery, shall be inadmissible in evidence, and shall not be used, relied on, or disclosed in any manner, nor shall testimony or other evidence be permitted based upon such data, in any civil action pending on or filed after the effective date of this Act in any State (including the District of Columbia) or Federal court or in any administrative proceeding other than a proceeding commenced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to enforce the provisions of that chapter, or a review of such an action or proceeding

The data in the Firearms Trace System database is clearly available to law enforcement. In fact, that was what it was created for.

What it is not for is to let anti-gun politicians use this information for their own agendas. The trace data is only useful in direct conjunction with a criminal investigation. Any other use would not yield viable results because of the nature of the data.

(Colored Emphasis Added)

The entire quote from The Examiner makes the definitive answer that proves the lie. The Tiahrd Amendment was enacted to make firearms records available to law-enforcement polities, with the intent to solve crimes. However it is cunningly constructed so as to prevent the exploitation of this information for political purposes.

That is the reason why the Tiahrt Amendment is a continuing source of irritation to the Anti-Gun coalition.

And that is the reason why the Tiahrt Amendment is a reliable indicator that those polities (such as MAIG, as well as the more obvious "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence" aka Handgun Control Incorporated [HGI]) ... which rail against the Triahrt Amendment are definitively against private firearms ownership by otherwise legal firearms owners in any context.

SUMMARY:
The Tiahrt Amendment is the Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test of Gun Control.

The Tiahrt Amendment in no way restricts LEO access to Firearms Trace Data; it only disallows politicians or "non-LEO" individuals from using that data for purely political purposes.

I see no down-side in the Tiahrt Amendment. However, if you are an anti-gun political person, you are probably outraged by the restriction on your ability to use the law for political gain.


Essentially, any time you run across an opinion article which effectively proposes that the Tiahrt Amendment is "A Bad Idea" because it prevents Law Enforcement Officers from Doing Their Job (eg: tracking down Bad Guys), you may be excused from immediately assuming that the author has a Hidden Agenda. Specifically, the author isn't trying to solve crimes; he is trying to keep firearms out of the hands of honest citizens and is attempting to use the Firearms Trace System database as an (illigitimate) tool to impose his own personal civil-rights bias on YOU. Personally.
x

Stumble It!

Wll Ferrell's Opinion on "The Public Option"

Opposing Views presents a satiric video (click on article title to see the original) featuring Will Ferrell, and several other comics (none of whom I recognized, which just goes to prove what a Neanderthal I am). The intent is to convince you to contact your congress-critter and demand a "Strong Public Option". I know that's true, because it says so at the end ... just before it tells us that the video was produced and paid for by MoveOn.org

You can also see the video here.

Protect Insurance Companies PSA from Will Ferrell

I know you think that stand-up comics, actors, and similar leaders of public opinion should help us decide how to manage our lives, so this should be a great benefit to us all.

WARNING! If you are among the one-in-ten people who don't recognize satirical arguments, do not watch this video. It will confuse you. As will the comments on the Opposing Views page.

Stumble It!

On a Wing and a Prayer

So there I was, sitting around at home when I heard a great commotion outside. It was a roar like a hungry Lion, and my first thought was: fast mover!

I've heard jet fighters before, albeit it was over forty years ago in Viet Nam, and the plane was an F-4 Phantom overflying the 1st Infantry Division NDP (Night Defensive Position -- a.k.a. "base camp) and the jet was within hundred of yards of the ground. That time it scared the pants off me as I sat leaning against the sandbags of a bunker on the perimeter.

This time I was safe at home, and I knew I was safe as houses.

But the adrenaline was rushing through my veins because it felt like I was being attacked.



I rushed to my window, hoping to catch a glimpse of the sky warrior. I was rewarded by the sight of an F-15 Strike Eagle as he egressed the city limits, and kicked in the afterburners.

My camera was not handy, and although I rushed to find it and put it on the window ledge so it would be handy if the arrogant (and lucky!) SOB chose to overfly Corvallis again.

No such luck. I heard the engines pulsing in the sunny Indian Summer skies several times, but he never actually overflew this small PNW college town again.

Bummer, dude.

---

I love airplanes, and I particularly love Military Attack Planes. As a teenager I dreamed of becoming an Air Force Pilot, experiencing the thrill of thousands of horsepower kicking me in the seat of my pants as it booted me into the sky. I was much too young, and far too shy, to have ever experienced sex. If anything, I thought it would probably be a slightly less rewarding experience than flying a military jet in air combat.

---

In my adolescence, my priorities changed, and somehow I never got around to learning how to fly in an airplane. Instead, I went to college; I was drafted into the Infantry, and somewhere in that progression I got married.

Still, something in that experience triggered a need to determine that yes, I had indeed correctly identified the F15, and to find out more about this war-craft.

During my search of F-15's I discovered this video from YouTube which illustrated the robust nature of the aircraft.

I was entranced by the concept of a jet fighter which could not only survive the daage, but landed safely lacking a wing.

In my continued search, I found videos which purported to depict non-jets which had survived the loss of a wing, including this one (which, after some examination,
Among the most spectacular videos available. I found this one, where a sports competition airplane (prop-driven) seems to lose a wing and still land safely.

Unfortunately, there is some controversy about the validity of the video.

This video blatantly declares it a sham.

This video takes almost ten minutes to, supposedly, examine the "Speed Racer Loses a Wing and Still Lands Safely" concept ... in great detail. (Note: Most of the original video is included here.)

Since the rebuttals referenced "Knowledged ,Not Generally Known, I spent a little time researching RC ("Radio Controlled") airplane flying.

This video seems to support the proposition that small-scale radio-controlled airplanes are able to sustain flight modes which, in a large-scale ("Military Jets") mode would be non-viable. And, for the pilot in a full-size situation, would present counter-survivable conditions.

Here is the full-length (almost 10 minutes, in French with sub-titles) video which purports to explain in all detail why a speed-racer may njot have sur4vived a wing-and-a-prayer one-wing landing my not have actually occurred, but also why it was promulgated.

And again here is how rhe stunt may bed perforfmed with a Radio-controlled flyer:
'

I'm not qualified to decide whether the original non-jet "wing and a prayer" video is accurate and untouched. I only offer this sub-segment for your entertainment. You have to decide for yourself whether you accept the thesis.

However, in support of the anti-thesis, here is a video which demonstrates how versatile small-scale airplanes can be. In a word, when it comes to unbelievable maneuvers, small-scale "RC" (Radio Controlled) airplanes cheerfully ignore the Laws of Nature to which full-scale airplanes must conform.

This video demonstrates how easy it is to stall a "Radio Controlled" airplane: well, it isn't easy, but it can be done by a Master RD flier

After all, isn't this the concept which seems to have been proved by the original F-15 Strike Fighter Video?

Stumble It!

Open Left

Open Left:: Schumer, Reid Call on McCain to Release Medical Records

I call your attention to this particularly egregious Leftist website because ... these guys represent ME.

That is, I am necessarily (by virtue of my employment in a "union shop") to be a "fair share" member of the Service Employee International Union, or SEIU.

If ever there was a Rogue's Gallery of Labor Unions, SEIU would rank near the top along with the AFL-CIO.

I say all of this not to denigrate my Union, but to emphasize how badly Unions have been subverted ... or perhaps a better word woud be "perverted" ... to the cause of Political Parties.

I don't like this. I'm very close to sending a letter to SEIU stating that their political policies do no represent mine, and asking for a refund of monies I have contributes (willy-nilly) from my paycheck which are apportioned to political causes.

Stumble It!

Let's Go To The Hop

Moving on with the ARPC Club Match for September, 2009 ...

Stage 1 was "Walk The Plank". An easy stage, there should be no problems, right?

Starting in Box "A", step up on a short stool on your way to a horizontal platform and there shoot all the targets (11 IPSC targets -- four to the right, four to the left, 3 in the center with some vision barriers to make it interesting.)

Easy ... unless you can't keep your pistol in the holster.

I was actually the first shooter on the stage in my squad and I kept my hand on my pistol (securely locked in my Race Holster) on my way up to The Plank.

Unfortunately, a following shooter declined to manually retain his pistol, and it popped out of his holster and hit the ground when he stepped up on the stool.

There was a bit of a hush, and then the Range Officer performed his duties of moving the competitor away from the grounded pistol, then picked the pistol off the ground, cleared it, and carefully handed it back to the competitor.

The shooter said: "What now?"

The RO said: "Now you go home".

Of course, the pistol was safed; but the USPSA rules have always been clear on this point.

If a pistol hits the ground when not under deliberate control of the shooter, that is cause for a Match DQ. The shooter is always responsible for the gun. There are no valid arguments against a Match DQ in this situation.

In this case, the stage acted as a "Holster Retention Test", and we all learned from it.

Still, it was a bit scary. We always tend to over-react when a Safety Rule is violated, however inadvertently.

Fortunately, I was not filming the shooter, so we need not indulge our "slow down to look at the car wreck on the Freeway" tendencies.

but I did film a couple of shooters in the same squad, who heeded the lesson and were very careful to control their pistol when mounting the step-stool to The Plank.

Here's how it SHOULD be done.

Stumble It!

All Quiet - But Why?

As usual,I'm still posting the excellent articles by Jim Shepherd on "The Shooting Wire" (subscribe here).

And I'm still encouraging those of you who have not yet subscribed to this excellent Shooting Sports thrice-weekly shooting-sports related newsletter to subscribe.

This week, Mr. Shepherd postulates that the Obama-Boom in firearms sales is winding down. With notable exceptions:

Over the past few days, I've been running one of my extremely non-scientific, non-comprehensive, not-representative-of-anything-other-than-what-people-tell-me surveys of the firearms retail business.

And the research tells me what everyone already knows: gun sales are slowing again. It seems the "Barack Boom" has started to go bust. No real reason, other than maybe the fact that everyone has all the AR-style rifles they can shoot, store or afford, but there is an undeniable slowdown --virtually across the board. One exception, the still-ubiquitous .22 caliber rifles. They are selling quite well - probably because we've all realized that our assorted thumper guns have become the "gas guzzlers" of the shooting industry.

OK, I know some of you are going to take a shot at me for that analogy, but it's a simple fact- even to a writer who's been fortunate enough to have enjoyed lots of chances to shoot up someone else's ammo - that the days of "here, I don't want to haul this last 100 rounds of (your caliber here) back to the office, so you take it" are as gone as the roaring twenties.

Today, when an event's over, the ammo, and in some cases, the brass itself, is gathered up, boxed up, and shipped back to the office - or on to the next event. And the number of "events" isn't what it used to be, either.

Handguns, especially those little ones we've written so much about, continue to sell through very well. And as the calendars count down to hunting seasons across the country, there is a moderate amount of interest in the traditional-style hunting rifle.

Along with those rifles and some shotguns where mandated for deer hunting, scopes and other accessories/necessities are also moving pretty well.

The most positive thing I'm continuing to hear is the steady demand for qualified firearms training. It's reassuring to know that many of the first-time gun buyers aren't just sticking them away for future reference. They're getting real instruction and putting in some basic trigger time. That will make them considerably more inclined to get off the sidelines and start shooting for recreation.

As Rob Leatham says, he's never had anyone he's invited out to the range tell him they've had a bad time. Ditto everyone else with the possible exception of a few former military instructors. Their training's a bit too intense for most, although it's quite effective.

But it's very quiet out there in the industry right now. Discussion with other observers attributes that to several factors, not the least of which is companies working on their 2010 budgets, preparing their materials for 2010 rollouts at SHOT Show, and getting the last-minute kinks out of new products.

A couple of things worth noting....Legislation headed to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's would eliminate all gun shows at San Francisco's Cow Palace. According to the Oakland Tribune, SB 585 stipulates that no more than five gun shows may be held at the Cow Palace during 2010, 2011, and 2012. All gun shows would be out in 2013. According to Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) the bill outlawing the shows is "about respecting local values and local standards."

The whole stink is over a series of gun shows called "Crossroads of the West" which are held periodically at the Cow Palace. They regularly draw between two and three thousand Bay Area residents. In fact, the next show is scheduled for September 19-20. No word on what will happen for the shows scheduled for November, January, March and May. If the law passes, that will fill the five show quota, effectively eliminating all gun shows there. Alameda, Marin and Los Angeles counties have already enacted local ordinances banning gun shows at county-owned facilities.

As I've written before, it never stops, and we'll keep you posted.

--Jim Shepherd

Stumble It!

Fort Apache - ARPC 9/9

The Albany Rifle and Pistol Club (ARPC) club match on September 12, 2009, was full of surprises. Some of them good some of them startling. (Match Results available here.)

One of the 'good' surprises was the extent to which the range had been improved during the past six months. Due to the purchase of more land on the North end of the range, there is now room for competitors to park 'nose in' rather than the parallel parking which was mandatory before this summer. Also, the USPSA match this month was staged completely on the East side of the North Range, which allowed parking in a large field. And some kind soul even cut stair-steps in the middle of the 5-bay segment, which allowed competitors to choose to ascend to the raised level of the new bays without necessarily walking all the way to either access ramp.

Our squad started on Stage 5 ("Fort Apache"), a Comstock field-course which required the competitor to not only start with an unloaded pistol on one of two barrels, and all reloads to be pre-staged on the barrels ... but also mandated engaging most targets through cruciform ports which were 2" wide on each form of the cross-shaped port.

This caused some problems, which were not immediately obvious.

Most of the early shooters recognized that rounds which passed through the "impenetrable" vision barrier counted as misses. But in the actual event, it was virtually impossible to perceive that the pistol was not aligned with the cruciform port. As a result, targets were often engaged with the sight-line through the open port, but the muzzle of the pistol was significantly aligned below the cross-arm of the port.

I was the Range Officer for the first several shooters on my squad, so I was unable to take pictures of the ports as they were degraded by 'bad hits'.

The first shooter put six or seven shots through the vision barrier.

The second shooter also put several shots thru the vision barrier, as did the next 2 or three shooters.
We taped the holes between shooters, but we discovered that many of the guns ... especially Open-class guns with their Compensators ... tended to blow away the tape concealing earlier bullet holes.

Even if the pistols were correctly aligned through the port, the side-blast usually blew the tape off the earlier bullet holes.

Eventually, it became a challenge to the memory of the Range Officer whether he could remember which bullet holes were new, and which had been the result of impact of previous shooters.

Then the Hobo Brasser shot the stage and was penalized for "impenetrable hits". He (rightly) protested the penalties, because he had fired more than the minimum number of rounds necessary to legally engage all the targets. After some discussion, I ruled that he was correct and he was required to reshoot the stage because "it is impossible to score the state".

Finally, someone with his compensated pistol blew away the lower 2" of the left arm of a crucifrm porthole. We attempted to reconstruct the original profile of the port by placing tape over the gigantic hole, but the next shooter blasted that tape away with his second shot. Who could determine where the shot went when the structure of the port was essentially destroyed?

At this point, I turned to the stage designer (for the second time) and declared that "this stage is unacceptable, because it is impossible to score accurately and consistently."

Since only 4 competitors had shot the stage, it was possible to reshoot these shooters ... after the ports were re-cut so that a diamond-shape (about 8" on a side) replaced the cruciform port.



As it happens, a further modification was found to be advisable; because compensators tend to degrade shooting ports, tin-foil was added to the upper two edges of the ports, to prevent a dramatic change to the configuration of the ports.

Ultimately, including the time needed to effect the stage modifications and to allow the first four competitors to reshoot the stage, it took us (a squad of only 9 people) more than an hour to complete the stage. On this stage, the average time was about 30 seconds; which illustrates the reason why a stage which should have taken less than a half-hour to complete actually required twice the time.

Lessons learned:

When designing or constructing a stage, it's important to consider how the props can deteriorate during the normal usage of the stage. Ports which excessively restrict the passage of bullets which miss the legal port may be subject to protest by shooters who realize that it is exceedingly difficult to consistently and fairly determine which shots were un-legally aimed at legal targets through a port which is subject to deconstruction.

Finally, it is well to realize that a shot through a needlessly constrictive port, and which knocks down a steel target even though the round passes though a vision barrier, is immediate cause for a re-shoot because of Range Equipment Failure.


UPDATE: 14-SEP-2009
Response to comment:
"So. Whose bright idea was it to make ports needlessly constricted in the first place? "

Oh dear, this is my fault because I made the stage sound too horrible for words. In the event, it was a good stage. It's just that one element was added to test the shooters' ability to shoot through a very restricted port, and the experiment failed.

This was a club match, which means it had no effect of shooter rankings. There was no prize table, no rewards other than "bragging rights", and historically this venue has served to try out new twists on the run-of-the-mill stage designs such as "Underwater Submarine", which the commenter mentioned.

The stage designer wanted to try out a new twist, and it didn't ... quite ... work. Nothing more or less than that was intended, and it's notable that the stage designer took the time to watch the first squad shoot the stage. When it was obvious that the design wasn't feasible, he modified the stage props so that it worked, and we only had to reshoot four competitors to prove that the new stage construction worked.

Let me put this in some perspective.

I am very critical of stage designs, and although I was leery of the restricted ports I made no protest until a couple of shooters had tested it and we found it to be unusable. When it was ultimately proven to be unusable, the problem was fixed and we completed the stage before the next squad caught up with us.

Perhaps I made it sound more egregious than it deserved, but over-all the stage design was good. It allowed us to wring out the new design element, and we all learned from it.

Thats all it amounted to, and if I made it sound as if there was a lack of responsibility involved, that was my fault. I do tend to dramatize events, for readability, and in this situation I should have been more responsible in the original version of this article.

Stumble It!

Oregon Jet Sprint Races - Sep. 12-13-2009

The Oregon JetSprint Track Website presents (this weekend only) their "Points Race' ... and it's located about 3 miles from the Albany Rifle & Pistol Club.

$15 entry fee gets you in all day. Gates open 8am, racing starts 10am, both Saturday and Sunday.

Tickets available from TicketsWest (which here in Corvallis is the local Safeway Store).

There's a map available, which shows the raceway is just north of Old Boston Mill Road and on the west side of I5. (You have to follow the Google map from it's starting place on Hwy34 (I5 exit 228).

There are also some videos on the website, and here's one of them.

Turn the sound up.

Stumble It!

09-09-09 O my!

This is a rant.

This is a rant about ObomaCare.

O my!

I apologize for writing so much about Politics lately, but it seems necessary. Besides, I haven't been to a USPSA match for over a month (don't get me started) and I'm getting a little testy.

If you don't want to read about my take on ObamaCare feel free to move on. But not to moveon.org please.
___________________________

President Obama had a lot to say today. In the morning he talked about ObomaCare to the children of America (in a broadcast which was controversial, even though the White House swore was not political. In the end he couldn't resist bringing it up during the Q&A period.)

In the evening Obama had scheduled a half-hour speech in front of congress. This as did not go as well as it might have. At one point, Congress interrupted his speech by shouting "Liar". when Obama "took a swipe at Sarah Palin's comment about Death Panels."



"Illegal Aliens":
During the speech, he also gave the lie to charges that the ObomaCare bill would provide free health care to "Illegal Aliens".

Actually, this is true. The bill specifically says that free health care will not be given to illegal aliens. Unfortunately, the bill does not specifically state that free health care will be denied to applicants who can't prove that they are not legally in America, nor does it allow health care workers to inquire about the legal status of applicants, nor does it specify any penalties for illegal aliens who attempt to acquire free health care under this bill.

In other words, there are no negative consequences for Illegal Aliens who apply for free health care under this bill. And no grounds for denial, or enforcement of any implied restriction.

In fact, its all smoke and mirrors and no substance ... not only on this point, but on several others.

"Death Panel":
This subject has to do with the accusation that the ObomaCare bill would allow the nation's inability to provide the maximum quality care for each individual to be undermined by the current economic situation.

And that concept is based on an interesting point.

Currently, you pay your insurance bills and your insurance pays for most procedures and medications, dependent on your ability to come up with the "Co-Pay" tithe.

Under ObomaCare, it doesn't require a great stretch of the imagination to conceive of a situation where the national economy is so strapped for case (either inflation or recession) that it's hunting for a way to minimize the expenditure of available funds.

Is that so hard to believe? How often have you read in your local newspaper that your state government is so strapped for funds that it must reduce "Essential Services"? Usually, this involves understaffing police and firefighters and Educational Institutions, or whatever your state considers a serious threat to your confidence that "We're From The Government, And We're Here To Help You".

At the state level, this is a threat which you probably interpret as meaning "either cops and firefighters and teachers gotta go, or your state senators will have to take a cut in pay. And you know we're not going to take a cut in pay!"

So take that same default bureaucratic stance and move it from the state level to the federal level.
The next time the national budget is 'at risk' (which happens every frickin' year, almost without fail, except for the first term of a new incumbent administration), you can expect to discover that National Health Care or ObomaCaree, whatever you want to call it, will be the Bogeyman with which your president threatens you.

Only, in this case, it's not a straw man. It's the real thing. Historically, countries with a National Health Care System (in England it's NHS, or National Health Service) don't bother to threaten you with cuts in service. They just ... cut the service, and boldly dare you to complain.

They won't listen to you. They don't have to. You, who have already allowed your national government to establish a NHS, no longer are a part of the decision making process.

Think of AMTRACK, the U.S. Postal Service, and any Department of Motor Vehicles office you have ever visited, and you should have a visceral understanding of how a NHS works for you.

So let's look at how NHS (I'm really tired of trying to write and format " ObomaCare") works in nations which have already been taken like the Monkey took the Miller's Wife.

We'll get back to ObomaCare, after we've taken a few pertinent examples from The Brits.

(1.) Sentenced to Death on the NHS

Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors have warned.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
...
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.

The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.
...
It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government’s health scrutiny body, in 2004.

It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.

Okay, let's look upon this report as a basic Governmental policy that 'some people are just not worth the resource investment required to extend their lives'.

Maybe it's true. After all, Arctic cultures (frequently, if inaccurately, referred to as "Eskimos") have historically abandoned their old people to freeze/starve to death on the Arctic Ice, because they had become to great a burden on the tribe's ability to survive, without providing tangible benefit to the tribe. "...in the past some Eskimos did kill old people when circumstances were sufficiently desperate."

So we're talking about to reverting to a primitive culture which no longer even practices such draconian methods to preserve societal resources? Yes, if we adopt ObomaCare, which is an American adoption of the British NHS.

Oh, of course it's not that obvious. We would only, as do the Brits, counsel them on how much a burden they are on their family, and vaguely wonder whether we can 'in good conscience' reasonably continue to exhaust our 'clan' resources. And this is the kind of "End Of Life" counseling that ObomaCare espouses, in the bill if not in the speeches.

How about other limitations on Health Care?

How about an infant who is born prematurely, and is denied 'extreme measures' because the chance of saving a life is just ... not ... worth ... the ... effort.

(2) Premature Baby Sentenced to Death - today --

Doctors left a premature baby to die because he was born two days too early, his devastated mother claimed yesterday.

Sarah Capewell begged them to save her tiny son, who was born just 21 weeks and five days into her pregnancy - almost four months early.

They ignored her pleas and allegedly told her they were following national guidelines that babies born before 22 weeks should not be given medical treatm
...
Guidance limiting care of the most premature babies provoked outrage when it was published three years ago.

Experts on medical ethics advised doctors not to resuscitate babies born before 23 weeks in the womb, stating that it was not in the child's 'best interests'.

The guidelines said: 'If gestational age is certain and less than 23+0 (i.e at 22 weeks) it would be considered in the best interests of the baby, and standard practice, for resuscitation not to be carried out.'

Medical intervention would be given for a child born between 22 and 23 weeks only if the parents requested it and only after discussion about likely outcomes.

The rules were endorsed by the British Association of Perinatal Medicine and are followed by NHS hospitals.

The association said they were not meant to be a 'set of instructions', but doctors regard them as the best available advice on the treatment of premature babies.

Okay, so maybe we're making too big a thing of Obamacare. Maybe we can just ignore it (eg: continue as we are, even if we don't subscribe to a Health Care System, maybe even if we don't want to.) Why should we care?

We should care because a Congressman has proposed (congressmen never 'suggest' ... they "propose" that Americans who decline to accept available health care options should be penalized by a fine ... we're talking $3,800 per year.

When we're discussing ObomaCare, we're talking about a National Health Care System governed by Bureaucrats.

What is a Bureaucrat?

1. An official of a bureaucracy.
2. An official who is rigidly devoted to the details of administrative procedure.

Note that we aren't seeing any mention of "value earned for money paid", or "concern for the patient". We're just looking at "administrative procedure", and that is the essence of obomacare, NHS or any other governmentally constructed and administrated National Health Care System.

If they can afford to take care of you, they may. If they can't, or think they can't ... they won't.

Bottom line, folks. They don't care about YOU. They care about "the details of administrative procedure". And as a state employee for umpteen years, I can tell you with some assurance that while the individual governmental agent may prefer to provide a service, the default mode is to find a way by which the agency can evade administrative procedures to that the bureaucracy is not obliged to spend funds which can either (a) be better spent on a better 'investment', or (b) spent on Office Furniture for the Bureaucrats so that next year's budget is not diminished because we didn't spend all the money we were allotted this year.

Why should we get so bent out of joint about this Natinal Health Care Bill, and the Obama Administration generally?

Maybe we should ask Jack Web. Isn't DRAGNET the American Icon that we grew up with?
height="344">

Stumble It!

Iran’s Universities Punish Students Who Disputed Vote

Iran’s Universities Punish Students Who Disputed Vote - NYTimes.com

Iranian universities have begun disciplining and suspending students who took part in street protests after the disputed presidential election in June, reformist Web sites reported Friday and Saturday.

The new disciplinary actions came as officials reported that a presidential panel has begun an investigation of the humanities curriculums at universities, the semiofficial Mehr news agency reported. Although the panel was formed a year ago, it did not start work until after recent calls to purge universities of professors and curriculums deemed “un-Islamic,” based on the fear that the teaching of secular concepts helped fuel the political unrest following the June 12 election.

The investigation will report its findings directly to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Mehr reported.

For weeks, the authorities have voiced concern about the possibility of renewed protests as students return for the fall semester, which begins Sept. 23. Some of the worst clashes during the post-election protests took place at universities in Tehran and elsewhere. Last week, five students at the University of Mashad who had openly supported an opposition candidate were arrested with no official explanation, several Web sites reported.

I've been an employee at a University for 15 years, and as such I have been very aware of the tongue-in-cheek axiom that "... this would be a nice place to work, if it was not for the students".

Students are ... difficult. They are irreverent, headstrong, and they think they know it all even if they flunked "History of Western Civilization" in their first term at school.

Both of those comments are, of course, offered tongue in cheek.

The fact is, the University (or College) is usually the first opportunity for young people be challenged by concepts which had not occurred to them in what may have been a sheltered life in a provincial culture.

As I walk across campus on my way to lunch, or just taking a strol as a break from my geekish labors, I sometimes encounter groups of students offering petitions, interviewing people for polls, handing out pamphlets or just standing silent vigil ... such as staking thousands of crosses in the ground to exemplify the numbers of babies killed in abortions during the past year, or the number of Iranians killed during the past year.

Those of us who encounter university students as part of our daily environment are often challenged by what seems to us to be contrary, often radical thoughts. It is part of the maturation process that young people try on various societal and political stances before they eventually find one that works for them. I agree with few of them, and sometimes they are obnoxious in their surety that their viewpoints are more valid than mine. I've had a half-century more experience to establish my opinions than they have theirs, but you just can't try to win an argument with them.

Okay, so you can ... but it's a lost cause and a waste of time. They are almost invariably confident that, although they may only convinced of this 'one thing' they are absolutely convinced that they know what must be done to make the world a better place.

[sigh]

Perhaps they're right; perhaps they're wrong. Either way, this part of the educational experience. They need to win a few arguments to teach them confidence. They need to lose a few arguments to teach them that, although they are clear in their opinions and they are able to voice their arguments clearly, that doesn't mean that they are always going to convince others to change their minds.

It's part of the education process that sometimes the most valuable lessons you learn at University are not taught in a classroom.

Which brings us back to the original news report.

Iran held a Presidential Election, and charges were made that the election was rigged. Students protested, as students will. Students were arrested, assaulted ... one was murdered. (Apologies for inappropriate commercial preceding the vide.)

The Strong-Arm National Government "won", in the sense that student protests were treated as riots and in the end, only the Government has guns.

There's a lesson there, but it's not the point.

The Government just couldn't leave it alone. Not content with merely "putting down student riots, with unfortunate collateral damage", the Government of Iran has initiated a policy of following up on intelligence gathered during the demonstrations. They have identified student leaders, and have initiated a concerted campaign to punish these individuals.

The new disciplinary actions have taken place at universities in Tehran, Tabriz and Shiraz, where the Intelligence Ministry forwarded the names of politically active students to the university authorities, according to a report on the Peykiran Web site that named several students.

Some were suspended for up to two years, while others were barred from dormitories or subjected to disciplinary proceedings, the report said. At Tehran University, 50 students living in the dormitories were questioned for hours by a disciplinary committee, according to Advar News, a student-run Web site.

Politically active students have long been vulnerable to disciplinary measures or outright bans from universities, but such exclusions have become more common in the past three years.

Meanwhile, political pressure to further Islamize Iran’s higher education establishment has intensified in recent days, with more leading clerics warning about the danger of subversive and secular ideas.

It seems to me that the Iranian Government has just made a major mis-step. The penalties being imposed upon dissenters may not be terribly burdonsome ... after all, the students are not being converted into ground meat by tree-limb chippers, as Sadaam Hussein's enforcers are notoriously said to do. So why is this such a bad thing?


As I said earlier, the University is how young people learn, and not all of the most important lessons are learned in the classroom.

What is the Iranian Government teaching these students?

• You do not have a voice in your government.
• You are not free; you are not citizens. You are an embarrassment, because you dared to speak out.
• Your country ... or at least, your government ... will allow you to learn only those lessons which are pre-approved
• You are not allowed to think for yourself. You are only allowed to adhere to the party line
• When you protest the official Government line, you become vulnerable to arbitrary and unilateral punishment against which you have no right to defend yourself.

This is, I think, the policy and doctrine of a Government which cannot defend itself. And it will eventually come back against the Iranian Government and kick them in the ass. Hard. Eventually, it will be the downfall of this particular government, and some day these students will become influential members of this government ... if they do not indeed become the Iranian Government.

It has been forty years since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, and the current regime has had ample time to exemplify a theocracy gone wild. For several years there has been much unrest among the citizens of Iran. They are beginning to see that an Islamic Nation has no room for free thinkers.

Perhaps today, the next generation of Iranians can see that unless they cleave to the politics and the religion of their fathers, they will have no say in the future of their nation. This is grounds for a New Revolution.

It may not happen immediately.

China had a mini-revolution in 1989, culminating in the events in Tiananmen Square.

The Chinese Government has not been overthrown, and perhaps it is this example which encourages the Iranians to impose draconian solutions to their own popular unrest.

Still, for the moment it may be sufficient that Iran has demonstrated their inability to evince popular support for the official Government position.

The next step is either increasingly draconian solutions to "student riots", or increasing popular dissatisfaction with the Iranian Government, or both. Probably both.

Revolution hasn't worked in China, to bring down an unpopular government. Yet. And it may take another 40 years before it works in Iran.

One thing is clear; the Iranian Government has just drawn a line in the sand, and they are waiting breathlessly to see if it works.

It may work ... today. Probably it will work tomorrow. Students are reluctant to accept limitations on their new-found philosophical and political freedom, and as long as their country permits no legal redress from governmental excess, it will remain a festering boil on the hide of the Iranian people.

These are not just Iranians, they are Aryans , they are Persians. They are a proud people, a culture of fighters. They are the people of Herodotus, Cyrus and Xenophon. Soldiers and scholars. They are the people who invented the Parthian Shot ... they do not yield easily, and even in retreat they have shown themselves to still be a threat to their enemy.

The Iranian Government may learn to regret their intemperate actions.

Let us hope this will come to be.

Stumble It!