Yin and Yang: Peggy Noonan

Yesterday I called Mark Steyn "one of my all-time favorite political commentators".

That hasn't changed, but now I see it's time to introduce another: Peggy Noonan.

Ms Noonan often writes for the Wall Street Journal (see the link on the sidebar, under WSJ Opinion Journal), and if Steyn's style is to go for the gonads (in the nicest possible way), Noonan's style is to go to the heart (in the deadliest possible way).

Steyn and Noonan are the Yin and Yang of political commentary.

I love this lady. She has style, she has verve, and she has the sharpest knife in the drawer. She can slice and dice you in 600 words, and you wouldn't feel a thing as she cuts out your heart.

Today her target was Joe Biden.

For twenty years, I have referred to him as "The Distinguished Windbag from Delaware".

Imagine how rewarding it is to read the following paragraph from today's column, as Ms Noonan typifies the congressional interrogation of Judge Samuel Alito by Senator Joe Biden. In part:

Must he sit there bland-faced and unmoving as they say what they say? Yes, of course. Judge Alito and the White House know they have to let these men talk. They don't want the senators to feel resentful or frustrated. They know each senator feels he has to play to his base. They know the senators are, by nature, like Conair 2000 hairdryers: They just love to blow, and hard. Fwwaaaaahhhhhhhhh. And they know it is good, it is helpful, to let each senator reveal himself through his own words. I think senators feel that their words, when strung together, become little bridges. I think the White House feels that their words, when strung together, become little nooses.

"Little Nooses".

I just love that, don't you?

They (the Judiciary Subcommittee) abused Alito to distraction; and then, when Lindsey Graham spoke nicely to Sam Alito, the poignancy of the moment drove Alito's wife, Martha-Ann, to tears. From that moment on, if it hadn't already happened, Alito became a shoo-in.

Alito's wife, Martha-Ann Alito, was overcome with emotion as Sen. Lindsey Graham called her husband "a decent, honorable man." (Watch wife brought to tears -- 1:57)

In the words of Robert Culp (or was it Bill Cosby, in "I Spy":

I just love it when a plan comes together.

Lindsey Graham for President?

Canadian Cluebat 3: Life Imitates Art

TheStar.com - Absent fathers root of gun crimes, faith leaders say

You heard it here first.

On December 29, I commented on the gang shootings in Toronto (Canadian Cluebat 2: Toronto). My theme was that the cause of "Gun Violence" was not the GUNS, but the VIOLENCE, and that the indirect cause of the violence was the break-up of the Nuclear Family.

If you couldn't bear to wade through all the pedantry, here's a summary; my thought was that when the family doesn't have both parents, or when the parents themselves are disfunctional, their children will not be given the chance to learn how to act. Given no familial support, children may turn to gangs as their only 'family'. The gang culture is typically violent, and leads directly to the kind of criminal behavior which Toronto experienced on Boxer Day.

That concept has been reinforced, surprisingly by the MSM ("Main Stream Media"), in the form of an article in the Toronto Star.

Here are some cuts from the article:

Absent fathers root of gun crimes, faith leaders say

Young male adolescents who have no male role model at home 'look to gangs for family'

Jan. 11, 2006. 04:13 PM

CURTIS RUSH

STAFF REPORTER THESTAR.COM

Young, angry adolescents who have no male role model at home are committing many of the gun crimes in Toronto because gangs are their family, faith leaders said today.

And fathers who desert the home are the root of the problem, the leaders said at a news conference held at the Driftwood Community Centre in the gang-plagued Jane-Finch corridor.

Rob Brodie, who works on trying to rehabilitate criminals following their sentences, said that of 20 case files he recently pulled at random, 14 of the criminals were from single-mother homes.

Along with a call for politicians to toughen drug laws, the faith leaders pointed to a breakdown in the family home as the leading edge of the downward spiral.

While 'broken families' are often unablel to provide parental guidence to children, the problem is often more complicated. In our current culture, both in Canada and in America, the parents may feel 'disempowered' by the State. In this day of aggressive social workers, what may seem as reasonable disciplinary measures may be interpreted by The State as inappropriate.

Dr. Charles McVety, of the Evangelical Association and Canada Christian College, echoed the call for lawmakers to roll back the clock to a time when parental punishment could be used as discipline.

“I’m not talking about abuse,” McVety said. “But there has been an erosion of parental rights and a social drift that’s been coming for years.”

Children who know the law, he said, are practising a form of civil disobedience in the home and getting away with it.

You may be the perfect parent, but if your child resents your discipline and calls Adult and Family Services (AFS) or the local equivalent, a social worker will be sent to your home to investigate. This is an appropriate response by AFS, but a child acting-out can cause such disruption that AFS may decide that the best response is to remove the child from the family. It can take weeks, or even months, to walk through the rounds of counselling and court appearances. In the meantime, your child has learned that your authority is subject to an overworked, underpaid Social Worker. In other words, your child doesn't have to act according to the modes of behavior. If the child resents being required to act in a civil manner in the home, the best revenge may be escalation of the problem until it evolves into a complete disruption of the family. Your child will then be under the care of the State, and someone whom you have never met. Even the best Foster Parent may be reluctant to discipline a child in this situation.

At the least, the child has learned how to "get" Mommy and Daddy. The juvenile (or teen) who has learned this technique is often the child most likely to abuse it.

DRUGS
Narcotics, and other illegal drugs, are just one more factor in undermining the family.

With the federal election coming on Jan. 23, the leaders said they hoped the new government would keep drug possession illegal.

“Stop the soft talk on drugs,” McVety urged. “Young people are joining gangs for the lure of drug money. It is dangerous talk.”

Prime Minister Paul Martin wants to reduce penalties for simple possession.

But that’s going down the wrong road, McVety said, and the party leaders should make their intentions known before people go to the polls.

McVety said “it’s sending the wrong message” to spend millions on curbing tobacco use, but mapping out a strategy to make drugs more permissible.

As I said, it's not easy.

But it can be done.

Someone has taken this idea, and added some concrete steps that show parents what they can do to addres the issue of violence.

Congratulations, Canada! You've Got A Clue.

Anonymous Comments

SayUncle � The end of blogs?

I've posted before about the annoying habits of some people who indulge in blog-spamming.

This is something different.

As of last week, if you write an annoying, ANONYMOUS comment, you're subject to fines and who-knows-what-else.

That's right, it's a federal crime to write annoying anonymous comments with the intent to . . . well, annoy someone.

Three questions:

1. What's "annoying", and is it possible to write Anything that won't be Annoying to Somebody?
2. Who's going to turn in an "annoying" commenter to the feds?
3. If they're anonymous, how ya gonna catch 'em?

Just one more justification for Congress Control.

(H/T Triggerfinger)

Russian Free-Runners

Got eight minutes, 24 seconds to spare? High-speed Internet connection (or a HELL of a lot of patience)?

Acrophobic, tolerant of french rap, and prepared to be amazed by the gymnastic abilities of deceptively aesthetic-looking young men?

Wander over to Wadcutter and check out the video on Russian Free-runners.

Blow your mind, it will.

There's also a couple of other NSFW (Not Safe For Work) videos that were not to my taste, but you don't have to watch 'em if you don't want to. It took me about 10 seconds to kill the play, when I previewed them.

Reloading Tip No. 1: Boraxo

Boraxo

I've talked about this on The Unofficial IPSC List, but I just realized that I've never mentioned it here.

I reload a lot (though not so much during the winter months; it's too cold in the garage!) and when I get done my hands are covered with grease, carbon, lead and powder residue -- whatever comes from handling brass, powder, bullets and that filthy Dillon XL-650.

When I use one of those waterless hand cleansers, my hands feel like I've been washing in solvent.

Regular hand soaps just don't do the job. They're too wimpy. I have to scrub and scrub, use a brush (ouch!), and I often still have black crud in the knuckle-wrinkles.

A few years ago I remembered that my father, a mechanic, use to wash withLava, a bar soap with pumice. It worked, but his hands were sore and red when he finished. (I know how they felt; I've used it myself.)

Then I also remembered the can of Boraxo in his shop. So I found my own can of Boraxo at the grocery store, brought it home and tried it.

Wonderful stuff! A little Boraxo powder (actually, it's more like 'granules') and hot water, wash-wash rinse-rinse, maybe finish with some of that wussy liquid "Antibacterial" soap if I want to smell like a flower, and all the black crud is gone.

The best part is that my hands don't hurt, they don't feel chapped and dry, and they're not red.

I don't know why people still use the waterless hand soap crap if there's water handy. Lord knows, you STILL have to wash in water to get the "soap" residue off, and it makes your skin (well, MY skin) burn.

Buy the Boraxo. It's cheaper than dirt. And you don't have to coat your hands with greasy hand lotion, as my father did every working day of his life, just to feel like the skin on your hands maybe won't break if you move your fingers.

Your hands won't stink of petroleum distillates, either. You can go right to the dinner table without smelling like the crank-case of a '49 Chevy pickup, and (also) not have to worry whether there's still some lead residue on the hand you're using to hold the Pillsbury Buttery Dinner Roll.

PS: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. The background in the picture? Yep, that's the notorious BoomerShoot T-shirt.

U.S. shouldn't have to do tap dance over bugging

U.S. shouldn't have to do tap dance over bugging

Mark Steyn remains one of my all-time favorite political commentators. The New Hampshire British-sounding guy has the gift of finding the nugget in the nuggies and polishing it into an eminently readable argument for survival of Western Civilization.

Here he takes on the DemocRats who would impeach President Bush for taking needful steps to ferret out terrorist snakes before they can strike.

Citing, just for example, the resounding intelligence success which stopped a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge (why didn't they just buy it?), he makes the case for unfettering the hands of the man who we re-elected to protect us from another 9/11.

You do remember 9/11, don't you? I sure do. My clock radio woke me at 7am Pacific Time with continuous news about planes striking the Twin Towers in New York, the skyscrapers in flames, people trapped on the 83rd floor and jumping to their death from fear of being burned alive, the inevitable word that the towers had collapsed into rubble heaps . . . two . . . one . . . zero towers.

I didn't go to work that day. I sat at home alone, listening in horror to the newscasts on the radio. My Darling Daughter called me from San Diego around mid-day, and we talked in hushed voices about the calamity and what it might mean for our country. We had no idea how bad it could be.

Later, we all found out how bad it could be.

We were lucky, if you can call it that. About 3000 people lost their lives, including the people in the three buildings and the passengers in the four airplanes, plus all of the rescue workers caught in the collapse. It could have been worse. Initial estimates were that as many as 50,000 people could have been in the World Trade Center buildings. But it was too early in the day, about 9am Eastern Time, and the shopping crowds hadn't yet gathered in the ground-level malls.

Lucky. Yeah.

The following days gave us a glimpse of national solidarity, as Congress gathered on the Capital Steps to sing "America" and every one said "Never Forget!"

But some of us did forget.

There was a lot of talk about the failure of the intelligence services, and how they SHOULD have known about this threat, but they were forbidden to work together to process and share the information that was, as we now know, readily available.

We changed that. Changed the laws that enforced only the concept that International Terrorism was only a civil or criminal matter. We knew now that we were in a war, a knife-fight for national survival. Never forget.

But some of us did forget.

"Now we are engaged in a great Civil War, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure."

It has nearly come down to that, as politicians play the game for political advantage . . . the Outs furious that they are no longer the Ins, and forgetting that it was their casual, Politically Correct vision of National Security brought us to this National Tragedy.

They no longer foam at the mouth in a vindictive desire to find the people who "did this to us", and to take any necessary measures to prevent a similar recurrence. Instead, they snap at the heels of the Big Dog whose job it is to, as the Constitution requires, insure that we can

. . . establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity . . .

That's how I feel about it.

Here's how Mark Steyn says it:

It's very hard to fight a terrorist war without intelligence. By definition, you can only win battles against terrorists pre-emptively -- that's to say, you find out what they're planning to do next Thursday and you stop it cold on Wednesday. Capturing them on Friday while you're still pulling your dead from the rubble is poor consolation. For example, in 1988, a British SAS unit shot dead three IRA members on the streets of Gibraltar. The United Kingdom's Joint Intelligence Committee were acting on information that the cell was planning to blow up the changing-of-the-guard ceremony on the Rock. The two men and a woman were subsequently found to be ''unarmed,'' and as a result various civil liberties groups protested and critical TV documentaries were made. But there was no dispute that they were IRA members and that they had bomb-making materials in their car. If the state cannot take action until its sworn enemy uses those materials, it had better be prepared to lose the war.

It shouldn't be necessary to point out the obvious. But, unmoored from reality, wafting happily into fantasy land safe in the hermetically sealed Democrat-media bubble, Sen. Barbara Boxer and her colleagues are apparently considering impeaching the president for eavesdropping on al Qaida calls made to U.S. phone numbers. Surely, even Karl Rove can't get that lucky.

By the way, I'd love to see the witness list for that trial: Muhammad al-Jihad testifying that a week before he blows up a Bali nightclub he always makes a perfectly innocent call to his cousin in Milwaukee to ask how the kids are; Abu Musad al-Zarqawi testifying that he only called Howard Dean to issue a formal complaint about congressional Democrats stealing his rationalizations. Etc.

The Democrats and the media want to upgrade every terrorist into O.J. Simpson, insulated by legalisms and entitled to his own dream team. (Their figleaf, the court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which previously denied not a single request, has turned down hundreds in the years since 9/11.) The practical effect of the Dems' approach is to extend the protections of the U.S. Constitution to any dodgy character anywhere on the planet who has a U.S. telephone number in his Rolodex. Indeed, given that perfectly ordinary cell phones can be used almost anywhere -- this week, I spoke to an American in London by dialing his Washington cell number -- if the Democrats have their way, all terrorist cells in Europe or Pakistan would have to do to put themselves beyond the reach of U.S. intelligence is get a New Jersey-based associate to place a bulk order for Verizon cell phones.

There's more, much more, and you really must read the entire article to appreciate the concise flavor of his proposition that, essentially, desperate times require desperate measures.

And this is, indeed, a desperate time.

There WAS a time when my greatest fear was that my son would be called upon to serve his country by taking up arms in its defense. I did it, in 1968-1970, and I would not wish that on anyone who was not whole-heartedly determined that this was The Right Thing To Do.

I did it, even though I was not "whole-heartedly determined". My family was frightened for my sake during the entire time, perhaps even more frightened than I was. Hard to imagine.

Now I'm even more worried. Even though my son, and my daughter's good husband, will probably NOT be conscripted to fight a war, we have all been so conscripted in a way that is even more fearful.

We don't have a country to fight. We don't even have an open enemy.

Instead we have a nest of vipers who lurk in the shadows, hide amongst honest folk, and only strike at the most vulnerable of us. They have no fear of death, and deprecate us because we love life.

We cannot raise an army, train and arm them, transport them on troop ships to their home country to defeat them in detail. They don't have a home country, they only have malice.

How do we find these pockets of enmity?

You have to know where to look.

How do you know where to look?

Aye, there's the rub. And the very few, the pitifully few weapons we have at our disposal are being taken from us by serpents at our breast. The people whom we chose to protects us in mass have chosen to protect their own vested interests by attacking our leaders.

Oh, go read Mark Steyn. He's much less melodramatic than I am. More convincing as well


x

Xbox Rage

The ChronicleHerald.ca

In Nova Scotia, a man killed a friend because he believed the friend had stolen his 'game console'.

One more justification for "Xbox Control".

Maybe there should be a law against possession of "electronic game players". At least, keep them out of the hands of kids.

Nope, that won't work. The killer was 24, legally "old enough to know better".

I guess the Canuks will just have to put them off-limits to anyone who can't prove he's mentally competent, trained in the safe usage of electronic game players, has a valid REASON for possession of an electronic game player, and can get three citizens to swear to their good repute. Then they'll have to register and license their xbox, and open their home to police inspection to assure that they are keeping their xbox out of the hands of children. You know, like they do with guns.

Perhaps the family of the victim will sue IBM for irresponsible marketting of a dangerous electronic game player. I'd love to see how the Canadian Parliament handles THAT question.

Dang, I'm feeling very dark tonite.

Woman sues cops for shooting her

Macomb Daily : Woman in high-speed chase sues police for shooting her

A woman who was left a paraplegic after being shot several times by Warren police in the moments following a high-speed car chase has accused officers of using excessive force in a lawsuit filed in Macomb County Circuit Court.

The story is complicated, you really need to read the whole article to figure it out. But here's the summary (if I'm capable of boiling down an article, which I doubt.)

Woman gets into a "dispute" at her brother's house. Brother calls cops, says she pointed a gun at him and drove off in her Chevy Malibu. Cops find the Malibu driving down the road, try to pul her over. Woman jackrabbits, reaching speeds of up to 110 miles an hour on the freeway. Cops ahead of her put out 'stop sticks', puncturing her tires. Woman crashes into freeway wall.

Cops approach the wreck, see woman "lying across the front seat with a revolver in her hand". Cops see "smoke or flame" coming out of the barrel of her gun. Cops return fire.

Woman severely wounded (see below) goes to hospital where she's declared a 'paraplegic', eventually. Meanwhile, cops find 400 rounds of ammunition in her car. Woman claimes she kept all of her belongings in the car because she's homeless. Excuse me: "transient".

Here's where it gets complicated.

Woman hires lawyer. Lawyer sues city, saying even though [woman's] brother told police his sister was armed, police "didn't know she had a gun." Also, woman "did not fire her gun first, and even if she did, the police officers' response was excessive."

Brother later tells cops his sister is "bipolar".

Following the incident, Mattera spent 10 months under police guard in William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, where an arm was amputated below the elbow, then spent up to 60 days in a state psychiatric center.

Her later statement was that she saw police at her brothers house:

"There were at least 40 or 50 of them," she says. "I did not know they were there for me. There were so many, why would there be? Then I realized and I got scared and I ran."

She says that after her vehicle crashed on I-696, "I stayed in the vehicle and saw them draw their weapons. I got down in the seat of the car because they drew their weapons. They opened fire and I saw the bullets going in and out of the car. I was hit with quite a few of them. I brought out my pistol and I fired in the air and fired wide, not to hit anybody. I saw that it was doing no good, so I quit doing it. They brought out a shotgun and shot my arm off. That was it. It was over."

Right. Okay, who believe this ding-bat's story? Show of hands? (Oops, sorry lady. You're the only one who believes your story, and you're running out of hands.)

I may sound a little insensitive here. I do believe that the woman (let's call her by her name: Carmen Mattera) was hit in the arm by a shotgun blast, and that's probably the reason she's now considered 'paraplegic' . . . the doctors eventually amputated her arm.

I'm sorry she lost her arm, and was so banged up in the car crash. She had enough problems already, having been diagnosed (as it turns out) as a "paranoid-schizophrenic" a few years before, and having been in and out of psychiatric treatment for ten years.

Now she's suing the cops who stopped her from whatever her fevered mind would have caused her to do, with her revolver and her eight boxes of ammo. Essentially, her claim is that the cops over-reacted.

No, they didn't.

Reading both sides of the story, and allowing that you can't tell WHAT the truth is by what you read in the newspapers, I'm inclined to believe the cops' version. The woman is a dingbat. She finally stepped over the line and threatened people -- her FAMILY -- with a gun. When the cops tried to stop her, SHE over-reacted. They responded with appropriate force, and it's hard to tell why she lived through the experience. As soon as she pointed a gun at a cop, she had forfeited her right to live in a civilized society.

Sorry, this isn't a simple, amusing story about a dingbat who went goofy and sued the cops who were doing their job. There is no punch line about "she got what she deserved" or ""she did that, and then sued the cops for making her face the consequences of her own bad decisions".

And I'm not going to do the "poor little girl" speech, and tell you that the police should have been more understanding of her problems, or celebrate her psychiatric diversity.

I have some history of dingbats with guns. Their sickness may not have been their fault, but you can't reason with a rabid dog and that's what she was.

Sometimes, the family just can't protect each other from their screwy members. Police are suppose to be psychologists, because the people they meet are often deranged in one way or another. The line is drawn, and rightly, when the people they meet are obviously a threat to the health and life of everyone they meet. You can't reason with them. You can only stop them.

Whatever it takes.

Here's the Bottom Line:

In the lawsuit, Mattera accuses police of "oppression and malice" with "reckless indifference and disregard for the plaintiff's physical welfare, safety, life and liberty."

She says police conspired to cover up police misconduct, and the officers intentionally inflicted emotional distress on her and their actions "went beyond the bounds of decency."

She says the city of Warren exhibited "deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of persons in Warren" by failing to provide proper police response and or stop police from using excessive force.

Oppression and malice? Reckless disregard? Emotional distress? Beyond the bounds of decency? Indifference to rights? Proper response? Excessive force?

Indeed.

This is what her brother must have felt when she pointed a gun at him.

Swedish Bikini Team

How can I have been posting IPSC news for over a year, and never have mentioned the Swedish Bikini Team?

Just stupid.

There's actually two of them. The 'new' Swedish Bikini Team, seen above, and the Old Swedish Bikini Team.

Here's the Old Team.

They don't look all that old to me.

The Swedish Bikini Team was best known (to me) for their IPSC participation. Obviously, they had a lot of other activities. There are a lot of Bikini Team websites. You can look them up on your own ... Google works for everyone.

Here's one that emphasizes the IPSC activities of the team. Don't be fooled by the flash and glitter, these ladies DID compete in several shooting matches. I can't tell you whether they did well in competition. Rumor has it that the RO never looked at the trigger finger, and the scorekeeper just wrote down whatever the team members said.

Works for me.

Texas Shoot-Out

Here's a video, and supporting still photos, proving that Cops earn a lot more than they are paid.

The originator (H/T: G-man) suggests that you look at the video before you view the still photos. You can't really do that in this format. But after you have viewed the 4mb video, go back and look at the "after" pictures anyway.

I did, and I thanked God that I don't earn my living by going around with a big bulls-eye painted on my forehead.

I count 38 bullet holes. What's your count?

Warning: obscene language.

Completely justified, I believe.

UPDATE:
More information about these pictures has become available since I wrote this.

The still photos of the car were taken after a separate, entirely unrelated shooting incident.

The Gun Zone has the information about the five shot-up-patrol-car photographs. (Note: may load slowly on lo-speed connections.)

H/T: C.T.

13-JAN-2005:
Chris wrote to point out that I failed to include the link to the Gun Zone article. That has been done (above), but for emphasis here it is again:
http://www.thegunzone.com/mos/schertz.html

Bandwidth II

SELF-PROMOTING PROPAGANDA: Ignore at your leisure!

A few months ago, I talked about bandwidth , by means of complaining about AOL and dial-up access.

I had some goals:

If this all works out, my email addresses may change in the months to come. I can get rid of the QWEST landline (no loss!), and my AOL connection & email addresses on an unreliable, slow landline (net gain!), and do the computer things I really want to do at a lower cost to me by this time next year.

And I'll still be here next year, posting interesting RKBA and IPSC-related topics as well as this kind of really boring personal crap. But then I'll be able to offer digital MPG files of movies taken at IPSC matches, which includes Candid Camera moments that are worth the price of the ticket all by themselves.

Well, it's 'next year', and I am still here and I AM doing the same old boring stuff.

But I'm doing it faster.

Remember the Six Million Dollar Man?

"Gentlemen, we can rebuild him . . . we have the technology. We have the capability to make the world's first bionic man. Steve Austin Jerry the Geek will be that man. Better than he was before, Stronger, Faster . . ."

Okay, so maybe I'm no Better but I'm sure-hell Faster and Stronger.

With my faster internet access, I can do more in less time. One of the problems I use to have (last June, when I was complaining about dial-up access) was that it took me all night to research a topic. I could do internet searches, but the results were so slow that following the links to real information could take all night. Sometimes I grew impatient, and was unwilling to continue my search for data which would either support or disprove my thesis. Consequently, some themes were never completed, and remain to this day in my DRAFT files.

On the other hand, it may be that further research would have revealed the story behind the story, and prevented me from proliferating fallacies. I am reminded most immediately about the story of a deputy sheriff who suffered injuries due to an accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound which turned out to be not his fault at all. I characterized as "either the biggest liar, or the luckiest man I've ever heard of" or words to that effect. When the duputy contacted me later and explained the circumstances, I realized that I was misrepresenting him egrigiously and wrote a hasty retraction. Unfortunately, it may be that readers will remember the original canard and not the correction. My bad, entirely, and while it may be personally embarassing for ME, it created a situation which I can never make right. I hope never again to demean an innocent, and this tool (faster access to background material) may help me to realize this goal.

The written word can be cruel, and it matters not if the cruelty is unintended.

---

The faster internet access has also allowed me to take advantage of web hosting, which has resulted in protecting against broken links to photos (they're on MY web-host server, not somebody else's, so I know they won't disappear).

Thanks to my new best friend and web-host Brian B (whose name I can't spell, according to evidence in Front Sight Magazine), I have been able to store photos and videos of several IPSC matches, and provide them to you on a separate website (Jerry the Geek's Shooting Gallery). Brian was kind enough to install the software necessary to establish a photo gallery, and has been entirely supportive while I bloat his server hard-drives with, at last count, over 2GB of photo content. This photo gallery alone supported my efforts in achieving several goals:

1. Promote Practical Pistol Competition by showing what IPSC matches look like, for the benefit of people who may be interested in joining but just aren't sure what the Sport is like;
2. Promote participation of experienced competitors by demonstrating the high quality of stages and matches in the Columbia Cascade Section, using views of actual shooters in actual matches as an example;
3. Improve training of new shooters, by showing not only the RIGHT way to shoot a stage, but often the WRONG way as an example of what to avoid. (Videos of my own shooting frequently provides the most embarassing examples of the "wrong way", but that's the price you pay when you decide to accept "full disclosure" as a standard. Fortunately, I'm not so committed that I won't edit out my worst stages.)
4. Reinforce continued participation by experienced shooters by providing photos and videos of their match experiences when they are performing at their very best competitive level. I've been fortunate in that I have been able to include videos of stage winners in 'major matches' (within the Section) at their most glorious moments.
5. Demonstrate stage designs, and target arrangements, which provide interesting Shooting Challenges that might be used in other matches.
6. Amuse you and me by illustrating the funny little glitches which are part of the Sport.

Okay, so we're not talking about Steve Austin-level of improviement.

But we're getting a lot closer to being able to provide a valuable service to our readership, and as far as I'm concerned it's worth the expense, the temporary inconvenience, and the steep learning-curve to accomplish an improvement in content.

Besides, it's fun.

Pirates! A History Lesson

Somali piracy is worst in world

I know I've written before (although even I can't find the link, it was in some BLOGMEAT post last year and it's too obscure to find) about the problem of Pirates on the High Seas.

As I recall, the earlier post was a tale of a couple of yachts sailing together in Indonesian waters, who were beset by pirates in small boats. (Indonesia, and the straits, there-in, having been the scourge of the seas for the past hundred years.) The yachts were both equipped with small arms, and between them they managed to provide mutually supportive fire and drove off the pirates with some apparent casualties. That is, casualties to the Pirates, not to the Yachters.

That was then; this is now.

Now, the entirely lawless non-state of Somalia is riding high on the misery of their Tsunami-decimated neighbors and the influx of international aid flowing to them by sea.

Rather than to accept that these mercy ships are bringing much-needed supplies to their brethren in a humanitarian effort, the blackguards (I've waited my whole life to use that word!) are preying upon their fellow citizens, once removed, by ambushing ships which would relieve the suffering in Somalia.

This is the style of predation which led to the "Blackhawk Down" situation under President Clinton's watch; there, American troops had been volunteered in an effort to ensure that international relief supplies were actually delivered to the starving populace. Due to a lack of mission support and true commitment to the goal, not only were supplies of food, medicine and clothing intercepted in a political situation which precluded the American mission from actually accomplishing its goals, but the under-supported American forces were attacked and decimated (literally) by forces of the Somalian warlords. America suffered one of its greatest defeats there, and it was not due to the lack of dedication by the brave warriors who had dedicated themselves to a worthy effort, but by the lack of dedication on the part of the politicians who set the goals.

This was probably one of the most telling events in the promulgation of terrorism in modern times, as the terrorist world subsequently decided that American troops and forces could be attacked safely, because the American forces had not the will to enforce civilized behavior by dint of our obvious strength.

This event was a direct precursor to the 9/11 attacks directly on America, and the loss of thousands of American lives, the undermining of the American economy to the extent of billions of dollars, and the current Jihad of Islamic Extremists against the American Extremists.

(Thank GOD that Al Gore didn't win the 2000 election, or John Kerry the 2004 election, lest these mongrels would be nipping at our homeland heels even yet!)

You can see that, as an indicator of attacks against Western Civilization, piracy is a non-insignificant matter both to America and to Civilization as a whole.

In this latest attack, pirates in small, open boats attempted to attack and, presumably, board and capture, a Cruise Ship in the Indian Ocean off the shores of Somalia. It seems reasonable to assume that the were Somalian "nationals", if such a term is applicable to an outlaw land which has had no national leadership for several years.

To our surprise, the cruise ship fought back. Admittedly, their weapons were non-lethal 'noise generators', and happily these were sufficient.

But what if they were NOT sufficient?

Would the cruise ship have had the resources to resort to more lethal defenses? Do cruise ships carry large guns, as traders have historically found necessary to defend themselves against barbarians?

Barbarian: a useful word, denoting (among other things) 'non-civilized' persons. *

It is interesting also in that it suggests a connection to the Barbary Pirates.

The Barbary Pirates were predators in the Mediterranean Sea for a thousand years. In fact, they ruled that body of water even during the period when America, a fledging nation, was expanding its international trans-oceanic trade up to the 19th century. At first the American government was convinced that the best way to handle the pirates (who not only had captured American traders, but had even enslaved American seamen and held them for ransom) was to pay tribute. This did serve to emancipate a few sailors, now and then, but the pirates realized that America was just one more Paper Lion and continued their predations. The effect was that American trade, like that of other sea-faring nations, was constantly subject to pirate attacks until it became obvious that no amount of tribute had the effect of lessening the aggressive behavior of these Tripoli-based "insurgents".

(Do you now see the parallel?)

Finally, in 1801, America decided to discontinue tribute and instead invested its resources in a long and ongoing attack against the barbarian state of Tripoli; a kleptocracy, as is Somalia now a kleptocracy; albeit on a somewhat smaller scale so far.

This wasn't a "short, decisive war" (or "Short, victorious war" as it is often referred to).

Instead, " It was not until 1815 that naval victories ended tribute payments by the U.S., although some European nations continued annual payments until the 1830s."

But in the final act, American shipping was no longer subject to the 'Barbary-an' *(barbarian)* trepidations and, eventually, the whole world was able to free itself from this egregious and bloody battle to ensure safe world-wide trade among civilized nations.


Take a moment and scroll back.

Can you see the analogy between the Barbary Pirates and the Islamo-Fascist terrorism of our modern world? How has the world changed in the past 200 years?

The only changes are in the technology of defense, and the will to defend civilization against barbarism.

Civilized nations now have better weapons to defend itself against barbarians. A single US Naval flotilla could wipe out the Somalia Pirates. Better yet, a policy of arming civilian shipping against pirates could have the same effect at one tenth the cost.
Will 'they' do it? Will civilized nations arm civilian traders (and cruise ships) sufficiently to defend themselves against "three men in a boat"?

Probably not yet. But this is what the world is coming to.

Liberals and liberal nations are determined to insist that it is 'ungentlemanly' (or words to that effect) for civilians to arm themselves in self-defense. In fact, they are loath to allow individuals to arm themselves in self-defense. But we are seeing today that this is necessary. Police cannot protect individuals; nations cannot protect groups; navies cannot protect ships of their own flag!

The time has come when steps must be taken.

Flag-carriers must be armed to defend themselves.

Individuals must be armed to defend themselves.

Those who would argue that civilian defense measures would inhibit the international (via the United Nations) drive to disarm everybody . . . will eventually become extremely uncomfortable living with their head in such an uncomfortably anal position. If the United Nations, individual nations, and local bodies finally are driven by circumstances to admit that they cannot protect their citizens, they will take such measures as are necessary to provide these citizens with the means to defend themselves, or at least ALLOW such self-protection.

It will happen. It is bound to happen, because the only alternative is to continue losing law-abiding citizens to such predations as is typified by the Somalia Pirates.

It won't happen soon, and a lot of good people will die before the politicians decide to get out of the way.

The politicians only need to be thumped resoundingly by the barbarians a few more times, and to find a viable 'exit strategy', to explain away the reasons why they haven't taken such actions before.

I do feel sorry, though, for the innocents who must suffer until they find the courage to do the right thing.

It's always the innocents who suffer from the sins of politicians, isn't it?

CCW in Nebraska?

Nebraska legislatures are still hopeful that they will be able to enact legislation enabling Concealed Carry of Handguns in the 2006 session.

In an Associated Press pre-session survey, 26 of 49 senators said they would favor allowing Nebraskans to carry concealed weapons, while five said they were leaning that way. Eight were opposed to the idea and two were leaning that way. Four were undecided and three did not answer the question. One senator did not participate in the survey

State senators have been trying for TEN YEARS to get this legislation passed, and in the 2005 session they were making good progress on the latest version of the concealed-weapons measure (LB454) but ran out of time.

It was passed out of committee and sent to the floor for debate, but with the legislative session waning, she (Senator Jeanne Combs, the bill's sponsor) made a deal with Speaker Kermit Brashear of Omaha to pull the measure from the agenda.

In return, Brashear committed to scheduling the concealed weapons measure “for full and fair debate” at the beginning of the looming session, which starts Wednesday.

(This article was written on December 30, 2005; that session beginning date, then, would have been January 4, 2006.)

Governor Dave Heineman" supports the concept of legalizing the carrying of concealed weapons but has not taken a position on Combs’ bill."

But there are some potential problems with the bill, and even those Nebraskans who desperately WANT to see CCS enacted have mixed feelings about THIS bill.

Gunscribe of Nebraska, in his From The Heartland blog, lists some of these potential friction points in an article dated February 28, 2005.

• PRE-EMPTION: there's nothing preventing local government from passing draconian ordnances which prohibit Concealed Carry in their town or county.
• TRAINING REQUIREMENTS are not specified. The Nebaska State Patrol is responsible for establishing the requirements, and that department may be able to change requirements unilaterally even after they have been established.
• TIME LIMIT FOR ISSUANCE has also not been addressed, as it often is in other states. For example, in Oregon a county sheriff has a limited period (I believe it is 30 days) to perform a background check, and if at the end of that period no cause to prevent issuance has been established the sheriff SHALL ISSUE a permit.
• RECIPROCITY/RECOGNITION: no reciprocity with other states has yet been addressed.

These are all important points, and I agree that they should all be addressed before the measure reaches its final form. But are they so 'egrigious' (in the words of Gunscribe) that they should generate active opposition from the gun-owners of Nebraska?

Several (February 09, 2005), Gunscribe had called it a "Broke Bill". This doesn't look good for passage of ANY CCW bill in Nebraska.

However, on April 23, 2005, Gunscribe wrote another article where he asked whether LB454 is "a good law". In answer to the question whether "any bill (permitting CCW) is better than no bill at all", he reiterates his concern, and his outrage that his home state should treat its citizens "like first graders while the rest of the country is already in high school".

Then he finishes the article thus:

Having said all that;

The problem is that there is just not enough interest in CCW by the citizens of Nebraska to pass a good law. That means that a law like this has to be the starting point. Over a period of time, a large part of the population of Nebraska will aquire a license/permit and they will become more interested in the subject.

This interest will make the citizens aware of the differencess (sic) between Nebraska and the other states. Nebraskans, at that point will wake up to the fact that they are under a thumb of oppression not felt in other states. Then and only then will this realization morph into a grassroots effort that it will take to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear that is LB454.

It was with this realization that I, and several other very good people sat before the judiciary committe and testified on behalf of this bill.

Good law? NO, but it is probably the only way to get the ball rolling in a positive direction.

(Emphasis added)

Since Gunscribe has not only decided NOT to oppose passage, and in fact has actively testified for its passage, the bill may have a good chance of being enacted this year, even admitting that it is flawed.

In May, he wrote extensively about state-wide opposition to the bill (primary coming from state legislators and the Lincoln Journal Star) , noted that 33 votes are needed to bring cloture and were not yet guaranteed, and that the bill had already, AT THIS EARLY DATE, been tabled for the 2006 legislature. (There were only 14 days left in the session as of the May 12 date of this article.)

I don't know about you, but I'm already confused. I can't keep track of the ball, and I don't know the players. So I decided that, rather than to obfuscate the issue further by trying to follow the action, I would ask the local expert.

I've contacted Gunscribe through his website and asked him to comment on the bill either here or by email to me directly. I hope he will be able to update the situation, and comment on the possibility of the measure being enacted into law, either with or without amendment, in the 2006 session.

When I hear from him, I'll be sure to let you know.

January General

Vote For Your 2005 Today's Toons Favorites (Preliminary Round)
h/t: Techno Gypsy

Here's an idea .... Read Mark Steyn!

If you don't read him daily, there's no better time than NOW to start.

His latest (as of right NOW!) is "It's The Demography, Stupid!"
The real reason the West is in danger of extinction.

The Smallest Minority links to Lileks for more .....

If this doesn't run chillls up and down your spine, you must be a Flaming Liberal (who thinks this future is "just fine")

H/T: WorldNet Daily

Mr. Completely has a great idea for demonstrating the idiocy of anti-hunters.

BOOMERSHOOT!


(H/T ... Mr. Completely)
I have participated in two BoomerShoots to date, and it was always worth the drive.

Joe Huffman plans once again to demonstrate the indefatigable drive of the Western Male to go to exotic places and blow things up.

Expect rainy weather, expect 2pm winds from the west which will drive your bullets far from the target, and expect to have a great time while experiencing wind, rain, awkward positions and highly reactive targets.

I still have the t-shirt I got at the 2001 "Big Bang", and I still haven't worn it. For a while, I thought to donate it to Kim DuTuit in recognition of his splendid blogging. But it pissed me off when he closed down his KDT blog in favor of the "Nation of Riflemen" forum, so I'm keepin' it. (Hey, it's my blog, it's my shirt, and I can be pissed of for illogical reasons if I want to!)

Maybe I'll snap a picture of the shirt next week. Or not. Depends on my mood, which is mercurial. Besides, the shirt is still clean and has the creases from theoriginal folds. (Also, it's already too darn small for me to wear.)

In preparation for the first (1999) BoomerShoot I attended, I sent an email to Joe describing the conditions I expected to encounter. It's still up on his website, under the heading "How to prepare for your Boomershoot experience (Sixteen Helpful Hints for the Boomershoot)".

Joe, and my friend Bumstead, are determined to never let me forget that a list of 16 items should be expected to include sixteen points. Nonsense. I was just leaving Bumstead room for a response.

Iraq hero

Michael Burghard's Moment of Glory


(H/T: Hobo Brasser)

The Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant in the picture is Michael Burghard, part of the Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Team that is supporting 2nd Brigade 28th Infantry Division (Pennsylvania Army National Guard). I heard the below story first hand last Saturday during a video teleconference between his Brigade Commander and the 28th Infantry Division Commander. I thought that others should hear it as well, as I think it demonstrates the true spirit of most of our troops on the ground (from my experience).
John

Leading the fight is Gunnery Sgt Michael Burghardt, known as "Iron Mike" or just "Gunny". He is on his third tour in Iraq. He had become a legend in the bomb disposal world after winning the Bronze Star for disabling 64 IEDs and destroying 1,548 pieces of ordnance during his second tour. Then, on September 19, he got blown up. He had arrived at a chaotic scene after a bomb had killed four US soldiers. He chose not to wear the bulky bomb protection suit. "You can't react to any sniper fire and you get tunnel-vision," he explains. So, protected by just a helmet and standard-issue flak jacket, he began what bomb disposal officers term "the longest walk", stepping gingerly into a 5ft deep and 8ft wide crater. The earth shifted slightly and he saw a Senao base station with a wire leading from it. He cut the wire and used his 7in knife to probe the ground. "I found a piece of red detonating cord between my legs," he says. "That's when I knew I was screwed."

Realizing he had been sucked into a trap, Sgt Burghardt, 35, yelled at everyone to stay back. At that moment, an insurgent, probably watching through binoculars, pressed a button on his mobile phone to detonate the secondary device below the sergeant's feet. "A chill went up the back of my neck and then the bomb exploded," he recalls. "As I was in the air I remember thinking, 'I don't believe they got me.' I was just ticked off they were able to do it. Then I was lying on the road, not able to feel anything from the waist down."

His colleagues cut off his trousers to see how badly he was hurt. None could believe his legs were still there. "My dad's a Vietnam vet who's paralyzed from the waist down," says Sgt Burghardt. "I was lying there thinking I didn't want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad and for him to see me like that. They started to cut away my pants and I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down. Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, 'Good, I'm in business.' "As a stretcher was brought over, adrenaline and anger kicked in. "I decided to walk to the helicopter. I wasn't going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher." He stood and gave the insurgents who had blown him up a one-fingered salute. "I flipped them one. It was like, 'OK, I lost that round but I'll be back next week'."

Copies of a photograph depicting his defiance, taken by Jeff Bundy for the Omaha World-Herald, adorn the walls of homes across America and that of Col John Gronski, the brigade commander in Ramadi, who has hailed the image as an exemplar of the warrior spirit. Sgt Burghardt's injuries - burns and wounds to his legs and buttocks - kept him off duty for nearly a month and could have earned him a ticket home. But, like his father - who was awarded a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for being wounded in action in Vietnam - he stayed in Ramadi to engage in the battle against insurgents who are forever coming up with more ingenious ways of killing Americans.

Because this was sent to me with no attribution, I can't identify the person ("John") who wrote the preface.

If you click on the story title, there's a link to the Omaha World-Herald source. However, you have to be registered to read the article.

Warning to Canada

Canada Has Been Warned

This morning, from a cave somewhere in Pakistan, Taliban Minister of Immigration, Mohammed Omar, warned Canada that if military action against Afghanistan continues Taliban authorities will halt Canada's supply of convenience store managers.

If this action doesn't yield sufficient results, cab drivers will be next.

It appears that it's really going to get ugly.

H/T: The Hobo Brasser

Video Blog: CCS 2005

It has taken me five months to complete it, but I've finally uploaded all of the photos (including movies) of the 2005 Columbia Cascade Sectional Tournament to Jerry the Geek's Shooting Gallery.

There are 5 sub-albums total, presenting 204 photos and 33 videos

You can go directly to the shooting gallery main page and click on the links for direct access to each sub-album, or follow the links from the day-1 album, or weave your way through the albums and find links to the sub-albums.

That works fine for browsing, but here's the directory with links to the main album and all the sub-albums:

Day 1 - Still Photos (48 images on 6 pages)
Day 1 - Videos (12 movies, including "Miami Vice - The Movie" on Page 2)

Day 2 - Still Photos (71 images on 8 pages)
Day 2 - Videos (21 movies)

Awards and Group Pictures (85 pictures on I forgot how many pages)

You may recall that I earlier spoke of how burned out I was after the match, and later I discussed the thematic considerations ("Keystone Kops") and how they affected the stage designs and the props we used. (There were lots of jail-bars, and all of the stages were named after cop-movies and cop-television shows.) Also, as the Keystone Kops were known for running back and forth in apparent confusion, most of the stages featured lateral movement and often required you to re-cover the the same ground several times.

There was even a fine discussion on rules interpretation ("What is A Tool?") , which overflowed into various Internet forums including my home town, The Unofficial IPSC List.

Unfortunately, we didn't have a 'dedicated photographer', so most of the photos and videos were taken within the confines of the squad to which I was assigned: Squad 1. I don't know whether I got that squad assignment because I was Section Competition Director, or because I pouted so prettily. But it was kewl starting with the first stage, and going to each stage in rotation until I got to the last stage.

The first article I wrote gave the link for the match results, if you're interested. They're still 'up' on the Columbia Cascade Section Website (see the link on the sidebar),

If you go look at them, and compare them to the sequence of the photos, you may notice that the stages are numbered differently than the sequence in which they were actually encountered. That's because no single range was big enough to hold the entire 11-stage (plus chrono) match, so it was spread across two ranges. Half of the squads shot at the Dundee range on Saturday, and on the Tri County range on Sunday. The other half of the squads started on Tri County, and finished on Dundee on Sunday.

But the Tri County range was in the middle of a MASSIVE reconstruction project, adding a lot of new bays, and they weren't sure how many would be available and what size they would be. The TC folks but a major effort into completing enough bays to hold their half of the stages JUST in time -- they were building the berms and leveling the grounds on the last two bays while we were setting up stages, TWO DAYS before the match started!

As a result of this reconstruction, Tri County will host the 2006 Area 1 match. They now have 12 bays, from small (10x20 yards) to huge (40x60 yards) and most of the berms are built of huge concrete 'bricks', faced with dirt. You can see them in many of the pictures on the album.

Incidently, my home range (Albany Rifle and Pistol Club) is also in the process of reconstruction. There will be 11 bays, the last four of which will be comparable to the biggest of the Tri County bays. Seven of them currently feature concrete pads and 3-walled cover over the staging area. All of the bays in these two ranges are covered in deep gravel, so mud and rain are no longer a problem in the Columbia Cascade Section.

The plans are for the 2006 Columbia Cascade Sectional to be held at the Albany Range, which will even have sufficient parking for over 100 competitors.

I'm getting a little far astray of my main theme - the CCS photos are UP! - but this is my first official post of 2006, and I think it continues with the comfortable tradition of Geek-Length posts.

I want to extend a special thank you to the lovely SWMBO, who took at least half of the photos displayed on the Gallery. I didn't post ALL of the photos, but I did post all of the videos. She chose to assume this chore in addition to RO-ing, taping, scoring, helping me with squad-leader administrivia, and incidently shooting her own match.

If you like the photos, thank her; she made it all possible. If you don't like the photos, it's my fault.

But if you have a hi-speed connection, I particularly recommend the film she made showing how a couple of the stages look from the point-of-view of the shooter. She did this for "Remington Steele" and "Miami Vice". (I added a little appropriate music to the last film.)

Common Dreams: Liberals and The War

Common Dreams | News & Views

Here's a website that won't appear on my blogroll.

Common Dreams is a quasi-news website which bills itself as "Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community". This Radical Liberal Sump-tank starts off comparing GW Bush with RM Nixon, and 'moves on' to a call for "... the urgent release of peace activists held in Iraq". (A look at the signatories of this petition reveals a cross-section of liberal wacko's including Noam Chomsky, Cindy Sheehan, the parents of Rachael Corrie, Ralph Nader, the 'Reverand' . . . former 'Father' . . . Daniel Berrigan, and "Mazin Qumsiyeh, author, Sharing the Land Of Canaan, board member US Campaign to End the Occupation". Just the Band of Brothers to put America Last.)

No, the Christian Peacemaker Teams were not kidnapped by the Americans, but by the Iraqi 'insurgents' (read: terrorists) against whom we are fighting. But it's obvious that CPT and Common Dreams (and the signatories of the petition) are willing to make America the villain of this peace.


Another of its current articles is titled "Show's Not So 'Purrfect' for Female Forces in Iraq". This reports the outrage of one Sharon Kibiloski, an Air Force Captain stationed in Iraq, and she's "fighting mad" because the US Army brought in a 'scantily clad female troup for a two-week tour in Kuwait and Iraq".

Her point?

"The show only appeals to men, and in my mind has the potential to increase sexual advances toward female soldiers afterward," Kibiloski said in e-mails and reiterated in a telephone interview. "To me, if the military really cared about sexual harassment, they would not sponsor such a show."

Uh, excuse me. For years, the US Military has preferred NOT to station women in combat zones, and the women who wanted to BE in combat zones were strident in their claim that they could do the job as well as men, and anyone who thinks this would be a problem must be some kind of misogynistic Neanderthal. To illustrate this, the position of the National Organization of Women (NOW), a notorious Liberal 'feminist' movement, in 1990 included the statement that

the exclusion of women from combat in the modern military is a fraud only to perpetuate a second class status of women in the military

Now that women are IN a combat zone, they have started to make a few changes. Batting her eyes at the moon, Captain Kibiloski demonstrates the worst of all possible worlds when this Air Force officer complains that another service brings in what is essentially the 21st Century's version of a USO show. The good captain was too young to have attended any of Bob Hope's shows, but I wonder what she would have thought about The Gold Diggers, "a troupe of beautiful, scantily clad girls" who were featured in his 1969 Christmas show in Camp Eagle, Vietnam.

This is just one more Liberal Cause intended to undermine the military for the sake of Political Correctness. 'Scantily clad girls' are, admittedly, 'a guy thing'. Well, so is Military Service and for reasons which are obvious to almost everyone.

Yet another article discusses a Colorado couple's decision not to pay the fifty-cent federal excise tax on their phone bill. While I have no objection to their petty tax revolt, I wonder whether they seriously believe that this is a legitimate protest against the war in Iraq, or a grand-standing hype given too much credence by Common Dreams and the originating news source, the Denver Post.


Most of the articles in Common Dreams mix news and politics with an implied slant to the far left. Their dreams are certainly 'progressive' in the sense of those Liberals who are not comfortable to be identified as such and have adopted the word 'Progressive' in preference.

Perhaps this demonstrates that they at least have a sense of shame. And well they should.

Canadian Cluebat 2: Toronto

The Globe and Mail: Bystanders gunned down on busy Toronto street

On the Day after Christmas (known as "Boxing Day" in the UK and former colonies), a 15 year-old girl was gunned down in a busy Toronto, Canada mall.

Two "groups"of "youths in their late teens and early twenties" (Read: thugs or gangbangers if you're American, yobs in the UK) got into a fight and somebody pulled a gun. Probably more than one gun was involved, because 6 people were wounded, and at the end Jane Creba lay dead on the street.

This is a terrible thing to happen, and we grieve for the Creba family. We all agree that Something Ought To Be Done about this, but what?

Straight up, we already know that the guns were illegally carried. We've already talked about Canada's ultra-expensive, ultra-not-working gun laws. In fact, we've even talked about 'technologically feasible' gadgets which keep people from suing someone else's gun.

Just to make my point painfully obvious, we have seen that making guns illegal doesn't get them off the street; it just gets them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens who carry them for self-defensive purposes. The people who want to hoo-rah the down and raise hell, the people who are looking for an escuse to go out and shoot other people; those people already have their guns, and they're using them. They don't CARE that it's illegal to have a gun. They'll get them somewhere. (Possibly more on that later)

The rest of Canada . . . is a target. Also known as an "Innocent Bystander", in situations such as this.

Got it? Good.

Back to the story.

The Mayor of Toronto, Dave Miller, is shocked, SHOCKED!, that people in his town are carrying guns and these people ( say . . . "groups of youths in their late teens and early twenties") are using their guns to shoot each other and Innocent Bystanders.

The Prime Minister . . . well, read it in the original:

Prime Minister Paul Martin offered his condolences to the family of the victim in a statement Tuesday, saying he was "horrified" by the shootings.

"The taking of innocent young life is always an outrage, but doubly so when it occurs during a season which is dedicated to celebrating the joys of family and peace.

"What we saw yesterday is a stark reminder of the challenge that governments, police forces and communities face to ensure that Canadian cities do not descend into the kind of rampant gun violence we have seen elsewhere," he said.

Elsewhere?
ELSEWHERE?

Oh, yeah. I get it. You mean, as in the United States, your churlish neighbor to the South. Gun violence, rampant. You want to avoid that, right?

Well, here's a clue. Your plan, whatever it is (confiscation), isn't working.

The Toronto Official Police Spokesman had something interesting to say:

"I think it's a day that Toronto has finally lost its innocence," Toronto Police spokesman Det. Sgt. Savas Kyriacou said at a news conference Tuesday. "It was a tragic loss and a tragic day."

I agree that it was a tragic loss, and a tragic day. But Detective Sergeant Kyriacou, how could you not be aware of the previous "Tragic Days" which Toronto experienced this year?

We've just been looking at the Globe and Mail. There are other news sources available, and some of them have been paying more attention to the "Tragic Day in Toronto" count than you seem to be.

The Canada Free Press ("Canada's Fastest Growing Independent News Source') will give you a rundown, if you wish:

On December 1, Toronto were looking for two men who killed a 25-year-old man in a car parking lot. This was the 74th murder in Toronto for 2005, and the 50th shooting death.

During the period December 3 thru December 27, there were ten other shooting incidents in Toronto. A couple of these incidents resulted in 'no injuries' (that they know of), but the box score by my count is:
Wounded: 11
Dead: 2

I repeat, this is JUST for the last 10 shooting incidents AFTER December 1, and in two of them there were no injuries reported.

I hardly think that the Boxing Day (December 26) shooting was the single incident in which Toronto "lost its innocence". That would be like trying to pin down the day when Heidi Fleiss lost her innocence.

FULL DISCLOSURE:

The hat-tip to Hal Lindsey ( a columnist who I don't often read ) of WorldNet Dailey is in order. He posted a column today on this subject, and it piqued my interest to the point where I did a little background digging of my own. The results you see above.

The one point which Lindsey made, and which I won't try to steal because he did such a nice job of fisking it, is that . . .

According to Toronto's mayor, Toronto's gun problem is Uncle Sam's fault. It seems – gasp! – that criminals aren't obeying the gun ban. They are going to the United States and smuggling guns back into Canada. (Yes, Canada also has a law against smuggling – but that's not important. Just ask the Canadians.)

Lindsey's coup de grace:

Let's see if I am following this correctly. I don't want to misunderstand. There are poor young people suffering discrimination in Toronto whose social condition is so bleak they will even resort leaving the country to get a gun they can smuggle back so they can shoot up Toronto ...and that is America's fault?

Sure is, says Canada's prime minister, Paul Martin. Martin says half the gun crimes in Canada involve guns smuggled in from the United States. Indeed, Martin said he raised the "smuggling problem" with Condi Rice when she visited in October.

That must have been interesting. "Madame Secretary, Canadians are breaking Canadian smuggling laws and we are powerless to prevent it. What does the United States propose to do to solve our border inspection problems?"

Okay, before this gets too long (or "Geek Length", as we here in Geekistan like to say), let's look at what a select group of Canadians have to say about the "Gun Violence Problem in Toronto". To do that, I'll just cite the folks who commented in the "Globe and Mail" article. (Okay, so it's going into Geek Length" territory. If it bothers you, stop reading. )


Testament Number One:

Paul Thompson from Cheongju City Korea, Canada writes: Sir: Some people have commented on the malevolent influence of such things as "gangsta"-glorifying hip-hop music and films such as Four Brothers on the problem of gun violence. Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with listening to or watching such junk as long as you don't ACT on it! I recall watching a movie like Bonnie and Clyde but I don't remember wanting to rob banks or shoot people afterwards. Of course, given how that movie ended, one could argue that it didn't glorify violence at all. My point is that if we can find out what it is that makes certain people act on the violent messages they may get from the media, we will have solved at least one piece of the puzzle. Also, I find it quite nauseating to hear so-called "conservatives" blaming liberal or socialist policies for this problem when a redneck-infested place like Texas has a gun violence problem that dwarfs ours.

"Cheongju City Korea, Canada"? I had no IDEA that Canada was THAT multicultural!
Paul may have a point, no matter how vapid he sounds, in suggesting that the problem may have something to do with "people". He's not talking about GUNS as the cause of Gun Violence, he's talking about "People".

Unfortunately, he gives away his Moral High Ground when he resorts to name calling. "so-called "conservatives"" and "redneck-infested place like Texas" are high on my twit-filter rules list, and it should be on yours. My guess: Paul has never met a REAL Conservative, and he has never been to Texas. (However, he probably has a lot of personal experience with 'infestation' based on his apparent fondness for "liberal or socialist policies".)

Testament Number Two:

A Fraser from Canada writes:

Dennis Ergas, thank you for your insightful comments. I do not agree that locking all the criminals up solves anything. Look at the US, which has the highest rate of incarceration per capita in the industrialized world, yet still has higher per capita murder rates than Canada.

There has to be a multi-pronged approach to this issue.

Fraser (he isn't from Seattle, is he?) has a fine appreciation for "Dennis Ergas". Who is that? I googled the name, and found a sergeant (66-67) in the 27th Infantry Regiment ("The Wolfhounds") in the 25th Infantry Division ("Tropical Lightning", home station Scofield Barracks in Hawaii) of the United States Army. I served in that division in 1970, in Vietnam, and I never met Dennis Ergas. Guess I didn't get around much.

But I digress. I'm in good company, because Fraser digresses, too. That's hard to do, because he never establishes a point from which he may digress. He doesn't seem to favor locking up criminals, he's very big on "per capita" statistics (without any supporting citations) and is searching for a 'multi-pronged approach'. I don't know what that is, but I'm going to add that phrase to my Twit-Filter immediately. ("Per Capita" is already in there!)

Testament Number Three:

Wilf Kruggel from Onoway, Canada writes: I've said it for years and I'll say it as often as it needs to be said, get the "cops" out of the ditches looking like coyotes hunting for that unsuspecting speeder or the one that doesn't come to a complete stop at a stop sign and put these very same highly trained cops dealing with the various gangs. The canadian police chiefs said several years ago that they are losing the fight to stop organized gangs. How long is it going to take before our idle politicians do something. instead of putting these crimminals into "fivestar hotels for life, say to "hell" with these human rights activists and put the criminals back into chaingangs and at the end of the day give them a lash or two, just as a reminder that what they did was seriously wrong. Talking to people in the middle East that had the lash, they weren't going for another round. That's what's needed in our justice system, "deterrants", not "coddling". I keep saying that we have to get away from this "socialist" mentality because that's what is the sole cause of our social problems. If nothing is done, people will just keep blowing each others "cans" off.

I'm a little intimidated by this. Wilf seems not to be a Fellow Traveler of Fraser. Won't that undermine Fraser's self-image?

Probably; and it might be a refreshing moment for Fraser, if he ever noticed it.

Wilf has take a step in the right direction; at least he doesn't seem to advocate patting Larry the Yob on the bum and sending him back out into the street to play. And he certainly agrees with me (always a virtue) by agreeing the Something Must Be Done.

But I'm afraid he's just looking a peneological solution (can I say that?).

Testament Number Four:

dave bussiere from Canada writes: This is a brutal event.
We can blame the US. We can blame immigration. But that would be naive.
The US didn't do this....some of our teens did this.
Immigration didn't do this...though maybe some immigrants did....and maybe some locally-born jerks.
I am not pro-gun.....but this is not a result of legal gun purchases by average Canadians. This is a sign of the times.

Awwww . . . shucks. If it weren't for the honor, I would have to decline the honor. "We can blame it on the US", dave says, and then he rejects the proposition entirely.

'dave' (I KNOW he has a Shift Key!) is hot on the trail, but he is perhaps only mildly in error when he says "some of our teens did this". Not. It wasn't "some of our teens", it was our (their) society which allows teens to grow up without knowing how to act. Nothing against the Canadians; we do the same thing in the US, too. dave, you're getting warmer! Keep up the good work, and keep posting.


Testament Number Five:

Jason Varmazis from Toronto, Canada writes: A child was killed on the streets of Toronto while shopping with her
parents in the late afternoon. If there ever was a wakeup call that we
must take action to address the issue of gun violence, this it.

Action is not targetting certain immigrant groups, bringing back the
death penalty, or other forms of non-judicial punishment for criminals.
And it is not another registry or gun control programme from our
corrupt and inept federal government.

Our civilized, just socitey (sic) is under attack. And we must effectively
defend her in a civilized and just manner. The will to accomplish this
is actually universal, regardless of our individual politics.

Laws concerning gun crimes must be toughened and strictly enforced.
Programmes must be funded and implemented to find and remove the
illegal guns out there. The police should put their best and brightest
on their gun removal teams. Also, you can pay with money or you can pay
with blood. Rewards for turning in illegal weapons (no questions asked)
and turning in gun offenders is money well spent. If people won't
volunteer information, it is unfortunate, but we will obviously have to
pay them for results.

And for those talking about social programmes for disadvantaged youth.
Such programmes should be funded because they will help willing
disadvantaged youth reach their full potential as adult citizens. And
that is good and just. But it won't turn around some gang banger who
lights up his weapon on a crowded street. We need tough courts and jail
for these individuals.

Darn it, Jason starts out like gang-busters (pardon the expression) in the first three paragraphs, and then he fades fast.

1. Something Must Be Done. A no-brainer, but who am I to complain?
2. Laws don't work. Another no-brainer, and I agree.
3. This is a societal problem. Politics don't work. Doing good, Jason!
4. We have to enforce our laws. What happened to Paragraph 2?
5. Government can fund programs, and if the kids don't respond . . . hang 'em high!

sigh.

No. You can't solve 'gun violence' by passing more laws, or by 'more strictly enforcing' existing laws. That has already been tried. It doesn't work.

The Government has done everything it can, which essentially consists of passing laws and throwing money at the problem. You can see where that gets us. (Here I'm talking about Canada, the US, UK, France and her riots which are NOT caused by Muslims, Holland with her street executions which are NOT caused by Muslims, etc.)

You want the answer in the simplest possible terms? I'll give you a term in two words, and you'll laugh because it is such an out-of-date concept:

Nuclear Families.

That's right. It's not a matter of governmental programs or federal/state/local laws. It's not even a matter of any religious concept such as the Ten Commandments (which just happens to be the simplest, most concise and easiest-to-follow Handbook for Life which was ever composed), although religion can be one of the more powerful tools for raising a child to be a peaceful, law-abiding, responsible, respectful and respected adult.

Here's the basic scenario:

A man and a woman get together, they make a pact to cleave to each other and forsake all others for the sake of their own children. That's their responsibility: their children.

They provide the children a good, stable home. They also provide instruction on how the children should live. They serve as role models, which only means they are an example of the kind of people that the children should attempt to emulate when they reach their own adulthood.

They love their children, and they teach them. They don't keep their children safe, warm, well-fed, clothed and happy because there's a law saying they have to, or because if the Social Worker comes around and finds they're living in a pig-sty, the Department of Human Services may cut of the Welfare Check.

At least one parent brings in an income, at least one parent provides a save and nurturing home environment. The way this is accomplished may vary according to circumstances, but that's a basic minimum.

Little Johnny isn't running around with a gang, because all of the other potention Homies are also in safe and nurturing environments. Have you ever read the studies of street gangs which state that for most of their members, that's the only family they have? Maybe you should, because that is the key to the answer.

This isn't stuff you learn in school. Teachers are there to teach you how to read and write and do ciphers. It's not THEIR job to teach them to get along with other people, or to know 'instinctively' the difference between right and wrong. It's your job.

Sometimes, you may learn part of it in a church. Even if you're not 'religious', you can see that religion is a way to live and it probably has a lot of practical lessons that will help you see the way to fulfill your obligation to your family.

This is the hardest possible way to resolve the problem of "gun violence". We've gone so far down the wrong road, we're in our umpteenth generation of people who believe that the Government (including schools, and even churches) should be responsible for removing the threat of violence -- any violence -- from our culture.

We have to fix the parents, so they can fix the children. That means it's a family problem, and they only way the family can function is if they REMAIN a family where each member is responsible to every other member of the family.

By the way, I couched this essay in terms of Canadian Cluelessness. Apologies to our Canadian friends (and Australian, French, Deutch et al) if I seem to be singling you out. We're all in the same boat, we've all lost our way. It isn't a national problem, but all nations are struggling with it. Why isn't anybody listening to the people who are already pointing this out?

Because it's just too hard.

I never said it would be easy.

I just said it would work.

UPDATE:
Less than 24 hours after I wrote this piece, I found an article about an assault in Milwaukee which illustrates almost every point.

PREMISE:

MILWAUKEE - A prosecutor began reviewing possible charges Thursday against five juveniles in the brutal mob beating of a man yanked from his car while driving through a north side neighborhood. Two are 17 years old, two are 16 and one is 14, according to a police statement that did not give the genders of the suspects in the attack on Samuel McClain, a 50-year-old father of 12. Police continue to seek more suspects, the release said.

THESIS:

"I thought that the last time this happened in our community that people would wake up," Johnson said. "It's time for this to stop. Parents need to sit down and talk with their children about what's right and what's wrong."
("Johnson" is the wife of the victim in the beating)

ANTITHESIS:

State Rep. Leon Young, D-Milwaukee, said he plans to introduce a bill in the Legislature early next year that would toughen the penalties for those participating in group assaults. Young, a former Milwaukee police officer, started working with the department after several 2004 mob beatings.

The penalty enhancer would kick in when three or more people take part in violence against a person and would range from one extra year in prison to five, depending on the severity of the victim's injuries.

Locally, a group of City Council members said Thursday they will introduce an anti-gang ordinance that would allow police to ticket groups of people who loiter in a menacing fashion.

Sure, keep it up. Treat the symptoms, but not the cause.

Of course, it might have been worse. He might have been attacked by a gang of youthful Chihuahuas.