Monthly Archives: July 2010

Quote of the day–John Boccieri

Posted on by

In these difficult times, it is vital that Congress maintain individuals’ constitutional property rights. Some property rights are secure; clothing, pets, or crops can be deemed exempt from repossession. Other property rights, however, are ignored, most notably 2nd Amendment rights.


In response, I urge you to join me in becoming an original cosponsor of The Protecting Gun Owners in Bankruptcy Act of 2010. The Protecting Gun Owners in Bankruptcy Act of 2010 will allow consumer bankruptcy debtors to exempt firearms from the claims of creditors.  Specifically, the measure would permit firearms held primarily for the personal, family or household use of the debtor to be exempt from the claims of creditors under federal exemption law.


John Boccieri U.S. Representative (Democrat) from Ohio
Letter to Congress June 2010.
[I’m not so sure I like the idea of exempting all firearms from the claims of creditors. I could see some dollar value exemption, like $10K in guns and ammo but not an unlimited number of firearms or dollar value. If someone owed me $100K I would be pretty upset if the debtor could tell the judge the only thing he owned was just this one gun and the judge was required to let the guy keep it rather than pay his debt to me.


On the other hand it’s nice to see politicians (especially Democrats) thinking of ways to curry favor with gun owners. And of course putting Josh Sugarmann at risk of a aneurysm gets a few bonus points from me too.–Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by



Yeah, right.


If anything gun rights activists are more upset than those that dance in the blood of these tragic events. Nearly all mass shootings occur in victim disarmament zones. Much of the loss of life and injuries could have been prevented. We are constantly trying to prevent future tragedies and people like this artist are doing their best to hinder us.

Quote of the day–John R. Lott, Jr.

Posted on by

The Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center evaluate the benefits of concealed handgun laws based solely on the claimed costs — they don’t compare the cases where defensive uses occurred to the bad things that happen, but only count what they claim are the bad cases. They ignore lots of amazing defensive gun use cases. But even more bizarrely, they count legitimate self-defense cases as bad events even when no charges are filed or the permit holder is later exonerated.


John R. Lott, Jr.
July 25, 2010
Gun Control Advocates Make up Facts about Concealed Handgun Laws
[Typical. They have to lie to push their agenda.–Joe]

Floating down the river

Posted on by

Today we took a little trip down the Middle Fork of the Clearwater River. We put into the river a little bit east of Kooskia and got out a little bit east of Kamiah. Here are some pictures:



Barbara, Joe, Ellie, Dow, Kim, Bryan, Nancy, Willie, Mike.



Kim in the water. Taken with a Windows Phone 7 by Asus.



Ellie and Dow. Taken with a Windows Phone 7 by Asus.



Bryan. Taken with a Windows Phone 7 by Asus.



Taken with a Windows Phone 7 by Asus.



Bryan, Nancy, Willie, Mike. Taken with a Windows Phone 7 by Asus.





Video from my video glasses.

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by



And this is funny how? Humor has to have at least an element of truth to it to be funny. Where is the truth in random shooting while an oath of office is being administered?

Quote of the day–U.S. Rep. Debbie Halvorson

Posted on by

We’re one of two states who don’t have concealed carry. Chicago is seeing some of the worst gun violence right now — though it had some of the tightest gun restrictions.

Violence goes down when concealed carry is the law. Illinois should pass common-sense legislation.



U.S. Rep. Debbie Halvorson, D-Crete
July 23, 2010
Gun fight looming — State legislators expected to reload laws
[Yes. Illinois should do that. When I can discreetly carry in Chicago I might actually consider visiting again. The same goes for California, Hawaii, and a few other places that I am interested in visiting.


Notice also the ‘D’ after her name. She is a friend of gun owners even though I’m sure there are some issues we will be the exact opposite of each other. But until the gun issue is settled we can ignore differences. When we have something we agree on we should work together to accomplish things. Don’t look for reasons to reject someone. Look for reasons to take advantage of their offer to help accomplish mutual goals.–Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by



When a small child manages to start and drive a car, falls into a swimming pool, or down the stairs you don’t hear people demanding cars, pools, and stairs be banned. And you don’t hear people say cars, pools, and stairs kill people. Why the obsession with firearms and accidents involving them? Since I have been keeping track accidental firearm deaths have fallen from about 1500 per year to 700 per year in the U.S. And that is with the total number of guns in the country increasing.


I agree there are some legitimate things to mock the NRA about. But the slogan “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” is not one of them.

How the Brady Campaign counts members

Posted on by

This should come as no surprise to those who have clashed with the Brady Campaign over the years:



Well, like 2 years ago I sent an e-mail to the Brady Camp, pointing out that their section of TN gun laws contained outright lies. One specifically stated that there were no age restrictions to possessing a handgun in TN. I pointed out how rediculous [sic] their whole premise was and how they could believe an inanimate object (a gun) could CAUSE evil.


…


I told them to respond unless they knew they were wrong. So today I get an e-mail saying that thanks to members like me, the Brady Campaign is succeeding in curbing gun violence??????


Remember those 50,000 members they claim they have? As we suspected, that should be revised down considerably. Even if they try to hide their lies, we have backups.

Think it through Dennis

Posted on by

Dennis Henigan tells us guns aren’t useful as a deterrence against violent crime:

Apart from the statistics, the deterrence theory poses an interesting conundrum. If criminals are deterred by the prospect that their victim may be armed, how can we account for attacks by armed criminals against other armed criminals? Why do armed drug dealers have anything to fear from other armed drug dealers? Why do armed gangs have anything to fear from other armed gangs? Pro-gun researcher Gary Kleck of Florida State University reports that street gang members are over eight times more likely to own handguns than other youths, and nineteen times more likely to be homicide victims. Drug dealers are almost four times more likely to own a handgun and six times more likely to be homicide victims. Why doesn’t their gun possession deter attacks on these criminals? Surely it can’t be true that bad guys fear only armed good guys, but not other armed bad guys.

Half-Truth Henigan, as is usual, only explores a subset of the situations. The missing part is where one side is armed and the other is disarmed. How much deterrence is there then?

It’s obvious Henigan is only a lawyer for the Brady Campaign instead of an engineer, a scientist, or a carpenter. If carpenters built houses like Henigan builds his theories of criminal behavior the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization*.

* I’m plagiarizing Wienberg’s Second Law.

Vacation

Posted on by

In an hour or so I’m headed off to the semi-deep woods of North Central Idaho. I know I won’t have any cell phone service. I might be able to occasionally find an Internet connection. It’s just as likely I will come across wolves (or they will find us). The reports I have been hearing suggest they are getting more bold and agressive toward humans. If it comes up I’ll give a field report on the Hornady TAP FPD in 55 grain .223 Remington I found waiting for me when I got home last night.

Quote of the day–Dmitry Orlov

Posted on by

The mid-1990s did not seem to me as the right time to voice such ideas. The United States was celebrating its so-called Cold War victory, getting over its Vietnam syndrome by bombing Iraq back to the Stone Age, and the foreign policy wonks coined the term “hyperpower” and were jabbering on about full-spectrum dominance. All sorts of silly things were happening. Professor Fukuyama told us that history had ended, and so we were building a brave new world where the Chinese made things out of plastic for us, the Indians provided customer support when these Chinese-made things broke, and we paid for it all just by flipping houses, pretending that they were worth a lot of money whereas they are really just useless bits of ticky-tacky. Alan Greenspan chided us about “irrational exuberance” while consistently low-balling interest rates. It was the “Goldilocks economy” – not to hot, not too cold. Remember that? And now it turns out that it was actually more of a “Tinker-bell” economy, because the last five or so years of economic growth was more or less a hallucination, based on various debt pyramids, the “whole house of cards” as President Bush once referred to it during one of his lucid moments. And now we can look back on all of that with a funny, queasy feeling, or we can look forward and feel nothing but vertigo.


Dmitry Orlov
February 13, 2009
Social Collapse Best Practices
[I had a conversation with a friend earlier this week and he was of the opinion (pharaphrasing) we went from “it was too early to shoot the bastards to it’s too late to do any good and it’s just a matter of riding things out as best we can as we auger into the ground”.


I can’t say that I have any factual basis to refute his assessment.–Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by


The artist completely ignores all the issues of due process, inability to challenge your placement on the list, the criteria for being placed on the list, etc. It would appear the artist believes it’s “all about the profits of the gun industry” or some such thing.


As I said over in the comments at Sebastian’s place:



My model of his (and many other) claim of “gun lobby profits” and such things is that they can’t imagine individuals actually wanting a gun unless they are a criminal or they have been duped by the “evil corporations”. I could be wrong, but it seems to me a great number of them think in terms of “everything bad is due to capitalism” or even more general in that “freedom is the root of all evil”. Their vision of utopia is government planning and control of everything.


Because of this if they don’t get their way it cannot be “the fault” of the individuals. It has to be influence of the evil capitalists. Why do you think the “progressives” want to silence their opposition (most recently Fox News, in years past it was “Fairness Doctrine”)?


As one admitted Marxist told me, “I believe in the good of society over the good of the individual.” Society/Government/Intellectuals/The-Central-Committee should make the decisions. Capitalists with their influence are the only real threat to “Society” and they should always be suspect because their motives are money and not “the good of society”. Only those untainted by Capitalist urges can be trusted to be pure and good.


At least that is the way I see their delusions working.


The concepts of a “basic human right” and a “specific enumerated right” being denied by involuntary membership on secret lists somehow don’t make it past their filters.

Quote of the day–Ed Black

Posted on by

Much of the unprecedented economic growth of the past 10 years can actually be
credited to the doctrine of fair use, as the Internet itself depends on the
ability to use content in a limited and nonlicensed manner. To stay on the edge of innovation and
productivity, we must keep fair use as one of the cornerstones for creativity,
innovation, and, as today’s study indicates, an engine for growth for our
country.

Ed Black
Fair Use Worth More to Economy Than Copyright, CCIA Says
President and CEO of CCIA.
September 12, 2007
[I’ve been doing some research into “fair use“. For the obvious reasons.

There may be other options as well as those I have seen discussed. I’ll report back if I find anything “interesting”.–Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

I’ll admit there is some hostility toward the ATF by gun owners. But I have yet to meet anyone who advocates using the cartridge box at this point when we haven’t finished using the soap, ballot, and jury boxes. Yet this artist apparently thinks we are violent criminals just waiting for an opportunity to get in a shoot out with government employees.

Quote of the day–Thom Mannard

Posted on by

Finally, the Court’s ruling to extend the scope of the Second Amendment has
national implications. The gun lobby is using this decision to further its
real agenda, that they want anyone to have any gun, anywhere, at any time
regardless of the proven risk to police and the public. Their unstated motive
is to enhance the profits of the gun industry by encouraging individuals to
believe they need a multitude of guns and are seeking nothing less than the
complete dismantling of our nation’s gun laws for their own political and
financial gain. Lawmakers in state legislatures and in Congress must utilize
the Supreme Court’s decision to press for common sense gun laws for the safety
and security of the America people.

Thom Mannard
Executive Director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence
June 28, 2010
Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence Issues Statement On Supreme Court Ruling Over Chicago’s Handgun Ban
[He is just repeating the same lies anti-gun people have been attempting to use for decades. Here is a quick scan of the obvious lies from just this one paragraph:

  1. I have had many “behind the scenes” conversations with multiple people placed high in the power structure of “the gun lobby”. I read nearly all their media releases. I have never heard anyone in power within “the gun lobby” even hint they want “anyone to have any gun, anywhere, at any time”. Mannard is either lying or is delusional.
  2. If there is “proven risk to police and the public” then Mannard (or anyone) should be able to answer Just One Question. Just One Question has been posted for nearly six years now. Still there have not been any answers which Mannard is likely to tout (I do have a nomination for an answer that I must investigate sometime soon–if I can just find the email they sent).
  3. The “gun lobby” that represents the gun industry and is concerned with their profits is the NSSF. They had an exceedingly small role in the Heller and McDonald decisions. The NRA (with, at best, minor roles) and SAF were the gun lobby organizations that won those decisions. The NRA and SAF are grassroots organizations that represent individuals, not the manufacturer and profits of “the gun industry”. Even five minutes of research would have clearly revealed these facts. That is, if Mannard had been concerned with facts.
  4. Mannard has motive for “the complete dismantling of our nation’s gun laws” exactly backward. If the NRA and SAF were to be totally successful, by Mannard’s criteria, then they would have destroyed their “industry”. And with it any further political and financial gain. In fact some gun rights activists accuse the NRA of not wanting to win because it would destroy their positions of power and money.

-Joe]

TSA blinders

Posted on by

I’ve been wondering when something like this would be publicized and available for sale.

If I had the time and didn’t mind missing my flight I would make myself a set of clothes that were lined with, or made of, aluminized Mylar. I pretty sure it would be hot and uncomfortable but it would also totally block the latest TSA body scanners.

If I had enough money that I didn’t have to work anymore I think I could entertain myself for years making (bigger) fools of the TSA on a weekly basis. Of course some of my jollies might bring commercial aviation to halt for a day or two and then I would feel bad for the hardship I had imposed on all the innocent people trying to travel.

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

My guess is the artist had no idea what a “Saturday Night Special” is. And I’m certain they didn’t know the origin of the phrase (“Ni**ertown Saturday Night Special”) and how the legal restrictions on them came about (to disarm poor blacks).

And what about the “School Day Shooters”? Did the artist really believe people advocate shooting school children? I think some pretty bad things of the anti-gun people but I am of the opinion that most of them actually have good intentions (reduction of criminal violence). But there are so many anti-gun people who seem to actually believe the pro-freedom people intend the destruction of innocent life. I suppose it’s possible they don’t actually believe their own rhetoric. They could be just telling the big lie again and again in hope others will believe it.

But I think the most likely explanation is that they haven’t put any thought into it. So many times when I have asked some anti-gun person just one or two questions they get this blank look on their face. It’s a “deer in the headlights” look. Or perhaps a better metaphor would be that it is as if they were the Emperor who just realized they were totally without clothes.

Boomershoot private party

Posted on by

Some people from work followed me back to Idaho on Friday night.

Saturday morning we had breakfast at the Breakfast Club in Moscow with Tim, Barron, and Janelle.


Hiep and Priyanka walking into the restaurant. Photo by Sharath.

We drove to the Boomershoot site and I told them the history, told lots of stories and gave them a tour. They found some .50 BMG bullets and seemed quite thrilled. The picture below is from on top of the berm where the 700 yard targets are placed looking back at the hay field to the shooting line.


Janelle, Barron, Tim (just barely visible behind the grass), Hiep, Sharath, and Priyanka.

I gave them a safety briefing on the chemicals (which consists mostly of telling them not to eat, drink, or snort anything) I had the people from Microsoft weigh the chemicals and my staff mix the explosives and package it into targets:


Sharath, Priyanka, Hiep.


Janelle, Tim (barely visible–he doesn’t want his picture taken because cameras will steal your soul), and Barron.

We ate lunch then placed the targets in front of the large berm at the tree line.


Sharath, Priyanka, and Hiep putting stakes in the ground for the targets.

One of the targets had something special on it (see also here).

I gave safety and basic firearm instructions while Tim, Barron, and Janelle placed the targets on the stakes. Sharath had never shot a gun before. Hiep had only shot one once and that was after he had three years of military instruction in Vietnam. Priyanka shot a gun for the first time last September and then in March took her parents (visiting from India) to the range on her own and taught them to shoot.


Targets ready for engagement. Photo by Sharath.

We then got back a few feet and let the visitors shoot the targets. There were many smiles and much exaltation.


Joe and Hiep. Photo by Sharath.

Hiep once told me he didn’t think private citizens should possess firearms. Only the police and the military should have access. I should ask if he still thinks that.

Boomershoot is a tool for teaching people from all over the world the joys of guns and explosives–the joy of freedom.