Some wacko (redundancy alert) gun control activist “chopped off the tip of his trigger finger to protest efforts by the gun lobby to scuttle tougher firearms laws.”  It happened in 1994 and he is now auctioning off the homemade guillotine and small hammer he used to do it on eBay; Which is why it is in the news now.  Read about it here.

It certainly takes a fair amount of dedications to do that but it doesn't compare to burning yourself to death in public like some Buddhist monks (and I believe some Quakers) did to protest the Vietnam war.  And I have to give him credit for symbology too, assuming he is not left handed, or chops off the other “trigger finger“ this week.  But of course gun control is all about symbolism rather than substance so one can't really expect much real dedication from him.  But I have been thinking what he, and his fellow activists, might do if they had the dedication of the aforementioned Buddhist monks.  I'll leave the details to your grisly imaginations, I would rather not give them a road-map for even temporary political success, but it involves changing the national statistics on murder and suicides committed with firearms.

You know you have had a bad week when the high point was the visit from the ATF.

Joe Huffman
March 22, 2005

Yesterday I spent essentially the entire day with Crystal.  That last time I had a visit from the ATF it was Sue that came down from Spokane.  I had spoken with Crystal on the phone at least a time or two but this was the first time I had met her. It had come up in my conversation with Sue that Crystal was very likable and fun to be around.  Crystal is a character.  She was constantly making jokes and laughing.  You have to either like her style of humor or get away because it never stops.  I liked it.

Her card says ATF, not ATFE, and her shirt and coat both have ATF in big letters on them--she calls them her “shoot me clothes“.  While at A&W, where we met, she wore a different coat over the top of her “shoot me shirt.“

We talked about regulations and changes since the Safe Explosives Act, and examined my paperwork.  There was one issue that bothered us both as we sort of danced around the issue for a while.  She said I had to have production records for everything I manufactured.  I knew I had to have storage records for everything, unless (I thought) I used the material within 24 hours of it's manufacture.  She said I needed production records for everything no exception if used within 24 hours.  I couldn't recall anything like that and I didn't have them.  I asked to see it in the “Orange Book”. She looked it up and showed it to me.  Ouch.  There it is.  Subpart G 55.123 (b):

(b) Each licensed manufacturer shall not later than the close of the next business day following the date of manufacture or other acquisition of explosive materials, enter the following information in a separate record:
(1) Date of manufacture or other acquisition.
(2) Manufacturer's marks of identification.
(3) Quantity (applicable quantity units, such as pounds of explosives, number of detonators, number of display fireworks, etc.).
(4) Name, brand name or description (dynamite (dyn), blasting agents (ba), detonators (det), display fireworks (df), etc.) and size (length and diameter or diameter only of display fireworks).

I was sure there was an exemption if it was used withing 24 hours.  She couldn't recall anything like that and didn't see it either.  I was looking at the book upside down across the table from her and asked if I could look closer.  She gave me the book and a few seconds later I found what I was looking for.  Just before (e):

Exception: A licensed manufacturer is exempt from the recordkeeping requirements of this subsection if the explosive materials are manufactured for his own use and used within a 24 hour period at the same site.

We both smiled and breathed a sigh of relief.

It turns out I still have a minor problem.  I had the production record information combined with the storage record.  Technically I need to print the production information on a separate piece of paper.  It won't happen again.

It was typical Boomershoot weather--raining.  She rode in my car out to the Boomershoot site where she inspected both explosives magazines, did inventory and found my count matched hers.  The magazines were clean, properly ventilated, and built according to specification.

Every year I send the local fire chief (not sure of his exact title) an email a few weeks before the Boomershoot.  I describe the methods I plan on using to prevent fires and loss of materials both during and after the event, and I invite him to show up at any time during preparation, the event, or during clean up.  Recently I have been telling him when the ATF will be out to inspect things and invite him to show up at the same time.  This time he accepted the invitation and wanted to bring the assistant chief along.  It turned out the chief couldn't get away and just the assistant chief, Don, showed up.  After Don showed up Crystal informed me there was a new requirement for me.  I need to notify the local fire chief verbally, and in writing, of the status of the explosive magazine.  “Joe needs to tell you whatever it is you need to know.  They just want to make sure you guys are talking to each other”, she said.  I need to communicate a little more frequently and with more detail, but basically I had been complying with the spirit of the regulation already.  I think I got some “brownie points” for demonstrating I was a little bit ahead of them on that point.

After we finished up the magazine inspections I told Don we were going to dispose of the 32 targets left over from the last Boomershoot either by shooting them or burning them and he was welcome to hang around if he wanted.  He said no thanks.  He has been a spectator for the last three years and next year he plans to be a participant so there was much novelty in standing around in the rain watching Crystal and I dispose of the targets.  So he left as I loaded up the magazine for my evil black “assault weapon”.  Crystal offered to help set up the targets and I asked her to get them out of the magazine while I positioned them.  I told her I didn't want her slipping in the mud and getting hurt.  If anyone was to get hurt I wanted it to be me.  About 15 seconds after saying that I slipped, with my hands full of targets, and fell on my ass in the mud.  I laughed.  She was polite enough not to.

We got a back about 25 yards and I started shooting the targets.  Nothing happened.  I tried other targets.  Nothing but holes in them.  The stuff was completely dead.  Okay.  We have to burn them.  I piled up a bunch of them and got out my lighter.  It lit after a few attempts and burned for a short time but not long enough to catch the now damp target box on fire.  The lighter wouldn't ignite a second time.  Crystal didn't have any matches and I didn't either.  I drove over to the neighbors place just a few hundred yards away.  No one home.  I called my brother Doug.  He sent my brother Gary over with newspapers and a box of matches.  I got the first pile on fire with the first match but it took two matches for the second pile.  It turns out the burning targets work pretty well as “smoke bombs”:

After the fires were out we drove back to Moscow laughing and telling stories.  I dropped her off at her car, went home, took off my muddy and wet shoes, socks and pants at the door and called it a day.  A very good day.  A welcome change from the rest of my week.

What's the difference between the person who hits you and the person who ties your hands so that someone else can hit you? Whoever takes away your ability to defend yourself needs to be defended against.

Richard Roberts

We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true!. We're going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy! We're going to beat guns into submission!

U.S. Rep. Charles Schumer
November 30, 1993
NBC Nightly News

As I said the other day government health care means you do not get to decide whether you get to decide whether you get life saving treatment or not.  Someone else will decide whether your life is a good allocation of resources or not.

THE National Health Service should not have to give life- prolonging treatment to every patient who demands it because that would mean a crippling waste of resources, the Government said yesterday.

A lawyer for Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, said that a ruling granting a patient the right to request life-prolonging care had serious implications for the NHS.

...

The Department of Health, backing the GMC’s attempt to reverse the ruling, said that if that right were established, patients could demand other life-prolonging treatments.

...

Philip Sales, for the Health Secretary, told a panel of three appeal judges, headed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers: “A general right, as identified (in the High Court), for an individual patient to require life- prolonging treatment has very serious implications for the functioning of the NHS.

...

Mr Sales said that the ruling had led to a confusion of the roles of doctor and patient — decisions over treatment were for doctors, not patients.

Read that last sentence carefully.  Decisions for treatment are for doctors not patients.  And the doctors decide whether it is “a waste of resources” for you to be treated or not.  Keep that in mind when someone advocates government health care.

Brought to my attention by The Smallest Minority who has a somewhat different viewpoint.  In an effort to “banish street crime“ they are banning certain types of clothes in England now.  And I thought banning knives was so low the only way they could go was up.  I was wrong:

The United Kingdom is the most-monitored nation in the world, with more than 4 million closed-circuit television cameras operating around the country. But culprits frequently evade Big Brother’s watchful eye by concealing their identities with the ubiquitous head wear.

"I think the fact you go around with these hats and these covers... I mean, it is a uniform, in a sense," Prescott said last week.

As a result, a large shopping center in southeast England offered a new tact by implementing a "code of conduct" that includes a ban on the wearing of "hoodies."

...

“I think it’s marvelous,” Bluewater shopper Jill Hopper said of the initiative this week.

...

Cropper, a doorman, and Thomas, a bar manager, both added that they would like to see a complete ban on caps and hoods in city centers.

What will it take for them to realize the problem isn't that they don't have enough laws but they have too many?  If a few potential vicitims emptied a couple of 15 round magazines of jacketed hollowpoints into a gang of thugs attempting a violent crime two things would happen:

1. Thugs would be less inclined commit crimes.
2. There would be fewer repeat offenders.

But that won't happen.  I can't imagine what will be next but I'm certain they will think of something else to ban.

I've recently had some time to reflect on some things about myself. And I suspect my son James shares at least a portion of this personality trait with me.

It has long been known to my wife and close friends I am "different". I don't work well with incomplete rules. If you give me a set of rules or a process by which I can evaluate things I will do fine. But if something isn't covered I will end up "stepping on someone's toes". A typical situation will go something like this:

My accuser, "You shouldn't have done that."

My defense will be, "Here are the rules, I didn't break any of them."

"Everyone knows you shouldn't do that, you don't need to be told."

Things will deteriorate from there. I sometimes get offers to "help me". But I don't want their "help". I want them to either enumerate things or give me a process by which I can unambiguously take the data and process it into a go/no-go decision. That discussion goes something like this:

"That's just not possible come up with rules for everything."

"You can't punish me for breaking a rule you didn't tell me about or even give me a hint about".

"You should have known better."

"How?"

"I can't explain it! It's just the way it is!"

"If you can't even explain it then how do you expect me to know it? How is it that you know it? How do I know you aren't just making things up as you go along?"

If I took them up on their offer to "help" me we would both soon be frustrated and angry. They with my constant pestering about "obvious" things. And me with their condescending attitude and having to constantly be asking for "permission".

Surprising as it might be at first glance I believe this characteristic is closely related to another one articulated by my friend Eric. He describes me as "completely without guile". To him this is "both refreshing and frightening". It is refreshing because he can count on me to tell him precisely what I think without holding back or telling him what I think he wants to hear. It's frightening because...well, because I will say precisely what I think without holding back. When I worked at Microsoft he had to "run interference" on some of the email I sent. A typical event would go something like this. He would come to my office and say,

"Your email caused quite a stir. My boss (or someone else in management) asked that I talk to you about it."

"Which email?"

He would shudder and say, "Have you sent anything in the last 30 minutes?"

"Just a checkin email."

[twitch] "That's probably okay. The one I'm talking about now was one you sent a couple hours ago."

"And?"

"I'm not saying I disagree with what you said. It's just that people aren't comfortable with it being said."

"Is there some way I could have known this before I sent it?"

His mouth will open and then slowly close as his eyes roll up towards the ceiling. He is thinking. He takes perhaps three or four seconds which is about the time it takes for him (he has an IQ of 165 and is an incredibly fast thinker) to search the entire Unabridged Oxford English dictionary in his mind for words to explain. There aren't any. "No. For you, I don't think you could have known. Just don't send anything that might cause problems for a couple days until things cool down."

"But checkin emails are okay?"

He starts to say "Yes" but stops as he realizes he would be creating a rule for which I would probably find an exception a few milliseconds later, and says, "Probably. Just be careful for a few days."

"Are you unhappy with me?"

"I have far bigger problems than you. And having you throw hand grenades up and down the halls draws attention from all the havoc I create on my own. Just don't do that too often."

"Can you tell me what it was I did?"

[heavy sigh] "No. I don't think I can."

You might assume that with this apparently clueless personality that I am insensitive. That would be wrong. I am incredibly sensitive. I break into tears more frequently than some women. From "tear jerker" movies, to hearing of someone else's pain, to being on the receiving end of minor slights, rejections, or insults--the tears start flowing with incredible ease. People at the Boomershoot 2005 dinner who listened to me telling about the loss of Adam Plumondore know what I'm talking about.

So what does all this mean? I'm not entirely sure but my guess is that I process information differently than most people. I know that I take and say things literally when others process or expect them to be processed "as they were intended". I complain that people don't listen to the words I say and find a way to misunderstand me. Others complain that I should know what they meant even though that's not what they said.

I expect "the human experience" is far more subtle and nuanced than people realize. There are many things which are just an integral part of they way people think about things they are sort of in the position of a fish trying to describe water. They will tell me "the way things are" and I will think of a half dozen exceptions which they dismiss as being unimportant and I think are critical. They think I am "broken", "defective", or "handicapped" because I can't understand. I think they are "obtuse", "talking nonsense", or "making things up as they go along". I think it boils down to that, in a very real sense, I don't share the same reality with a good share of the population. I wish there were some drugs they could take to cure them of their delusions.

With a 10,000% tax we could tax them out of existence.

U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan
November 4, 1993
Washington Post
Refering to a tax on ammunition.

A friend invited me over for dinner last night.  It's been nearly a year since I was last there.  The timing was excellent after the bad day I had yesterday (which my friend was unaware of until I arrived).  My future at PNNL is on hold/in-question because of my blogging and I needed a distraction.  I wasn't really hungry even though I didn't eat lunch.  I did eat and enjoyed the meal before we retired to the living room.  Mostly we talked about kids, movies, computers, and technology.  It was 2:00 AM before we both ran out of steam and I came back to my room.  I answered a couple emails and tried to go to sleep.  It wasn't possible.  I couldn't think about anything but the situation at work.  Sometime after 5:00 AM I finally fell asleep for a couple hours.  I woke again and lay in bed where I still am.  Barb called a couple times to check on me.  I'm okay.  No appetite and I haven't eaten anything since dinner last night.  I'm just not interested.  She doesn't have an appetite either and jokingly said it was a good way to lose weight.

I finished deleting and editing all my blog postings that were causing the problems.  I suppose it's possible I missed something but unless they give me a list I can't really know for sure.

I'm going to start looking for a new job.  This is a very unpleasant position to be in and I don't want a repeat of some sort in the future even if this episode turns out okay.  Barb's employer has wanted her to work full time for years and the recently asked her again.  So even if I take a big cut in pay Barb can take up a lot of the slack.

Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein
November 18, 1993
Associated Press
[A reminder of how far we have come in the past few years.]

Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.

U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden
November 18, 1993
Associated Press
[A reminder of how far we have come in the last few years.]

I can demonstrate airport security is a huge waste of money and have long advocated we spend that money on something worthwhile.  Last month I had another opportunity to demonstrate the inability of TSA to provide security and wrote Bruce Schneier an email in response to his posting about the ban on lighters on planes.  He asked me for permission to use my letter and then published in his monthly letter (do a search for 'Huffman' to find my email).

Here is what I said, in case you don't want to go searching in his web page:

From: Joseph K Huffman
Subject: Lighters Banned on Airplanes

One of my hobbies is explosives. I have a ATFE license to manufacture high explosives. I do so recreationally on a fairly regular basis.

I made the explosives for a recent event wearing gloves. Then had to rework some things later and did that without gloves. A few minutes later I handled a rifle case without cleaning up. On April 13th, three days later, that same rifle case went through airport security at Pasco Washington. I watched a TSA agent wipe down the handle and interior of the case and test them for explosives. Everything passed. The rifle case went with me to Albuquerque, New Mexico. On April 16th, that same rifle case made the return trip and again went through a TSA screening without questions. I have numerous stories of this nature. This is only the most recent.

As near as I can determine, airport "security", from one end to the other, only exists to make people feel better. It does not represent a deterrent to even a moderately skilled adversary. We are wasting something like $1.8 billion per year on this activity to make some people feel better.

From Jihad Watch; a Palestinian Authority Sermon:

We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again. The day will come when we will rule America. The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world – except for the Jews. The Jews will not enjoy a life of tranquility under our rule, because they are treacherous by nature, as they have been throughout history. The day will come when everything will be relived of the Jews - even the stones and trees which were harmed by them. Listen to the Prophet Muhammad, who tells you about the evil end that awaits Jews. The stones and trees will want the Muslims to finish off every Jew.

I love the observation Jihad Watch makes:

 Humm, rule the world and kill the Jews...that was tried once before as I recall..

From the Second Amendment Foundation:

NEWS RELEASE

SAF CALLS FOR 'WAITING PERIODS' ON PRESS FOLLOWING FATAL NEWSWEEK DEBACLE

BELLEVUE, WA – More than 115 dead or injured, and now a lame "apology" from Newsweek; maybe it is time for the press to accept waiting periods before exercising i ts First Amendment rights in the same way the press has backed waiting periods on law-abiding Americans before exercising their Second Amendment rights.

That's the observation from the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) now that Newsweek has acknowledged its report about the desecration of the Koran by soldiers at Guantanamo Bay was bogus.

"I wonder if Newsweek, or its owner, the Washington Post, would submit all of their stories for FBI clearance before they publish," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "This irresponsible exercise of the First Amendment freedom of the press has killed and injured more people than Charles Whitman or the Beltway Snipers.

"How many times," Gottlieb wondered, "have Newsweek and The Washington Post advocated waiting periods for law-abiding citizens, who have hurt nobody, before they can buy a firearm? A waiting period amounts to prior restraint by the government. How loud would reporters scream if they faced prior restraint be fore printing their version of the news? Their double standard is hypocritical.

"The Second Amendment is the only civil right in this country that Americans can't exercise unless they get government permission," he noted. "A Newsweek story just killed or injured more than 115 people, but they don't have to face government scrutiny before turning on the press.

"Newsweek reporters and editors should be subject to the same kind of ‘cooling-off' period they advocate for gun buyers," Gottlieb observed. "In their heated rush to print a sensational story to discredit American soldiers and the Bush Administration, they started a chain reaction that ended in worldwide acts of violence.

"The blood is on Newsweek's hands," Gottlieb stated. "Their report killed and injured scores of people, yet it is the American gun owner who must endure waiting periods because of an irrational fear that they might commit a crime. Crimes were committed because of Newsweek's story. People have died."

The Second Amendment Foundation is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers & an amicus brief & fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

One of the bigger threats to the individual, ranking right up there with “gun control”, is a government monopoly on health care.  In addition to failing my Jews in the Attic Test we get situations like this:

Leslie Burke had asked the court to rule that he, not a doctor, is best placed to decide whether his life should be prolonged by medical intervention.

He is now in his forties and has known since he was a teenager that he has a progressive condition which is very likely to mean that he will need artificial feeding and hydration - known as ANH.

What worried Mr Burke was the possibility that doctors could make a decision to withdraw ANH on the assumption that his quality of life as a disabled person was too low to merit prolonging it.

The government allocates a budget for “health services” and ends up making decisions on “greatest good for the greatest number”.  The individual doesn't get that much of a say in things--unless they have the right connections.  It doesn't matter if you, or your relatives and friends, are willing to spend some large sum of money (had the government not taken it from you) on your health care.  The government is able to decide that temporarily saving the lives of 20 drug addicts is more important that saving your highly productive life and they use the money they took from you by force to do it.  In addition since “someone else” is paying for it or “it's free” people don't have the incentive to take care of themselves.  It's just a really, really bad idea.  Don't let it happen here.

Hypocrites, bigots, and idiots annoy me.  I had one New York City lawyer tell me how he was all concerned about the rights of the people and we needed rules and regulations as we implemented Universal Biometric Identification Cards.  Apparently he believed the government regulations would protect us from the government. This same guy claimed that if someone were to shoot someone else it was up to the shooter, and rightly so, to justify his actions to the government.  This LAWYER apparently believed “innocent until proven guilty” didn't apply if a firearm was involved.

The newspapers are filled with similar stuff but it generally goes away after a while.  I presume the reporters and editors get corrected and they drop it.  The following meme has been persisting far longer than normal and it's beginning to annoy me.

Gun control is virtually non-existent. A Government Accountability Office study recently found that 35 out of 44 applicants to buy guns were able to do so despite appearing on a government terrorist watch list.

If someone is on the “Terrorist watch list” they are suspected of having an association with terrorist organizations.  They haven't done anything wrong that we know of.  They may be deserving of being closely watched, but they are innocent until proven guilty.  The press usually has this right in regards to flying on an airplane but for some reason they get brain freeze on a constitutionally guaranteed right.

If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms.  Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.  May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams
1776

Nobody who supports the Second Amendment has anything to fear from me.

Tim Kaine
Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate.
Former Richmond Mayor who used city funds to help bus Richmond activists to the “Million Mom March” in Washington, D.C., in 2000.
From the Roanke Times May 15, 2005
[A reminder of how far we have come in the past few years.]

The Second Amendment is as important as the First Amendment.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
May 11, 2005
In an interview on CNN's Larry King Live, recalling how her father took up arms to defend fellow blacks from racist whites in the segregated South.  She said her father, a black minister, and his friends armed themselves to defended the black community in Birmingham, Ala., against the White Knight Riders in 1962 and 1963. She said if local authorities had had lists of registered weapons, she did not think her father and other blacks would have been able to defend themselves.
[A reminder of how far we have come in the past few years.]