They probably said, “There’s the old guy. He’ll keel over first. Dibs!”
Xenia Huffman-Scott
May 25, 2009
[After hearing that when Kim, Caleb, and I climbed to the top of a cliff on Saturday there were five vultures circling us. Pictures tomorrow.–Joe]
Via email from friend and co-worker Kris comes this nifty bit of history and an alternate use for your rifle stock.
Robertson v. Baldwin declared “the carrying of concealed weapons” (presumably, handguns and knives) to be an exception to the Second Amendment. 165 U.S. 275, 281-82 (1897). The exception proves the rule: that a ban on all handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment. Similarly, Justice Holmes’ opinion in Patsone v. Pennsylvania upheld a state statute against legal aliens possessing long guns for hunting, because the statute “does not extend to weapons such as pistols that may be supposed to be needed occasionally for self-defence.” 232 U.S. 138, 143 (1914).
The District’s current prohibition against handguns and immediately serviceable firearms in the home effectively eliminates a woman’s ability to defend her very life and those of her children against violent attack. Women are simply less likely to be able to thwart violence using means currently permitted under D.C. law. Women are generally less physically strong, making it less likely that most physical confrontations will end favorably for women. Women with access to immediately disabling means, however, have been proven to benefit from the equalization of strength differential a handgun provides. Women’s ability to own such serviceable firearms is indeed of even greater importance given the holdings of both federal and state courts that there is no individual right to police protection.
M. Carol Bambery
Brief of amicae curiae 126 women state legislators and academics in support of respondent.
Now, it just so happens that most things that are positives prior to collapse turn out to be negatives once collapse occurs, and vice versa. For instance, prior to collapse having high inventory in a business is bad, because the businesses have to store it and finance it, so they try to have just-in-time inventory. After collapse, high inventory turns out to be very useful, because they can barter it for the things they need, and they can’t easily get more because they don’t have any credit. Prior to collapse, it’s good for a business to have the right level of staffing and an efficient organization. After collapse, what you want is a gigantic, sluggish bureaucracy that can’t unwind operations or lay people off fast enough through sheer bureaucratic foot-dragging. Prior to collapse, what you want is an effective retail segment and good customer service. After collapse, you regret not having an unreliable retail segment, with shortages and long bread lines, because then people would have been forced to learn to shift for themselves instead of standing around waiting for somebody to come and feed them.
Dmitry Orlov
February 13, 2009
Social Collapse Best Practices
Xenia and Kim got their grades. Xenia just finished her sophmore year in college and Kim her freshman year. They got all A’s except for one B.
Barb and I are very proud.
Breda conclusively demonstrates TSA is nothing but security theater. As conclusive as that story is I could tell better stories than that–but the statute of limitations hasn’t expired yet.
TSA, it’s A Security Theater.
Yesterday Caleb and I did some more work at the Boomershoot site. We folded a bunch more boxes, and inspected the repairs Caleb had made on the stairs. We hooked up the generator and charged the batteries for a while and did some other odds and ends.
What really surprised us was the place where we had two fires recently. Unless you looked closely it was difficult to know there had been a fire:
I’ve been on vacation the last couple of days and have not had time for blogging. Tomorrow we are going camping and won’t have an Internet connection or even cell phone service.
I’ve posted some QOTDs that may or may not show up on the appropriate days.
I’ll get back into things Monday or Tuesday.
Part of what I spent part of my vacation doing was fixing my parents boat so we could take it out camping to some boat accessible only campsites. It had a heating problem. When the engine was running at slow speed it would quickly get hot. At high speed it was fine. Brother Doug and I hypothesized there must be a bad hose that was feeding water from the stern drive (it’s in inboard/outboard Mercruiser) to the engine. The boat doesn’t have that many hours on it but it is 36 years old.
Kim, Caleb and I took the stern drive off and found the hose we knew must exist. It as as hard as a rock and it must have took us about two hours to get it off. It came off in dozens of pieces. Here are some of the larger ones:
It didn’t help that the ends of the hose were only accessible with our finger tips or tools. Getting a clear view, with light and tools on the object was impossible.
Doug happened to be in town and called just before he returned. We gave him a parts list and he picked up the hose, gaskets, O-rings, and a few other things we needed and we started putting the boat back together.
That took hours too. Just putting the hose on must have taken an hour by itself.
We didn’t get home until about 21:45. We were tired and covered in grease.
Next time, 35 years from now with the hose goes bad again, I advise our kids and grandkids to take it in and have an expert fix it. We must have put 25 man-hours into it. It wasn’t worth a day of my vacation for the dollars saved by doing it ourselves.
No matter what other nations may say about the United States, immigration is still the sincerest form of flattery.
This was a lot of fun. Joe had said that some people like to blow up Boomers at long range, while others prefer to “pick grass and dirt out of their teeth.” I could understand why. By the end, my cheeks hurt from smiling so severely.
ErnestThing
May 11, 2009
Boomershoot 2009
[This was referring to the High Intensity close range shoot. I’m thinking of doing it both Friday and Saturday evening in 2010.–Joe]
We in the pro-freedom camp (Americans) spend too much time arguing about safety. Or rather, we argue safety far too often in the terms laid down by our enemies– the enemies of liberty. Though the statistics are often on our side, we’re granting the basis for the argument (that government exists to promote the physical safety of the individual) to the enemy.
Wrong premise.
Too many police departments, for example, call themselves Departments of Public Safety and the like. That’s not their function, per se. Their proper function is to enforce the law and the primary purpose of law, in the uniquely American sense at least, is to promote and protect your rights. That this function has been corrupted over the years does not change the original intent.
The American Revolution was indeed fought for safety, but the safety so dearly bought therein was a rather different kind of safety from that promoted by the neo-Fascists. It wasn’t the kind of safety taught at your local public school. It wasn’t the kind of safety we’re training for in a fire drill or in a drivers’ education class. That kind of safety is properly the responsibility of the individual or of private interests.
The kind of safety for which the Revolution was fought and for which the constitution was written is safety from government interference– safety from the enemies of liberty both foreign and domestic.
Historically, out-of-control governments have presented a danger to public safety far greater than all common criminal activity and standard physical danger combined. Some government or left-wing hack asserting that we need more government intrusion as a means of promoting “safety” is a bit like advocating mass sex orgies for the promotion of abstinence.
When we’re arguing safety and public policy then, we need to make it clear beforehand which particular kind of safety we’re discussing– the safety of subjects owned by the government (the safety of tyrants and sycophants) or the safety of a free people. They are near polar opposites.
The credit card bill with the amendment for restoring our rights to keep and bear arms in national parks passed the Senate a few minutes ago:
_ Includes unrelated provision that would allow people to carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
It’s not a sure thing it will get passed into law yet but the chances aren’t too bad:
The 90-5 vote, following a 357-to-70 vote in the House on April 30, made it likely that President Obama will have a measure on his desk before the Memorial Day recess. The differences between the House and Senate versions will have to be worked out, but given the political atmosphere it seems likely that the House-Senate negotiations will move quickly.
Amazing. And this bill is much better for us than the ruling change the Brady Campaign shot down with the bogus “no environmental assessment study was done” lawsuit.
The Brady Campaign may have not only wasted their money but they may get a worse result for their efforts.
Be on the lookout for more Sad Pandas.
In the U.K. the Speaker of the Lower House of Parliament has several duties. Some of these have been hazardous to their health:
The Speaker sets the agenda for debate in parliament, calls on members of parliament to speak, can limit question time and decide whether amendments should be voted on.
They also traditionally serve as a liaison with the monarch, acting as a buffer between the Commons and the sovereign.
In the past, when relations between the two were not always so good, Speakers had a deadly job. In fact, nine Speakers, all prior to 1560, died a violent death, one murdered, one killed in battle and seven beheaded, two on the same day.
I’m all for our Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi resigning because of her scandal (as the U.K. speaker is) but being beheaded seems a little over the top (as well was being a little off the top).
I complain about the lack of freedom and the almost daily new encroachments on our freedoms but things could be worse. We could be living in China where things like this happen–apparently without even a hearing or any sort of due process:
This investment turned out to be as risky as it was risque. A sex theme park that featured explicit exhibits of genitalia and sexual culture is being demolished before it can even open, a government spokesman in southwestern China said Monday.
The park, christened “Love Land” by its owners, went under the wrecking ball over the weekend in the city of Chongqing, said the spokesman, who like many Chinese bureaucrats would give only his surname, Yang.
Yang refused to give the reason for the demolition or other details. However, photographs of the adult-only park had circulated widely on the Internet over the weekend, prompting widespread mockery and condemnation.
Exhibits had included giant-sized reproductions of male and female anatomy, dissertations on how the topic of sex is treated in various cultures and what the official China Daily newspaper called “sex technique workshops.”
The park’s main investor, Lu Xiaoqing, had earlier claimed that the attractions sought only to boost sexual awareness and improve people’s sex-lives.
The demolition highlights conflicted views on sex in modern China, where a prudish attitude toward discussion of sexuality is paired with an almost clinical approach to its physical aspects.
It was just day before yesterday I said I might want to visit.
The U.S. Treasury Department has taken an interest in my hardened underground bunker. Given the mention of our V.P. in the post it probably was the Secret Service just doing their job this time:
| Domain Name | treas.gov ? (U.S. Government) | |||||||||||||
| IP Address | 63.167.255.# (Sprint) | |||||||||||||
| ISP | Sprint | |||||||||||||
| Location |
| |||||||||||||
| Language | unknown | |||||||||||||
| Operating System | Microsoft WinXP | |||||||||||||
| Browser | Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) | |||||||||||||
| Javascript | disabled | |||||||||||||
| Time of Visit | May 19 2009 7:29:53 am | |||||||||||||
| Last Page View | May 19 2009 7:30:00 am | |||||||||||||
| Visit Length | 7 seconds | |||||||||||||
| Page Views | 2 | |||||||||||||
| Referring URL | unknown | |||||||||||||
| Visit Entry Page | http://blog.joehuffm…dergroundBunker.aspx | |||||||||||||
| Visit Exit Page | http://blog.joehuffm…dergroundBunker.aspx | |||||||||||||
| Out Click | ||||||||||||||
| Time Zone | unknown | |||||||||||||
| Visitor’s Time | Unknown | |||||||||||||
| Visit Number | 508,096 |
They visited the post directly rather than through a referring link from a search engine web page. This frequently means a click on a link in an email.
Heavy sigh… I need to go through my log files with a fine toothed comb again…
If the intent of the Gun Control Act of 1998 was to discourage the sport of hunting and competitive target shooting and to disarm Massachusetts citizens, it must be considered a howling success. In 10 years since its passage, the number of licensed gun owners has decreased from 1,500,000 to 220,000, an 85 percent drop, according to figures provided by the by the House Post Audit and Oversight Committee. Well done!
If the intent was to reduce crime, then that law must be considered a miserable failure. Based on incidents per 100,000, gun-related homicides are up 68 percent, assault related gun injuries up 72 percent, assault related hospital discharges up 160 percent, gun assault Emergency Dept visits up 222 percent and gun assault outpatient observations up 538 percent. Keep in mind that these increases occurred when there were 1,280,000 fewer licensed gun owners in the state.
In addition to not curbing gun crime, the legal gun owners have had to bear the brunt of additional costs and inconvenience, not to mention the constant character assignation that licensed gun owners receive. There appears to be a misconception that has been instilled into the public that everyone who owns a gun is suspect and is one to be feared.
Well, duh! It’s about government control not citizen safety. It always has been. It makes people feel safer. And for most people perception is reality. That and people will enthusiastically accept statements like, Just because something is irrational doesn’t mean you don’t have to believe in it. I’m with James on this.
The NRA just filed suit in San Francisco:
The City is being sued by gun owners and gun-advocacy groups because of a local law that says firearms have to be locked up or kept disabled.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court Friday afternoon, challenges a local restriction that forces handgun owners to either store their guns in a locked container or disable them with trigger locks. Mayor Gavin Newsom signed the law into effect in August 2007.
National Rifle Association attorney Chuck Michel, who filed the case, said the locking restriction interferes with citizens’ rights to immediately defend their families.
Plaintiffs include a group of San Francisco gun owners, retired police officers and the NRA.
“These are all people who recognize the right to self-defense is a fundamental civil right that needs to be protected as well,” Michel said.
The suit also tackles The City’s ban on the sale of fragmenting bullets, which break apart upon impact, and names Newsom and police Chief Heather Fong.
Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard said locking up one’s guns is a matter of common sense.
“If even one life can be saved by this sensible law, it’s worth it,” he said.
Good! Keep attacking. Let’s see how many fronts the Brady Campaign can fight on compared to the good guys. The NRA alone is acquiring 100K new members a month. That doesn’t include CCRKBA, SAF, JPFO, GOA, Calguns, etc.
Mr. Ballard, as Jeff points out, needs to consider the lives lost because of the law as well as the lives saved.
Why do pro-gun folks refuse to accept obvious facts like these? Couldn’t they accept this data and still maintain their position on the 2nd Amendment? Why is it necessary to also deny the obvious? More guns means more gun deaths.
Mikeb302000
May 18, 2009
Gun Availability
[In answer to his questions–it’s because the “facts” he quotes ignores certain data points, such as Washington D.C. and Chicago, and because they are only measuring “gun deaths”. Justified (and praiseworthy) homicide are included and murder rate and violent crime rates are ignored.
It’s an anti-gun blog with open comments. I wonder how long that will last…–Joe]
One of the people participating at Boomershoot this year was a U.K. citizen. Via Facebook I found out the following:
I Got a call from the cops at 2300 last night, suggesting that I haven’t been shooting my guns enough.
It was the UK police on the phone, calling my US cel number. I have a UK firearms certificate – one of the requirements to keep my UK firearms certificate is that I must shoot every 12 months, and my UK rifle club just reported that I hadn’t done so… I told them that I’ve definitely shot in the past 12 months, so now I need to send them proof. This is, actually, the least surreal part of this experience.
So… in the land where handguns are banned and long guns are severely restricted the cops will call you and threaten to take away your firearms certificate if you haven’t been shooting enough.
Since I knew he had been shooting three inch square boxes filled with explosives dangling from paracord nearly 700 yards away just a three weeks ago I offered to confirm his story. He said if he needed my help he would let me know.
