Tuesday, June 06, 2017

"Does This Mean War?" Part 1a



London Absorbs Another Hit: London Mayor Talks Tough. Does This Mean WAR?


London mayor to Islamic Terrorists: 'You do not commit these disgusting acts in my name'
Gee, it's funny how time slips away.

Back in WWII ("The War to End Wars to End Wars"), Winston Churchill said very much the same thing, only he said it better in his "Never Surrender" speech:



On War

Wars are fought for many reasons: the purported reason is often "land".

The true reason is more often "Culture".



The American Civil War was supposedly fought because one group of people wanted to secede from a larger body .... the South from the North.   But it was because one group wanted to keep its culture (agrarian, economically effected by slavery) while the rest of the nation had decided that slavery was an abomination.   The South considered their people ... land-rich but resource-poor and people-poor ... to be culturally superior to the industrial North.  Pride and Money and Slavery ... let's call it a Culture War.

WWI ... was previously lost by Germany, and it was more likely a "LAND" war; but the reparations demanded by the winning Allied nations were so cruel that it led directly to WWII in a single decade, because the German people felt much put upon by the peace terms which were imposed upon them.
But for a while, Germany conquered its neighbors and added their resources to its own coffers.

WWII was supposedly fought for land ("Lebensraum"), but in a large sense it was fought to impose the culture of one group of people upon another ... Germany oppressed the Jews, for "religious" reasons.  Well, that was as good a reason as they could think of, although the real reason might have been economic.   Greed, more likely.   The Jews in Germany held an inordinate percentage of the national wealth, and every Jew who was killed or driven out of the country left behind the majority of their property, which was promptly seized by the German government (specifically, Hitler's henchmen.)   GREED, in one form or another, may not have started the war; but it certainly defined it, in the end.   The Jews were targeted because they better businessmen than other Germans ... who have since learned to be every bit as greedy, avaricious, and in all ways also very good businessmen

 But the Germans began their war by seizing land (Norway, Austria, France, etc.)   And they while the stole the riches of the conquered nations, they imposed their totalitarianism on those countries.  In a  sense, this was also a Culture War.

AS for why Japan decided to drag America into that war ... I doubt even the Japanese remember the exact reasons, but they did have a difficult TRADE IMBALANCE which certainly led to their infamous "sneak attack" on American soil on December 7, 1941.   Greed?   Agreed.

Japan ran rampant through the East, conquering parts of China and many of the Island Nations of the Pacific region.  They were fierce and ran cruelly amok among their neighbors, because their leadership had been usurped by an ambitious and greedy Military Junta which could not conceive of any major nation standing up for the small countries which they gobbled up and terrorized (See: Rape of Nanking)

The turning point of the war against japan had two parts:   (1) The Battle of Midway, where the American Navy laid waste to the Japanese navy; and (2) Iwo Jima, where the Japanese Army was unable to deny to the Americans a final "stepping stone"; an island where an airfield could be built in support of the Bombers which pounded Japan into near-oblivion.


[The American Flag was raised by U.S. Marines on Mount Suribachi ,
the highest point on Iwo Jima, on February 23, 1945.  My birth date.)

  Much to their dismay ... when the Japanese surrendered in August of 1945, it was probably not because of the two Atomic Bombs which America dropped on two of its major cities as much as that they had bankrupted themselves. ALL of their major ships had been sunk, they had lost every major naval battle since 1942, their (by then poorly supplied and equipped) armies were being slaughtered almost at will, and their people were committed to fight an invading American army with sticks and stones, committing a National Hari Kari.

While the geography of Japan was known, the US military planners had to estimate the defending forces that they would face. Based on intelligence available early in 1945, their assumptions included the following:[26]
  • "That operations in this area will be opposed not only by the available organized military forces of the Empire, but also by a fanatically hostile population."
  • "That approximately three (3) hostile divisions will be disposed in Southern KYUSHU and an additional three (3) in Northern KYUSHU at initiation of the OLYMPIC operation."

 The American offer to accept a surrender was accepted by the emperor because almost any alternative would inevitably lead to the end of the Japanese people.

The Americans were subsequently instrumental in bringing their culture into the 20th Century, under the stern leadership of General Douglas MacArthur, and the Japanese are now one of the most fierce economic competitors of America ... to American dismay!

The European War:
Winston Churchill was probably the single most important reason why America came into the European phase of WWII, especially his 1941 "Never Surrender" speech at Harrow:

Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
We stood all alone a year ago, and to many countries it seemed that our account was closed, we were finished. All this tradition of ours, our songs, our School history, this part of the history of this country, were gone and finished and liquidated.
Very different is the mood today. Britain, other nations thought, had drawn a sponge across her slate. But instead our country stood in the gap. There was no flinching and no thought of giving in; and by what seemed almost a miracle to those outside these Islands, though we ourselves never doubted it, we now find ourselves in a position where I say that we can be sure that we have only to persevere to conquer.
No German soldier ever set foot on the English coast.

(Well, except for Donald Sutherland in the movie "The Eye Of The Needle".)

Copyright 2012 by Jerry The Geek

WAR? (PART II) -World War Z!-


London mayor to Islamic Terrorists: 'You do not commit these disgusting acts in my name'

Gee, it's funny how time slips away.

NOW we are challenged to another "Culture War".

"War as we know it"
War is declared, defended and played with the three national priorities of land, greed, and culture... and I suspect  that in the final analysis this war will end up being played (if it's to be played at all) on all these basic premises:

Greed, Culture, Land.

This promises to be an undeclared war, a "Guerrilla War": not an honorable war in defense of one's nation but one which is designed by the aggressor to impose cultural imperatives upon people whose heritage is not gladly subjected to an archaic code of subjugation to an alien concept of a harsh god.

It will not be fought by both sides according to the "Geneva Conventions" (whichever version you prefer)  ... those wars require all combatants to be uniformed, answerable to a readily identifiable higher authority, and bound by BOTH sides to abide by the common conventions of 'no torture', sanctuary to non-combatants,

Western Civilization is based on principles of community,








Monday, June 05, 2017

Whiner

Comedian Kathy Griffin says her career is over after gory Trump photo | Reuters:
Comedian Kathy Griffin tearfully apologized in a Friday press conference for posing with a fake bloodied and severed head depicting U.S. President Donald Trump, saying that she felt her career was now over and that Trump "broke" her.
Isn't that just like a Liberal?

First you attack the President of the United States, Kathy, with a disgusting staged photo;
     Then public opinion is that you're a disgusting person;
          Finally you blame all your troubles on the President of the United States!

Don't give it another thought, Kathy; You are a "Self-Made Woman".

Sunday, June 04, 2017

Falling Down

London Bridge: 1 killed after van plows into pedestrians; Theresa May calls incident ‘potential act of terrorism’ - The Washington Post:
In packed pubs — normally scenes of Saturday night revelry and merriment — patrons threw chairs, bottles and glasses at the attackers as the assailants used long knives to slash their way through crowds. Tourists gaped at the carnage from the roofs of double-decker buses. London’s Metropolitan Police said the attacks were being treated as “terrorist incidents.”

Oh, that's TOO WRONG attacking brits in their pubs!

In packed pubs — normally scenes of Saturday night revelry and merriment — patrons threw chairs, bottles and glasses at the attackers as the assailants used long knives to slash their way through crowds. Tourists gaped at the carnage from the roofs of double-decker buses....

(Get a gun.  Much more effective than chairs, bottles and glasses.)
(Oh, wait ... you can't do that, can you.  Dear dear, guess you should call a bobbie?)
British Prime Minister Theresa May, who returned from the campaign trail to 10 Downing Street for emergency meetings with security officials, had earlier described the “terrible incidents” as “a potential act of terrorism.”

"Potential"?

These are POTENTIAL ACTS OF TERRORISM?
As long as you idiots keep talking through your small mouth, you're going to be attacked.

You invited these a-holes into your country.  I would be more condemnatory, except that my country is no more prepared to protect itself by strictly regulating the people who are allowed to enter the country than are you.

(Working on it!)

. Other parties were expected to follow suit. London Mayor Sadiq Khan issued a statement condemning “a deliberate and cowardly attack on innocent Londoners and visitors to our city enjoying their Saturday night.” People in London should expect more police on the streets in the coming days, Khan said in a television interview on Sunday morning. But Londoners should not be alarmed and should not let terrorists disrupt daily life or the upcoming election, he said. “We can’t allow them to do that,” Khan told Sky News. “We are not going to be cowered by terrorism.”
Yeah.  Right.  You are not going to be cowered by terrorists:  
Stiff upper lip ..and all that.

It's all the fault of the MORMONS ho want to convert every one to Mormonism, and ... what's that?

Phone call.>  It's not the  Mormons?   You say it's another group of religious fanatics who will not rest until we all convert to their religion?  Sorry, Mormons  I got that  wrong.

Guess what? England, you are Terrorism's Butt Boy; any time they want you, you're wide open and not complaining until it's all over and the hurt begins.

We're beginning to believe you really LIKE it: you're so not-doing-more-than-whining!


Bye!

PS: Just learned that Amera can't protect ITS borners, either.
Well, What do you know.  Isn't that a Coincidence/

Saturday, June 03, 2017

It's such a pleasure to coach a competent student! *The Best Gig I've Ever Had! *

Yes, it's that time of the month again; I held another "Introduction to USPSA" class, and only had one attendee.

He was a treasure.

He was safe, accurate and fast.  I had NOTHING to teach him, except the basic concept that IPSC competition juggles ACCURACY vs SPEED.  It took little time to convince him that he needed to know his own competence, and the decide for himself whether he needed to learn to give up a few points on ACCURACY to benefit his natural talent to shoot quickly with little loss of ACCURACY.

After the minimal "shoot two shots at one target" exercises, to determine his level of competence, I decided to present more challenging exercises.
(When you have only one student, you get to flex his wings and on-the-spot invent stages which are more difficult: it's even more fun when your student is very competent in basic shooting skills, and you get to introduce him to
 You can first move the targets farther away from the firing point, make them more complicated with mandatory reloads, and mix cardboard targets with steel targets.
Then add movement between different firing points, and eventually make the exercises "Free Form" so the student learns to evaluate the course of fire and determine his OWN "best" solution to the shooting problem!)
Eventually, I began to play "dirty tricks" on him.

Friday, June 02, 2017

"I Have A Right To Feel Safe!"

Where do people get the idea that they have a right to "Feel Safe"?

It's not in the Constitution, but in discussions of the Second Amendment in America, I see no referenced to the right to "Feel Safe".

I've been writing about Second Amendment rights here for ... I'm not sure.  Certainly going on ten years, perhaps a bit longer.

One thing I've learned from all this bloviating is that nothing I say has any influence on the dialogue of "Second Amendment Rights" versus "Hey! I Have A Right To Feel Safe!"

Usually, this statement comes from commenters who object to the Second Amendment, as a rebuttal to the right to keep and bear arms.  Which is part of the Constitution.   They (the commenters) bloat their arguments with imaginary rights, as if that will keep "Bad Guys" from accosting them in a short-cut back alley to steal their 'stuff' '(or in their own homes, or when travelling on "public transportation"), and then they complain that they have the right to "Feel Safe".

I don't know where that  RIGHT to "Feel Safe" idea came from, but it crops up from time to time, and I think it's about time that someone actually talks about it.

I want to feel safe.  YOU want to feel safe ... everybody thinks they have a right to feel safe.

Maybe we do have such a "right", but that isn't codified in American Law.

It's just wishful thinking.  I get that .. I feel the same way.

I want to feel safe, too.  I want World Peace,   I want everyone to have .. a lot of things, some of which we can afford to the people of the world by enacting some kind of law.

Unfortunately, nothing in the world community has ever offered a mechanism which provides ANY of us the possibility that we can "BE Safe".


Except in the Second Amendment.

Folks want a lot of things that they're not willing to work for .. to change their way of life for ... to fight for.

Feeling "Safe" isn't something that you can demand just because you want it.

Feeling "Safe" is something that you have to work toward, and there are absolutely NO guarantees that you can "make yourself safe", and still "Feel Safe".

If you want to feel safe against muggers .. pick up a gun, or learn some really complicated techniques of unarmed self-defense.  Nobody will make you do it;  but if you want to "Feel Safe", learn to defend yourself.

If you want to feel safe against home intruders ... unarmed self-defense techniques will only take you so far; if you have more intruders than you can personally kick ass to defeat, you're good to go.

But if you have more intruders than you have bullets in your gun ... you may die with the sense of satisfaction that you made them pay a high price.  It's not much, but it's better than dying with a knife in your gut while you watch the bad guys rape your wife and your daughter.   Yes, this has happened, and just maybe you can convince the bad guys that you're too tough a target to allow them to act out their depraved scenario.

It might happen.  Maybe not, but more likely than if you just roll over and allow them to work their will without effecting a defense at least as violent as their offense.

You say this never happens?

Indianapolis, October, 2013

District of Columbia, 2016

San Diego, 2017

These are only a few, randomly chosen instances where intruders broke into a home and abused and/or murdered occupants.  It happens ALL THE TIME and the residents of the home were unable to defend themselves.

They felt safe.

They were unable to MAKE themselves safe, because they had not established adequate home defenses because ... "this never happens".

You do have a reasonable expectation to 'feel safe" in every place you go, even in your home.
That doesn't necessarily mean that you ARE safe.  If you are accosted in your home by violent intruders, please feel free to discuss with them your right to "feel safe".

Or buy a gun, practice with it, keep it close and when they attack you in your own home?

Kill Them.

That may not satisfy you, but it's better than the alternative.

And the next guy might possibly think twice about rape and murder in your home.

It's worth a try.



Pediatricians Revisited:

Your child's Doctor does NOT have the right to tell your children that Daddy can't have a gun in the home!


The problem with pediatricians is that they are inclined to ask personal questions of your children about your home life ... which is only ONE reason you are encouraged to never leave your child with your pediatrician when you are not present.

Pediatricians may tend to impose their own personal opinions about the way you raise your child, and one of the most prevalent biases which they may impose upon your child is their objections to the presence of firearms in the home.  It's not just a matter of "safe storage" ... it's that Pediatricians typically object to ANY firearm in the home when a child is present.

Today we read this message:

Pediatricians and Parents Could Curb Child-Gun Incidents With Talk, Awareness, Report Says - NBC News:
Research published this month by the Children's National Hospital shows more than 4,500 kids under 21 were killed by firearms in 2015.
Well, that's better than the way it was ten years ago.

(I wonder .. "kids under 21"?  ... are these still "Children"?  The gangsters in Chicago, Baltimore, Cleveland, New York and ... name your favorite Big Town ... don't seem to think so.  But I digress!)

Or is it the same old thing?


I've been blogging about the intrusive actions of pediatricians since at least 2007 ... to no avail.
Unfortunately, most of the references linked in these articles are no longer active, so it serves no purpose to reference them here.

However, one article from 2007  retains an active link.

If you are concerned that your child's pediatrician may be "turning your child against you" because you have firearms and your pediatrician speaks against your parental decisions .. there is a form which you can print and ask your pediatrician to sign before treatment,

This form, which you can require your pediatrician to read and sign before he/she treats your child, requires the doctor to certify that he/she is qualified to discuss and make recommendations about firearms in the home.  It provides spaces for the pediatrician to not only attest, but list the courses of instruction, accreditation, licenses and certifications which make him/her an authority competent to counsel your family about firearms safety.

The form also includes a section titled:
Risk Management Advice to Physicians and Malpractice Insurance Providers
... which cautions physicians not to speak on subjects which they are not qualified to address.

If you are a firearms owner, and a parent, you have the right and responsibility to determine what kind of information is imparted to your child from your medical providers.

Assuming that your pediatrician is qualified and responsible, and attendant to the parental rights to raise your children according to your own values, is not necessarily reasonable.  Even the most caring pediatrician may feel that his/her political bias trumps your parental rights.

THE LAW IS that you do NOT have to allow your pediatrician to speak to your children in private, you do NOT have to allow your pediatrician to speak against your judgement, and your pediatrician is violating his oath by undermining your parental decision-making authority.

And firearms ownership is NOT "Parental Abuse".

Thursday, June 01, 2017

Dirty Words

I once got into an argument with a friend, and came very close to calling him the vilest name I could think of.

And then I thought ... "what if he decided to call ME a New York Liberal Democrat Politician?"

So I merely called him an "@$$" and we parted friends.

It's good to have friends.

Below, a thumbnail of a miserable  man who has no friends.   It makes you mean.

NY Dem Pushes Bill Labeling Traditional Guns as 'Child Operated Firearms' - Breitbart:
New York State Senator Jose' M. Serrano (D-29) is pushing legislation that will require retailers to label a traditional gun which lacks a disabling device as a “child operated firearm.” The legislation–Senate Bill S3444–then bans the sale of any “child operated firearm.”

What Part Of "Shall Not Be Infringed" needs to be rephrased using small words for you, Senator?




Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Heroes: Ricky John Best, Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche, and Micah Fletcher

While I'm no fan of HuffPost, I'm grateful that they identified the three brave heroes who stopped the insane murderer on the Portland, Oregon "train".

And those three fine men are all heroes.

2 Men Stabbed To Death Standing Up To Muslim Hate In Portland | HuffPost:

 Portland police identified the deceased as Ricky John Best, 53, of Happy Valley, and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche of Portland. Best died on the train, while Namkai-Meche was pronounced dead later at the hospital, police said. The third victim was identified as 21-year-old Micah Fletcher of Portland.
These men suffered grievous knife wounds .. two died in their effort to protect innocents while the third (Fletcher) was fortunate to survive the attack.

These are the heroes.


The pitiful loser who initiated the attacks  ,.. he obviously was someone who sought notoriety by hateful acts when he could not acquire fame by contributing a benefit to society .... should never be named.  I hope he burns in hell knowing that he has not achieved his goal of notoriety.

I won't attempt to profile the heroes here ... HuffPost did a fine job of identifying them.  I'm sure we will learn more about Best, Namkai-Meche and Fletcher.

If they do not receive (at least!) a medal from the hands of the President ... it will be a travesty of justice.

We would hope that any of us would have had the courage to intervene as these three fine men did, but I suspect that most of us would have been, in similar circumstances, frozen by terror and unable to act.  I cannot say that I would  have as well defended the innocent girl were I disarmed.

I doubt that most of us can aver, with certainty, that we would have had the courage and the sense of civic responsibility which was demonstrated by  Ricky John Best,  Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche  and Micah Fletcher!

In passing:   While it may seem that I'm beating the drum for my personal bias, it cannot go without commenting that if just ONE person on that urban train had been a CHL person, that entire tragedy could have been stopped with one accurate shot.

Two fine men would have lived; the third would not be grievously injured.

The evil man would have died .. as he obviously had hoped.

And the young woman ... the subject of the original assault ... might have been traumatized, but not as badly as she obviously was when she was forced to watch the gruesome death of two fine men, and the mutilation of another, for her protection,

Portland is suffering under the unfortunate appellation of "Berkeley North" because of its Liberal politics.  I cannot help but wonder if that might have contributed to this tragedy; the attacker might have assumed that he could attack without any effective resistance, if only because this might be an area where nobody would be armed with a gun (A "Gun-Free Zone" City?)

He was correct, to a point.

But he obviously never envisioned that three unarmed men would throw themselves bodily against an armed man (armed with a knife, which he had already demonstrated that HE had no hesitation to use) in defense of a young woman whom he deemed ... 'different'.


People Sometimes Ask:

"Why do you  carry a gun.  Are you so fearful?  Do you think that somebody will just walk up to you and assault you for no reason at all?   What... do you think you live in The Wild West or something?"

Well .. you never know.

Do you?


Oregon Bills May Prove Expensive: Especially SB1065


A couple of Oregon firearm bills are up for votes immediately .. including

SB1065:
SB 1065 includes language from several previous anti-gun bills that died due to a procedural error made by Floyd Prozanski, a sponsor of this bill.The bill is a 26 page monstrosity, but here are the lowlights.  Among many other things this bill does, it nearly quintuples the length of time the State Police can deny you a firearms transfer with no cause.  It also drastically complicates the process for getting a concealed handgun license.

Also:
Online classes will be prohibited unless the class is provided by the NRA or an “Oregon law enforcement agency or association. “
I'm sure there are several professionals who provide this training locally, but I don't know if they are NRA Approved or if they need to be; the law isn't clear about that.  They are usually expensive, running into multiple hundreds of dollars.  I know of at least one Oregon provider, and I'm sure his training is worth the money.

The problem is that not everyone can afford it.

This bill may prove burdensome for some law-abiding Oregonians,

Fortunately, I acquired my first CHL fifty years ago .. which lapsed, but I re-applied some years later.

Here's a hint:  If you have a CHL in Oregon, do NOT let it expire.  Mine did, last month (they're only good for 4 or 5 years, which is enough time to forget you need to renew it) and now I have to go around collecting signatures from friends and neighbors signifying that they think I'm an honest responsible gun owner.

It's a LOT easier if you renew before your CHL expires.  In my state, at least, and probably in most states.

Monday, May 29, 2017

Campus SJW's OWNED!

Question on Campus:  How about if we take a few points off the GPA of the higher-scoring students and give them to the bottom-scoring students?  Okay by you?

Davidson College students furious after they're tricked into rejecting socialist ideal - The College Fix:
 Some students said the fake petition made them struggle with feelings that they do not belong at Davidson, while others aggressively attacked the video, calling it “oppressive,” “illegally filmed,” and “inflammatory bullsh*t,” according to a video of the April 27 teach-in on Facebook.

I'm thinking of a word .. what is it?  
Oh, I've got it;  the word is ... HYPOCRISY!
hy·poc·ri·sy
[hi- pok-r uh-see]NOUN [PLURAL HY·POC·RI·SIES.]1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.
Alternate Title: "The Hypocrisy of the Meritocracy"

The interesting thing is, these students who reject the thesis are the same Social Justice Warriors who think that "Wealth Distribution" is a social "Good".

(But in truth, they just may be part of the meritocracy)

So .. Daddy makes enough money that you can afford to matriculate at Davidson College ...

But it isn't YOUR money, and there's a lot of it.   So. if Daddy's money is 'shared', it doesn't hurt you.

However, when the "benefits" are finite, and it's a Zero-Sum game ... you're against it?


Let's look at the fee schedule for Davidson College:

FEES FOR 2017-18 ACADEMIC YEAR

  • Required student charges (tuition, student activity fee) $49,949; student activity fee covers student publications, student government, and social and cultural activities
  • Standard Double Room (other rooms available) $7,102
  • Meals, 21 per week (other plans available) $6,852, includes N.C. Board Tax
  • Total: $63,903

Gee, for almost 139% of average annual salary which the average America workers makes (<$44K), you could go to college at Davidson ... and be outraged that some dork wants to take a couple points off your GPA and give them to a lower-ranking student?

That's just so  not fair!

[H/T: IRONS]

Trigger Scale

I broke down and bought a Trigger Scale from Amazon last week.  I never owned one before, and I was curious about just how heavy the trigger pull was on my pistols.

I rather wish I had not.  The scale only measures to eight pounds ... most of them were way over the limit.   Which is okay for certain uses, I suppose, but not for any purpose for which I bought the pistols.    Even The Beloved Kimber, since I got the trigger replaced, now clocks in at "UGH!" pounds trigger pull.

I can understand it for DA-Only pistols, but even my SA pistols tend to over-do it.

The only exception is the STI Edge in 10mm, which still breaks at a crisp, clean 3-3/4 ounces.
Ah ... perfection!   Unfortunately, my eyes have degenerated so badly in the past few years that I'm unable to use it as well in competition as I use to.   I can't see the iron sights.

I'm sorely tempted to have it mounted with an AIMPOINT, and get back into the Pistol Game ... even if I do have to shoot in OPEN Division without a compensated barrel.


"Will Not Comply!" Eh!

The funny thing about our "kinder, gentler" Northern Friends is that when it comes to taking their guns away, they're every bit as resistant to The Gov'ment as are we rowdier "southern neighbors".

This Week:
More than a million restricted, prohibited guns in Canada - Politics - CBC News:
A year and a half after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government came to office promising to tighten Canada's gun laws, there are now more than a million restricted and prohibited firearms across the country. The number of restricted firearms in Canada rose 5.5 per cent last year, reaching its highest point in more than a decade, according to the annual report from the RCMP's commissioner of firearms. There are now 839,295 restricted firearms, many of them handguns. The number of prohibited firearms in Canada, such as fully automatic guns, edged up 0.5 per cent to 183,333
Considering that these firearms are being described as "prohibited" and "restricted", it's difficult to understand how they get an exact count of the 'restricted' guns    Let alone the 'prohibited'!

In the meantime, the article missed an interesting point when they neglected to mention whether unregistered "restricted' guns were confiscated if/when found, or were the owners merely obliged to register them.

Seeing as how a government which would restrict guns would prefer to say "Mister and Missus Canada, Turn 'em All In!" it's probably safe to say that the guns were confiscated without compensation.
Eh?


"Quite frankly, the Trudeau government really hasn't done very much in regards to attacks on firearms owners in Canada since they got elected. About the only thing they have done is let the RCMP run wild and make up laws as they go."
And that does not endear the Trudeau government (or any government) to citizens who would be legal firearms owners without these bizarre restrictions.

(H/T: "The Gun Feed")

Friday, May 26, 2017

Hillary an Alcoholic???

Secret Service Detail: Hillary Clinton Was Drunk Morning of Campaign Rally | True Pundit:
(Posted on October 31, 2016)

Hillary Clinton had been drinking vodka the morning of a New Jersey campaign rally and was “visibly intoxicated,” a law enforcement source told True Pundit. “She’d been hitting it (alcohol) early,” one member of Clinton’s Secret Service security detail told True Pundit. Amazingly, the source acknowledged it wasn’t the first time Clinton enjoyed multiple cocktails prior to taking the stage at a campaign rally, fundraiser, or television appearance.
See, it's crap like this which makes us think that somewhere, some "pundit" is casting aspersions against a candidate for political purposes.

I hadn't seen any of the webposts which supported this charge until today, and it didn't make any difference to my vote back in November:  Hillary is a lying shrew, and nobody blames her husband quite so much for his can't-keep-it-in-his-pants ways now that we've got to know Hillary a bit better.

Sure, I think that Hillary is a lying, conniving manipulator who would say anything to gain a high office ... but I'm trying to think of another politician on the national level who doesn't also fit the mold.
(The short list is VERY SHORT!  I'm thinking a General who was responsible for the European Theater of Operations in WWII ... and he was not exactly a competent President even if he was our first American president to demand that we put a 5 pound satellite into orbit.   Post-Sputnik joke at the time:  "Why can't Eisenhower ride his horse at night?  He doesn't have a Saddle-light!"  But .. Integration, Civil Rights, Highways, Budget .. Korea!)
Sorry .. I digress in favor of one of few presidents I admire.

And of course, Hillary is married to Bill ... any woman who puts up with that pusillanimous p*ssy-hound has either a heart of gold, or she wants "Higher Office" so desperately that she is willing to put up with anything to further her political aspirations.

It's obvious to most oblivious that Hillary is not the fortunate possessor of a "Heart Of Gold".

And I would not be disappointed if she disappeared from the political fold forever.

But is she an alcoholic?

Hell, I don't know,  I'm the LAST person to ask.

Still,  on  9.11.16 when Hillary stumbles and had to be helped to her car, the explanation was both "allergies" and "Pneumonia", as well as "Dehydration".

No, I'm not persuaded by three contrasting medical explanations, advanced by "experts" within hours, not days, of her "Stumble" episode.   The comments (by people who have probably never evaluated her physical condition her in the examining room) are not convincing.   Surely, a politician would not have a personal physician who couldn't keep his mouth shut in a politically charged "event".

When that many people are eager to explain away what would have been a mere "stumble" in the average citizen ... I'm not persuaded, but I'm still unconvinced.

You tell me which is the most denigrating explanation, versus the most reasonable.   Hillary's political opponents are quick to offer unqualified opinions.   Her supporters provide so many alternative explanations, it muddies the field.

I'm still waiting for a reliable first-party (independent attending physician?) who is willing to go on the record to provide a definitive explanation for that momentary lapse in coordination,

Anybody?

Nope.  Not going to happen.  We still are left with no better explanation than our own private political opinion, and that's perhaps not the best way to judge the physical competency of a political candidate.

My personal opinion is not worth the paper it's not written upon.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Oh Hell!

Hell Is In The Eyes



You can explore the public story (the below link is a good start),
 but the real story is not in the text, but in the photo.

IF that is not The Most Evil Set of Eyes you've ever seen, then you have truly been through hell, and I pity you.

Wasserman Schultz Threatened Police Chief Over IT Evidence | The Daily Caller:
As one of eight members of the Committee on Appropriations’ Legislative Branch subcommittee, Wasserman Schultz is in charge of the budget of the police force that is investigating her staffer and how he managed to extract so much money and information from members. In a highly unusual exchange, the Florida lawmaker uses a hearing on the Capitol Police’s annual budget to spend three minutes repeatedly trying to extract a promise from the chief that he will returna [sic] piece of evidence being used to build an active case.
Under that gaze, I'd do and say anything to just get the HELL out of the same room with her!

Do you really think she doesn't know the power of her gaze?

PS: Nice dress; crappy hair
Texas Chainsaw Massacre eyes!

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

"Have I Got A Deal For You!"

Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof pleads guilty in state court, avoids second death penalty trial - The Washington Post:
Instead of pursuing their case after the federal one, prosecutors agreed to a deal in which Roof would plead guilty to nine counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder and a related weapons count and face a guaranteed sentence of life in prison without parole.
(H/T: John Lott)


He plead guilty (see here)
Gross Travesty of Justice?

Roof never gave his victims such a choice.

[Charleston church shooter: ‘I would like to make it crystal clear, I do not regret what I did’]

JUSTICE would have been a firing squad.

But Roof is now ... what?  Twenty-three years old?  

By all accounts a good looking, slightly effeminate lad.

His future now is with a Prison Husband who rents him out to his 300 Best Friends.
That sounds like retribution.

Roof may welcome the shiv in his belly ... eventually.

I don't believe the lad chose wisely.

Variation on the "Man Bites Dog" theme

Yeah, I know; but she actually fired a gun in the city limits.

Woman Charged for Pointing Gun at Teen Allegedly Raping Dog | US News:
There’s a difference between pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid for no reason and pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid because they’re having sex with a dog,” Wilkinson says.
See ... I didn't know that.
An Arkansas woman is facing a felony charge after pointing a gun at a teenage boy who she says was sexually assaulting her neighbor’s dog.
Kerrie Lenkerd told police in Centerton, a northwest Arkansas town, that she looked out a window and saw the teen with "the dog he raped last time."
"I got my gun out of my safe and went out my back door," Lenkerd told police, according to a court filing. "I told him to get on the f---ing ground and pointed my gun at him."
The boy, identified only as NM, 14 years old, in court documents, jumped over a fence and ran. As he fled, Lenkerd fired a shot into the grass "to scare him," she said.
The teenager left behind an iPad and clothing, Lenkerd told police, who also found a spent shell casing.
Presumably, the police were able to follow the lad home by following the trail of excreta he left behind him.



Another version of the story.

Why I Don't Trust Computers ... or Government!

This is, of course, Bureaucratic Incompetence.

Florida concealed weapons permit holders exposed in computer hack | Tampa Bay Times:
More than 16,000 concealed weapons permit holders in Florida may have had their names accidentally made public because of a data breach at the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The agency released a statement saying concealed weapons licensees who renewed online may have had their names accessed, and 469 other customers were notified that their Social Security numbers may have been hacked as part of the breach.
The article identifies this as a "HACK".  As far as we know, some clerk printed a list and dumped it in a wastebasket without shredding it.   That, too, is a "data breach".

How concerned is the "Department of Agriculture" about providing third-level security on their database?   Was it wise for Florida to embed extremely sensitive personal information in a database designed to identify crop rotation practices in commercial orange groves? (I made that up.)

I know people who have chosen not to apply for a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) because of this very thing.  Well, and also because they object to "the guvmint" knowing more about their private lives than is absolutely necessary.

They still carry ... but contend that the Second Amendment is their CHL.
(And they are right.)

Just one more reason to love your country but fear your government.
I so fear my government that I applied for a renewal of my CHL, because it's better to risk being hacked than to be arrested for carrying without a license from the state.

"License From The State" ... to exercise my constitutional right.  Isn't that a sorry tale?

[H/T: Say Uncle]



Publish or Perish for Politicos

GUNS OUT: 2A Group Targets Anti-Gun Legislators:

While I'm no admirer of politicians Senator Warren, this ill-conceived and misbegotten attempt to interfere with legitimate consumer activity is nothing more than political grandstanding and should never even come to the table.
Earlier this week, GOA submitted a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressing their concern over House Bill 1652, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act. According to GOA, the bill could adversely affect gun owners. By establishing this new regulation, “hearing enhancers,” used by hunters to amplify sound, would mean the government could regulate hunting.
Oh, no.   It's MUCH worse than that!

A lot of people in shooting sports own and use "electronic ear muffs", which filter out sounds above a certain decibel level, but allow lower volumes (such as range commands) to be clearly heard.

Range Officers rely upon these "discriminatory amplifying" electronic devices, because if a downrange safety issue is observed by someone one in the audience who yells STOP!, for example ... that warning might be missed by the Range Officer who has his attention focused on the gun.

At the same time, the competitor is better served with amplification, because he is focused on his targets and the RO's range commands must be loud enough to attract this attention.

Amplifying low-decibel sound is an important range safety consideration.

Yes, you can conduct a shooting match without amplification ... but you can do a better job of it with amplification of background sounds.

So by the same sense ' ... the government could regulate target shooting ...', for example.

Regulation of any product often increases its price to the consumer, as well.  It's unwise for a government to not only interfere with a constitutional right, but also to tax it.   But don't tell the ruling class that there's a reason to butt out ... they're in the business of seeming to be "doing something" by passing laws.  (Sort of a "Publish or Perish" for Politicos.)


Take my computer ... please!

House IT Workers Fear Members Are Being Blackmailed | The Daily Caller:
The Awans “had [members] in their pocket,” and “there are a lot of members who could go down over this.”
We didn't elect them because they were the smartest kids on the block.

Note to Pols:
You got to ask yourself ... do you feel lucky?

Saturday, May 20, 2017

watermelon thigh squeeze

watermelon thigh squeeze practice - YouTube:

Okay, I'm not looking for a date.
Any more.

Ever.

Okay?







No Big Magazines for YOU, California!

SF forces gun suppliers to agree to halt sale of high-capacity kits - SFGate:
(May 16, 2017)
San Francisco extracted a legal settlement Tuesday from online gun suppliers who may have tried to sidestep state and local bans on high-capacity gun magazines by advertising “repair kits” that could be used to assemble the forbidden weapons’ cartridge holders
But the question is ... can San Francisco do this ... legally? *
 (City Attorney Dennis ) Herrera sued five out-of-state companies in February, accusing them of violating state laws prohibiting the sale of gun magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. He said Tuesday the companies have agreed to a 10-year settlement that forbids them from selling or advertising the repair kits in California and requires them to notify customers on their websites that the kits and the large-capacity magazines are illegal in the state. 
I had thought this was a San Francisco ' local ordnance, but NOOoooo .. it's state law!
 (See the above reference for full text)

“Californians have spoken clearly. We don’t want these weapons in our communities,” Herrera said in a statement. “I have zero tolerance for gun sellers who try to skirt the law.”

Well, magazines are not weapons, but I catch your drift.

The answer to my above question is .. oh, hell yes! *


I won't ever go to San Francisco again ..
but I have family down there, which are too important to me, for me to be scared off by a bunch of hopolophobes.

So I will still go down to the wilds of California from time to time, but only carrying 5-shot and 6-shot revolvers.   No semi-automatics ... I get it.

But if California wants to throw me in jail for carrying a tiny revolver (or .380) for personal defense ... they can do so and kiss my patootie.

I'm kidding, of course.


Take away my stuff, will you? SUE YOU, I will!

Today, May 18,the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) announced it is supporting, along with the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), an important Second Amendment lawsuit challenging California’s ban on the possession of standard capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The lawsuit, filed by NRA attorneys, titled Duncan v. Becerra,challenges California’s ban on possession of these standard capacity magazines because the law violates the Second Amendment, the due process clause, and takings clause of the United States Constitution.
What this article is suggesting is that California CANNOT confiscate private property without addressing the constitutional rights of the owners.

The first  *(Due Process Clause)* is that the owner cannot be deprived of his property without an actual legal action, in which he may defend the ownership of his property in court.

The second *(Taking Clause)* is that the owner, even if he loses the court decision, cannot be deprived of his property without compensation ... presumably, for the monetary value of the property which is being confiscated.
(GREY AREA ALERT: with a physical article, it may be sufficient to present a receipt for the original purchase; for landed property, such as a house and lot, the valuation of the property may be the cause of many more legal actions.)
DETAILS:

It occurs to me that some folks may not be aware of the details of the "Due Process Clause", and the "Takings Clause", of the Constitution  Here are the details of both clauses of the 5th Amendment:

Expired? Who ... ME?

My CHL *(State issued Concealed handgun License)* expired on the 17th.

That means I have to go to the county sheriff's office, get my picture taken, pay them a couple of bucks (I think it's on the order of $15 for the processing fees), and then wait for a week for them to send me a new CHL.  I doubt they need to take my finger prints again, but if they do that's okay.
They already have them on file, have for years since I got my first CHL from this office.

This is the third time I've had a renewal (I got my first CHL in 1966, but it expired LONG ago!) and as I recall it takes about a week for them to make a new card ... which looks a lot like a drivers' license.

It's my fault, really; but how often do you look at those cards to see when they expire?

Credit cards are nice, they write you a letter to let you know when yours is about to expire, and make it really easy.

But the sheriff is not exactly 'customer oriented'; and they need to know you're still alive before they re-issue.  (Credit cards don't care; they know you have a bank account, and they'll charge you even if some stranger is using your card, unless you deliberately cancel the card!)

This may be a good time for you to check your CHL (or whatever passes for a concealed carry license in your area) and make plans to update it before it expires.   Note that the cops CAN arrest you for carrying with an expired CHL ... depending on the local laws.

I think the sheriff considers CHL processing to be a mundane administrative chore .. they only schedule two days a week, and always after lunch  (if I recall correctly) to process either new or renewals.  So I'll have to make an appointment, and then get a haircut; nobody wants to license a handgun owner with scraggly hair.

Hell, if it weren't for scraggly hair, I wouldn't have no hair at all!

But nobody wants to look like a fugitive on their CHL picture!


The Decline and Fall of the British Empire

Self-defense is now ILLEGAL in the UK - NaturalNews.com:

As reported by The New American, British subjects seeking advice about what are and are not permissible self-defense instruments found some recently on a police web site. It is sponsored by the British government's Police National Legal Database. Q589: Are there any legal self defence products that I can buy? The police answer: The only fully legal self defence product... is a rape alarm.
Chaperone® Baysik Personal Rape Alarm with Test ButtonIf a British subject picks up an object to defend against a violent intruder, that is a crime.  Even if they only threaten, and don't actually USE it against their aggressor.


The only LEGAL alternative to a rape alarm (what the heck is a "Rape Alarm"?) would be a squirt bottle of dye which could be used to easily identify the intruder after he has had his way with you, your family, and your home.
StoppaRed Mini Defence Spray


But if you squirt it in his eyes, that also  may be a criminal offense.

The intruder, if caught, will probably not be charged.  The resident will most likely be charged.

Pick up a knife?   You're toast, Baby!

Aren't you glad you're you?

Product image
Welcome to America ... Land of The Free and Home of the Saved!

You don't know what you think you know; and the difference can be important

Massad Ayoob  Blog Archive  THE VERDICT IN TULSA:

 Officer Shelby had observed erratic behavior from a large man who appeared to her to the under the influence of PCP. This would later be supported by evidence: Crutcher had PCP within his body, and a quantity of it in his car. After repeatedly ignoring lawful commands, he suddenly reached to the open window of his car, as if for a weapon. It was enough to cause the male officer present to fire his TASER at Crutcher, and enough to cause Shelby to fire the single pistol shot that killed him.
The difference between a trained LEO and a "Private Citizen" (no matter what your training) is big enough to take your breath away.

Literally.

Officer Shelby had LEO training which would cause her to believe that a suspect under threat of address might respond in an extreme manner ... such as reaching for a firearm to resist arrest.

A person (not a suspect, if you're not an LEO) who is confronted by a 'citizen' pointing a firearm at him might legitimately reach for a gun; if you shoot him, you are a murderer.

Forget all that "Citizen Arrest" BS.   You, as a citizen have few rights beyond those afforded the person you may be accosting, for whatever reason.

Unless you are accosting an unknown & aggressive trespasser on your own property, and are not a LEO and have not identified yourself as such .. you are an aggressive felon, in the eyes of the court.

(Very little wriggle-room there, and circumstances are subject to the eye of the interpreter.)

As a private citizen, you not, with confidence that your actions will be acknowledged under"Castle Doctrine" guidelines shoot at someone who is not moving aggressively toward you, or not threatening you with a lethal weapon.  *

However, in most american counties ... if you're in your home and someone breaks in and threatens you ... most counties will assume that deadly offense if a legitimate defense if you can't tell that your assailant is NOT there with the intention of physical meyham.
*(Some local exceptions may apply; if you don't know them, don't expect them to justify your actions. Exceptions are rare, but MAY apply for your physical response using only fists and boots, or apply with a firearm only if you are a juvenile, female, old person, abused domestic partner of record, absolute stranger ... etc.)
I am not a Lawyer, nor do I play one on television.

But I am sufficiently well-read to realize that the concept of "Castle Doctrine" may not be completely legally agreed upon in all states, if at all.


If, under the circumstances, you are completely convince that a home intruder intends to do murder or "grievous bodily harm" (and who can read their mind?) you decide to defend yourself, your family, your home with aggressive lethal means ... you're probably much better protected from legal challenges in America than you might be in England .. which espouses the concept of Proportional Defense.

I know, I've said this all before.

I'll say it again.

You don't need to read it, if you already know everything.

"Allowing"?

 Allowing more Minnesotans to freely carry guns seems unwise | Duluth News Tribune:

 It wasn't that I thought the NRA and its members had some ill intent when I decided to discontinue my membership; it was because of the evermore unlikeable image of the NRA to many people.
Odd, that this writer decided that he should quit the NRA because of what OTHER people think.
(You may want to read the original post to GROK the context.)
PERSONAL:I have no objections to his decision to quit the NRA; I've personally quit the NRA a dozen times over the past 50 years .. .for reasons which were personal, and not related to what someone else may think.
.
I still don't much like the NRA; I get tired of getting "personal emergency letters" from La Pierre, hounding me for more money.   I'm retired; I need my money for ammunition

So, "This Guy" quit because of public pressure?  Because anti-gun groups, founded by a half-dozen zillionaires, are using their money to turn their own personal preferences into laws which infringe on MY private space?

And "This Guy" has made this decision to quit the battle because his friends and neighbors wonder if he's such a nice guy, after all?  He has allowed the opinion of others to prevail upon his personal judgement, because either he is not sure of his own judgement, or he is fearful of the opinion of his neighbors.  So who needs him?
(Thought: move to another neighborhood; your neighbors don't deserve you.  On second though, because you kowtowed to the opinion of others instead of forming your own judgement, perhaps you deserve them.)
America was built by Individualists; people who knew what this country looked like when outsiders, fearing an armed populace, imposed  severe restrictions upon their civil rights.

Now these  "NEW outsiders" who are nominally INSIDERs are actively trying to impose these same restrictions on me (not us ... ME, personally!)

In 1776 (and before, and later), the OUTSIDERS were the British, who didn't like it that "free men" thought they should have some say about what laws were reasonable, vs those laws which kept them from their freedoms.

Now these new OUTSIDERS are international fat-cats who share the same nationality as we do, but they don't share the same respect for the Constitution.

They want to force us to reject our freedoms, because they fear another revolution.   Which is odd, because their actions are driving America into a mini-revolution; one which has already started.

So far, it's a war of words; a war for men's minds.

Here are some words to ponder:




H/T: Sebastian

Friday, May 19, 2017

"What Did I Do Wrong?"

WATCH: “Shattered” co-author Amie Parnes on the many mistakes that doomed Hillary Clinton’s campaign - Salon.com:

In “Shattered,” the first must-read book to emerge from the 2016 presidential election, political reporters Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes provide a detailed autopsy of what their subtitle calls “Hillary Clinton’s doomed campaign.” Their account — drawn from background interviews with numerous people who worked in or around the Clinton campaign — is controversial for many reasons. As they admit in their introduction, Allen and Parnes assumed all along that Clinton would win, and that for all her strategic missteps and messaging problems they were probably chronicling the election of America’s first female president. Only on the night of last Nov. 8, they write, did the full meaning of their reporting become clear.
Dear Hillary;
Let me tell you the story of a man named Job  [cue banjo theme song]

Job was a poor man, barely kept his family fed.  He observed the sabbath and kept it holy, paid his tithe faithfully, was diligent in his work and never spoke ill of any man.
Then one day his daughter turns up pregnant.
His son runs away with someone named "Maurice".
His wife admits that she has contracted a social disease, and she's not sure from whom.
The sky clouds over, the rains pour down, washing his crops away.
His oxen are struck by lightening.
His barn burns down.
He develops running pustules on his face.
And all of his neighbors turn their backs to him
.
Job falls to his knees, looks up into the stormy skies, and weeps:
"Lord, why hast thou forsaken me?"
The rains stop for a minute.   The clouds part, a beam of brilliant golden sunlight catches job, and a deep voice booms out:

There's something about you, Job, that just pisses me off!


Thursday, May 18, 2017

Jason Chaffetz ... lays out Reasons for leaving Washington DC. - YouTube

Jason Chaffetz ... lays out Reasons for leaving Washington DC. - YouTube: Published on May 18, 2017 Jason Chaffetz Tears up as he thinks about his kids, and lays out his reasons for leaving his position in Washington DC. He speaks about his conversation with President Donald Trump....



This is important. Chaffetz is one of the most .... aggressive and believable Conservatives in Congress, and he's leaving for reasons which are not quite clear, other than he would prefer to spend more time with his family.

Just one more reason to admire his integrity.

I'm going to miss his effect on the current administration.

If you're interested, here's an interview:




Dumb Thief Steals Airsoft Gun After Handing in Resume

Dumb Thief Steals Airsoft Gun After Handing in Resume - YouTube:

Uploaded on Dec 12, 2011
Check out what happened at Airsoft and Hobby Stores in Santa Clarita. Pretty amazing how stupid some people are.



Old news, but still ... geez!

OWIEE!

Police: Suspect Shot In Groin While Trying To Rob Man With Gun  CBS Philly:
PHILADELPHIA (CBS)—Police say a suspect was shot in the groin while trying to rob a man in Philadelphia on Tuesday. It happened around 2:37 p.m. in the 4800 block of Palethorp Street.

There's an AP for that:


Oregon gun nuts ... another gun bill.

They Never Give Up | Oregon Firearms Federation:
After the failure of their last bill that sought to force gun dealers into the mental health business,House Rep (and gubernatorial hopeful) Knute Buehler and anti-gun extremist Senator Elizabeth Hayward are back with a watered down version. HB 3460, introduced today, would require the Oregon Health Authority to create “a firearm safety and suicide prevention program.”
Go read the whole thing

Universal Background Checks = Registration!

THIS is What's Wrong with Universal Background Checks - The Truth About Guns:
 Universal background checks are a bad idea that leads to even worse ideas. They should be opposed and repealed.
I keep reading articles about UBC (Universal Background Checks) as part of the process required for transfer of firearms from one person to another, and I can't believe that everyone who writes about the "process" misses the most important point:

Universal Background Checks = REGISTRATION!
Has nobody noticed that when you submit to a UBC, during purchase of a firearm, you must submit detailed information about the gun you are proposing to purchase?

Why is this significant?

Person "A" wishes to purchase a firearm from Person "B", so both parties submit to a UBC,   No problem, so the purchase is .. well, not "Approved", but at least not "Dis-approved".

What information is required for a background check.

There's a lot about the purchaser, a little about the seller, and a bit about the firearm in question.

Why do we need to submit information about the firearm being traded?

Make, Model, Serial number.   Isn't that part of the form filled out?

Form 4473 is the standard paperwork required to properly complete a firearms transfer.

 HERE is a copy of the standard form 4473, necessary to register any gun sale.

Notice that the purpose of the form is to determine whether the purchaser of a firearm is legitimately and legally authorized to purchase a firearm.

Notice that Section "D" includes full information about the firearm being transferred: including make, model and serial number.

Complete the form?  Buy the gun?

You have just registered the gun.

Now our kindly Uncle Sam knows that Person "A" just bought a gun  (with full information including make, model, caliber, serial number, etc) from "Person "B", and even if Person "B" didn't register the gun ... he is now known as the seller.   Isn't that just too cute?

And Person "A" is registered as the proud new owner of the gun.

And Person "B" (the seller) is also registered .. in case he didn't go through the process (as in: private transaction) of letting Uncle know that he purchased a firearm in a very private transaction ... he looks Not Very Good because he didn't tell Uncle that he owns an unregistered gun.

(Tsk Tsk ... this will NOT look good on your Resume!)

Don't believe in registration?  Too bad, Charley .. your loving uncle has established a record of ownership going back to both you, and the seller.   What do you want to bet that Uncle can't .. or WON'T .. track any other firearms transaction by you or the seller?  Paranoid much?

Don't like that?  Too bad ... it's the law.  And you always thought that "Registration" was for people in "other states".

WHY does the form include information about the gun?  The obvious justification for the form is to determine that the seller is legally someone who is not forbidden to purchase a gun (insanity, felony .. whatever reason why you shouldn't buy a gun) but why include the information about the gun?

Because your Uncle wants to know what guns are being transferred (and are now being owned) from whom and by whom.  Including your social security number (which you have been PROMISED will not be used to trace your chattel!)  By completing the purchase, and a 'gun show' .. you have just registered the gun.

Did the person who sold you the gun buy it in a private transaction, where no 'registration' was required?  Gee, he now is flagged as an "unregistered gun owner' and he will be followed through every sales transaction that pops up on the Internet, because he didn't register the gun when he bought it.

Shrug ... just part of doing business, expect Uncle to look over your shoulder at every opportunity.

He may not pay much attention NOW, but in the future ... if your name pops up in some other investigatory venue ... every thing you do and think and say (and every firearms transaction) will be flagged.   Yes, Big Brother is definitely watching you.  Not actively, but very completely.

Paranoia much?  

Probably not enough.




Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Money for nothing ... chicks for free!

Deportation fears stop some LA County immigrants from applying for EBT program:
(May 10, 2016)
Los Angeles County officials say they are hearing stories that immigrants with legal status or those who are undocumented are staying away from health and social services programs. At a county Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday, Supervisor Hilda Solis said she’s hearing from residents in her district that pregnant women are afraid to go to hospitals to deliver their babies. Los Angeles law enforcement officials as well as those with various county departments have said they will not share immigration status with ICE.
So you want to immigrate to the States, but you don't want to take advantage of all the Free Money that America offers its citizens under the Welfare program?

Good.

Get a job, become a citizen, contribute to the common welfare and then feel free to take advantage of American welfare programs after you have paid your fair share.

I'm sick of extra-nationals coming to America only to abuse the programs which we have established to take care of our own.

Not every American is as heartless as I am on this point.  

Most of us are sympathetic to citizens who have issues which require them to rely on the largess of the Public Trust to help them get past the Hard Times.

But people who come to America only to suck on the public teat?

Not so much.

And if you legitimately decline public support because you know that you have not contributed?

Very good for you ... you are a responsible new citizen and we are happy to include you.   WE will help you to find a job, support yourself and your family, and welcome you to the community of hard-working who just want to do the best they can with the (often limited) means they have.

Every one else, those who sneaked into this country because you think you can get money for nothing?

Not so good for you.

You're liars, you're cheats, you are an imposition on our trust, and frankly we don't need more never-do-wells whose intent is to take take away from the rest of us, because we will let you.  

Monday, May 15, 2017

It's hard to get a baby-sitter in the middle of a burgulary

Homeowner Shoots, Kills Man Who Allegedly Brought 7-Year-Old Son Along for Home Invasion - Breitbart:

According to the San Antonio Express-News, the suspect allegedly tried to break in through a window in the very room where the homeowner happened to be asleep. The female homeowner heard the suspect trying to make entry into her home, armed herself, and fired at least two rounds. Police arrived in time to transport the alleged intruder to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead. The woman was in her mid-30s and the alleged intruder was his mid-30s. 
Police also discovered the alleged intruder’s 7-year-old son at the scene. San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said of the young boy, “We’re gonna get help for him.”
The man must have been either desperate, or depraved, to bring his son along with him when he attempted to perform a "Home Invasion" in an occupied dwelling.

Either that, or he was trying to "break his kid in" on the Family Business.

Stupid Is As Stupid Does:

Perhaps he was as stupid as he sounds.

It's gonna be hard for the child to work through all of this.   I doubt if he really understands it.

I know I don't.

Probably, it's going to be difficult for police to explain to the lad that "Your Father Was As Dumb As A Box Of Rocks, And We Expect You To Turn Out Better".

It's worth a try, I guess.

I have no great expectations.  Stay tuned about seven years from now for The Rest Of The Story.

Fratricide is Religious; don't f**k with my religion!

Anti-Travel Ban Lawyer Leans on Argument that Honor Killings Are Islamic:
 
The lawyer representing the State of Hawaii in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today has stated the collection of data with regards honor killings should be removed from President Trump’s Executive Order in order to “pass constitutional muster”.
In other words, it's okay to kill your sister if she acts in a manner which contravenes the strict interpretation of your shared religion?   Is that the tenet?

And if some person calls on the Constitution to justify murder because he claims it is a religious tenet
 .. that should be considered acceptable?

That is the most despicable thing I have ever heard.

The Constitution is the one thing which should never be used to justify immoral acts.

And this thing ... "honor killings" of a family member ... is the most immoral act possible.

That is not America, and anyone who leans on the Constitution to justify despicable immorality is the most horrible person imaginable.   They should NOT consider themselves part of America.

FOAD!

How the Illinois House can help combat gun crime - but they won't

Where I live, I can (and do) carry every day.  In fact, I'll be going to my local sheriff office tomorrow to renew my CHL license.'   For the third time ... CHL must be renewed every five years; the cost is $5,

I feel good about that.   I've never been threatened by a gun, or witnessed firearms violence in the 20+ years I've lived here.

How many people in Chicago (etc.) can make that claim?

How the Illinois House can help combat gun crime - Chicago Tribune:
Will allowing the state to regulate dealers prevent all guns from getting in criminal hands? Of course not. But allowing the state to require dealers to improve security measures will help prevent gun theft and burglary. Recently, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives stated that since 2012, the earliest year for which data are available, burglaries from licensed dealers have increased by 48 percent, and the number of guns stolen during these burglaries increased by 73 percent. Requiring dealers to train all employees on how to identify potential straw purchasers will also reduce that path of guns getting into the illegal market.

Chicago might be better served by allowing gun stores to locate in the inner city, where police presence is better manned, then  forcing them to establish in the outlying districts.

NRA ... can't you tell when you're being played?

It's Publish or Perish in the Blog-o-sphere, and sometimes we write stuff that is obvious.

Sometimes we have to belabor the obvious, to reach the 2% who just don't "get it" without having everything spelled out for them.

Like all the foo-fra over Maloney's latest "outlandish measure".

Of course it's impossible.   So we should not be treating it like it was a legitimate attempt to pass a bill.

Part of her proposal is for her own self-aggrandization;  part to show her constituents that she's "trying to do something about the Gun Problem", and part just to bait the NRA.

Since the NRA *and its members* would be better served to ignore the professional politician [but they didn't], they fell right into her trap.

She can SHOW she's "doing something", can SHOW that the NRA can't do anything, and SHOW that she's important because she has the NRA dancing on her strings like a clumsy marionette.

As of today, I score it Maloney 3, NRA zero

Just looking at the following NRA release (an excellent example of over-explaining the obvious),
 I wonder if we aren't as dumb ... or at least as easily manipulatable ...  as we think she is,

America's 1st Freedom | Another Helping Of Maloney Baloney:

Now Maloney has introduced an outlandish measure in the U.S. Congress—H.R. 2380—requiring that within five years, all newly manufactured handguns sold in the country include technology enabling only authorized users to fire the gun. That’s quite startling when you consider that proven technology of that kind doesn’t even exist. H.R. 2380 would also require that existing handguns be retrofitted with similar technology within 10 years of the measure's passage. With the wide variety of handguns made and sold over the past many decades, such an undertaking would, of course, be impossible. The result of such legislation would simply be outlawing all of those currently owned handguns.
When I was a journalism minor in college, my instructor told me:
"It's all about Column Inches, Son; don't ever forget that."

I didn't.  Didn't like it.  Went into computers instead of journalism.

Now where am I?   (Duh!)

Washington State Background Check Failure

New Washington State Background Check Failure Reporting Law Raises Questions:
So much for Michael Bloomberg’s I-594 living up to its promises. Not that anyone expected it to have any effect whatsoever on predators. What it did do, aside from forcing “law-abiding” gun owners to give up private transfers, was create and put a new class of “criminal” at risk for life-destroying consequences —the previously “law-abiding” who chose “I will not comply” civil disobedience over submission to new Intolerable Acts.
- David Codrea
Yep.   Look for the same results here in Oregon.   We always tread on Washington's coat tails.

Einstein's Definition of Insanity:  Trying the same thing over again, expecting different results

NOTE:   Also posted by IRONS

Sunday, May 14, 2017

EEEEYAAAAAAHHHHHH!

I have commented unfavorably on the issue of the so-called "Appendix Carry".

(We use to call it "Mexican Carry" before that was considered to be a ... racist, socially unacceptable and very insensitive term.)

From now on, whenever the subject comes up (excuse the expression) in conversation again, I can simply point (excuse the expression) to this article as a very good reason why ...

IT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA, Cowboy!  (Excuse the expression.)


Ohio Man Shoots Himself in Penis While Exiting His Car - The Drive:
There have been about 700 unintentional shootings this year—and this one may be the most unfortunate. (At least, among the non-fatal incidents.) A poor guy named Murad Hamedallah in Toledo, Ohio was found by police on the ground near a garbage can with a bullet hole in his penis and his right thigh. Witnesses say he was screaming after he got out of his car, tried walking, and collapsed. You would be screaming too, if you went through what he did.


Saturday, May 13, 2017

No guns for you, no guns for you ... go away kid, you bother me1

California Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D-7) is pushing legislation to take away school administrators’ power to allow teachers with a Carry Concealed Weapon license (CCW) to be armed in classrooms for self-defense.
Sez it makes him nervous.

He doesn't spend a lot of time on high-school grounds (note: "NO GUN ZONE" ... duh!)

Well, it's not as if maniacal gunmen waste their time shooting kid on school campiii ...

What's the worst that could happen?

Dem. Assemblyman Pushes Bill to Guarantee Teachers Cannot Shoot Back if Attackers Strike - Breitbart: