You're not crazy.
The Obama Administration will just keep GASLIGHTING you until you think you are.
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Friday, May 16, 2014
"Gaslighting"
Bill Whittle: Gaslighting @ AMERICAN DIGEST:
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Hey' Y'All, Watch this! ("Go ahead and shoot, Honey; I'm covered!)
[H/TL "Guns Save Lives"]
(Unfortunately .. not always.)
[Video] SC Female Teenager Fatally Shoots Friend While Testing Bullet Proof Vest: [Video]
Let me make this perfectly clear: when y'all are determined to test the efficacy of a (previously untested) "Bullet Proof Vest", the best thing it not to drape said vest over the person of yout (ex) Best Friend!
FOX Carolina 21
(Unfortunately .. not always.)
[Video] SC Female Teenager Fatally Shoots Friend While Testing Bullet Proof Vest: [Video]
Let me make this perfectly clear: when y'all are determined to test the efficacy of a (previously untested) "Bullet Proof Vest", the best thing it not to drape said vest over the person of yout (ex) Best Friend!
FOX Carolina 21
I talked to my daughter today, and ...
Long: Personal:
My daughter phoned me this afternoon. She lives in San Diego, and she told me that the fires are both frightening and fearsome.
But she is driving toward them, anyway.
She is "working" a golf tournament in Carlsbad, because the extra money is worth the effort; she and her family are planning to move to Northern California in a couple of months, and they need the money for the move.
She assures me that the fires are nowhere near the country club, and "they haven't cancelled the tournament, so there it must be safe, there". She may be right; country clubs are the last bastions of American society, right?
She assures me that she will be in no danger; I told her to lock her car. She replied that there's nothing of value in the car, and if it gets burned up the "only thing of value in that car, Dad, is me".
What you are thinking, is what I said. I hope that she understands that when I say "Lock Your Car", I meant "Keep Your Escape Options Open".
So I phoned her back, this evening. Worried that she might be at risk..
She's having fun at the event. She said she met a lot of celebrities, including one guy who was her "teen-age heart throb" (No, I never heard of him and didn't recognize the name .. apparently he's at television star from the nineties) and otherwise having a grand time .. although her job doesn't warrant any "tips".
But she says she is not in danger.
She's still working for The American Dream: a few extra dollars to finance the next step toward moving to a better place. It's not exactly 'financial independence' in the next step, but perhaps it's a place to go where the salary is higher, and where the jobs are better and the future of her children is more assured. They have A Plan, and she and her husband .... they aren't afraid of hard work.
And her mother needs her, due to medical 'sithuations', so next month my daughter is going to where she can provide support in turn. She's moving to Central Californa, "where life is beautiful all the time"
I'm very proud of my children. Her brother is "Davy, who's still in the Navy, and probably will be for life". He's working steady in Puget Sound; they will soon both be within six or seven hours travel time of where I live, so I'll probably get to see my children, and my grandchildren, more often. That's important to me.
For tonight, I'm worried about my daughter's safety. But I .. I was about to say "I'll never let her know".
Too late, she already knows that. I wish I could phone her again, without making her feel self-conscious.
Maybe she'll go home early.
11:12 pm ..
Yeah, she called. She's fine. I feel better.
Never mind.
My daughter phoned me this afternoon. She lives in San Diego, and she told me that the fires are both frightening and fearsome.
But she is driving toward them, anyway.
She is "working" a golf tournament in Carlsbad, because the extra money is worth the effort; she and her family are planning to move to Northern California in a couple of months, and they need the money for the move.
She assures me that the fires are nowhere near the country club, and "they haven't cancelled the tournament, so there it must be safe, there". She may be right; country clubs are the last bastions of American society, right?
She assures me that she will be in no danger; I told her to lock her car. She replied that there's nothing of value in the car, and if it gets burned up the "only thing of value in that car, Dad, is me".
What you are thinking, is what I said. I hope that she understands that when I say "Lock Your Car", I meant "Keep Your Escape Options Open".
So I phoned her back, this evening. Worried that she might be at risk..
She's having fun at the event. She said she met a lot of celebrities, including one guy who was her "teen-age heart throb" (No, I never heard of him and didn't recognize the name .. apparently he's at television star from the nineties) and otherwise having a grand time .. although her job doesn't warrant any "tips".
But she says she is not in danger.
She's still working for The American Dream: a few extra dollars to finance the next step toward moving to a better place. It's not exactly 'financial independence' in the next step, but perhaps it's a place to go where the salary is higher, and where the jobs are better and the future of her children is more assured. They have A Plan, and she and her husband .... they aren't afraid of hard work.
And her mother needs her, due to medical 'sithuations', so next month my daughter is going to where she can provide support in turn. She's moving to Central Californa, "where life is beautiful all the time"
I'm very proud of my children. Her brother is "Davy, who's still in the Navy, and probably will be for life". He's working steady in Puget Sound; they will soon both be within six or seven hours travel time of where I live, so I'll probably get to see my children, and my grandchildren, more often. That's important to me.
For tonight, I'm worried about my daughter's safety. But I .. I was about to say "I'll never let her know".
Too late, she already knows that. I wish I could phone her again, without making her feel self-conscious.
Maybe she'll go home early.
11:12 pm ..
Yeah, she called. She's fine. I feel better.
Never mind.
Gun Control Poll Results
Gun Control Poll Results
This is an interesting poll conducted by an organization that I'm not familiar with ... isidewith.com.
The results of this specific poll are automatically accessible by several poll-taker criteria, including state, major city within state, political affiliation, ethnicity, income level, and education level. It's worth taking a look at.
Interesting, the 'general' question was a clear decision. Broken down by state (Oregon), it also seemed clear. But when you look at the responses from the "major city" (Portland) ... the results were reversed. Portland residents did NOT feel obliged to support the Second Amendment rights of all Americans. In point of fact, they rather liked the idea that the State might abrogate the Constitution, as long as the state of Oregon continued toimport overlook illegal immigrants as long as the grape harvest was completed in a timely manner.
(Yes, I am projecting. Sue me.)
Tentative conclusion: residents of Portland are less concerned with "Gun Control" than other issues; among them the social issues of immigration, birth control, and public support of loafers and other "In Need" individuals.
When it deals with broad questions, it does all right. So I took the poll myself. And .. there were a plethora of other questions besides Gun Control, and I took those questions, too.
Unfortunately, the polls are generally simplistic and do not offer enough choices for a reasoned response; there were issues in which I seemed in turn to agree with the Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Green Party, and Libertarians. No, I'm not making this up.
I think I'm getting a sick headache.
PS: Oh, they were clear that I don't agree with "Gun Control". Glad we got that straightened out!
This is an interesting poll conducted by an organization that I'm not familiar with ... isidewith.com.
The results of this specific poll are automatically accessible by several poll-taker criteria, including state, major city within state, political affiliation, ethnicity, income level, and education level. It's worth taking a look at.
Interesting, the 'general' question was a clear decision. Broken down by state (Oregon), it also seemed clear. But when you look at the responses from the "major city" (Portland) ... the results were reversed. Portland residents did NOT feel obliged to support the Second Amendment rights of all Americans. In point of fact, they rather liked the idea that the State might abrogate the Constitution, as long as the state of Oregon continued to
(Yes, I am projecting. Sue me.)
Tentative conclusion: residents of Portland are less concerned with "Gun Control" than other issues; among them the social issues of immigration, birth control, and public support of loafers and other "In Need" individuals.
When it deals with broad questions, it does all right. So I took the poll myself. And .. there were a plethora of other questions besides Gun Control, and I took those questions, too.
Unfortunately, the polls are generally simplistic and do not offer enough choices for a reasoned response; there were issues in which I seemed in turn to agree with the Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Green Party, and Libertarians. No, I'm not making this up.
I think I'm getting a sick headache.
PS: Oh, they were clear that I don't agree with "Gun Control". Glad we got that straightened out!
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
‘We Have 500 Days to Avoid Climate Chaos’
French Foreign Minister: ‘We Have 500 Days to Avoid Climate Chaos’ | CNS News:
(May 13, 2014)
(H/T: Say Uncle)
We are so screwed!
No, it's not the latest "climate chaos" scare mongering that we have to worry about.
It's that our Frenchified Secretary of State, the Right Honerable John [bleep] Kerry is openly cohabitating with The French.
It's probably A Good Thing that Mr. Kerry has openly come out as both a Francophile and a weasel ... not that everybody didn't already know that.
It's that Kerry And His Friends will be officially joined at the hip ... one way or the other .. next Winter:
So now, it is official. This is the first time in modern history in which any nation has surrendered to The French (may the fleas of a thousand camels infest their scrotums) rather than the other way around.
This is a sad day for America.
Say ... who actually signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol for America?
(May 13, 2014)
The world has “500 days to avoid climate chaos,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said alongside Secretary of State John Kerry at the State Department on Tuesday.
“We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos,” Fabius said. “And I know that President Obama and John Kerry himself are committed on this subject and I’m sure that with them, with a lot of other friends, we shall be able to reach success in this very important matter.”
(H/T: Say Uncle)
We are so screwed!
No, it's not the latest "climate chaos" scare mongering that we have to worry about.
It's that our Frenchified Secretary of State, the Right Honerable John [bleep] Kerry is openly cohabitating with The French.
It's probably A Good Thing that Mr. Kerry has openly come out as both a Francophile and a weasel ... not that everybody didn't already know that.
It's that Kerry And His Friends will be officially joined at the hip ... one way or the other .. next Winter:
The organizers have high hopes for the Paris event known in U.N. jargon as the 21st conference of the parties (COP21) – the parties being the signatories to the 1992 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
“By the end of the meeting, for the first time in over 20 years of U.N. negotiations, all the nations of the world, including the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, will be bound by a universal agreement on climate,” the French foreign ministry said around the time it offered to host the conference.
Invited to respond Tuesday to Fabius’ 500-day warning, White House press secretary Jay Carney pointed to the National Climate Assessment released last week which, he said, “made clear in the view of the science that climate change is upon us and the effects and impacts of climate change are being felt today.
So now, it is official. This is the first time in modern history in which any nation has surrendered to The French (may the fleas of a thousand camels infest their scrotums) rather than the other way around.
This is a sad day for America.
Say ... who actually signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol for America?
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
"Dumb Guns": The new "Saturday Night Special"
Smart Gun Mandate Makes Gun Ownership Rich Man's Game:
(Breitbart, 11 May 2014)
(Breitbart, 11 May 2014)
Right now, an American can walk into a gun dealer and buy a brand new, ultra reliable Glock 19 or 26 in 9mm for between $480 and $530. Like Walthers and Rugers, the Glock line of handguns is one that families of all socioeconomic backgrounds can afford to purchase and use for self-defense. But that all changes when a state mandates that an $1,800 .22 pistol has to be sold in place of the $480 Glock. Once that mandate takes place, only the wealthy will able to afford guns, while the poor will be left to hope the locks on their doors are strong enough to keep home invaders out.The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Gun Nuttery
Mr. Cope’s Cave: The Stupid Things That Gun Nuts Do | Cobweb | Boise Weekly:
(May 12, 2014) [quote .. not Geek Words]
Unfortunately some people are unable to responsibly exercise this right.
This is also true of the First Amendment rights recognized by the Constitution. Some people are completely incompetent to speak in public, and for one simple reason:
They are idiots.
SPEAKING OF IDIOTS:
The First Amendment preserves the right of "The People" to express themselves freely, even when their speech addresses "unpopular" opinions. For example, burning the American flag is protected speach, according to the Supreme Court.
And I think the court was right, in this interpretation. You may not like the image of people burning the flag ... I don't either .. but the flag is a symbol. And .. well, they're idiots; what can you do?
Folks burn a flag in protest of the nation which is so free that they get away with it, and they don't even get a poke in the nose. At least, they are not harassed by jackbooted storm troopers sent by their government to stop protest which some people consider offensive.
By example, here's a guy who rails against the Second Amendment because it allows idiots to possess firearms, even when they are incompetent.
And it doesn't even make me want to poke him in the nose.
Because you know what? He's right.
I train people in firearms safety (in the USPSA context); now and then I see people who make me cringe because they are inadequately trained, or insufficiently skilled, to be safe shooters under pressure. It's never because they are actually idiots, but because they don't know how to safely handle their pistols. Yet they think they are ready to attempt to enter a stressful, moderated environment with limited skills.
I don't have time, during classes, to teach them how to handle their guns safely. So I try to correct the most egregious gun-handling habits. When they perform a maneuver in a manner which is unsafe to others (more often, unsafe to themselves), I stop them and give them immediate feedback. Then they try again, until they get it right.
The process is often frustrating to the shooter. We call it "Good Training". Wish we had time to give them more of it, but instead we just refer them to a Basic Handgun training program, which is designed to deal with
The good news is that this specific environment is self-regulating: those people who don't quickly develop good gun-handling skills are weeded out by the process of Match Disqualification. Some people process the feedback, and decide that they're not all that interested in being 'closely monitored'.
About half of the people who take the class never attend a match; a smattering of those who do, and who are disqualified at their first match (often during the first stage of the match), also seek to find less demanding competitive sports.
Actually, that's about 99% of the people who have not independently developed good gun-handling skills.
The good news is that this weeds out most of these unfortunate people, and may encourage them to seek training. The bad news is that not all of them are willing to accept the judgement given by their own experience. This doesn't mean that they are incompetent people; it only means that some people just shouldn't have a gun ... either because they are unwilling to learn the skills, or because their personality is not up to the grave responsibility.
They either learn, or they quit coming to matches. The feedback mechanism works, at least in the field of competitive marksmanship.
Getting back to the "gun owners are idiots" article:
Yes, the author is correct in saying that some people should not be allowed to own guns! It's just like "some people should not be allowed to drive cars", although the 'right to drive' is not on the same level as the "right to keep and bear arms".
But the author of the original article keeps coming back to his theme of depicting "gun nuts" as incompetents.
And this just pisses me off.
Why?
Mostly, I'm irritated because the person who wants to compete with a firearm is among the 90% ["they" can make up their statistics, I can make up mine] of shooters who are responsible gun owners. The cited article completely ignores the "good"; instead, it emphasizes the "bad", for the sole purpose of making a political point.
As long as we all understand that authorial bias, I have no problem with the article.
After all, I'm a Gun Nut. I'm not a Liberal!
(May 12, 2014) [quote .. not Geek Words]
Just this past Friday, I explained how I like to extend certain subject matter into open-ended series, if for no other reason than so often, the same stuff comes up again and again. Said another way, shit doesn’t just happen; it happens over, and over, and over.The Second Amendment takes notice that all Americans have the right to "keep and bear arms".
Nowhere is that more true than in the sphere of American gun nuttery [emphasis added], and it’s no mystery why. In fact, I consider it a guiding principle of human nature, as basic to understanding the behavior we see around us as knowing that those who abuse drugs often have addictive personalities, or that fat people have a tendency to eat more than slim people do.
As simple as I can make it, this guiding principle would read: Not only do stupid people do stupid things, they never learn to stop doing them.
As this principle relates to gun nuts, how many times do we have to hear of some guy showing his piece off to friends with the assurance, “Don’t worry... it’s not loaded,” seconds before he puts a slug through his ceiling—if he’s lucky—or his wife’s head (if he’s not)?
Unfortunately some people are unable to responsibly exercise this right.
This is also true of the First Amendment rights recognized by the Constitution. Some people are completely incompetent to speak in public, and for one simple reason:
They are idiots.
SPEAKING OF IDIOTS:
The First Amendment preserves the right of "The People" to express themselves freely, even when their speech addresses "unpopular" opinions. For example, burning the American flag is protected speach, according to the Supreme Court.
And I think the court was right, in this interpretation. You may not like the image of people burning the flag ... I don't either .. but the flag is a symbol. And .. well, they're idiots; what can you do?
Folks burn a flag in protest of the nation which is so free that they get away with it, and they don't even get a poke in the nose. At least, they are not harassed by jackbooted storm troopers sent by their government to stop protest which some people consider offensive.
By example, here's a guy who rails against the Second Amendment because it allows idiots to possess firearms, even when they are incompetent.
And it doesn't even make me want to poke him in the nose.
Because you know what? He's right.
I train people in firearms safety (in the USPSA context); now and then I see people who make me cringe because they are inadequately trained, or insufficiently skilled, to be safe shooters under pressure. It's never because they are actually idiots, but because they don't know how to safely handle their pistols. Yet they think they are ready to attempt to enter a stressful, moderated environment with limited skills.
I don't have time, during classes, to teach them how to handle their guns safely. So I try to correct the most egregious gun-handling habits. When they perform a maneuver in a manner which is unsafe to others (more often, unsafe to themselves), I stop them and give them immediate feedback. Then they try again, until they get it right.
The process is often frustrating to the shooter. We call it "Good Training". Wish we had time to give them more of it, but instead we just refer them to a Basic Handgun training program, which is designed to deal with
The good news is that this specific environment is self-regulating: those people who don't quickly develop good gun-handling skills are weeded out by the process of Match Disqualification. Some people process the feedback, and decide that they're not all that interested in being 'closely monitored'.
About half of the people who take the class never attend a match; a smattering of those who do, and who are disqualified at their first match (often during the first stage of the match), also seek to find less demanding competitive sports.
Actually, that's about 99% of the people who have not independently developed good gun-handling skills.
The good news is that this weeds out most of these unfortunate people, and may encourage them to seek training. The bad news is that not all of them are willing to accept the judgement given by their own experience. This doesn't mean that they are incompetent people; it only means that some people just shouldn't have a gun ... either because they are unwilling to learn the skills, or because their personality is not up to the grave responsibility.
They either learn, or they quit coming to matches. The feedback mechanism works, at least in the field of competitive marksmanship.
Getting back to the "gun owners are idiots" article:
Yes, the author is correct in saying that some people should not be allowed to own guns! It's just like "some people should not be allowed to drive cars", although the 'right to drive' is not on the same level as the "right to keep and bear arms".
But the author of the original article keeps coming back to his theme of depicting "gun nuts" as incompetents.
And this just pisses me off.
Why?
Mostly, I'm irritated because the person who wants to compete with a firearm is among the 90% ["they" can make up their statistics, I can make up mine] of shooters who are responsible gun owners. The cited article completely ignores the "good"; instead, it emphasizes the "bad", for the sole purpose of making a political point.
As long as we all understand that authorial bias, I have no problem with the article.
After all, I'm a Gun Nut. I'm not a Liberal!
Shooting at Jack in the Box
Gunman fires after victim says no to drugs at Jack in the Box - WKRN News 2:
*Posted: May 13, 2014 2:54 AM PDT
Ironic, though. Wouldn't you say?
[H/T: "GUNS SAVE LIVES"]
*Posted: May 13, 2014 2:54 AM PDT
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A man was shot Monday night after he says a man approached him and tried to sell him drugs in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant. The incident reportedly happened outside of Jack In the Box located at 1504 Hampton Street, not far from West Trinity Lane northeast of Nashville. The 43-year-old victim told police he was walking across the parking lot when he was approached by a black male who offered to sell him drugs. The victim said he refused and got into a verbal argument with the gunman, an arrest report states. During the argument, the suspect pulled out a handgun and fired two shots. The victim was grazed in his right shin and sustained non-critical injuries.Not saying the man wouldn't have got shot if Jacques Dans le Boite hadn't established a 'no guns' policy post demo in Texas.
Ironic, though. Wouldn't you say?
[H/T: "GUNS SAVE LIVES"]
.22 LR
My friend The Hobo Brasser invited me to go hunt "Sage Rats" in the SE *(sagebrush)* part of the state next week, and so I mosied over to my local Bi-Mart to buy a couple of bricks of .22 LR
Well, they had seven bricks there, and sold me one. "Sorry, only one to a customer, per day" they said.
So I went back the next day, and they were out of stock. "Come back next week", they said.
When asked, they said that they wouldn't get any replacement ammo until their next stock shipment .. next Tuesday. "But I can't guarantee that we'll receive any then, either."
It has been four weeks, and I still can't find any more .22 LR ammo.
Well, they had seven bricks there, and sold me one. "Sorry, only one to a customer, per day" they said.
So I went back the next day, and they were out of stock. "Come back next week", they said.
When asked, they said that they wouldn't get any replacement ammo until their next stock shipment .. next Tuesday. "But I can't guarantee that we'll receive any then, either."
It has been four weeks, and I still can't find any more .22 LR ammo.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
You like guns because you are insecure and incompetent
Letter: Insecurity drives gun advocates:
Response #1: To quote Dr. Leonard McCoy, of the Starship Enterprise:
"Jim .. you're an idiot!"
Response #2 (somewhat longer)
Aside from being a hunting tool and a defense mechanism, it seems for some that a gun is now a device to reduce or allay their fears and insecurity. Many, if not most, of those who support gun freedom and feel there is security in gun ownership seem to be afraid that someone is going to try and rob them, threaten their life or the life of someone they love, take away something that belongs to them or infringe on their rights.(H/T: GunWire - 5/10/14)
This resultant belief and comfort is under the assumption of course that a gun will somehow make a difference and prevent a tragedy or unwanted event. Further, they don't seem to trust the government or the police to do the job.
Response #1: To quote Dr. Leonard McCoy, of the Starship Enterprise:
"Jim .. you're an idiot!"
Response #2 (somewhat longer)
Navy Sentry tried to shoot intruder, couldn’t find the Safety Switch!
Mahan sentry tried to shoot intruder, couldn’t disengage gun’s safety | WTKR.com: News from Hampton Roads and Northeast North Carolina':
(May 08, 2014)
(Savage had been previously convicted of manslaughter in civilian courts, but was somehow able to acquire a TWIC.)
But when the guard nodded permission, Savage drove the semi through the entry point and onto Pier 1, where two U.S. Navy ships were docked: The USS Comfort, a hospital ship, and the USS Mahan, a Destroyer.
After parking his truck, he walked past the hospital ship and then up the entryway to the Mahan.
The gangway sentry, a MA2 (Master At Arms Second Class... US Navy ranking for military police who typically are assigned to sentry and guard duties, plus some other patrolling activities) attempted to direct Savage away from the ship. When Savage continued his approach, the unidentified MA2 drew her service pistol (probably an M92) and when he changed his approach to a rush she attempted to engage him with direct fire.
She was "unable to get a shot off" (see below the line) before he reached her. Savage wrested her pistol out of her hands, and turned it in her direction with the obvious attempt to shoot the downed sailor with her own pistol.
(May 08, 2014)
Norfolk, Va. – A watchstander on the destroyer Mahan raised her pistol to intruder Jeffrey Savage, but could not disengage the gun’s safety. Savage snatched the pistol and killed another sailor with it before other sailors shot the intruder.About 11pm on Monday, March 24, 2014, a civilian named Jeffery Savage drove a 2002 Freightliner truck to the entry gate at the Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Va. He didn't have a worker's pass which allowed him entry to the base, but waved a "TWIC" ("Temporary Worker Identification Card"?) at the guard station and made hand motions indicating that he wanted to make a u-turn around the guard shack, suggesting that he wasn't trying to enter the base.
(Savage had been previously convicted of manslaughter in civilian courts, but was somehow able to acquire a TWIC.)
But when the guard nodded permission, Savage drove the semi through the entry point and onto Pier 1, where two U.S. Navy ships were docked: The USS Comfort, a hospital ship, and the USS Mahan, a Destroyer.
After parking his truck, he walked past the hospital ship and then up the entryway to the Mahan.
Sailors watched Savage stumbling down the pier, at times talking to himself and other times screaming. Some remembered Savage flailing his arms. Savage walked to the end of the pier and looked into containers. He reversed and stopped briefly at the brow of the hospital ship Comfort before heading to the Mahan. Savage walked up the destroyer’s brow.
The gangway sentry, a MA2 (Master At Arms Second Class... US Navy ranking for military police who typically are assigned to sentry and guard duties, plus some other patrolling activities) attempted to direct Savage away from the ship. When Savage continued his approach, the unidentified MA2 drew her service pistol (probably an M92) and when he changed his approach to a rush she attempted to engage him with direct fire.
She was "unable to get a shot off" (see below the line) before he reached her. Savage wrested her pistol out of her hands, and turned it in her direction with the obvious attempt to shoot the downed sailor with her own pistol.
Friday, May 09, 2014
You thought you knew how badly ATF was screwed up?
ATF retirement highlights questionable assignments under Jones, source claims - National gun rights | Examiner.com:
May 9, 2014
Upper Management is again shuffling assignments in an attempt to force experienced senior field agents out.
Zapor, once in charge of the Phoenix field office (where he owned a home), has declined to accept a transfer to Newark.
Who could blame him?
His "Operation Fearless" ... which included buying guns from kids who attended school across the street from the 'pawnshop' operation set up to "sting" criminals who fence stolen firearms ... was widely criticized in the national press.
The resulting publicity made the ATF look bad; somebody had to go.
The good news?
If the ATF forces out a senior field agent every time the agency looks bad to the press, it won't be long before there will be only one person on the ATF staff.
The bad news?
That single staffer will probably be Eric Holder.
ATF DIRECTOR JONES COMMENTS ON OPERATION FEARLESS (May 09, 2014)
May 9, 2014
The ATF supervisor, who oversaw the “Operation Fearless” Milwaukee storefront fiasco before being transferred to Phoenix is retiring, the Journal Sentinel reported Tuesday. Bernard “B.J.” Zapor opted to leave the bureau rather than accept reassignment to head the Newark office, the story reports.
Upper Management is again shuffling assignments in an attempt to force experienced senior field agents out.
Zapor, once in charge of the Phoenix field office (where he owned a home), has declined to accept a transfer to Newark.
Who could blame him?
His "Operation Fearless" ... which included buying guns from kids who attended school across the street from the 'pawnshop' operation set up to "sting" criminals who fence stolen firearms ... was widely criticized in the national press.
The resulting publicity made the ATF look bad; somebody had to go.
The good news?
If the ATF forces out a senior field agent every time the agency looks bad to the press, it won't be long before there will be only one person on the ATF staff.
The bad news?
That single staffer will probably be Eric Holder.
ATF DIRECTOR JONES COMMENTS ON OPERATION FEARLESS (May 09, 2014)
Sure, it was a Home Invasion, but you shouldn't shoot them for THAT!
Another mother of another teen shot and killed in home break-in blames homeowner - Liberty Unyielding:
(May 09, 2014)
Yes, they were kids. Young and stupid.
Yes, they should have known better.
Yes, they probably didn't deserve to die. But when you break into a home when you know there are people inside, the residents are justified in assuming the worst of intentions. Just because you seem to be leaving the house, that doesn't mean you're not going to come back with a gun, or that there aren't more people with you.
For all the homeowner knew, you might be from Chicago.
UPDATE: May 24, 2014:
The American Thinker has an article discussing the ensuing 'justification' of the friends and family of the thugs.
(May 09, 2014)
“Now, kids, remember: If you break into a private home and someone there is armed, you risk getting shot.” It’s not a typical piece of parental advice, but in view of the growing spate of home invasions by teenagers who end up on morgue slabs, maybe it’s high time it became one.All this only proves two things:
The Merced (Calif.) Sun-Star identifies the most recent casualties as Steven Crider, 16, and, Michael Sambrano, 14, both of Sacramento. The two were shot and killed as they were exiting an upscale home shortly after they broke in around midnight last Sunday.
- Beretta: "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"
- Firecreek: "Any man worth shootin' is worth killin'"
Yes, they were kids. Young and stupid.
Yes, they should have known better.
Yes, they probably didn't deserve to die. But when you break into a home when you know there are people inside, the residents are justified in assuming the worst of intentions. Just because you seem to be leaving the house, that doesn't mean you're not going to come back with a gun, or that there aren't more people with you.
For all the homeowner knew, you might be from Chicago.
UPDATE: May 24, 2014:
The American Thinker has an article discussing the ensuing 'justification' of the friends and family of the thugs.
A Good Case For "Hammer Control"
Police: Hammer Attack In Brooklyn Subway Station Was Not The First - CBS New York:
(May 08, 2012)
This not the first time it has happened, either. CBS interviewed people in the subway station.
Money Quote:
You already forbid your subjects the possession of guns and knives.
Maybe it's time to add hammers to the list of "What We Should Ban This Week".
American "Gun Control Enthusiasts" take note:
A woman's work is never done.
(May 08, 2012)
Straphangers are on alert after police said a suspect attacked a man with a hammer at a Brooklyn subway station.The victim was staggered by a blow to his head. Then the assailant robbed him of $140 and left, still hanging onto his hammer with both hands.
This not the first time it has happened, either. CBS interviewed people in the subway station.
Money Quote:
“I think it’s horrendous. I think that there should be some type of safety protocol put in place so that people can be safe down here because that type of thing happening in a New York City subway station where it’s public is just ridiculous”England, take note:
You already forbid your subjects the possession of guns and knives.
Maybe it's time to add hammers to the list of "What We Should Ban This Week".
American "Gun Control Enthusiasts" take note:
A woman's work is never done.
Colorado Woman Can’t Get Her Gun Back
Colorado Woman Can’t Get Her Gun Back, Thanks To New Law - Daily Surge:
(May 09, 2014)
Yes, the legislators who pushed the draconian laws have been recalled. But the law has not been repealed.
Warren isn't the only person to be caught in the Catch-22 style fiasco. Many Colorado sheriffs have stated that they will refuse to arrest people for violating the unjust law, but this isn't an arrest; it's the return of impounded property and the lawmen's hands are tied.
Read the article to learn the temporary, awkward way the contretemps was resolved. Yes, they did just what YOU would have done if you were the Sheriff.
(May 09, 2014)
Colorado’s controversial new gun law requiring a background check for any transfer of a firearm has left one woman unarmed.And, the repercussions keep echoing in Colorado.
Sara Warren said Fort Collins police took her Ruger SR9, which she uses for personal protection in her job as a maid when visiting clients’ homes, after an accident required her to be transported to the hospital.
The police want to give it back, but a new universal background check law passed last year amid much controversy requires a Federal Firearms License background check.
Fort Collins police don’t have an FFL holder on staff.
Yes, the legislators who pushed the draconian laws have been recalled. But the law has not been repealed.
Warren isn't the only person to be caught in the Catch-22 style fiasco. Many Colorado sheriffs have stated that they will refuse to arrest people for violating the unjust law, but this isn't an arrest; it's the return of impounded property and the lawmen's hands are tied.
Read the article to learn the temporary, awkward way the contretemps was resolved. Yes, they did just what YOU would have done if you were the Sheriff.
Nigeria provides such INTERESTING email correspondents!
Most of us receive 'goofy' emails from total strangers, now and then. I know I do, and I bet you get junk mail from surprising sources, too.
Today I received the most innovative junk mail (note that I am carefully ignoring the "S-word" indicative of tins of spicy meat from questionable sources).
Supposedly, a U.S. Army General .. a lady, no less! has chosen me as her newest and most favorite Pen Pal. Nothing new in the concept, but the approach is unique.
Behold!
Never mind the actual email address ... I don't want to encourage "her".
Yes, the "Hi dear friend" phrase was the salutation, and immediately repeated in the body of the letter. The inconsistent grammar, adolescent structure and awkward phrasing of the text are indicative of someone to whom English is not their native language.
Certainly, it is not the kind of letter that one expects to receive from a total stranger. I am tempted to create a throw-away email address and reply, just to see how far the sender is willing to go in an obvious attempt to extort money from strangers.
I just wanted to provide another example of the strange letters one receives from Nigerian s* p* a* m* e* r* s; as a warning. (As an example of how little it takes to pique my interest, perhaps.)
It probably doesn't need to be said, but I'll say it anyway. If you receive a letter from such an unexpected source, do not reply to it. These emails are typically created by a software program which inputs random email addresses. If they receive a reply, that is their cue that they have found an active email account, and they will inundate you with requests for personal information (including bank account numbers) in an attempt to defraud you of your life savings.
Just .. be careful out there.
Today I received the most innovative junk mail (note that I am carefully ignoring the "S-word" indicative of tins of spicy meat from questionable sources).
Supposedly, a U.S. Army General .. a lady, no less! has chosen me as her newest and most favorite Pen Pal. Nothing new in the concept, but the approach is unique.
Behold!
Hi dear friend,
Hi dear friend, I'M LIEUTENANT GENERAL SUSAN J. HELMS. I am a UNITED STATE ARMY GENERAL. From united state of America. Am supportive and caring, looking forward to get a nice friend. I read your profile and pick interest on you. I will like to establish mutual friendship with you. Please let continue our conversation through my private email box. Here is my email adders (xxxxx.xxxxx25@yahoo.com) I will introduce myself better and send you my picture as soon as i receive your mail.
Thanks and regards.
Gen. SUSAN J. HELMS.
Never mind the actual email address ... I don't want to encourage "her".
Yes, the "Hi dear friend" phrase was the salutation, and immediately repeated in the body of the letter. The inconsistent grammar, adolescent structure and awkward phrasing of the text are indicative of someone to whom English is not their native language.
Certainly, it is not the kind of letter that one expects to receive from a total stranger. I am tempted to create a throw-away email address and reply, just to see how far the sender is willing to go in an obvious attempt to extort money from strangers.
I just wanted to provide another example of the strange letters one receives from Nigerian s* p* a* m* e* r* s; as a warning. (As an example of how little it takes to pique my interest, perhaps.)
It probably doesn't need to be said, but I'll say it anyway. If you receive a letter from such an unexpected source, do not reply to it. These emails are typically created by a software program which inputs random email addresses. If they receive a reply, that is their cue that they have found an active email account, and they will inundate you with requests for personal information (including bank account numbers) in an attempt to defraud you of your life savings.
Just .. be careful out there.
"I Will Not Comply!" - New Jersey
‘Gun for Hire’ Colandro asks how N.J. will afford 900,000 new felons - National gun rights | Examiner.com:
What's the buzz?
Or, for the ignorant among us (such as me) ... "it's stupid, so screw you arrogant bastards".
Under our Republican system of government, we elect representatives to make laws. We hire policemen to enforce these laws. We elect judges to confirm the laws. But ultimately, We The People are (during a trial) called upon to convict our fellow citizens of an illegal act when they (our neighbors) decline to obey the laws.
That's what the folks in New Jersey are doing, now. As are the citizens in several states (Connecticut, etc, who decline to obey laws inhibiting the Second Amendment of the Constitution), New Jersey citizens are publicly stating that they "Will Not Comply" with new laws which make felons of formerly law-abiding citizens.
Good For You, New Jersey!
Addressing the New Jersey Senate in Trenton Monday during a proposed magazine limitation bill hearing, “Gun for Hire” activist Anthony P. Colandro attempted to educate closed minds, earning, if not a change in heart from the rulers, at least an enthusiastic show of support from a number of citizen attendees.Oh, go to the EXAMINER website and watch the video.
“I’m a lifelong resident of New Jersey, and up until today, not a felon,” Colandro told the politicians. “I realize that the majority of you here represent constituents who choose free stuff over freedom.
“Have you thought about the lost taxes and revenue when you have to start incarcerating 10,000 or 100,000 or even 1,000,000 law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, who are fed up with being pushed around with unjust laws that will do nothing to address the real crime issues and criminals?” he asked. “So if just only 19 percent of us legal gun owners stand with me, it will cost the state $550,000,000 a year to house us... Remember, this does not take into account the lost revenue when we, the previously law-abiding citizens, are no longer working and paying our taxes."
What's the buzz?
All states allow handguns to be carried outside the home, but some are more restrictive than others. Gun-rights supporters said New Jersey’s law, similar to ones in Maryland, New York and elsewhere, make it nearly impossible for anyone who is not a member of law enforcement to get such a permit.This trend (see "Colorado Lawmakers Ousted in Recall vote Over Gun Law", et al) by citizens of their states to refuse to 'comply' with the laws which their state legislators have enacted against their wish, is similar to one of my favorite "Citizen Noncompliance" movements; in trials, jurors may choose to "nullify" directions of the court and conversely make their own decisions about the outcome of a trial. It's called "Jury Nullification", and judges don't like it; it means that the jury may think the defendant is 'guilty' of the crime, but they think the definition of the crime is invalid.
Or, for the ignorant among us (such as me) ... "it's stupid, so screw you arrogant bastards".
Under our Republican system of government, we elect representatives to make laws. We hire policemen to enforce these laws. We elect judges to confirm the laws. But ultimately, We The People are (during a trial) called upon to convict our fellow citizens of an illegal act when they (our neighbors) decline to obey the laws.
That's what the folks in New Jersey are doing, now. As are the citizens in several states (Connecticut, etc, who decline to obey laws inhibiting the Second Amendment of the Constitution), New Jersey citizens are publicly stating that they "Will Not Comply" with new laws which make felons of formerly law-abiding citizens.
Good For You, New Jersey!
I have received some negative comments (along the lines of: "Geek! Get a GRIP!") in response to my post discussing "Hi, I'm Bubba, give me a Coke and Fries". I would like to respond to them.
I know about "Second Amendment" and "Open Carry" and all the rest. I know you CAN legally walk into the front door of a Burger King (MacDonalds, Wendy's, etc.) with a shotgun or a rifle slung over your shoulder.
But .. should you? What would the people in the restaurant think?
If you do that, is it unreasonable for the citizens to freak out?
I don't think so.
Why would you do that?
(To recap: the original article had some guys walk into a fast-food restaurant with their "rifles and shotguns slung over their shoulders.")
(And ... recent news suggest that this was not a bunch of guy coming home from a day of shooting; instead, it may have been a deliberate "Open Carry" demonstration". Not helping, guys!)
Video here?
Someone posted a comment to the effect of "Would you walk away from a $3,000 rifle sitting unattended in your car?"
Hell no! I would have one of my buddies sit in the car and watch it!
I know about "Second Amendment" and "Open Carry" and all the rest. I know you CAN legally walk into the front door of a Burger King (MacDonalds, Wendy's, etc.) with a shotgun or a rifle slung over your shoulder.
But .. should you? What would the people in the restaurant think?
If you do that, is it unreasonable for the citizens to freak out?
I don't think so.
Why would you do that?
(To recap: the original article had some guys walk into a fast-food restaurant with their "rifles and shotguns slung over their shoulders.")
(And ... recent news suggest that this was not a bunch of guy coming home from a day of shooting; instead, it may have been a deliberate "Open Carry" demonstration". Not helping, guys!)
Video here?
Someone posted a comment to the effect of "Would you walk away from a $3,000 rifle sitting unattended in your car?"
Hell no! I would have one of my buddies sit in the car and watch it!
Wednesday, May 07, 2014
"Domestic Abuse Victims" .. are not always wives
Timeline Photos - Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America | Facebook:
There is a funny thing about "Domestic Abuse" charges, which are not always publicized.
Husbands are sometimes the victims of Domestic Abuse, too. But when it comes to trial, the courts are loath to find for the husband instead of for the wife.
This leads ... not all the time, no, but sometimes .. to a miscarriage of justice.
In Family Court, when the testimony of the wife contradicts with the testimony of the husband, the wife is most often believed by the judge. The only exception is if the police have been involved, and their on-the-scene investigation reveals that the usual scenario of spousal abuse has been reversed from what is expected.
No, the abuse is not always physical. In fact, when a woman abuses a man (no matter what their legal relationship may be), the abuse is usually psychological.
Which cannot be covered up by make-up ... by men, or women.
There's a movie, broadcast in 1993, which dramatizes the plight of abused men:
It has rarely been seen, because .. well, Men Don't Tell.
It's embarrassing to admit that your wife abused you. That because you are not a violent man, your "loving spouse" will take advantage of your morals. That she will taunt you to hit her, because she is certain that you will never do so. That you are so confused by her violence, you don't know how to deal with the situation.
The video is a 90+ minute movie. It may not be something you want to watch.
The movie is difficult to watch. And all too often shockingly true.
Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America MOMS HAVE THE POWER: American women represent 84% of all female firearm homicides in the developed world, but for years the NRA has fought against legislation that would keep guns out of the hand of domestic abusers. It seems the tide is turning. A recent article in The Economist stated that, “...the NRA’s sudden sympathy for domestic-abuse victims has something to do with the importance of female voters in this election year, and the advocacy of a gun-safety group called Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America": http://econ.st/QaWPV5
There is a funny thing about "Domestic Abuse" charges, which are not always publicized.
Husbands are sometimes the victims of Domestic Abuse, too. But when it comes to trial, the courts are loath to find for the husband instead of for the wife.
This leads ... not all the time, no, but sometimes .. to a miscarriage of justice.
In Family Court, when the testimony of the wife contradicts with the testimony of the husband, the wife is most often believed by the judge. The only exception is if the police have been involved, and their on-the-scene investigation reveals that the usual scenario of spousal abuse has been reversed from what is expected.
No, the abuse is not always physical. In fact, when a woman abuses a man (no matter what their legal relationship may be), the abuse is usually psychological.
Which cannot be covered up by make-up ... by men, or women.
There's a movie, broadcast in 1993, which dramatizes the plight of abused men:
Published on Oct 16, 2012On March 14, 1993, CBS aired "Men Don't Tell", a TV movie about domestic violence starring Peter Strauss and Judith Light. The twist: Strauss's character, construction executive Ed MacAffrey, was abused by his wife Laura, played by Light.
Based on a true story, it dramatizes the story of a loving husband, who is terrorized by the violent behavior of his wife. He had long endured the physical and emotional abuse heaped upon him by his neurotic wife.
"Men Don't Tell" was seen in 18.3 million homes, ranking third among the week's prime time broadcast, behind ABC's "Home Improvement" and CBS's "60 Minutes." Peter Strauss won a Golden Globe Award for his performance.
First telecast by CBS on May 14, 1993, according to a New York Times Story, "Men Don't Tell" was never rebroadcast on over-the-air television, reportedly because it incurred the wrath of several women's groups. Nor was it ever allowed to be released on VHS or DVD. Further, no other movie addressing this subject has ever been made, though 40% of the victims of domestic violence are men.
It has rarely been seen, because .. well, Men Don't Tell.
It's embarrassing to admit that your wife abused you. That because you are not a violent man, your "loving spouse" will take advantage of your morals. That she will taunt you to hit her, because she is certain that you will never do so. That you are so confused by her violence, you don't know how to deal with the situation.
The video is a 90+ minute movie. It may not be something you want to watch.
The movie is difficult to watch. And all too often shockingly true.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)