Sunday, November 28, 2004
There is Someone Out There!
From the old man:
The one comment I received was completely adolescent:
"The last thing that people who are pro 2A can afford to do is turn our back on the issue..."
If you read carefully, or at all, you will notice that I did not say turn your back on the issue, namely 2nd amendment. What I said was quit making it an issue. You have won, there is no foreseeable gun control legislation on the horizon nationally (local might be a different case), so quit fighting the last war and keep your eye on future wars. As long as you beat a dead horse, there is always the possibility that it will get up and bite you in the ass.
The one comment I received was completely adolescent:
"The last thing that people who are pro 2A can afford to do is turn our back on the issue..."
If you read carefully, or at all, you will notice that I did not say turn your back on the issue, namely 2nd amendment. What I said was quit making it an issue. You have won, there is no foreseeable gun control legislation on the horizon nationally (local might be a different case), so quit fighting the last war and keep your eye on future wars. As long as you beat a dead horse, there is always the possibility that it will get up and bite you in the ass.
One More Hmong Post
As it stands, I should probably shut up about this. I've gotten one comment endorsing the death of any white hunters and another that said I should die if I don't shut up.
This editorial (h/t to KABR) is so ignorant, it begs to be Fisked. First quote:
At the risk of noting the obvious, Sunday's deadly confrontation between a semiautomatic weapon-wielding Minnesotan and a group of hunters in northern Wisconsin can and should be factored into debates about the availability of semiautomatic and automatic weapons.
When hunters in Sawyer County confronted the Minnesotan - a 36-year-old Hmong immigrant named Chai Vang who was in a deer stand on private property and told him that he would have to leave - several of the greatest myths that are peddled by opponents of gun control exploded.
Right. Those arguments just "exploded." First myth shattered:
Myth One: A semiautomatic weapon is just another kind of gun.When he was told to leave, in what may or may not have been a racially charged incident, Vang is reported to have responded by opening fire with a high-powered semiautomatic SKS carbine. By the time he was done, six hunters - five men and a woman - were dead or dying. Two others were badly wounded. Several had been shot more than once. Though advocates for no-holds-barred gun policies will claim that just as much havoc could have been wreaked with a standard hunting rifle, that claim is nonsense.
Semiautomatic weapons are increasingly popular among hunters of a not particularly sporting ilk. But it is comic to suggest that they are needed for hunting, unless the targets are people. In northern Wisconsin on Sunday, the toll was higher because the shooter had a semiautomatic weapon.
Does this mean that we need a blanket ban on semiautomatic and automatic assault weapons from here on out? Not necessarily. There are subtleties in this debate - especially when guns are modified. But the debate ought to be more realistic than it has been up to this point, and what happened in northern Wisconsin on Sunday ought to be factored into the debate.
OK. The 7.62 round an SKS fires is a man-killer. A 9-mm overpenetrates but a .45 ACP is just about right for dropping a mutant on his ass.
That being said, my father owns a Garand chambered for .308, a hunting round. I could have wrought more havoc than this poor Hmong guy. No one would have recovered, especially based on his testimony that he followed up with kill shots.
The other thing this donkey misses, at a certain range, I could kill everything within a zone with a bolt action and I assume Mr. Vang could do the same. So bolt vs. semi-auto vs. pump vs. etc. doesn't make any difference.
• Myth Two: When people are well armed and trained to use their weapons, they can protect themselves against gun violence.
The victims in Sawyer County had access to guns and knew how to use them. Most of the dead had long experience with their weapons. But they were not prepared for a confrontation with a man who was ready to kill and was carrying a semiautomatic weapon.
The notion that more guns will ever translate into less violence has always been absurd. But the incident on Sunday should remind everyone of the extent to which this fantasy can be deadly.
The point here is not to advocate for sweeping gun controls. This newspaper has always recognized the right to bear arms and we respect the hunting traditions that are so ingrained in Wisconsin.
The group of hunters who were attacked in the woods on Sunday had a right to bear arms. Initial reports suggested that most of them were exercising that right responsibly, although Vang's statement raised concerns about whether that was really the case. The Minnesotan claims that at least one of the Wisconsin hunters shouted a racial epithet at him and then shot at him.
The details of what really happened will have to be sorted out.
But the fact that volatile situations are made dramatically more dangerous when semiautomatic weapons are present should be beyond debate.
Sensible gun controls - perhaps in the form of a ban on hunting with semiautomatic and automatic weapons; perhaps in the form of a more sweeping restriction on the purchase of some guns - place some restrictions on the absolute right to bear arms. But such controls might well have saved at least some of the lives of those hunters.
The proper response to this deadly incident is a balanced one. Wisconsinites have a right to bear arms and to hunt, and that right ought to be protected. But they also have a right to be protected from weapons that are better designed for hunting people than deer.
Sorry, I thought this genius would shatter all 15 myths about assault weapons, but he only managed 2.
This dipshit rightly points out that this is still under investigation and that we need to wait for the results forthcoming. At the same time, he cites all twenty Caucasian hunters as being trained but unable to defend themselves. As of the publishing of this brilliant column, all twenty hunters shared one rifle. Not the way I hunt or even walk streets but that's up to them. And the pompous sh** even refers to their "weapons". Note the plural. That is not what I have seen reported.
The genius points out that "The notion that more guns will ever translate into less violence has always been absurd. But the incident on Sunday should remind everyone of the extent to which this fantasy can be deadly."
Now the gentlemen brings no accurate data or statistics to the table. It is prima facia that "more guns" will equal more violence. I tend to think that the more mutants can't surmise who is packing and who isn't, it makes their job a whole lot more difficult and dangerous. Who the hell would want to hold up a Luby's in TX nowadays? Not me.
The seer goes on to bring up this point: "Sensible gun controls - perhaps in the form of a ban on hunting with semiautomatic and automatic weapons; perhaps in the form of a more sweeping restriction on the purchase of some guns - place some restrictions on the absolute right to bear arms. But such controls might well have saved at least some of the lives of those hunters."
No, it wouldn't have saved any lives. And I can't see hunting deer with an SKS. The round does not have the penetration to effectively do a one-shot kill.
As to the hunters, if Mr. Vang had been using a .30-06, it would have been 8 dead instead of 6.
The capper, the final admission of ignorance, occurs at the end of the article/editorial/whatever: But they also have a right to be protected from weapons that are better designed for hunting people than deer.
Well, that is a bit of a quandary, as any weapon that can kill a dear is more than capable of killing a human being. In my state of NM, it is illegal to hunt deer with a .223 round. Why? Because it will not kill a thick-skinned large animal. This is the round our military uses but it is not sufficient to drop a deer?
Anything designed to drop a deer, will drop a human being even quicker.
This editorial (h/t to KABR) is so ignorant, it begs to be Fisked. First quote:
At the risk of noting the obvious, Sunday's deadly confrontation between a semiautomatic weapon-wielding Minnesotan and a group of hunters in northern Wisconsin can and should be factored into debates about the availability of semiautomatic and automatic weapons.
When hunters in Sawyer County confronted the Minnesotan - a 36-year-old Hmong immigrant named Chai Vang who was in a deer stand on private property and told him that he would have to leave - several of the greatest myths that are peddled by opponents of gun control exploded.
Right. Those arguments just "exploded." First myth shattered:
Myth One: A semiautomatic weapon is just another kind of gun.When he was told to leave, in what may or may not have been a racially charged incident, Vang is reported to have responded by opening fire with a high-powered semiautomatic SKS carbine. By the time he was done, six hunters - five men and a woman - were dead or dying. Two others were badly wounded. Several had been shot more than once. Though advocates for no-holds-barred gun policies will claim that just as much havoc could have been wreaked with a standard hunting rifle, that claim is nonsense.
Semiautomatic weapons are increasingly popular among hunters of a not particularly sporting ilk. But it is comic to suggest that they are needed for hunting, unless the targets are people. In northern Wisconsin on Sunday, the toll was higher because the shooter had a semiautomatic weapon.
Does this mean that we need a blanket ban on semiautomatic and automatic assault weapons from here on out? Not necessarily. There are subtleties in this debate - especially when guns are modified. But the debate ought to be more realistic than it has been up to this point, and what happened in northern Wisconsin on Sunday ought to be factored into the debate.
OK. The 7.62 round an SKS fires is a man-killer. A 9-mm overpenetrates but a .45 ACP is just about right for dropping a mutant on his ass.
That being said, my father owns a Garand chambered for .308, a hunting round. I could have wrought more havoc than this poor Hmong guy. No one would have recovered, especially based on his testimony that he followed up with kill shots.
The other thing this donkey misses, at a certain range, I could kill everything within a zone with a bolt action and I assume Mr. Vang could do the same. So bolt vs. semi-auto vs. pump vs. etc. doesn't make any difference.
• Myth Two: When people are well armed and trained to use their weapons, they can protect themselves against gun violence.
The victims in Sawyer County had access to guns and knew how to use them. Most of the dead had long experience with their weapons. But they were not prepared for a confrontation with a man who was ready to kill and was carrying a semiautomatic weapon.
The notion that more guns will ever translate into less violence has always been absurd. But the incident on Sunday should remind everyone of the extent to which this fantasy can be deadly.
The point here is not to advocate for sweeping gun controls. This newspaper has always recognized the right to bear arms and we respect the hunting traditions that are so ingrained in Wisconsin.
The group of hunters who were attacked in the woods on Sunday had a right to bear arms. Initial reports suggested that most of them were exercising that right responsibly, although Vang's statement raised concerns about whether that was really the case. The Minnesotan claims that at least one of the Wisconsin hunters shouted a racial epithet at him and then shot at him.
The details of what really happened will have to be sorted out.
But the fact that volatile situations are made dramatically more dangerous when semiautomatic weapons are present should be beyond debate.
Sensible gun controls - perhaps in the form of a ban on hunting with semiautomatic and automatic weapons; perhaps in the form of a more sweeping restriction on the purchase of some guns - place some restrictions on the absolute right to bear arms. But such controls might well have saved at least some of the lives of those hunters.
The proper response to this deadly incident is a balanced one. Wisconsinites have a right to bear arms and to hunt, and that right ought to be protected. But they also have a right to be protected from weapons that are better designed for hunting people than deer.
Sorry, I thought this genius would shatter all 15 myths about assault weapons, but he only managed 2.
This dipshit rightly points out that this is still under investigation and that we need to wait for the results forthcoming. At the same time, he cites all twenty Caucasian hunters as being trained but unable to defend themselves. As of the publishing of this brilliant column, all twenty hunters shared one rifle. Not the way I hunt or even walk streets but that's up to them. And the pompous sh** even refers to their "weapons". Note the plural. That is not what I have seen reported.
The genius points out that "The notion that more guns will ever translate into less violence has always been absurd. But the incident on Sunday should remind everyone of the extent to which this fantasy can be deadly."
Now the gentlemen brings no accurate data or statistics to the table. It is prima facia that "more guns" will equal more violence. I tend to think that the more mutants can't surmise who is packing and who isn't, it makes their job a whole lot more difficult and dangerous. Who the hell would want to hold up a Luby's in TX nowadays? Not me.
The seer goes on to bring up this point: "Sensible gun controls - perhaps in the form of a ban on hunting with semiautomatic and automatic weapons; perhaps in the form of a more sweeping restriction on the purchase of some guns - place some restrictions on the absolute right to bear arms. But such controls might well have saved at least some of the lives of those hunters."
No, it wouldn't have saved any lives. And I can't see hunting deer with an SKS. The round does not have the penetration to effectively do a one-shot kill.
As to the hunters, if Mr. Vang had been using a .30-06, it would have been 8 dead instead of 6.
The capper, the final admission of ignorance, occurs at the end of the article/editorial/whatever: But they also have a right to be protected from weapons that are better designed for hunting people than deer.
Well, that is a bit of a quandary, as any weapon that can kill a dear is more than capable of killing a human being. In my state of NM, it is illegal to hunt deer with a .223 round. Why? Because it will not kill a thick-skinned large animal. This is the round our military uses but it is not sufficient to drop a deer?
Anything designed to drop a deer, will drop a human being even quicker.
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Last Hmong Post
As this story clearly needs to investigated further, I will cease posting on this topic until it is at least heard by a grand jury.
In the mean time though, Minnesota Public Radio has taken the daunting task of reconciling the cultural influence that may have contributed to the event, on its own shoulders.
Ilean Her, executive director of the Council on Asian-Pacific Minnesotans, says the community wants Vang to be seen as a man who committed a violent act who happens to be a Hmong immigrant. She says the community dislikes the spotlight on Vang's ethnicity by the wider Minnesota community.
"Like, how could this have happened? Maybe some of this cultural background may be influencing how he behaved. And I think that's the mainstream community trying to understand this," Her said. "At the at the same time Hmong community trying to understand it with their own personal experience, background. And so the the Hmong community does not want to bring his culture into it at all."
What does this mean? I don't know. I think she may be saying that although it has nothing to do with culture, it actually may be all about culture.
His story conflicts with a surviving hunter's statement which makes no mention of racial taunting. Still, Her says Vang's account confirms Hmong community suspicions that Vang was provoked.
She says Hmong hunters widely report harassment from non-Hmong hunters. She knows hunters who have been confronted by white hunters at gunpoint, with baseball bats, or white hunters who have run over Hmong camps with their cars.
Her says though the community does not condone the shootings in any way, the Hmong community can identify to a certain extent to Vang's version of events.
And although race may have played a role in the unfortunate incident, race has nothing to do with it. And while all in the community find Vang's actions vehemently repugnant, some of them can understand why.
Hmong leader Ilean Her is cautioning everyone to not convict Vang before he's had his day in court. She says she's been puzzled by e-mails that accuse community leaders of defending Vang.
"The response is that we're not defending him," she said. "We just want to know the truth. We just want to know from point A to Z. We sort of know what happened at point Z, the killings. And that's terrible. But we want to know and understand from the beginning to the end and then we want to be able to allow the justice system does its job."
Well thanks to Minnesota Public Radio for making this so crystal clear to us.
As to our earlier question about whether only white people can be racist, an estimable reader has posted his answer in the comments sections of the earlier post. Minnesota Public Radio doesn't seem able to come right out and say what it means, but that is not so for our reader:
CHAI VANG acted upon Self defense and I just think that they deserved what they got. Honestly, I would have done the same thing if they had shot at me. In his mind, I believe, he thought they were going to kill him. Why else would they have fired two shots at him? Common sense, why would a "person" shoot someone else without cause? That doesn't add up, they must have done something to him to make him act in self defense. Yes, they shot at him, why would he "sound so self incriminating" in his report if he had done it out of anger, rampage? He was only letting the truth come out. But it is a white man's world, and they are ONLY up for their people. So I stand with mine. You would think that living in the 21st century that "CAUCASIANS" born in the United States of America would act as leaders. That they would take the pride in showing and demonstrating leadership. But, no. In reality, they are just some racist motherfuckers. I am glad that they got shot at. & if I sound racist, oh well, why? I have the same rights as those who tried to kill Chai Vang and then are still looked upon as "the innocent." That's bullshit, and GOD sees all. Chai Vang won't be the one to burn in the hot ashes of hell, but the WHITE people. I hope they all died a slow, tormenting, and torturing death that they surly deserved.
(h/t to Taranto at Best of the Web)
In the mean time though, Minnesota Public Radio has taken the daunting task of reconciling the cultural influence that may have contributed to the event, on its own shoulders.
Ilean Her, executive director of the Council on Asian-Pacific Minnesotans, says the community wants Vang to be seen as a man who committed a violent act who happens to be a Hmong immigrant. She says the community dislikes the spotlight on Vang's ethnicity by the wider Minnesota community.
"Like, how could this have happened? Maybe some of this cultural background may be influencing how he behaved. And I think that's the mainstream community trying to understand this," Her said. "At the at the same time Hmong community trying to understand it with their own personal experience, background. And so the the Hmong community does not want to bring his culture into it at all."
What does this mean? I don't know. I think she may be saying that although it has nothing to do with culture, it actually may be all about culture.
His story conflicts with a surviving hunter's statement which makes no mention of racial taunting. Still, Her says Vang's account confirms Hmong community suspicions that Vang was provoked.
She says Hmong hunters widely report harassment from non-Hmong hunters. She knows hunters who have been confronted by white hunters at gunpoint, with baseball bats, or white hunters who have run over Hmong camps with their cars.
Her says though the community does not condone the shootings in any way, the Hmong community can identify to a certain extent to Vang's version of events.
And although race may have played a role in the unfortunate incident, race has nothing to do with it. And while all in the community find Vang's actions vehemently repugnant, some of them can understand why.
Hmong leader Ilean Her is cautioning everyone to not convict Vang before he's had his day in court. She says she's been puzzled by e-mails that accuse community leaders of defending Vang.
"The response is that we're not defending him," she said. "We just want to know the truth. We just want to know from point A to Z. We sort of know what happened at point Z, the killings. And that's terrible. But we want to know and understand from the beginning to the end and then we want to be able to allow the justice system does its job."
Well thanks to Minnesota Public Radio for making this so crystal clear to us.
As to our earlier question about whether only white people can be racist, an estimable reader has posted his answer in the comments sections of the earlier post. Minnesota Public Radio doesn't seem able to come right out and say what it means, but that is not so for our reader:
CHAI VANG acted upon Self defense and I just think that they deserved what they got. Honestly, I would have done the same thing if they had shot at me. In his mind, I believe, he thought they were going to kill him. Why else would they have fired two shots at him? Common sense, why would a "person" shoot someone else without cause? That doesn't add up, they must have done something to him to make him act in self defense. Yes, they shot at him, why would he "sound so self incriminating" in his report if he had done it out of anger, rampage? He was only letting the truth come out. But it is a white man's world, and they are ONLY up for their people. So I stand with mine. You would think that living in the 21st century that "CAUCASIANS" born in the United States of America would act as leaders. That they would take the pride in showing and demonstrating leadership. But, no. In reality, they are just some racist motherfuckers. I am glad that they got shot at. & if I sound racist, oh well, why? I have the same rights as those who tried to kill Chai Vang and then are still looked upon as "the innocent." That's bullshit, and GOD sees all. Chai Vang won't be the one to burn in the hot ashes of hell, but the WHITE people. I hope they all died a slow, tormenting, and torturing death that they surly deserved.
(h/t to Taranto at Best of the Web)
Friday, November 26, 2004
Hi - From the Dad
Just trying this out to see if it works.
Quick comment on recent back and forth about the Assault Weapons Ban (similar note to liberals and the election), it's over, get over it. Every time someone mentions it in any context, it is basically free advertising for the other side and keeps it on top of the pile. It has ceased to be an issue.
Quick comment on recent back and forth about the Assault Weapons Ban (similar note to liberals and the election), it's over, get over it. Every time someone mentions it in any context, it is basically free advertising for the other side and keeps it on top of the pile. It has ceased to be an issue.
Give a Good Welcome to...My Dad
Shortly my father should be posting intermittent comments. He will not be regular, still note the name on the post, but he will be checking in.
For those of you unfamiliar, I like AR's, my father likes Garands. We both like 1911's, but he refers to my Glock as "the plastic gun." He is a wheelgun freak (but he also has a sweet-ass Colt Gold Cup), I have always been straight semi-auto. And to be sure, when I say wheelgun, I'm not talking about a .38. The man fires .44 magnum well. He is also the loader. 9's, .45's, .44's, etc.
The point is, we disagree quite a bit (case in point, he doesn't think I should swear as much as I do.) This applies to politics as well. My father is a stauncher 1A supporter than me. The list goes on. Occasionally he will be logging his disagreements with my ignorant ass, and I think that should provide interesting fodder.
The other thing is, he has ghosted a lot of gun blogs over the last three months (those no comment guys everybody bitches about.) Of my blogroll, he really likes The Head.
It could be once a week or once every 6 months, but the old man has access. Just thought I should warn you.
For those of you unfamiliar, I like AR's, my father likes Garands. We both like 1911's, but he refers to my Glock as "the plastic gun." He is a wheelgun freak (but he also has a sweet-ass Colt Gold Cup), I have always been straight semi-auto. And to be sure, when I say wheelgun, I'm not talking about a .38. The man fires .44 magnum well. He is also the loader. 9's, .45's, .44's, etc.
The point is, we disagree quite a bit (case in point, he doesn't think I should swear as much as I do.) This applies to politics as well. My father is a stauncher 1A supporter than me. The list goes on. Occasionally he will be logging his disagreements with my ignorant ass, and I think that should provide interesting fodder.
The other thing is, he has ghosted a lot of gun blogs over the last three months (those no comment guys everybody bitches about.) Of my blogroll, he really likes The Head.
It could be once a week or once every 6 months, but the old man has access. Just thought I should warn you.
Wandering Holiday Post
Had a good Thanksgiving, as I hope all of you did. The highlight was crashing out with the family dog for two hours.
Note: I haven't been able to gloat about the election, as no liberals will talk to me. My cousin noticed an Ann Coulter book on my father's shelf and damn near puked. Later, when I asked her what her favorite "Bush stole the election" conspiracy theory was, she would not pay me the courtesy of a response.
Like I said, a nap with the dog was cool. They're better than blankets. A space heater with legs.
In any case, my father and I have agreed that we are splitting the cost of a .22 magnum, as a Christmas present to each other. This is a cartridge that he fell in love with several months ago. What we originally fired was a scoped Seiko (I think.)
Well my father hates glass. So in negotiations we settled on either the Winchester lever-action or the Henry Golden Boy .22 magnum, as a bolt-action was completely out of the question. Both of these rifles will mount a scope so I'm happy. Both also have decent iron sights, which makes the old man happy. What I need to know is what the best quick-release scope-mounts are. No, I don't want to hunt deer and people at the same time like some lovable Hmong I know. I want to be able to switch from irons to glass while at the range. I know these kinds of mounts will never be as accurate as a permanent scope mount, so don't proselytize.
As with every Christmas, I also find it becoming to buy myself a present or two. Last Christmas I bought my first .357 wheelgun and a Colt Combat Elite. The .357 has been shot once since purchase. I'm just not a wheelgun kind of guy. The Combat Elite (which has to be one of the coolest looking guns of all time) has been shot on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, it is all f***ed up. Either the barrel or the sights are screwy. Additionally, I think the rails on the slide might be screwed. It's a case of getting my ass in gear, getting it diagnosed, and getting it fixed. At that point it will probably be a really sweet shooter.
This year I am going for quality, not quantity. I've been stewing on this for awhile. 6 months ago I really wanted a Sig 9mm (a P226, I think.) After some thoughtful reflection and some egging on from Kirk at Limpidity, I decided to do the H & K USP, chambered in a .45 caliber. .45 wise, all I have are Colt 1911's. I don't even own a Kimber. So I started to research and their are a lot of different flavors. What's best?
Rambling post. Two questions:
What are good quick release (dovetail, I assume) scope mounts?
If you were going to buy a H&K USP chambered in .45 ACP, what flavor would you buy?
In finality, I hope everybody had a wonderful Thanksgiving and said a prayer for the men and women who are putting their shit on the line for freedom. My fat ass is sitting here typing while a real hero is clearing a house somewhere near Fallujah.
God bless.
Note: I haven't been able to gloat about the election, as no liberals will talk to me. My cousin noticed an Ann Coulter book on my father's shelf and damn near puked. Later, when I asked her what her favorite "Bush stole the election" conspiracy theory was, she would not pay me the courtesy of a response.
Like I said, a nap with the dog was cool. They're better than blankets. A space heater with legs.
In any case, my father and I have agreed that we are splitting the cost of a .22 magnum, as a Christmas present to each other. This is a cartridge that he fell in love with several months ago. What we originally fired was a scoped Seiko (I think.)
Well my father hates glass. So in negotiations we settled on either the Winchester lever-action or the Henry Golden Boy .22 magnum, as a bolt-action was completely out of the question. Both of these rifles will mount a scope so I'm happy. Both also have decent iron sights, which makes the old man happy. What I need to know is what the best quick-release scope-mounts are. No, I don't want to hunt deer and people at the same time like some lovable Hmong I know. I want to be able to switch from irons to glass while at the range. I know these kinds of mounts will never be as accurate as a permanent scope mount, so don't proselytize.
As with every Christmas, I also find it becoming to buy myself a present or two. Last Christmas I bought my first .357 wheelgun and a Colt Combat Elite. The .357 has been shot once since purchase. I'm just not a wheelgun kind of guy. The Combat Elite (which has to be one of the coolest looking guns of all time) has been shot on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, it is all f***ed up. Either the barrel or the sights are screwy. Additionally, I think the rails on the slide might be screwed. It's a case of getting my ass in gear, getting it diagnosed, and getting it fixed. At that point it will probably be a really sweet shooter.
This year I am going for quality, not quantity. I've been stewing on this for awhile. 6 months ago I really wanted a Sig 9mm (a P226, I think.) After some thoughtful reflection and some egging on from Kirk at Limpidity, I decided to do the H & K USP, chambered in a .45 caliber. .45 wise, all I have are Colt 1911's. I don't even own a Kimber. So I started to research and their are a lot of different flavors. What's best?
Rambling post. Two questions:
What are good quick release (dovetail, I assume) scope mounts?
If you were going to buy a H&K USP chambered in .45 ACP, what flavor would you buy?
In finality, I hope everybody had a wonderful Thanksgiving and said a prayer for the men and women who are putting their shit on the line for freedom. My fat ass is sitting here typing while a real hero is clearing a house somewhere near Fallujah.
God bless.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
WP Nugget by a Stanford Professor
Too good to pass up.
Professor Lawrence Lessig has a stupefying piece up in the Washington Post editorial section today. To be truthful, I don't even know what point the gifted child is trying to make. Here's the opener:
A while back a federal court declared that the manufacturers of the most popular forms of peer-to-peer file-sharing technology are not liable for copyright infringement committed by people using their technology. Congress immediately sprang into action by taking up legislation to reverse the court's ruling. The goal is to make it clear that p2p manufacturers are indeed liable for copyright violations committed with their products. No doubt many hope this will drive the p2p companies out of business.
Technology people across the country are terrified by the idea. They fear that the standard being proposed by this law will force a wide range of technologies to justify themselves in federal court. A recent proposal from the Copyright Office purports to hold manufacturers responsible for "technolog[ies]" that "cause" copyright "infringement," if those technologies (1) rely on infringement for "commercial viability," (2) derive "a predominant portion" of their revenue from infringement and (3) rely on infringement to "attract individuals" to the technology.
I'm a strong opponent of this legislation, but not because I support copyright infringement. The technologies being attacked by this bill have plenty of important uses that have nothing to do with copyright infringement. This legislation would effectively eliminate them.
I'm not really sure what all this geek shit means. It sounds like there is software out there that makes it easier to file share. Companies got pissed and filed suit and the government stepped in and did... something. Lessig is opposed to this. Pretty straight so far except for the fact that if a Martian laser took out all of our P2P capabilities, I'd still wake up at noon on Saturday and make eggs.
Get ready for some whiplash here. This is the next paragraph:
But there is a silver lining here, and it has to do with, of all things, a very old technology: guns. For if Congress passes this bill, on what principled basis can it then refuse to hold gun manufacturers responsible for the crimes committed with their technologies
This is kind of an apples and oranges thing. If my crappy garage band gets a demo up online and you steal it, well piss on you. If you come in my house and shoot my wife, that rankles a bit more. And court wise, there will be a wide swathe in the acceptable monetary awards. Stealing my version of "Iron Man" is a bit less expensive than crippling me.
The parallels are unavoidable. Like p2p, firearms -- including assault weapons and cop-killing bullets -- cause harm. But also like p2p, guns -- as the NRA and its followers will tell you -- have "non-infringing uses" too. Thus, the gun lobby says, manufacturers should be exempt from responsibility for the crimes their customers commit. Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
But that argument will be much harder to sustain if Congress does to p2p what it has not done to guns. Of course, the same point is true of p2p technologies. It's not Kazaa that infringes Madonna's copyright; people infringe Madonna's copyright.
Well, I would rather someone steal a Madonna single than catch a double-tap steel point in the chest. And P2P's don't really scare me that much. If I was an aging diva with millions of dollars to hoarde, I might have followed that story a little more closely. As it is, I'm a middle-aged guy who pays $500 for a new Glock. That's a lot of money considering what you get. Most of the engineering was done several decades ago (just like Madonna's talent ran out several decades ago.)
The truly astounding thing is the man has no problem with violating the Constitution as long as its done in a way he sees fit:
Gun supporters may argue that the right to bear arms is protected by the Constitution, while the right to commit copyright infringement is not. But no one has a right to murder. At most the Second Amendment means that the abuses of cop-killing crazies shouldn't justify burdening my Second Amendment rights. Yet the same could be said about copyright infringement, given the amendment that stands just before the Second. There are many whose First Amendment interest in speaking, and in spreading their speech cheaply and broadly, will be burdened by banning p2p. So why doesn't the First Amendment at least mean what gun lobbyists say the Second means: that the abuse of copyright-killing crazies doesn't justify burdening my First Amendment rights in response?
I hope Congress doesn't harm the most important industry for growth in the United States by acting against p2p. But if it does, I don't see how it can, in all honesty, avoid doing the same with regard to firearms.
I'll translate: if they are going to screw with me legally, I think they should fuck with that guy over there even more. Because I'm talking about p2p and he's talking about a 9/11. So if the government spanks me on this I want retribution.
I'm beginning to lose the thread with these people, and that means I won't understand when judges agree with them.
Professor Lawrence Lessig has a stupefying piece up in the Washington Post editorial section today. To be truthful, I don't even know what point the gifted child is trying to make. Here's the opener:
A while back a federal court declared that the manufacturers of the most popular forms of peer-to-peer file-sharing technology are not liable for copyright infringement committed by people using their technology. Congress immediately sprang into action by taking up legislation to reverse the court's ruling. The goal is to make it clear that p2p manufacturers are indeed liable for copyright violations committed with their products. No doubt many hope this will drive the p2p companies out of business.
Technology people across the country are terrified by the idea. They fear that the standard being proposed by this law will force a wide range of technologies to justify themselves in federal court. A recent proposal from the Copyright Office purports to hold manufacturers responsible for "technolog[ies]" that "cause" copyright "infringement," if those technologies (1) rely on infringement for "commercial viability," (2) derive "a predominant portion" of their revenue from infringement and (3) rely on infringement to "attract individuals" to the technology.
I'm a strong opponent of this legislation, but not because I support copyright infringement. The technologies being attacked by this bill have plenty of important uses that have nothing to do with copyright infringement. This legislation would effectively eliminate them.
I'm not really sure what all this geek shit means. It sounds like there is software out there that makes it easier to file share. Companies got pissed and filed suit and the government stepped in and did... something. Lessig is opposed to this. Pretty straight so far except for the fact that if a Martian laser took out all of our P2P capabilities, I'd still wake up at noon on Saturday and make eggs.
Get ready for some whiplash here. This is the next paragraph:
But there is a silver lining here, and it has to do with, of all things, a very old technology: guns. For if Congress passes this bill, on what principled basis can it then refuse to hold gun manufacturers responsible for the crimes committed with their technologies
This is kind of an apples and oranges thing. If my crappy garage band gets a demo up online and you steal it, well piss on you. If you come in my house and shoot my wife, that rankles a bit more. And court wise, there will be a wide swathe in the acceptable monetary awards. Stealing my version of "Iron Man" is a bit less expensive than crippling me.
The parallels are unavoidable. Like p2p, firearms -- including assault weapons and cop-killing bullets -- cause harm. But also like p2p, guns -- as the NRA and its followers will tell you -- have "non-infringing uses" too. Thus, the gun lobby says, manufacturers should be exempt from responsibility for the crimes their customers commit. Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
But that argument will be much harder to sustain if Congress does to p2p what it has not done to guns. Of course, the same point is true of p2p technologies. It's not Kazaa that infringes Madonna's copyright; people infringe Madonna's copyright.
Well, I would rather someone steal a Madonna single than catch a double-tap steel point in the chest. And P2P's don't really scare me that much. If I was an aging diva with millions of dollars to hoarde, I might have followed that story a little more closely. As it is, I'm a middle-aged guy who pays $500 for a new Glock. That's a lot of money considering what you get. Most of the engineering was done several decades ago (just like Madonna's talent ran out several decades ago.)
The truly astounding thing is the man has no problem with violating the Constitution as long as its done in a way he sees fit:
Gun supporters may argue that the right to bear arms is protected by the Constitution, while the right to commit copyright infringement is not. But no one has a right to murder. At most the Second Amendment means that the abuses of cop-killing crazies shouldn't justify burdening my Second Amendment rights. Yet the same could be said about copyright infringement, given the amendment that stands just before the Second. There are many whose First Amendment interest in speaking, and in spreading their speech cheaply and broadly, will be burdened by banning p2p. So why doesn't the First Amendment at least mean what gun lobbyists say the Second means: that the abuse of copyright-killing crazies doesn't justify burdening my First Amendment rights in response?
I hope Congress doesn't harm the most important industry for growth in the United States by acting against p2p. But if it does, I don't see how it can, in all honesty, avoid doing the same with regard to firearms.
I'll translate: if they are going to screw with me legally, I think they should fuck with that guy over there even more. Because I'm talking about p2p and he's talking about a 9/11. So if the government spanks me on this I want retribution.
I'm beginning to lose the thread with these people, and that means I won't understand when judges agree with them.
More Hmong
I was a little hot last night when I penned the post on the Wisconsin shooting. In fact, after reading it this morning, I almost pulled. That would have been dishonest and I don't think I really stepped over a line.
I am in a calmer frame of mind and more information has come to light today.
First off, Mr. Chai Vang had an appropriate bail set: 2.5 million dollars. That means his ass is going to stay parked. Good.
Secondly, he claims that the white hunters fired the first shot and that it was racially motivated based on the epitaths they were spewing. That remains to be seen. There is the fact that there was only one rifle reported for 20 hunters that were staying on that cluster of land. That can be seen several ways. Either it was impossible for them to muster any kind of firepower, given they only had one firearm in their posession, or it is impossible to believe that 20 licensed hunters would go on a private land hunt with one gun.
It gets weirder and weirder.
Surprisingly, of today's copy, CNN has the most balanced report. Yesterday it was reported all over the place that Mr. Vang had brandished a gun in the presence of law enforcement while vowing to murder his wife. Today, of course, we are more concerned with the Hmong community at large. Also, I've actually not yet seen a decent article about the dead and their families.
Regardless, threatening to kill your wife while holding a firearm...well let's just say I wouldn't want to share a range with the man.
On to the multi-culti aspect, which I knew would blow up, we have this from the Capitol Times story:
State Sen. Mee Moua, one of two Hmong legislators in Minnesota, rejected the idea that cultural differences played any role in the shooting.
"He's probably crazy," she said.
She acknowledged that Hmong-Americans feel racism on a daily basis, but "that doesn't mean you kill people."
"We're all just speculating that may have been a trigger for him," Moua said. "We're all searching for answers."
So he says these killings were not racially incited but then goes on to say that they may have been. I have become to appreciate lately how only white people can be racist. If the group of hunters fired on him first, it will be a racially motivated crime. If he gunned down eight people in cold blood, it will "have been a trigger for him."
I don't think we're getting all of the facts on this yet, and I will probably withold judgement until I find out more.
At this point though, the low-down is 5 people were carried out in bags, 3 people on stretchers, and one guy walked out of the forest with an empty rifle.
The other thing is the fuel this gives to the Brady types. An SKS fired rapid fire with a high capacity magazine can kill 6 people, including a child. On the other hand, hunters and sportsmen are just as crazy as any other militant gun owner.
It is a tragedy that needs to be resolved with the proper people being held to account and it is also, well, just a bad hunting season story a couple of months after the AWB died.
Wait and see.
Update: Say Uncle has a very nice round-up on the whole incident. Also, thanks for the link. It's always gratifying to get a link from the big guys.
I am in a calmer frame of mind and more information has come to light today.
First off, Mr. Chai Vang had an appropriate bail set: 2.5 million dollars. That means his ass is going to stay parked. Good.
Secondly, he claims that the white hunters fired the first shot and that it was racially motivated based on the epitaths they were spewing. That remains to be seen. There is the fact that there was only one rifle reported for 20 hunters that were staying on that cluster of land. That can be seen several ways. Either it was impossible for them to muster any kind of firepower, given they only had one firearm in their posession, or it is impossible to believe that 20 licensed hunters would go on a private land hunt with one gun.
It gets weirder and weirder.
Surprisingly, of today's copy, CNN has the most balanced report. Yesterday it was reported all over the place that Mr. Vang had brandished a gun in the presence of law enforcement while vowing to murder his wife. Today, of course, we are more concerned with the Hmong community at large. Also, I've actually not yet seen a decent article about the dead and their families.
Regardless, threatening to kill your wife while holding a firearm...well let's just say I wouldn't want to share a range with the man.
On to the multi-culti aspect, which I knew would blow up, we have this from the Capitol Times story:
State Sen. Mee Moua, one of two Hmong legislators in Minnesota, rejected the idea that cultural differences played any role in the shooting.
"He's probably crazy," she said.
She acknowledged that Hmong-Americans feel racism on a daily basis, but "that doesn't mean you kill people."
"We're all just speculating that may have been a trigger for him," Moua said. "We're all searching for answers."
So he says these killings were not racially incited but then goes on to say that they may have been. I have become to appreciate lately how only white people can be racist. If the group of hunters fired on him first, it will be a racially motivated crime. If he gunned down eight people in cold blood, it will "have been a trigger for him."
I don't think we're getting all of the facts on this yet, and I will probably withold judgement until I find out more.
At this point though, the low-down is 5 people were carried out in bags, 3 people on stretchers, and one guy walked out of the forest with an empty rifle.
The other thing is the fuel this gives to the Brady types. An SKS fired rapid fire with a high capacity magazine can kill 6 people, including a child. On the other hand, hunters and sportsmen are just as crazy as any other militant gun owner.
It is a tragedy that needs to be resolved with the proper people being held to account and it is also, well, just a bad hunting season story a couple of months after the AWB died.
Wait and see.
Update: Say Uncle has a very nice round-up on the whole incident. Also, thanks for the link. It's always gratifying to get a link from the big guys.
Monday, November 22, 2004
Kill-crazy Hmong
This story is going far and wide as I type.
There are numerous aspects to this story. First off, we need to respect the cultural beliefs that Mr. Vang brought with him from the noble peoples of Laos to the forests of Wisconsin. He is part of a community. They seem not to notice one of the bedrock principles of this country, property rights. But multi-culturalism benefits everybody, especially those 6 dead people and the understanding of Laotian culture that I learned today.
I never knew that St. Paul was the largest Laotian refuge in the continental United States. I never knew that these people were so sensitive about God's green Earth. I never knew they produced Triple-A psychos. It was all a mystery before I read about his family saying he was a peaceful man.
Well, peaceful unless his wife pissed him off and then he'd just pull a gun.
This mutant should be executed immediately after his "speedy" trial. He killed people and wrought havoc on an untold number of lives. Wives, children, friends, etc.
Fuck reaching conciliation with people who produce this sort of invertebrate. Their community is worried about the backlash they may face. Aren't they worried about the destruction this man has inflicted on people? It's a deer hunt for God's sake.
In any case, forget about the cultural and violent aspect of the crime. The really important thing is that he used:
AN SKS ASSAULT RIFLE
Blame that, not the asshole pulling the trigger.
Update: Triggerfinger has a good post on this as well. I will have more up later.
There are numerous aspects to this story. First off, we need to respect the cultural beliefs that Mr. Vang brought with him from the noble peoples of Laos to the forests of Wisconsin. He is part of a community. They seem not to notice one of the bedrock principles of this country, property rights. But multi-culturalism benefits everybody, especially those 6 dead people and the understanding of Laotian culture that I learned today.
I never knew that St. Paul was the largest Laotian refuge in the continental United States. I never knew that these people were so sensitive about God's green Earth. I never knew they produced Triple-A psychos. It was all a mystery before I read about his family saying he was a peaceful man.
Well, peaceful unless his wife pissed him off and then he'd just pull a gun.
This mutant should be executed immediately after his "speedy" trial. He killed people and wrought havoc on an untold number of lives. Wives, children, friends, etc.
Fuck reaching conciliation with people who produce this sort of invertebrate. Their community is worried about the backlash they may face. Aren't they worried about the destruction this man has inflicted on people? It's a deer hunt for God's sake.
In any case, forget about the cultural and violent aspect of the crime. The really important thing is that he used:
AN SKS ASSAULT RIFLE
Blame that, not the asshole pulling the trigger.
Update: Triggerfinger has a good post on this as well. I will have more up later.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Weekend Roundup
The range usurpation and eminent domain arguments will continue between Kirk and I. I just think both of us have jobs and crap like that. Hat tip to Say Uncle who linked to our argument.
ZendoDeb has up a good point at TFS Magnum about the safety benefit many separated/divorced/"living with a psycho" women would have if they were armed. Of course, the laws are stacked against these individuals. Pull up stakes and move to D.C.; you'll be safe.
The Geek is always a bit economical with words, and that's a good thing. I can't think of anything to add on his comments on the soldier in Fallujah.
ZendoDeb has up a good point at TFS Magnum about the safety benefit many separated/divorced/"living with a psycho" women would have if they were armed. Of course, the laws are stacked against these individuals. Pull up stakes and move to D.C.; you'll be safe.
The Geek is always a bit economical with words, and that's a good thing. I can't think of anything to add on his comments on the soldier in Fallujah.
Global Community Round-up
Quick review of what is going on in the world. (If you want to skip my BS and look at the picture I'm pissed off about, click here; otherwise read it and wait for the picture.)
We've killed 1,600 insurgents in Fallujah. That's a good start. And kudos to the men who are accomplishing this task. And lay off the poor fuck who happened to get caught on camera doing his job.
Sudan has surpassed 50,000 dead and there are another 200,000 refugees, some of who have been raped and disfigured.
The Ivory Coast, from my understanding, has issued a national edict to rape white women. This is a French Colony, and the French tend to get randy when they deploy, so I guess turnabout might be fair play?
The Congo; refer to the above.
In Denmark, a man has been stabbed a lot, had a handgun unloaded into his stabbed ass, and had a note pinned to his chest. He's a fucking filmaker.
Iran and NK keep rolling with the nuke program.
Bush is a dope.
But never fear, the UN is here.
Kofi is probably implicated in the LARGEST FRAUD IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND. There's proof coming to light that this asshole knowingly let funds go to terrorists groups. For those of you who don't know this man, he heads the United Nations; the globe's savior; the last great hope; the only thing that can keep those crazy Yanks in check.
Let me introduce another buddy of mine: Robert Mugabe. Communist, Butcher, and Racist. If you want to see some of his handiwork check out this link. You have to scroll down for the pictures and pick the appropriately barbaric pictures based on the geographic area of that beautiful but heinous continent. Also note, this site does not necessarily agree with any of the opinions that are reflected on that site. In our opinion, the guy is a bit of a racist kook who shouldn't be living in Africa to begin with. But we live in New Mexico, so what the hell.
In any case, given the brief profiles we've given these two titans of peace and understanding, we found it heartwarming, that on the eve of us stupid Yanks giving thanks for killing so many people, these two future Nobel Peace Prize winners had time to break bread together.
It does my heart good to see to corrupt, murderous tyrants having a good laugh about the millions of their own people (they are both African, and that seems to be where they like to stick it) being slain by heinous means.
Let the merriment continue until we get our heads out of our asses and stop funding mini-genocides caused by assholes like these.
We've killed 1,600 insurgents in Fallujah. That's a good start. And kudos to the men who are accomplishing this task. And lay off the poor fuck who happened to get caught on camera doing his job.
Sudan has surpassed 50,000 dead and there are another 200,000 refugees, some of who have been raped and disfigured.
The Ivory Coast, from my understanding, has issued a national edict to rape white women. This is a French Colony, and the French tend to get randy when they deploy, so I guess turnabout might be fair play?
The Congo; refer to the above.
In Denmark, a man has been stabbed a lot, had a handgun unloaded into his stabbed ass, and had a note pinned to his chest. He's a fucking filmaker.
Iran and NK keep rolling with the nuke program.
Bush is a dope.
But never fear, the UN is here.
Kofi is probably implicated in the LARGEST FRAUD IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND. There's proof coming to light that this asshole knowingly let funds go to terrorists groups. For those of you who don't know this man, he heads the United Nations; the globe's savior; the last great hope; the only thing that can keep those crazy Yanks in check.
Let me introduce another buddy of mine: Robert Mugabe. Communist, Butcher, and Racist. If you want to see some of his handiwork check out this link. You have to scroll down for the pictures and pick the appropriately barbaric pictures based on the geographic area of that beautiful but heinous continent. Also note, this site does not necessarily agree with any of the opinions that are reflected on that site. In our opinion, the guy is a bit of a racist kook who shouldn't be living in Africa to begin with. But we live in New Mexico, so what the hell.
In any case, given the brief profiles we've given these two titans of peace and understanding, we found it heartwarming, that on the eve of us stupid Yanks giving thanks for killing so many people, these two future Nobel Peace Prize winners had time to break bread together.
It does my heart good to see to corrupt, murderous tyrants having a good laugh about the millions of their own people (they are both African, and that seems to be where they like to stick it) being slain by heinous means.
Let the merriment continue until we get our heads out of our asses and stop funding mini-genocides caused by assholes like these.
Friday, November 19, 2004
Range Safety (i.e. will you have one)
As I noted when I added Kirk at Limpidity to my blogroll, I anticipate some good discussion with the man.
Yesterday he had a post regarding non-lead policies at ranges. As you can see, I commented that Yucca Mountain is a slightly more toxic site than most gun ranges in the eyes of your average voter. I added to my comments that the range I shoot on, which is rumored to be some toxic testing site from the 50's, will be closed in a year or two due to the continuing sprawl that Albuquerque, NM is quickly becoming.
Kirk took this to heart and did a full post on the subject today. Kirk bases his argument on his experience with over-reaching local politicians who cite noise ordinances as rationale for gutting range rights. He also rightly points out that our ex-governor, Gary Johnson (may he run against Bingaman in 06', please) signed into law a range protection bill.
Unfortunately, the problem with my range is not a noise pollution one. On the X-axis, it is kind of squished between the airport and Kirtland Air Force Base. It is also very close to the local drag strip. In this area, noise is not really a factor.
What is going to happen, is that a subdivision is going to be built on the Y-axis downrange. They are going to be breaking ground on this in 18 months and range will be gone. Of course, the distance we are talking about could not be traversed by .30-06 round and BMG rifles are not allowed at the range. Essentially the reason the range is going to close is twofold.
Firstly, you have the wonderful environmental lobby. Albuquerque's main (or only) source of water is the water table present below this area of the state. Now you could spend X amount of money to try and figure out if a couple of lead rounds are going to poison every child in town, but it's much easier to just shut the range.
I cited approvingly Mr. Johnson's efforts (and some of you may hate him, although I think he was the best governor in the US while he served; he vetoed everything; a little different than Bush.) Since that time we have elected ex-Clintonista Bill Richardson to the governor's mansion; a man my father affectionately refers to as "Porky." Bill was a good student as far as the usurpation of powers from an executive standpoint and he had an excellent teacher, he who can not be named.
Richardson has already taken executive steps to ensure that "growth" is possible in the Albuquerque area. As we have Indian reservations on two sides, and a mountain range in one, there is basically only one direction for the city to expand in. And we can't take any of that land away from the Indians, in case anyone has any suggestions in that flavor.
What it will come down to is eminent domain. This is an area of law I am not well versed in and I don't understand its roots. SayUncle blogs on this topic frequently and I am starting to understand why. Basically the state will revoke the range's charter because expansion is in the best interest of the people or, more likely, a better revenue source for the government.
I will research the roots of eminent domain over the weekend and blog more extensively on it.
In any case, thanks to Kirk for picking up the ball and running with it. If you haven't checked out his site, do. It is worth your time.
UPDATE: SayUncle has usefully isolated his blogging on Eminent Domain issues. It is illustrative as well as scary.
UPDATE II: Kevin over at Smallest Minority has written an appropriate response, although the legal technicalities I'm not sure of.
Yesterday he had a post regarding non-lead policies at ranges. As you can see, I commented that Yucca Mountain is a slightly more toxic site than most gun ranges in the eyes of your average voter. I added to my comments that the range I shoot on, which is rumored to be some toxic testing site from the 50's, will be closed in a year or two due to the continuing sprawl that Albuquerque, NM is quickly becoming.
Kirk took this to heart and did a full post on the subject today. Kirk bases his argument on his experience with over-reaching local politicians who cite noise ordinances as rationale for gutting range rights. He also rightly points out that our ex-governor, Gary Johnson (may he run against Bingaman in 06', please) signed into law a range protection bill.
Unfortunately, the problem with my range is not a noise pollution one. On the X-axis, it is kind of squished between the airport and Kirtland Air Force Base. It is also very close to the local drag strip. In this area, noise is not really a factor.
What is going to happen, is that a subdivision is going to be built on the Y-axis downrange. They are going to be breaking ground on this in 18 months and range will be gone. Of course, the distance we are talking about could not be traversed by .30-06 round and BMG rifles are not allowed at the range. Essentially the reason the range is going to close is twofold.
Firstly, you have the wonderful environmental lobby. Albuquerque's main (or only) source of water is the water table present below this area of the state. Now you could spend X amount of money to try and figure out if a couple of lead rounds are going to poison every child in town, but it's much easier to just shut the range.
I cited approvingly Mr. Johnson's efforts (and some of you may hate him, although I think he was the best governor in the US while he served; he vetoed everything; a little different than Bush.) Since that time we have elected ex-Clintonista Bill Richardson to the governor's mansion; a man my father affectionately refers to as "Porky." Bill was a good student as far as the usurpation of powers from an executive standpoint and he had an excellent teacher, he who can not be named.
Richardson has already taken executive steps to ensure that "growth" is possible in the Albuquerque area. As we have Indian reservations on two sides, and a mountain range in one, there is basically only one direction for the city to expand in. And we can't take any of that land away from the Indians, in case anyone has any suggestions in that flavor.
What it will come down to is eminent domain. This is an area of law I am not well versed in and I don't understand its roots. SayUncle blogs on this topic frequently and I am starting to understand why. Basically the state will revoke the range's charter because expansion is in the best interest of the people or, more likely, a better revenue source for the government.
I will research the roots of eminent domain over the weekend and blog more extensively on it.
In any case, thanks to Kirk for picking up the ball and running with it. If you haven't checked out his site, do. It is worth your time.
UPDATE: SayUncle has usefully isolated his blogging on Eminent Domain issues. It is illustrative as well as scary.
UPDATE II: Kevin over at Smallest Minority has written an appropriate response, although the legal technicalities I'm not sure of.
Thursday, November 18, 2004
I really am Sick
I ordered an Al Mar Sere and it showed up today. As is well known, I am what my fellow shooters call crippled (i.e. I am left-handed.) As such my first task was to reverse the pocket clip on this truly beautiful knife.
Well, I am so out of it, I tried to use a Torx wrench on a standard Phillips screw system. Both pocked clip screws are stripped so badly I will have to find some sort of extraction (probably epoxy and a dead instrument.) I have emailed the Al Mar people requesting replacement screws and begged insanity on being such an ass.
My advice: when you are whacked out sick, watch a movie or just go to bed. Don't attempt to gunsmith or dick with really expensive knives.
Well, I am so out of it, I tried to use a Torx wrench on a standard Phillips screw system. Both pocked clip screws are stripped so badly I will have to find some sort of extraction (probably epoxy and a dead instrument.) I have emailed the Al Mar people requesting replacement screws and begged insanity on being such an ass.
My advice: when you are whacked out sick, watch a movie or just go to bed. Don't attempt to gunsmith or dick with really expensive knives.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Damned Flu
I've noticed that this has been going around the blogosphere. It's that time of year, I guess. In any case, I seem to have caught a bug that alternates between mild fever and body-ache, fatigue, crap.
Doesn't look like any range time is likely in the near future and by the time I get off work, I'm so crispy any sort of analyisis would make as much sense as the lyrics to "Imagine."
Hopefully it's a 24 hour type deal, though I think that strain is probably an urban myth since I have never experienced it.
Will return shortly.
Doesn't look like any range time is likely in the near future and by the time I get off work, I'm so crispy any sort of analyisis would make as much sense as the lyrics to "Imagine."
Hopefully it's a 24 hour type deal, though I think that strain is probably an urban myth since I have never experienced it.
Will return shortly.
Sunday, November 14, 2004
In case nobody has told you, you're stupid
This red state dummy crap has hit a crescendo. This guy, from the Portland Mercury, is very smart, though; just take his word for it.
This is an extremely long piece, and the author tends to repeat himself over and over and over and over again (did I get that point across?). It would be exhausting for me to do the whole piece and tiresome for any reader. As such, I will cherry-pick.
It's time for the Democrats to face reality: They are the heart of urban America. If the cities elected our president, if urban voters determined the outcome, John F. Kerry would have won by a landslide.
This is an easy opener for me: If "the cities elected our president" we wouldn't have a country by now. McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis; these people don't end cold wars, they stroke.
Citizens of the Urban Archipelago reject heartland "values" like xenophobia, sexism, racism, and homophobia, as well as the more intolerant strains of Christianity that have taken root in this country. And we are the real Americans
If they're the real Americans, than I'm the real Bill Gates. Do you feel more xenophobic (liberals have to use big words; "fear of strangers") when you are in a small town or NYC?
They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers.
Are you starting to get this gentleman's point? I have been called a hate-monger for many things (my disbelief in affirmative action, owning weapons, thinking women should not be active combat in the military, etc. etc.), but I have never been referred to this based on the geographic location of my home or the precint I vote in.
Again, look at the blue spots in red states like Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico--there's almost as much blue in those states as there is in Oregon, Washington, and California
There are 3 to four solid blue counties in New Mexico (as of last count.) These would be Santa Fe, McKinley, Rio Arriba, and San Miguel. Two of these counties are completely fraudulent. I do work in Santa Fe and there is a lot of young, stupid, "urban" people who would rather fly a UN flag from their antenna than a US flag. And they are not driving Hybrids. As to the western county/ies, that is a reservation. Nuff said.
We're everywhere any sane person wants to be. Let them have the shitholes, the Oklahomas, Wyomings, and Alabamas. We'll take Manhattan
I'm a resident of New Mexico. I lived in Poughkeepsie, NY for 8 months. Probably the worst 8 months of my life, except for the fact that women out there will...well nevermind. Leave it at this: I agree Manhattan is not a fundamentalist Christian stronghold. Crime there was higher than anywhere I ever lived. There were more homeless people.
So I decided to move back west, to the "shithole" I live in. Well fuck you elitist coastal types. I've seen your enviroment, but you've never seen mine.
While in NY, I worked as a line cook. This didn't exactly get me into celebrity parties or anything, but most of the people I worked with had never been out of the metro area. The 10% that had, had gone to Florida. These people don't even know what the United States looks like.
To red-state voters, to the rural voters, residents of small, dying towns, and soulless sprawling exburbs, we'll say this: Fuck off. Your issues are no longer our issues. We're going to battle our bleeding-heart instincts and ignore pangs of misplaced empathy. We will no longer concern ourselves with a health care crisis that disproportionately impacts rural areas. Instead we will work toward winning health care one blue state at a time
Your issues can be your issues, but take note: you lost. Let me say it again. YOU LOST. So it is you who can fuck off, my friend.
Wal-Mart is a rapacious corporation that pays sub-poverty-level wages, offers health benefits to its employees that are so expensive few can afford them, and destroys small towns and rural jobs. Liberals in big cities who have never seen the inside of a Wal-Mart spend a lot of time worrying about the impact Wal-Mart is having on the heartland. No more. We will do what we can to keep Wal-Mart out of our cities and, if at all possible, out of our states. We will pass laws mandating a living wage for full-time work, upping the minimum wage for part-time work, and requiring large corporations to either offer health benefits or pay into state- or city-run funds to provide health care for uninsured workers. That will reform Wal-Mart in our blue cities and states or, better yet, keep Wal-Mart out entirely. And when we see something on the front page of the national section of The New York Times about the damage Wal-Mart is doing to the heartland, we will turn the page. Wal-Mart is not an urban issue.
Yeah, Wal-Mart sucks. Unless I want to buy some cheap Winchester White-Box or maybe a good gift for one my friend's kid's. But I'm convinced; the government should seize Wal-Mart, ensure a living wage, give healthcare benefits, and force them into "blue states" that will rape them of profits. Problem solved.
Neither is gun control. Our new position: We'll fight to keep guns off the streets of our cities but the more guns laying around out there in the heartland, the better. Most cities have strong gun-control laws--laws that are, of course, undermined by the fact that our cities aren't walled. Yet. But why should liberals in cities fund organizations that attempt to get trigger locks onto the handguns of NRA members and Bush supporters? If red-state dads aren't concerned enough about their own children to put trigger locks on their own guns, it's not our problem. If a kid in a red state finds his daddy's handgun and blows his head off, we'll feel terrible (we're like that), but we'll try to look on the bright side: At least he won't grow up to vote like his dad.
This is the real gem from this coastal genius. None of us out here give a crap about our kids, it's all about the guns.
I don't know how many safety arguments I have seen from blog to blog to blog. Most of my fellow gun owners have kids; I don't. Therefore, I don't have all the safety bells and whistles most parents do. This guy, though, is basically saying we should shoot our children to cleanse the gene pool of any kind of pro-2A strain that might make into the next generation.
And when you look for ways to revive your failing towns and dying rural counties, don't even think about tourism. Who wants to go to small-town America now? You people scare us. We'll island-hop from now on, thank you, spending our time and our money in blue cities. You can starve out there in red America for all we care. Hell, we already give you enough money anyway, you big government leeches. Although you like to complain about "tax-and-spend liberals," guess where that big-government money gets spent: North Dakota, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska, West Virginia, Montana, Alabama, South Dakota, Arkansas. These red states top the list of federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid. And who's paying the most? That's right, you government-handout parasites: blue states. New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, California, New York, Minnesota. We pay the most and receive the least
OK, you obnoxious piss-ant. We are the states that provide agriculture, ore, lumber, etc. I live in a state where a missle range takes up almost a tenth of the whole state. If you sophisticated Manhattan people want a missle range next door, I'm sure you'd get some more pork.
My state has Los Alamos Labs, which is run by the UCLA (that's California, BTW), but they sure as shit don't want the Technical sites in their state do they?
A third of my state is Indian Reservations. Well there is a liberal cause if I ever saw one, even though I doubt any Democrat in Washington or the dim bulb who wrote this article has ever been on a reservation.
This guy is an ass. And I would like to put to bed the "moral issues" notion. Exit polls don't work. And while half the media was reporting that GW was getting his ass whipped by Kerry, the results were the opposite. So now, we have stories, based on the same faulty exit polls, saying that most people voted on Gay Marriage. Bullshit.
If they were wrong about the vote, they were wrong about the issues. It's all about killing more, and faster war.
This is an extremely long piece, and the author tends to repeat himself over and over and over and over again (did I get that point across?). It would be exhausting for me to do the whole piece and tiresome for any reader. As such, I will cherry-pick.
It's time for the Democrats to face reality: They are the heart of urban America. If the cities elected our president, if urban voters determined the outcome, John F. Kerry would have won by a landslide.
This is an easy opener for me: If "the cities elected our president" we wouldn't have a country by now. McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis; these people don't end cold wars, they stroke.
Citizens of the Urban Archipelago reject heartland "values" like xenophobia, sexism, racism, and homophobia, as well as the more intolerant strains of Christianity that have taken root in this country. And we are the real Americans
If they're the real Americans, than I'm the real Bill Gates. Do you feel more xenophobic (liberals have to use big words; "fear of strangers") when you are in a small town or NYC?
They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers.
Are you starting to get this gentleman's point? I have been called a hate-monger for many things (my disbelief in affirmative action, owning weapons, thinking women should not be active combat in the military, etc. etc.), but I have never been referred to this based on the geographic location of my home or the precint I vote in.
Again, look at the blue spots in red states like Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico--there's almost as much blue in those states as there is in Oregon, Washington, and California
There are 3 to four solid blue counties in New Mexico (as of last count.) These would be Santa Fe, McKinley, Rio Arriba, and San Miguel. Two of these counties are completely fraudulent. I do work in Santa Fe and there is a lot of young, stupid, "urban" people who would rather fly a UN flag from their antenna than a US flag. And they are not driving Hybrids. As to the western county/ies, that is a reservation. Nuff said.
We're everywhere any sane person wants to be. Let them have the shitholes, the Oklahomas, Wyomings, and Alabamas. We'll take Manhattan
I'm a resident of New Mexico. I lived in Poughkeepsie, NY for 8 months. Probably the worst 8 months of my life, except for the fact that women out there will...well nevermind. Leave it at this: I agree Manhattan is not a fundamentalist Christian stronghold. Crime there was higher than anywhere I ever lived. There were more homeless people.
So I decided to move back west, to the "shithole" I live in. Well fuck you elitist coastal types. I've seen your enviroment, but you've never seen mine.
While in NY, I worked as a line cook. This didn't exactly get me into celebrity parties or anything, but most of the people I worked with had never been out of the metro area. The 10% that had, had gone to Florida. These people don't even know what the United States looks like.
To red-state voters, to the rural voters, residents of small, dying towns, and soulless sprawling exburbs, we'll say this: Fuck off. Your issues are no longer our issues. We're going to battle our bleeding-heart instincts and ignore pangs of misplaced empathy. We will no longer concern ourselves with a health care crisis that disproportionately impacts rural areas. Instead we will work toward winning health care one blue state at a time
Your issues can be your issues, but take note: you lost. Let me say it again. YOU LOST. So it is you who can fuck off, my friend.
Wal-Mart is a rapacious corporation that pays sub-poverty-level wages, offers health benefits to its employees that are so expensive few can afford them, and destroys small towns and rural jobs. Liberals in big cities who have never seen the inside of a Wal-Mart spend a lot of time worrying about the impact Wal-Mart is having on the heartland. No more. We will do what we can to keep Wal-Mart out of our cities and, if at all possible, out of our states. We will pass laws mandating a living wage for full-time work, upping the minimum wage for part-time work, and requiring large corporations to either offer health benefits or pay into state- or city-run funds to provide health care for uninsured workers. That will reform Wal-Mart in our blue cities and states or, better yet, keep Wal-Mart out entirely. And when we see something on the front page of the national section of The New York Times about the damage Wal-Mart is doing to the heartland, we will turn the page. Wal-Mart is not an urban issue.
Yeah, Wal-Mart sucks. Unless I want to buy some cheap Winchester White-Box or maybe a good gift for one my friend's kid's. But I'm convinced; the government should seize Wal-Mart, ensure a living wage, give healthcare benefits, and force them into "blue states" that will rape them of profits. Problem solved.
Neither is gun control. Our new position: We'll fight to keep guns off the streets of our cities but the more guns laying around out there in the heartland, the better. Most cities have strong gun-control laws--laws that are, of course, undermined by the fact that our cities aren't walled. Yet. But why should liberals in cities fund organizations that attempt to get trigger locks onto the handguns of NRA members and Bush supporters? If red-state dads aren't concerned enough about their own children to put trigger locks on their own guns, it's not our problem. If a kid in a red state finds his daddy's handgun and blows his head off, we'll feel terrible (we're like that), but we'll try to look on the bright side: At least he won't grow up to vote like his dad.
This is the real gem from this coastal genius. None of us out here give a crap about our kids, it's all about the guns.
I don't know how many safety arguments I have seen from blog to blog to blog. Most of my fellow gun owners have kids; I don't. Therefore, I don't have all the safety bells and whistles most parents do. This guy, though, is basically saying we should shoot our children to cleanse the gene pool of any kind of pro-2A strain that might make into the next generation.
And when you look for ways to revive your failing towns and dying rural counties, don't even think about tourism. Who wants to go to small-town America now? You people scare us. We'll island-hop from now on, thank you, spending our time and our money in blue cities. You can starve out there in red America for all we care. Hell, we already give you enough money anyway, you big government leeches. Although you like to complain about "tax-and-spend liberals," guess where that big-government money gets spent: North Dakota, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska, West Virginia, Montana, Alabama, South Dakota, Arkansas. These red states top the list of federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid. And who's paying the most? That's right, you government-handout parasites: blue states. New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, California, New York, Minnesota. We pay the most and receive the least
OK, you obnoxious piss-ant. We are the states that provide agriculture, ore, lumber, etc. I live in a state where a missle range takes up almost a tenth of the whole state. If you sophisticated Manhattan people want a missle range next door, I'm sure you'd get some more pork.
My state has Los Alamos Labs, which is run by the UCLA (that's California, BTW), but they sure as shit don't want the Technical sites in their state do they?
A third of my state is Indian Reservations. Well there is a liberal cause if I ever saw one, even though I doubt any Democrat in Washington or the dim bulb who wrote this article has ever been on a reservation.
This guy is an ass. And I would like to put to bed the "moral issues" notion. Exit polls don't work. And while half the media was reporting that GW was getting his ass whipped by Kerry, the results were the opposite. So now, we have stories, based on the same faulty exit polls, saying that most people voted on Gay Marriage. Bullshit.
If they were wrong about the vote, they were wrong about the issues. It's all about killing more, and faster war.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Don't F*** with Jonah's Guys & Etc.
John over at Arrrrgh! has a nice post on the Ammo Buy-cott. As mentioned earlier, I bought a gun last week and held off until the first day of the "week" to purchase a buttload of ammo from ammoman.com.
When I link to these guys, I can never remember how many R's are in Arrrrrrrrrgh. I don't know if that is salient or not. The post on Ammo Week somewhat wanders off topic, which I have no problem with because I'm going to do so shortly. He plainly posts a statement to goblins, mutants, and any other trash that resulted from Ted Kennedy pissing in the gene pool. What really threw me, is that his wife is good with a trench gun. A .44 gets a little testy for me sometimes, but his wife seems to do fine with large firepower. BTW, don't screw with their house.
As a segueway, I have a friend whose wife shoots better than me. She can take down a rabbit (obliterate might be a better word) with a 7mm at 250 yards. I need to bench a 30.06 to get a relatively good shot. I told him today that his wife makes me look like a wuss.
When I did speak to him, he mentioned he had a couple of Oryx depradation hunt licenses and didn't have anyone to go with. I have absolutely no experience hunting anything except fowl. Depradation hunts consist of shooting at herds from the road, from what I understand (NOTE I MAY BE WRONG). Bipods are allowed and all the rest. It is probably not as sporting as I would like it to be, but it may be ideal for my first big game hunt.
When I link to these guys, I can never remember how many R's are in Arrrrrrrrrgh. I don't know if that is salient or not. The post on Ammo Week somewhat wanders off topic, which I have no problem with because I'm going to do so shortly. He plainly posts a statement to goblins, mutants, and any other trash that resulted from Ted Kennedy pissing in the gene pool. What really threw me, is that his wife is good with a trench gun. A .44 gets a little testy for me sometimes, but his wife seems to do fine with large firepower. BTW, don't screw with their house.
As a segueway, I have a friend whose wife shoots better than me. She can take down a rabbit (obliterate might be a better word) with a 7mm at 250 yards. I need to bench a 30.06 to get a relatively good shot. I told him today that his wife makes me look like a wuss.
When I did speak to him, he mentioned he had a couple of Oryx depradation hunt licenses and didn't have anyone to go with. I have absolutely no experience hunting anything except fowl. Depradation hunts consist of shooting at herds from the road, from what I understand (NOTE I MAY BE WRONG). Bipods are allowed and all the rest. It is probably not as sporting as I would like it to be, but it may be ideal for my first big game hunt.
Limpidity
Kirk, over at Limpidity.org has been downright genial in adding me to his blogroll. I always appreciate these gestures and, as is policy on this blog, I have returned the favor.
Kirk notes that, while I may be an OK writer, my HTML skills suck like...well you know. He is absolutely spot on in his analysis. While I have wanted to make the substance of this blog the writing, I neglect technological aspects of the whole thing (case in point, my blogroll disappeared for half a day last week; I still don't know why.)
The other really intriguing thing with Kirk is that he is a pro-2A moderate. I think some interesting discussions may take place in the future.
In any case, thank you Kirk.
Kirk notes that, while I may be an OK writer, my HTML skills suck like...well you know. He is absolutely spot on in his analysis. While I have wanted to make the substance of this blog the writing, I neglect technological aspects of the whole thing (case in point, my blogroll disappeared for half a day last week; I still don't know why.)
The other really intriguing thing with Kirk is that he is a pro-2A moderate. I think some interesting discussions may take place in the future.
In any case, thank you Kirk.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Concealed Carry and the Seasons
The winter season coming in once again reminds me how easy it is to carry concealed during this period of time.
I live in a Southwestern state. My job demands that I some do some physically revealing things sometimes (like climbing ladders, looking in crawlspaces, etc.) It gets really hot here round about July.
During the summer, I reveal my wasteline quite a bit, which precludes any kind of full size pistol being worn in the belt. I don't own any sub-compacts that would qualify as an ankle back up (maybe I should remedy this.) Consequently, I carry my favorite handgun, the Glock 17 in my truck, but do not carry a weapon on my person (outside of a buttload of knives.)
Recently I blogged about the necessity of a gunsafe in a work environment. As the weather has cooled, I find no need for storage because carrying a Colt Commander in a Galco IWB holster is perfectly comfortable. None of the clerical girls realize and it is with me all of the time.
Coats, long shirts, and the weather have, for once, worked to my benefit.
I live in a Southwestern state. My job demands that I some do some physically revealing things sometimes (like climbing ladders, looking in crawlspaces, etc.) It gets really hot here round about July.
During the summer, I reveal my wasteline quite a bit, which precludes any kind of full size pistol being worn in the belt. I don't own any sub-compacts that would qualify as an ankle back up (maybe I should remedy this.) Consequently, I carry my favorite handgun, the Glock 17 in my truck, but do not carry a weapon on my person (outside of a buttload of knives.)
Recently I blogged about the necessity of a gunsafe in a work environment. As the weather has cooled, I find no need for storage because carrying a Colt Commander in a Galco IWB holster is perfectly comfortable. None of the clerical girls realize and it is with me all of the time.
Coats, long shirts, and the weather have, for once, worked to my benefit.
Yasir Ass Kiss
Brace yourselves for the media mourning of the oldest and original terrorist passing on to a pit of brimstone and torment.
It's late, but already the Washington Post has a fawning story up about the human debris the world was rid of today. I'm not going to fisk everything for the next week because we all know this guy was not Ronald Reagan for crying out loud. Here's some choice picks from the initial bleating:
A Dreamer Who Forced His Cause Onto World Stage
That is the title of the piece. A dreamer? How about murderer, thug, terrorist, fascist, etc. A thousand words come to mind before dreamer.
For virtually his entire adult life, Yasser Arafat had one dream, and he pursued it with such energy and zeal -- some would say fanaticism -- that he came to personify the dream itself
Some would say fanaticism? If you view killing innocent women and children as "zeal" I suppose this shitsack qualifies as a dreamer. What dream he personified was "dead Jews." Helluva dream.
The dream was of self-determination and statehood for the Palestinian people, and in the end he did not live to see it.
In the end, I hope he died a miserably painful death. Despite Ehud Barak giving him everything but the kitchen sink, he had no dream of statehood. He could have had it at any number of points in time. He didn't manage to drive Israel into the ocean, so I guess the poor butcher died with some regrets.
Such was his devotion to the cause that Arafat, who died early today at age 75 in a military hospital outside Paris, was willing to tolerate and embrace bloody acts of terror that made him an international pariah, and also to sign a peace agreement with Israel that inspired the wrath of some of his closest advisers, who considered it a sellout.
This is just vomit-inducing. His devotion was such that he was forced to tolerate terrorism? And Ted Bundy was such a lover he tolerated rape and murder to that end. Also, note to the Post, just because you sign a peace agreement doesn't mean you abide by it. The Soviets proved this 50 years ago. Also, what the hell is the Second Intifada? The statesman-like result of a peace treaty?
By dint of ruthless violence often directed at civilians, artful manipulation and the sheer theatrical force of his personality, he managed almost single-handedly to elevate the grievances of a few million disenfranchised Palestinians to a prominent place on the world's political agenda.
Now let's compare the theatrical force of his personality to ruthless violence. Well, can we? Are these two comparable? No.
And the only reason the Palestinians are disfranchised is because their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters considered them untouchables and kicked them out of Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, etc. And none of these countries has ever offered to take them back. Lest you forget, Yasir was born in Egypt.
Yet for all Arafat's public exposure, a sense of mystery remained about his essential nature and some of the basic facts of his life, thanks partly to his own efforts at obscuring them.
I'm on the edge of my seat about that one. What was his essential nature? What was Mohammed Atta's essential nature?
At the same time, let's not be unfair to Osama. With 35 brothers and sisters, there are bound to be childhood issues.
HOLY COW. I just got to the bottom of this piece and realize there are 3 more pages of this bilge. I'm stopping with the first for now. If the collective groaning continues tomorrow, I'll finish.
He was a terrorist, I'm glad he's dead, and I hope it was excruciatingly painful. His brain died at a certain point so the hope of pain is probably exaggerated on my part, but if there is a hell, he'll be burning while I go to sleep.
UPDATE: I will give the post credit for publishing this piece by Krauthammer (damn, that's a great name.)
It's late, but already the Washington Post has a fawning story up about the human debris the world was rid of today. I'm not going to fisk everything for the next week because we all know this guy was not Ronald Reagan for crying out loud. Here's some choice picks from the initial bleating:
A Dreamer Who Forced His Cause Onto World Stage
That is the title of the piece. A dreamer? How about murderer, thug, terrorist, fascist, etc. A thousand words come to mind before dreamer.
For virtually his entire adult life, Yasser Arafat had one dream, and he pursued it with such energy and zeal -- some would say fanaticism -- that he came to personify the dream itself
Some would say fanaticism? If you view killing innocent women and children as "zeal" I suppose this shitsack qualifies as a dreamer. What dream he personified was "dead Jews." Helluva dream.
The dream was of self-determination and statehood for the Palestinian people, and in the end he did not live to see it.
In the end, I hope he died a miserably painful death. Despite Ehud Barak giving him everything but the kitchen sink, he had no dream of statehood. He could have had it at any number of points in time. He didn't manage to drive Israel into the ocean, so I guess the poor butcher died with some regrets.
Such was his devotion to the cause that Arafat, who died early today at age 75 in a military hospital outside Paris, was willing to tolerate and embrace bloody acts of terror that made him an international pariah, and also to sign a peace agreement with Israel that inspired the wrath of some of his closest advisers, who considered it a sellout.
This is just vomit-inducing. His devotion was such that he was forced to tolerate terrorism? And Ted Bundy was such a lover he tolerated rape and murder to that end. Also, note to the Post, just because you sign a peace agreement doesn't mean you abide by it. The Soviets proved this 50 years ago. Also, what the hell is the Second Intifada? The statesman-like result of a peace treaty?
By dint of ruthless violence often directed at civilians, artful manipulation and the sheer theatrical force of his personality, he managed almost single-handedly to elevate the grievances of a few million disenfranchised Palestinians to a prominent place on the world's political agenda.
Now let's compare the theatrical force of his personality to ruthless violence. Well, can we? Are these two comparable? No.
And the only reason the Palestinians are disfranchised is because their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters considered them untouchables and kicked them out of Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, etc. And none of these countries has ever offered to take them back. Lest you forget, Yasir was born in Egypt.
Yet for all Arafat's public exposure, a sense of mystery remained about his essential nature and some of the basic facts of his life, thanks partly to his own efforts at obscuring them.
I'm on the edge of my seat about that one. What was his essential nature? What was Mohammed Atta's essential nature?
At the same time, let's not be unfair to Osama. With 35 brothers and sisters, there are bound to be childhood issues.
HOLY COW. I just got to the bottom of this piece and realize there are 3 more pages of this bilge. I'm stopping with the first for now. If the collective groaning continues tomorrow, I'll finish.
He was a terrorist, I'm glad he's dead, and I hope it was excruciatingly painful. His brain died at a certain point so the hope of pain is probably exaggerated on my part, but if there is a hell, he'll be burning while I go to sleep.
UPDATE: I will give the post credit for publishing this piece by Krauthammer (damn, that's a great name.)
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Good discussions
Publicola and Stop the Bleating are mixing it up over the extent gun control, if any, should be accepted.
Wanted to give another shout out to TFS Magnum. Not only is she an invaluable blogger whose commentary is spot on, she never hesitates to offer practical advice. If she's not a regular check, she should be.
Wanted to give another shout out to TFS Magnum. Not only is she an invaluable blogger whose commentary is spot on, she never hesitates to offer practical advice. If she's not a regular check, she should be.
AG and DoJ
I was a bit crestfallen today to find that the Bush administration was not going to keep Ashcroft for the second term. A lot of people bitch about Bush's weird avoidance of 2A issues, but Ashcroft was the biggest ally we had in the White House and he's gone. There's rumors Guliani is going to be up for the post. I like Rudy, he did a great job during 9/11 and I think he is a principled man who acts on his beliefs. Unfortunatley, one of his big beliefs is GUNS=CRIME. While a lot of people bitch about laws, regulations that executively enact law are far more dangerous, which was Ashcroft's strong point. Ashcroft dictated how gun laws were enforced and took the 30 day Brady retention of records down to two days. Guliani is a good man and a good politician (as far as that description can go), but he is solidly anti-2A and would be in a position to make The Brady Bill stronger through how the Justice Department enforces the law.
This is always a fault I have with Republicans. They tend to dispatch the worst candidate to a given job, when that person's talents could be utilized much more effectively in another capacity. They also tend to stick ideal candidates on the back bench. Ashcroft was the exception to the rule. And he was the first to be dropped in the new administration.
This is always a fault I have with Republicans. They tend to dispatch the worst candidate to a given job, when that person's talents could be utilized much more effectively in another capacity. They also tend to stick ideal candidates on the back bench. Ashcroft was the exception to the rule. And he was the first to be dropped in the new administration.
Monday, November 08, 2004
Brief Respite
The election is over. If you want to see how wacky it was, try on Michael Moore. This guy is nothing if not tasteful.
If you want to find out how stupid you are, give Bob Herbert a whack. If you have missed my earlier posts on this rat-bastard, let me restate that I think he is a pusillanimous non-vertebrate who deserves all of the derision one could possibly throw at him.
Out of the fever swamps now (unless you want to slide over to commondreams.org for some really fascinating commentary.)
Moving on, we beat their ass. No apologies, no graciousness; we won and they lost. They can mull that over for the next four years. They can come up with any number of conspiracy theories, but this time there were not courts. Kerry gave it up, fair and square. And this "Uniter, not a divider" crap can go right out the window.
I also made a purchase in the days since the election. Generally, I'm not a wheelgun enthusiast. Glocks, CZs, 1911s, etc. are what I'm really all about. But seeing this gun was really an experience. Given that I never pass up a chance to better myself at the expense of someone who is suffering, I bought this barely fired gun off of some guy who needed money. He enclosed all of the documentation for the revolver.
Last night, I was looking at the receipts and realized the guy was on a payment plan. He couldn't afford the thing to begin with and then had to sell it. I had a slight pang of conscience. Being that tight on green sucks, especially if you are selling all of the crap you've saved up for, for the past few years.
In any case, Thursday is range day and I will have a report up.
If you want to find out how stupid you are, give Bob Herbert a whack. If you have missed my earlier posts on this rat-bastard, let me restate that I think he is a pusillanimous non-vertebrate who deserves all of the derision one could possibly throw at him.
Out of the fever swamps now (unless you want to slide over to commondreams.org for some really fascinating commentary.)
Moving on, we beat their ass. No apologies, no graciousness; we won and they lost. They can mull that over for the next four years. They can come up with any number of conspiracy theories, but this time there were not courts. Kerry gave it up, fair and square. And this "Uniter, not a divider" crap can go right out the window.
I also made a purchase in the days since the election. Generally, I'm not a wheelgun enthusiast. Glocks, CZs, 1911s, etc. are what I'm really all about. But seeing this gun was really an experience. Given that I never pass up a chance to better myself at the expense of someone who is suffering, I bought this barely fired gun off of some guy who needed money. He enclosed all of the documentation for the revolver.
Last night, I was looking at the receipts and realized the guy was on a payment plan. He couldn't afford the thing to begin with and then had to sell it. I had a slight pang of conscience. Being that tight on green sucks, especially if you are selling all of the crap you've saved up for, for the past few years.
In any case, Thursday is range day and I will have a report up.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Radio Silence
Things got weird during and after the election. Hosting Matters was weird and blogspot was, spotty, no pun intended.
In any case, my DSL went out for the last three days. I am posting this from a dial-up connection at the office.
The election is over, so we can get back to guns, and I have a new one. But the dial-up just doesn't cut it.
Will be reporting shortly.
In any case, my DSL went out for the last three days. I am posting this from a dial-up connection at the office.
The election is over, so we can get back to guns, and I have a new one. But the dial-up just doesn't cut it.
Will be reporting shortly.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
She's back, and thank God for it
Some of you may not agree, but I have always thought Peggy Noonan to be a dynamite commentator.
It was weird, in that, she got a bit squishy after 9/11 and I solidified. She was into uniting and I was into destroying. She believed in strength in corraling families and walking in NY, but at the same time I felt blood-lust.
Columns from that era do not resonate as well with me as what she was writing for the WSJ before she bowed out. I can't enter her brain, so I don't know, but her curent column is dead on.
It was weird, in that, she got a bit squishy after 9/11 and I solidified. She was into uniting and I was into destroying. She believed in strength in corraling families and walking in NY, but at the same time I felt blood-lust.
Columns from that era do not resonate as well with me as what she was writing for the WSJ before she bowed out. I can't enter her brain, so I don't know, but her curent column is dead on.
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Perfect Configuration
I have been collecting miscellaneous accoutrements, in hopes of attaining the perfect defense configuration. Today I scored a mid-size Ka-Bar.
I have a hard time choosing a knife. Unlike handguns and rifles, one is not given a regular opportunity to utilize or practice with one. I own fixed knives with blades between 5" and 9", tactical folders, and my regular carry, a Cold Steel push dagger. I bought the Ka-bar to try it out as a non-concealed carry weapon. I don't think that will work.
Handguns are a little easier. I'm a classicist. I either like the Glock 17 (9 mm) or a Commander 1911 (.45.) I am also looking at maybe buying a H&K USP .45 for Christmas, because I've been so friendly all year.
All purpose rifle, I have to go with the AR-15. People have numerous bitches about this gun and the caliber. I have about 6 uppers and a couple lowers. The best combination I have is a DPMS lower (pre-ban which I paid a crapload of money for a year ago) and a Rock River A2 upper. No jams, ever. The cartridge also seems ideal because I can fire it all afternoon and carry a lot of it. When I take out my 30.06 bolt to fool around with, I can usually get 30 rounds through it before I'm exhausted.
As far a the shotgun, I have a Mossberg 12 gauge.
If anybody has recommendations for improvements, please let me know.
By the way, I'm still waiting on my Surefire light and hope to stun my neighbors pets as a trial run.
I have a hard time choosing a knife. Unlike handguns and rifles, one is not given a regular opportunity to utilize or practice with one. I own fixed knives with blades between 5" and 9", tactical folders, and my regular carry, a Cold Steel push dagger. I bought the Ka-bar to try it out as a non-concealed carry weapon. I don't think that will work.
Handguns are a little easier. I'm a classicist. I either like the Glock 17 (9 mm) or a Commander 1911 (.45.) I am also looking at maybe buying a H&K USP .45 for Christmas, because I've been so friendly all year.
All purpose rifle, I have to go with the AR-15. People have numerous bitches about this gun and the caliber. I have about 6 uppers and a couple lowers. The best combination I have is a DPMS lower (pre-ban which I paid a crapload of money for a year ago) and a Rock River A2 upper. No jams, ever. The cartridge also seems ideal because I can fire it all afternoon and carry a lot of it. When I take out my 30.06 bolt to fool around with, I can usually get 30 rounds through it before I'm exhausted.
As far a the shotgun, I have a Mossberg 12 gauge.
If anybody has recommendations for improvements, please let me know.
By the way, I'm still waiting on my Surefire light and hope to stun my neighbors pets as a trial run.
Election Round-Up
I may have been to harsh on Mr. Kerry last night. My previously non-existant respect for the man climbed several notches today. I may be sentimental, but he took the honorable way out and I always thought we was too egotistical to concede. Kudos to him.
Edwards was a different matter. This guy is theoretically making a concession speech but it sounds like he's trying to rile up a union hall in Iowa during the primaries. This man is dangerous.
Daschle got booted and Thune seems to be a good candidate.
The only Dem I was rooting for was the guy who was running against Arlen Specter (Hoeffler?, Hoefsted?, something like that.) Mr. Specter is the most duplicitous member of the Senate. If he manages to stab Bush in the back in the next four years, W should have seen it coming. Also, this guy was the chief architect of the Bork smear, and we're going to trust him with the chair of the judiciary? Ludicrous.
Spoons agrees with me that Michael Barone is the smartest man alive.
Arafat also seems to have fallen back into critical condition. Poor, poor soul. If Bush wins, and Arafat croaks before midnight, this will be a very happy day, indeed.
UPDATE:
Cowboy Blob's assessment is pretty much mine. Smallest Minority sums it up graphically. Head says fuck em'. Hey, it's politics, and I'm just really glad it's over.
Edwards was a different matter. This guy is theoretically making a concession speech but it sounds like he's trying to rile up a union hall in Iowa during the primaries. This man is dangerous.
Daschle got booted and Thune seems to be a good candidate.
The only Dem I was rooting for was the guy who was running against Arlen Specter (Hoeffler?, Hoefsted?, something like that.) Mr. Specter is the most duplicitous member of the Senate. If he manages to stab Bush in the back in the next four years, W should have seen it coming. Also, this guy was the chief architect of the Bork smear, and we're going to trust him with the chair of the judiciary? Ludicrous.
Spoons agrees with me that Michael Barone is the smartest man alive.
Arafat also seems to have fallen back into critical condition. Poor, poor soul. If Bush wins, and Arafat croaks before midnight, this will be a very happy day, indeed.
UPDATE:
Cowboy Blob's assessment is pretty much mine. Smallest Minority sums it up graphically. Head says fuck em'. Hey, it's politics, and I'm just really glad it's over.
Is this a trend?
It's Tuesday night at 1:30 in the morning and I've just spent the last 7 hours staring at a television set (which is more TV than I usually watch in a month. I watched another pompous, liberal jerk-off dispatch a minion to tell me that he doesn't like losing and is gonna blame the Pong loss on the joystick (the classic 80's Atari arcade defense.)
Where does this party find people who actually believe they were conceived with the specific annointment that they should someday be president? If the asshole wants to delay things, why can't he come out and do it himself?
I was glad to see that Fox had Michael Barone on, probably one of the smartest pundits out there, although he's a little twitch on TV. He did the statistical analysis and there's no way Kerry can win. The electoral votes are there, the margin is too large in Ohio, and he just plain lost.
Par for the course, New Mexico, a beautiful but dystfunctional state that I call home, appears to have lost somewhere between 1 and 50,000 ballots.
Four years from now, I'm taking the week off and heading to the mountains. Or something.
Where does this party find people who actually believe they were conceived with the specific annointment that they should someday be president? If the asshole wants to delay things, why can't he come out and do it himself?
I was glad to see that Fox had Michael Barone on, probably one of the smartest pundits out there, although he's a little twitch on TV. He did the statistical analysis and there's no way Kerry can win. The electoral votes are there, the margin is too large in Ohio, and he just plain lost.
Par for the course, New Mexico, a beautiful but dystfunctional state that I call home, appears to have lost somewhere between 1 and 50,000 ballots.
Four years from now, I'm taking the week off and heading to the mountains. Or something.
Monday, November 01, 2004
Election Day
Tomorrow is election day. The family tradition is to stay up until 4 in the morning and wait for someone to retract a concession. Posting may be light until I figure out exactly how mutilated the democratic process is going to be this time.
My advice to you, is to drink heavily.
My advice to you, is to drink heavily.
