Fed Ex Saves The Flag

FedEx driver saves American flags from protesters’ flames in Iowa City | WQAD.com:

Around noon, a small number of people gathered at a rally in front of the pedestrian mall to protest the Dakota Access Pipeline, and a variety of other issues, reports KCRG. As they were burning an American flag, bystanders caught video of a FedEx employee jumping in and grabbing the flags, putting out the flames with a fire extinguisher.

H/T BOREPATCH

(Art work from COMMENTS section on the original post, and twitter)

update: 01/30/17: Matt Uhrin, the FedEx driver from Cedar Rapids, Iowa who intervened last Thursday to save American flags from protesters trying to burn them, will not be fired for his actions.

Why TSA is finding more guns in carry-ons

Why TSA is finding more guns in carry-ons | Buckeye Firearms Association:

Bringing a gun into an airport checkpoint is a really big mistake, but as more people carry more frequently, such mistakes are bound to happen. The Transportation Security Administration is reporting that the number of guns discovered at security checkpoints at our nation's airports has been steadily growing in recent years. TSA says they confiscated 2,653 guns from airline passengers in 2015, and are on track to break that record this year. They have been averaging a little more than seven guns a day at airport security checkpoints nationwide.

This article may be a bit confusing to some people, but it's probably because they are confused about the difference between "Carry-On" and "Checked" baggage.

No, you cannot have a firearm in the passenger area.  But it is perfectly legal to have a firearm in "Checked Baggage" (the bags which are stowed in the cargo area of the airplane, and not immediately accessible to you or anyone else in the passenger section of the airplane).

The rules for transporting a firearm in "Checked Baggage" will probably vary between airlines ... you need to check their online website to determine to priorities for the airline that's taking you to your next match.

But generally, there are a few rules in common for firearms in "Checked Baggage"

• The firearm must be unloaded!   Some airlines ask that you demonstrate to the ticket agent that you have an unloaded firearm during check-in, but that is becoming increasingly rare because you'll scare the pants off that check-in clerk if you are determined to "Unload And Show Clear" during the check-in process.   As long as the firearm is in a locked hard-shell bag, you're probably okay.
• Most airlines do not tag a bag as "Firearm Enclosed", but some may.  (Actually, most do.)   Not saying you should not declare, but if you must ... baggage handlers LOVE bags with a Red Tag on the handle.  Answer questions when they are asked, but it may not be necessary to offer information.  Again, check the rules for the airline you're riding with.The gun should be in a hard-side suitcase, and then inside a hard box, and the bag should be locked with a key. Get the most secure suitcase you can find; they're less expensive than buying a new race gun.  Oh, and baggage handlers will also focus on top-of-the-line secure bags because they know there are goodies inside.   No, you can't win; but you can make it more challenging.
• Ammunition, if you're travelling with it, must be in a separate bag.  If you're going to a match, it's a lot better idea to ship it ahead of time to your match hotel than to include it in your checked baggage.
• Ammunition, by the way, has special packaging rules.  They sound like "in original packaging", but what they're saying is you shouldn't have loose rounds in a box.   Or a tub.  Or anything that might get 'broken' by rough handling.  (I'm not picking on Baggage Handlers", but see the TV ad for Gorilla Luggage below.)  Which just makes good sense.  And by the way, plastic ammo boxes WILL get broken during shipment.  Cardboard ("Original") boxes are more likely to survive the bumps and grinds of baggage handlers.
• Shipping to the "Match Hotel" works fine for ammunition, but it has special problems if you try to ship your gun.  Assuming you're going out-of-state, you may run afoul of local/state laws if you ship a firearm, even to yourself, interstate.  (If you'r going to a match in the same state, you're probably going to drive.  If you don't plan to drive ... you may want to reconsider your travel plans)
• SPARES:  Expect the Unexpected. If you have two guns, bring them both; in separate packages, especially if you're shipping them (in luggage .. have two pieces of luggage with spares in each one).  Have a complete set of tools, including a small brass hammer, punches (a 1/8" as a minimum), screwdrivers and any other tools you would use to perform maintenance on your firearm.   Consider spare ejector, extractor (tune it at home so you don't have to do it at the match), various screws, recoil spring, main spring ... every spring you can think of!) firing pin, firing pin block.  Don't forget that blue stuff that keeps the screws from backing out because you expect to do a lot of shooting at a match.
• Ammunition ... always bring at least 50% more ammunition than you expect to need.   You never know how many 'reshoots' you will have to do because some dummy didn't write your time down on your score sheet.  At a major match, and if you're shooting some caliber that isn't standard (like .38 Super Comp), bring twice what you expect to need.  At least.  If you can't buy it at a sporting goods store in town, expect to need it.
  
• Insurance: Get some.  Make it appropriate to the value of your firearm(s).  You may not be glad you did, but you will be sorry if you don't.   If your 'stuff' gets lost in transit, insurance may be the cheapest, yet most valuable, purchase you make.
• Magazines (speedloaders) expect to lose some, or have them turn up non-functional; the likelihood of this happening is directly proportional to the expense of attending the match.
• Car Keys:  This sounds stupid, but when you leave your car at the airport, be SURE you didn't lock your keys in your car in the airport parking lot.  I once had to call my Sweety's sister from New York to ask her to break into my house and get my spare set of keys, because I left the keys to my car IN my car in the parking lot ... in Oregon.  She sent the spare keys to me, which saved me having to get a taxi from Portland to Corvallis just to get home from the airport.
• Other Stuff:   Cash, travelers' checks, credit cards, Drivers' license ... all the stuff you normally know you need to have on your person when you travel.

When you go to a major match, you don't need to have the distraction of anticipating problems when you're suppose to be focusing on the match.

By the way, I posted almost the same advice a few years ago, and most of this hadn't changed.  I'm just too lazy to look up the original article and provide a link to it here.

Gorilla Luggage:

x

Washington: "Unsecured Firearm Law" proposed

What IS it with Washington State this week?

Unsecured firearm law would hold gun owners accountable:

...  Washington state doesn’t have a law to punish gun owners whose weapons get in the hands of the wrong people. Democratic state Senator Guy Palumbo is trying to change that. Palumbo introduced a bill that would make unsafe storage of a gun a crime. “It’s basically to keep the guns we do have out of the hands of dangerous people,” he said.

Anyone with a firearm can be described as "dangerous people".  That's the whole point of a firearm.

 As the bill is currently written, a gun owner would either get a misdemeanor or felony — depending on how the gun was used — if their unsecured firearm was used illegally by someone. “

Which is to say, YOU can be penalized on a 'sliding scale' depending on what some OTHER person does ... and does without either your consent or your knowledge, never mind your active participation.

This is going to be a great year to be a Lawyer in Washington State!

You can never guarantee those wouldn’t happen — those tragedies — but certainly in those cases, this all would have had ramifications for the people’s whose guns were used in those tragedies.” Palumbo, a gun owner himself, says it is just “common sense” to lock up firearms. “I’m a gun owner, but it’s unfair to keep them unlocked,” he said. 

What's unfair is to require people to make their personal defense firearms inaccessible to the owners.
Which is another way of saying: "that's the whole point of a firearm".

 He admits he is not sure how well the bill will do.

In a sane society, it would be laughed out of the house.  On The Left Coast, we never know what the idiots in office will do.

Washington State: What part of "Will Not Comply" is still unclear to you?

FBI: Washington State Gun Owners Not Complying With New Background Check Law - The Truth About Guns:

 The FBI has just released a report showing that private party transfers in Washington following the new law accounted for only 2% of the total background checks.

Duh!
Nobody wants to comply, because (a) it's expensive and inconvenient, (b) since firearms serial numbers are necessarily included, it is tantamount to Registration [the first step to confiscation], and (c) only law-abiding citizens will obey the law ... which is supposedly framed to prevent sale of firearms to criminals.

Criminals will ignore it, rendering the law moot and ineffective as a means to its stated goal.
 Do you not recognize the dichotomy of the situation?

In America, private individuals have been loaning, exchanging and selling firearms to each other for hundreds of years,  To begin penalizing (imprisoning them?) now for exercising their constitutional rights would be the same as penalizing (imprisoning them?) for going to the church of their choice or speaking their mind in a public forum.

If the law would accomplish its goal, it might be acceptable by the citizenry ... if it were better written!
But this POS law will not really be effective in Washington.  Or Oregon.  Or Nevada or Connecticut ... etc.


For a detailed explanations of just why "Universal Background Checks" are A Bad Idea, read Dr. John Lott's recent explanation.

Ohhhhhhh .... Rob!

I'll miss Laura Petri.

In Case You Don't Know What Online Fakes Look Like:

I do this once every year or so, and I don't give the specific details because ... it's all fake stuff designed to defraud unsuspecting people.

This is what is commonly known as the "Nigerian Letter", and if your server prevents this from reaching you ... you have good protection.  

Yes, it tempts the recipient to engage in deliberate fraud.

Yes, it's all a lie.

No, you should not even respond to any letter that looks anything like this; if you respond at all, they have your email address and they will sell it to their friends.   And you will never hear the last of them.

If this looks like something you ought not to even see, just delete it now.

Significant "Tells" that this is bogus: they don't have your email address, they don't have your name, and most important ... if it looks too good to be true, it is.

Oh, and they are usually semi-literate, usually they can't spell as accurately as this guy, and they almost invariably originate from Africa.


Attn Sir/Madam

I'm Mr KIIIi K Kxxxu  a database engineer with International Commercial Bank Ghana. I'm writing this short message to you in expectation of an urgent reaction from you.

I'm in charge of the database which contains record of our transaction,
customer details and Identity  in one of our branches in Accra Ghana and I'm contacting you because there's an urgent need for a partner from your country for a quick business dealings with a 50/50 share agreement. We have a customer from the US who used our bank to apply for a contract here in Ghana and the contract has been long concluded and his money paid but the issue is that till date there has been no activities on the Bank account. I have been monitoring the account since the past two years and decided to make my research only to find out that the customer is late. It's a secret only me knows and i'm seeking to use it to my advantage as it will must definitely get to the hands of the top bosses once they realize this.

The total amount is 28 Million Euros, it was paid install-mentally and the
good news is that it is an online account so it can be accessed from anywhere in the world.

Now what I want you to do if interested is to make yourself available and
I will edit the information on the account to your information then the details of the account will be given to you. I will give the contact details  of the office to contact in our bank and you will request for reactivation of the account, they will only have to go through the account details which will match yours and approve your request for reactivation.

When this is done, you will be able to transfer the funds in the account to any account of your choice but that will be in Bits to avoid restriction, I will also give you my account information as well which you will have to transfer my part of the 50%. Since i'd be in control of the activities that go on in the account , I will make sure we disburse the funds in it as agreed.

Waiting to hear from you.
Thanks.

Why Am I Not Surprised?

HRC is a known and proven imaginative re-interpreter of facts Professional Politician..

It only stands to reason that her co-conspirators supporters are known bottom-feeding from time to time caught in the act convicted of "corruption".

Former Rep. Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.), who was a superdelegate for failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, has reported to prison to begin his 10-year sentence stemming from numerous corruption charges.

Just draining the swamp, Boss. Move on, nothing new here.

Except ... apparently we ARE judged by the company we keep.

Concealed Carry When It's Not WELL Concealed

Firehand has a post up about the embarrassment (and consequent legal issues) when your Concealed Handgun isn't as well concealed as it ought to be:

Irons in the Fire: Central Texas College chief Mary Wheeler should live in the PROM,: “And let’s say it was accidental, that they had a handgun underneath a coat or something, they bent over and the handgun could be seen,” CTC Police Chief Mary Wheeler said. “It’s no longer concealed if someone can see it.” Chief Wheeler said a violation of this law could lead to disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment for employees or expulsion for students, including the first occurrence.

Whatever the reason, that's Not A Good Thing, especially when you're in an area which doesn't also recognize Constitutional Carry (Open Carry).

And even if you are legally "allowed" to Open Carry ... do you really want people to know you're carrying?

Generally speaking, that's not often a problem in the Winter; coats make it difficult to 'pattern' a handgun, but when it's on a belt (or even IWB) there is still the possibility of flashing it.

I've been using a small auto in a pocket holster, tucked in the inside/upper jacket pocket.   It absolutely doesn't pattern, and it's secure even if I stand on my head.  (Which I do a lot, any more.)

What it also doesn't do is allow for quick retrieval.  I would almost wish I had a left-handed pocket holster, so my right hand would grab the grip naturally.  As it is, if I turn it around ... the butt is pointed in the wrong direction and it's even more awkward.

I'll live with this over the winter, and perhaps try something else when it's no longer "coat weather".   The little auto has a belt clip which provides good retention and access, but again there are issues with concealment; that little 1/2" of the butt sticking over the waistband of my britches is impossible to conceal without the shirt-tail flapping in the breeze.

So far, I've just pocket-carried, and that's fine except I can't keep my money clip or credit cards in that pocket, and I've learned that I can't carry a hip-pocket wallet.   Every time reach to make a payment in a store, I grab my pistol; I haven't pulled it, yet, in the 10+ years I've been carrying.

But I have to admit, a Kel-tec 380 is still a lot easier to carry than a full-size Kimber in .45acp!

Buyers' Remorse In The Making

I can't think of a more useless firearm, but somebody will buy it.

Sales out to zoom up to two, maybe 3 purchase a month.  For the first month.

A six-barrel .25 ACP pistol that fires two rounds with one trigger pull:

The outside-the-box thinkers at Standard Manufacturing, the good folks who brought us the double-barrel 12-gauge pump the DP-12, are at it again. Meet the S-333, it’s a six-barrel .25 ACP that fires two rounds with each pull of the trigger. The barrels don’t rotate like a pepperbox. Instead, they “Volleyfire” — a term Standard Mfg. has trademarked. MSRP is around $300, and it comes in all the colors of the rainbow.

(H/T: The Gun Feed)

Wisconsin: We Don't Have Enough Redundant Gun Laws!

In Wisconsin, you can lose your Second Amendment rights if you're convicted of 3 misdemeanors according to a new bill proposed by "a group of Wisconsin legislators.

"They say the measure would make Milwaukee safer."

I don't know what that word ("misdemeanor") means in Wisconsin law, so I looked it up.

A misdemeanor is a crime which is punishable by less than a year in jail or prison.

So ... you can be treated as a felon if you have already been convicted of (for example):

• Resisting or obstructing an officer
• Hazing
• Trespassing
• Conducting a Lottery
• Vagrancy
• Deer hunting violations
• Various food regulation violations

... plus other enumerated 'misdemeanors': any combination of three.   

Apparently,  any three misdemeanor convictions during your lifetime count; the accumulation of your criminal history is not bounded by any specific time line.  (I haven't read the proposed law or found a link)

CORRECTION: rereading the original article (always a good idea) I note the sentence reads:

The bill would make it a felony for people to possess a gun if they've had three misdemeanor convictions in five years.

I apologize for the mistake, The corrected reading makes more sense.
It still does not establish a legitimate precedence for undermining a citizen's Second Amendment rights for misdemeanors.

There are also reference to 'other felonies' included (straw buyers, etc.) which are already illegal under Federal law ... which makes the proposed Wisconsin law redundant in fact.

I don't know how boring it is in Wisconsin in the Winter, but these three bozos seem to have way too much free time on their hands.   I suggest they seek a second job, one which might be more inclined to keep them too busy to perform their legislative mischief.

I hear Burger King is hiring.

(see below for the original article)

Jerry The Geek on FaceBook .. not me!

https://www.facebook.com/JerryTheGeek/

sorry, I don't do facebook.  My son tells me that it's "The Devil".

can't speak for that specific facebook page, directly.

But I'm grateful to the facebook dude, because he's so ugly he makes me look good in comparison.

Oregon, and the Right to Keep and Bear Knobkerries

Oregon bans weapons in state workplaces:

Oregon officials have banned state employees from carrying weapons in the workplace unless they're needed for their jobs. The move caused consternation Thursday among Republican leaders in the Legislature. The Oregon Department of Administrative Services said it imposed the ban, which became effective on Jan. 6, in hopes of "providing a safe and secure environment for employees and visitors." Banned are firearms, daggers, slingshots, and a host of other specified weapons. Oddly, even knobkerries were mentioned. Knobkerries are clubs used by indigenous people like the Zulus in southern Africa, and are probably unknown to most Oregonians.

You realize that this would not make for a "safe and secure environment", right?

But if I was still working for The State, I would be a criminal.   Because what I did legally last month, would be illegal today.

For almost 20 years I carried a concealed Knobkerry at work, in a State Office, every day.  Nobody knew because it was ... well ... concealed.  
And I certainly wasn't going to mention it.

It was legal, because of state laws in effect in Oregon at the time, and I had a "CKL" (Concealed Knobkerry License".  But the place where I worked had an administrative rule disallowing the possession of knobkerries ... either open or concealed carry.    They could have fired me for wanting to exercise my God Given Right to Keep and Bear Knobkerries  (RKBK).  

But I would not have been subject to legal action;   I was not breaking any laws.

My thinking was that Knobkerry Free Zones (such as schools) were a prime target of 'mischief makers', and if  'mischief' were to occur at my work place,  I wanted to have options.  

I always felt much more "safe and secure" knowing that I could pull out my trusty knobkerry and pound the living crap out of anyone who decided to use an illegal knobkerry to attack my workplace.

Well, that has all changed now.   Because we are defenseless ... by legal fiat.

I am disgusted ... California Politics are creeping into Oregon.

Lest We Forget: The Obama Girl

Crush On Obama - YouTube




But wait!

Hillary Boyz?

"I got a crush on Hillary!




(I'm so ... GAG ME!)

Is it possible that the "Grown-Ups" actually decided that Hillary Tits were not the best criteria for a presidential election?

["My Mom Is A Republican!"]

Finally, it sinks in

The Virality Of Gun Violence | The Huffington Post:

Incidentally, for all the hullabaloo about the lack of government funding for gun research, I note that part of the funding for this substantial project came from the National Science Foundation, which also happens to be a government agency.
Obviously, the lack of CDC support for gun research has created real gaps in the evidence about gun violence; perhaps there are other ways to skin the proverbial research cat.

Yes, there are 'other ways'.  The CDC was busted *(lost its Federal funding for "Gun Violence" research) because it pursued an obvious bias in reporting on firearms injuries.  It focused on the availability of guns with little or no information about how some societies suffered more (gun) violence than other societies. Its reporting was generally not balanced by providing information on how firearms ownership provided a benefit to private citizens in violent demographics. It may be that NSF has found a way to provide a more 'balanced' reportage.

The JAMA report focused on the societal causes of violence, focusing on gun violence, and concluded that demographic signifiers were one method of predicting victims of violence.

If the CDC had made the effort, perhaps they would still receive federal funding for firearms research.  I note, however, that the CDC can still report anything they wish to about firearms injuries; they just don't get to use your federal tax dollars to tout their political bias.

Leave it to the Limeys ...

... to adore The HillaryBeast:

Hillary Clinton: The Guardian person of the year 2016 — News — The Guardian Nigeria:

Cerebral, hardworking and hugely versed in the workings of government, not many people were as prepared to lead America as she was. Dignified in carriage, humble in spite of her great guts, thoughtful and very wise, she was the inevitable philosopher-queen. Her tenacity in public and in private lives is the stuff of legends. She withstood haranguing by the leading lights of the opposition party who did their best to cast her as corrupt and dishonest. She endured the humiliation of a troubled marriage and steeled her heart to save it. In the campaigns, she was held to standards sometimes humanly, but certainly manly impossible to meet. She not only discharged herself creditably, she captured the imagination of the world. That she lost to a man who is as comprehensive in his ignorance as he is relentless in his arrogance to put it on display underlines a certain rot in the heart of their society.

Funny, that's not the Hillary that I voted against.

Donald Trump owes her a great debt, however, for she's the only American who would have won him the Presidency by simply being the most despicable America candidate.

Money for Nothin'; Chicks For Free!

Universal Basic Income Is Our Best Weapon Against The Rising Far Right | The Huffington Post:

LONDON ― A groundbreaking pilot project launched this week in Finland. The government is going to give a randomly selected group of 2,000 unemployed citizens a monthly income of $587 with no strings attached and no need to report how they spend it. The project aims to test the feasibility of a program ― called basic income ― that’s worked in earlier pilot projects elsewhere in the world.

Um ... unemployed?  And there is no "Societal Safety Net" already in place in Socialist Finland?

Well, that's really going to encourage the beneficiaries to go out and find a job.

Interesting, the comment that it has "... worked ... elsewhere...".
More interesting, there is no definition of the term "worked".

The bad thing about this kind of program is that it may constitute a "disincentive" to active job-seeking.  No word on how the recipients of this milk from the societal teat were selected, but one hopes that priority is given to those who are unable to find work because of age or infirmity or lack of training in marketable skills, rather than a disinclination to get up in the morning and earn their daily bread.

And if lack of marketable skills, wouldn't it be useful to use this funding to support unemployed persons while they are actively engaged in training which might lead to employment?   As in ... an incentive to learn to work?

That whole "no strings attached" thing stinks of Leftest Fantasies.

But then, this IS the Huffington Post, and that IS what they do best.

(Hat Tip: Codrea)

How Will We Survive (Another Liar) In The White House?

I don't know about you, but I grow tired of reading comments like this about President-Elect Trump:

How Will 'We' Survive A President Trump?:

“There’s a whole generation of dead queer men and dead poor women of color who didn’t survive Reagan. There’s over a million dead Iraqis who didn’t survive Bush. There’s millions upon millions whose lives were destroyed by the muscular policing policies of Bill Clinton, Margaret Thatcher and Obama. Stop saying ‘we’ survived them. Stop ignoring all those dead, incarcerated and disenfranchised people.” — Dr. Shant Paradigm Smalls

Frankly, I would be surprised to have elected a president who isn't a liar; we haven't elected one recently (with the possible exception of Eisenhower ... but I can't prove that) and we certainly managed to "survive" some proven liars.

 (*cough* Bill "I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Woman" Clinton *cough*)

Ronald Reagan (for example) may have been one of the most effective leaders of the Modern Era, but I was embarrassed for him when he repeatedly fell back on the "I must have mis-spoken" mantra when he was cross-examined under sworn testimony during congressional hearings on the Iran/Contra controversy.

Obama?

A Short History of Phenomenal Presidential "Mis-Speaking":



The question is not whether we will ever elect a president who is not willing to lie with a straight face, but rather whether we would WANT to elect a president who cannot lie convincingly.

They're all Politicians, and by definition they are all not only liars, but CONSUMMATE liars!


In future years, when I rant about the lies told by President Trump (and I'm sure that I will), you need not remind me that the alternative would have been to to place a second lying-Clinton in the White House.

He was elected President over the Hillary-Beast because he was a better liar.

He couldn't  have done it without her.   And he knows it.

Are public libraries obsolete?

John Lott asks the question, and my answer is a resounding NO!

I'm a voracious reader of books, and I have 30 Banker Boxes (plus five book-cases more) of books by my favorite authors that I own.   But I can't afford to buy as many books as I want to read, so I have formed the habit of requesting new books from my local (county) library which they do not have in stock.

They buy the books, notify me when they arrive, and I check them out to read.   I'm often the First reader of these books; and I'm careful to only request books by "popular authors", so the county is not stocking books which are unlikely to be checked out by other readers.

And their accounting system keeps track of these requests, so they are aware of books which are likely to be checked out by other readers.

It's a good system for me; the library is publically funded (by my taxes) and I like that I encourage them to continue stocking new books as they become available.

But if new books are not ordered, the library is likely to be defunded over the years.  It's important that libraries receive this kind of positive feedback, so they know they are actively serving an active readership.

I do not always read all of the books that I receive from my library.

For example, Vince Flynn died in 2013 and his series of books has been assumed by a new author.  I do not like this author's style, so I will not be borrowing new Vince Flynn books from my library.  Chances are that they will eventually discontinue the practice of automatically buying these books (and certainly I will not be requesting them), and that's A Good Thing.

When I stop checking out new Vince Flynn books, the library will eventually discover that the popularity has decreased, and they will stop buying these books because ... nobody wants to read them.

This has a positive feed-back effect, if on a small scale, and in my mind it's a good way for me to reflect the public opinion on which books my library should spend its funding on.

In the meantime, the article mentions that librarians are personally building the 'popularity' of Classic Books in order to provide statistics to keep them on the shelves.   I think that's A Good Thing.  I haven't yet read many recent classics but i will want to do so some day.

I've read some classic children's books on tape for my grandchildren, and even encourage family members to contribute to the project by asking them to read the parts of 'other characters' in the book.  my children, and their children, enjoyed this "Books On Tape" project, especially because they begin to associate the readers' voices with the characters.    (I recently read a short segment of an OZ book to my grandchildren, when my daughter brought them to visit me, and my daugher interrupted me to say that I "read the wrong characters' voice".  I had read Brer Rabbit with a different dialect/ she later informed me that she and her brother (living with my divorced wife) use to go to sleep listening to the tapes that I had made for them.)

When Libraries budgets are cut, when they stop stocking classic books because nobody checks them out any more ... children lose the encouragement to READ, and appreciate, books which are older than they are.

What will our nation  become when the libraries no longer stock Brer Rabbit books?

We'll soon find out, because my library has no copies of any "Uncle Remus" books by Joel Chandler Harris.

Is this anti-racist protest?  If so, it's a sad commentary on America, because if we no longer make Historic Black Culture to be stocked, it's a loss to American Culture.

"... situations like this are at least somewhat avoided ... "

.243 KABOOM due to Left Over Cleaning Patch - The Firearm Blog:
" ...So situations like this are at least somewhat avoided."

I should think so.

"Debunked"? Why?

I'm reading this news release from the NRA, and I don't know why the NRA is taking this approach:

NRA-ILA | 40 Percent Myth Further Debunked by Suspiciously-timed Harvard Report:

This week saw the publication of survey data compiled by Harvard Injury Control Research Center’s Deborah Azrael, Matthew Miller, and Lisa Hepburn, that should finally lay to rest the long-debunked factoid that 40 percent of firearms sales occur without a background check.

Who keeps track of how many firearms sales are conducted without a Background Check?  And how do they do that?  Wow, that's impressive: intuitive databases abound!

But that assumed factoid ignored:
Frankly, I'm resentful of the Federal Government's intrusion into the private sale of firearms.   Why is the NRA so particular about reassuring folks that "ALL" firearms transactions are registered and monitored?   Isn't the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution?

(Yes, I am ignoring the part about criminals and madmen, temporarily, for the purpose of discussion; where does it say "except for ...." in the Constitution?  Some states are currently toying with the concept of restoring Second Amendment Rights to convicted felons; is this A Good idea, or not?   How about restoring "Voting Rights" for convicted felons, which seem to be part of the same package deal?   Isn't "suppression of civil liberties" part of penal retribution?  Should it be?)

What purpose does it serve, to require Universal Background Checks?

The stated goal is to prevent sales to criminals.  How would that work?  Do thieves and murderers obey the law?  I'm imagining a potential mass murderer agreeing to a background check during the purchase of a firearm, and ... uh, no.  It's just not working for me.  I figure that they just steal the guns.  After all, they're criminals.

On the other hand, I can think of at least one good reason why universal background checks are "Not A Good Idea":

Registration.

I don't so much care about the added expense and inconvenience which Universal Background Checks imply (although that is a factor, at least), but why do these background checks require that the serial number of the firearm be part of the process?

The only reason I can think of is that this allows somebody to track the serial number of the gun; and the name (and other biographic information) of both the buyer and seller will be entered into a database somewhere.

Which is, of course, against the law unless deleted within a 'reasonable time period' (typically, one week if I'm not mistaken).  And of course I believe that the information will be permanently deleted.

If that is true, why?

Why enter the information into a database if it's due to be deleted in a week?  What's so magic about a 7-day time period?  Who gets that information, and what do they do with it? Impermanent data has no value.  I've been in the Data Processing business for most of my adult life, and I never saw any organization go to the bother of designing, building, maintaining and updating a database unless there is a reason for keeping a history into perpetuity.

 (Oh, sure: "backup"; it's a standard DB feature.  Right!  And I'll still respect you in the morning!)

This makes no sense at all!

Of course, we are assured (by the federal government ... oh, THAT'S a reliable source!) that the data is deleted "Real Soon Now".

So why is it entered in the first place?   They tell us that the information is only used to confirm that the buyer is not a felon, or a registered madman is trying to purchase a firearm.

 (Is there a "MadMen Database" somewhere, and who maintains it or vets the data input to make sure than any 'non-madmen' are not erroneously included? What ... the "No-Fly List?"  No, The Government would have no reason to conflate "Suspected, but not confirmed, terrorist" with "don't let this guy buy a gun".)

I thought it over, turned it around in my mind, and I still can't figure out why a private transaction should be entered in a database.

Sure, 'they' tell us that the transaction is not actually recorded; it's just input so they can check it against their 'people who we don't think should have a gun' list.

But why do all the assurances mention that the transaction will be deleted in seven days?
Why delete it if it isn't entered?  Can't they just check the buyer against the MadMen Database, without recording it?

Is it possible that "They" are lying to us??

"Just because I'm paranoid, that doesn't mean that 'they' aren't out to get me."

(also:  The check is in the mail", and "of COURSE I'll still respect you in the morning!")

I am reassured.  What possible reason can 'they' have to lie to me?