An anti-gun bigot targeted the SKS again. Pretty much every thing I said before when the SKS was singled out for "being evil" is true this time as well. The new stuff is taken care of by Kevin.

I spend $2 million [campaigning] every election. If my colleagues are smart, they’ll pay their $20,000 and Michael will draw the district they can win in. Those who have refused to pay? God help them.

Rep. Loretta Sanchez
From Stealing Democracy: How to Rig Elections by Spencer Overton
Pages 19 and 20
[Sanchez was referring to Gerrymandering the election districts to win elections. If you read the Amazon description of the book and the comments by the author be sure to keep your blood pressure medicine close by. Hat tip to Larry Pratt for pointing out the Sanchez quote. Read Pratt's article for the gun rights connection.--Joe]

I just love it when they say things like this:

..no matter how much training is involved, or who’s holding it, a gun is always dangerous. This guy, it seems, thought that because he was a police officer (and weapons instructor– which probably means NRA member), that he could be above the law. After all, he’s a cop, right? He would never do anything wrong, right?

Wrong. These fully automatic weapons are illegal for a reason, and it’s because they’re not safe in anyone’s hands, police officer, NRA member, weapons instructor, “law-abiding gun owner,” or otherwise.

These "guys" have no clue. They don't realize just how far out of touch with the rest of the world, and reality, they are. Or else they really are our friends and are trying to further discredit the anti-gun movement.

We call upon the city government and Congress to immediately repeal the District's Draconian gun regulations. The city's law-abiding citizens must be allowed to fight back, and regain control of their neighborhoods. Any politician, whether in the municipal government or on Capitol Hill, who does not trust the citizens of Washington, D.C. with their Second Amendment rights does not deserve to hold office, and should hand in his or her resignation. This risk-free working environment for criminals must end now.

Alan Gottlieb
July 13, 2006 News Release
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

The murderous attack that took place this morning was not a terror attack. It was an act of war by the state of Lebanon against the state of Israel within its sovereign territory.

The government of Lebanon, of which Hezbollah is a part, is trying to undermine regional stability. Lebanon is responsible and Lebanon will bear the consequences of its actions.

Ehud Olmert
Prime Minister of Israel
July 12, 2006
Chicago Tribune

I want to make clear that the event this morning is not a terror act, but an act of a sovereign state that attacked Israel without reason. The government of Lebanon, of which Hezbollah is a part, is trying to shake the stability of the region.

Ehud Olmert
Prime Minister of Israel
July 12, 2006
New York Times

[Regardless of which quote is more accurate (the Times Online of the UK agrees with The Chicago Tribune) the spirit is the same. This is war.--Joe]

Okay. Maybe there is some evidence of global warming. But it's not as conclusive as the caption makes it out to be. And there's no evidence given that it's caused by man.

[The link is work safe.]

Faced with genuine horrific physical abuse and cold-blooded murder of captured human beings by Muslim jihadis in Iraq, Amnesty International was strangely silent, prompting some observers to question their neutrality.

Joining in the lack of response were typically outspoken Jimmy Carter and the International Red Cross. Joint statements from Arab defense leagues and Muslim anti-defamation groups were not made. The United Nations has scheduled no hearings, and has thus far proposed no sanctions.

In stark contrast, U.S. use of humiliation tactics similar to college-fraternity pranks, to get prisoners to reveal information, were broadly denounced as grotesque affronts to humanity, barbarous criminal abuse and violations of human rights, by the now silent critics.

The U.S. procedures involved putting underwear on a person's head, leading a prisoner around on a leash, and taking sexually explicit photographs, none of which lead to physical harm or death.

U.S. authorities, bowing to world opinion, court martialed and imprisoned some of the prison guards involved in the college-prank styled interrogations. A search for the Islamist insurgent perpetrators of the horrific murders has not yielded any suspects.

Alan Korwin
Writing under the pen name of The Uninvited Ombudsman
July 9, 2006
Page Nine -- No. 7 (an email list posting)

Thanks to Ry for pointing this out.

Now that the war on legal guns is won (the war on illegally owned guns cannot ever be won). The Scots have a new tool for their war on the knife culture:

METAL detectors that look like gardening gloves could save lives by taking knives off Scotland's streets.

The gloves conceal hi-tech gadgetry which officers will unleash this weekend on people suspected of carrying switch-blades and other knives.

Seven pairs of the specially-designed gloves, costing about £200 a pair, will be tried out for a month in Strathclyde and central Scotland. The battery-operated gloves allow officers to scan an individual for weapons with the fingertips or the palms of the hands. If metal is found, the glove, which is made from stab-proof Kevlar, starts to vibrate at the wrist.

Scottish police have already been issued with 1,000 hand-held scanners as part of the Safer Scotland campaign, but they have decided to give the gloves a try as they allow for people to be searched more discreetly. The manufacturers also say the glove enables police to carry out covert searches as only the wearer is aware when a knife is detected.

Karyn McCluskey, the deputy head of the Glasgow-based Violence Reduction Unit, said: "We are constantly looking at utilising new technology to detect weapons and take them off the streets of Scotland.

"It's important we look at innovative ways of tackling violence, and we are confident that these gloves will allow officers to search people in a safe and efficient manner."

This enrages me.

"Tackling violence"? All they are doing is shouting to the world that they have mental problems.

"More discreetly"? "Covert searches"? "Allow officers to search people in a safe and efficient manner"? In the U.S. we have the 2nd Amendment to enforce the 4th Amendment against violations like this.

There's the good news that this animal was killed:

MOSCOW — Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev, responsible for modern Russia's worst terrorist attacks, was killed Monday when a dynamite-laden truck exploded in his convoy, Russian officials said.

Federal Security Service head Nikolai Patrushev told President Vladimir Putin that Basayev had been killed overnight in a special operation conducted by Russian forces in Ingushetia, the area of southern Russia that borders Chechnya. Patrushev's meeting with Putin was shown on Russian state television.

Basayev, 41, was behind some of Russia's worst terror attacks, including the seizure of a Moscow theater in 2002 in which dozens of hostages and militants died, the 2004 school hostage taking in Beslan that killed 331, and the seizure of about 1,000 hostages at a hospital in Budyonnovsk that killed about 100.

...

The Interfax news agency quoted Ingush Deputy Prime Minister Bashir Aushev as saying that Basayev's body had been identified "through some of the fragments, including his head."

Then the part that is most interesting to me is this line buried deep in the article:

Basayev was the most notorious of the Chechen warlords, eluding Russian forces for years despite Kremlin vows to hunt him down and an offer of $10 million and plastic surgery to anyone providing information leading to his death.

Do you notice anything a little different from what we are doing when we put a reward on a terrorist's head? The Russians don't waste time with the things like Club Gitmo. It's, "If we find him we are going to kill him."

I just hope they follow up on my suggestion for dealing with this type of vermin. It was the Russian school children incident that inspired me to come up with that disposal method so I think it would entirely appropriate for them to implement it with the fragments of this scumbag.

I wish it were true--that it were legal to actually carry your personal protection tools with you when you visited the Washington D.C. area. But this US News and World Report article does have a point, we are making some progress. We still have a lot of work ahead of us and we can't back of. We need to drive them into political extinction.

Packing heat on the hill

The NRA is riding high; gun control is a political loser

Oklahoma Rep. Dan Boren's Washington office features his hunting trophies, including a stuffed wild turkey and a mounted deer head. The freshman congressman's enthusiasm for firearms might always have stood out in the Democratic Party, but Boren now finds himself among an even more endangered species: Democrats willing to discuss guns at all.

"When we as Democrats are trying to reach out and speak to voters in the center of the country, I don't think that we can support gun control," he explains. After seeing Democrats hammered at the polls for voting to regulate guns, many of his colleagues seem to agree. As a result, a number of pro-gun measures moving through Congress will most likely face little opposition, as advocates of gun control increasingly find themselves marginalized and ignored.

Not long ago, it was the gun lobby on the defensive from the passage of the Brady bill in 1993 and the 1994 ban on "assault" weapons. But some say support for gun control cost Democrats the House in 1994, and former President Clinton credited it with Al Gore's 2000 presidential defeat. "It's different than it was in the early '90s. Those were, in retrospect, the glory years," says Paul Helmke, former GOP mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., who recently took the reins of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Meanwhile, with little fanfare, National Rifle Association backers in Congress allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 and last year shielded gun makers from being sued over crimes committed using their products. Since 1999, nine states have eased restrictions on concealed weapons, and NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre says the freedom of gun owners is in "the best shape it's been in decades."

Today, Israel is really terrorising our people ... Israel and America, which talked too much about this terrorism in past are the worst, severest and ugliest examples of terrorism.

Khaled Mashal
The exiled supreme leader of Hamas
UK Times: Uncompromising message from exiled Hamas leader
July 10, 2006
[I'm sure Mashal can back up this claim with hours of video tape of Americans and Israelis doing more severe and ugly things than the beheadings of civilians, bombings of civilian aircraft in-flight, the torture and killings of school children, and violent, brutal, aircraft hijackings for the destruction of skyscrapers filled with innocent civilians.--Joe]

Ry and I have often spent hours talking until the sun rose on the "solving of the worlds problems". Our conclusions have sometimes been uncomfortable and things we don't really share in public. My "feed them to the hogs" approach is an extrapolation of some of those conclusions. My suggestion that Israel needs to do some very distasteful work now is also an extrapolation of those conclusions.

Kevin has elaborated, quoting numerous books and people, on how this is the American way. Along the way he explains why my wife, Barbara Scott, without hesitation and somewhat to my surprise supports the "feed them to the hogs" approach. My wife's last name and her heritage is a significant part of that explanation. He also echos other private discussions I have had where we concluded that it would take another 9-11 type hit on our home soil before we would obtain the resolve to do what we need to do and that when that happens we will do what needs to be done no matter how distasteful a job it is.

Thank you Kevin.

Contrary to widespread opinion, to rationally demonstrate or justify a belief is not synonymous with claiming certainty for that belief.  Depending on various factors, such as the nature and amount of available evidence, a belief may be categorized as probable to some degree.  If this is what the evidence warrants, the belief has been justified.  Reason demands that the degree of certitude assigned to a belief must be in accordance with the available evidence.  Reason does not demand that every bit of human knowledge must be accepted as certain or closed to further investigation.

George H. Smith
From: Atheism: The Case Against God
[Although not directly mentioned in this quote I took Smith's approach to theism in my approach to gun control. Translated that comes out as, demonstrate to me that your belief in the goodness of gun restrictions is valid. Hence, I have Just One Question. I have been asking that question for over six years now and still there is no answer other than the absurd.--Joe]

No doubt you have heard that Diane Feinstein, among others, is seeking to abolish the Office of Civilian Marksmanship, on the grounds that civilians ought not to know how to shoot. The leftist elite obviously fears an armed citizenry, which is, of course, the sole barrier to tyranny.

From the opposite point of view, what ought to be abolished is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, a rogue organization that was never needed in the first place and which has now developed into an uncontrolled instrument of harassment recruited from the dregs of the federal employment establishment.

Let us by all means economize, but let us get our priorities straight.

Jeff Cooper
From Jeff Cooper's Commentaries
Vol. 3, No. 8
21 June 1995
[Feinstein is still a threat to liberty and one of the larger stains in the U.S. political system.--Joe]

Barb and I will be in Branson, Missouri during the middle of August to celebrating our 30th wedding anniversary. We will be visiting Ozark Pyrotechnics (who put on a dynamite shoot the week before Boomershoot 2006) as well as various activities both Barb and I will enjoy. If anyone else in the area and would like to get together for dinner or something let me know.

The introduction of tough laws to control guns and knives appears to be failing to keep lethal weapons out of the hands of Australian criminals.

An Australian Institute of Criminology study of interviews with more than 2300 prisoners also found that drug users were more likely to carry - and use - weapons than other offenders.

Greg Ansley
July 6, 2006
Tough new weapons laws 'miss hard core of criminal underworld'
The New Zealand Herald
[We told you so. And a reminder of Just One Question. Thanks to David Hardy at Of Arms & the Law--Joe]

I'm the webmaster for the Lewis Clark Wildlife Club. I finally got around to updating their website after months of essentially ignoring it. Probably the most interesting thing I updated is the training page. They have a carbine class coming up July 21 through the 23.

A comparison between the early days of home computers and the current state of the art with genetics makes for some interesting thought experiments:

In the 1970s, before the PC era, there were computer hobbyists. A group of them formed the Homebrew Computer Club in a Menlo Park garage in 1975 to trade integrated circuits and swap tips on assembling rudimentary computers, like the Altair 8800, a rig with no inputs or outputs and half a megabyte of memory.

Among the Club's members were Apple founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs.

As the tools of biotechnology become accessible (and affordable) to a wider public for the first time, hobbyists are recapturing that collaborative ethos and applying it to tinkering with the building blocks of life.

Eugene Thacker is a professor of literature, culture and communications at Georgia Tech and a member of the Biotech Hobbyist collective. Just as the computer hobbyists sought unconventional applications for computer circuitry, the new collective is looking for "non-prescribed uses" of biotechnology, Thacker said.

Computer hobbyists brought us the spreadsheet, BBS's (forerunners of web forums), personal word processors, and incredibly cheap porn.  On the downside they also brought us computer viruses, Internet worms, and gave voice to barking moonbats. Now imagine what might come of genetic hobbyists. A cure for baldness, a pill that really does increase the size of your penis, food plants that don't need fertilizer or pesticides, and killer viruses that only affect people with hazel eyes.

I wonder if there will be anti-virus services like McAfee and Norton that you will have to subscribe to prevent getting wasted by the latest "script kiddie" that sets something free that turns your skin green or causes your fingernails to fall off.

As I've reported before (and here) when it comes to political affiliation people don't behave rationally. Our son James also has expressed frustration at this irrational behavior. Here is some research (via Lyle at UltiMAK) that attempts to explain why people do it:

"These sacred truths are unverifiable, and unfalsifiable, but the faithful nevertheless accept them to be unquestionable. In doing so, like assemblies of the faithful since the dawn of language, they bind themselves together for protection or common action against unbelievers and their lies."
--Nicholas Wade, Before the Dawn, p. 165-166

When people in business meet for the first time to discuss a transaction, they often exchange what I call "trust cues" in order to reduce mutual suspicion. For example, they may recite empty phrases from popular business books, such as "win-win," "synergy," "principles," "customer-driven," or "raising the bar."

Nicholas Wade provides a readable, wide-ranging survey of the impact of recent advances in genetics on anthropology. In one chapter, he argues that the origins of what I observe in business behavior can be found in early religious rituals. Religions produce trust cues. Trust cues are necessary for large societies and trade among strangers to emerge. They serve to protect people from cheaters and liars.

What I am going to suggest in this essay is that political beliefs can serve the function of trust cues. Political beliefs may have at best a tenuous empirical basis, but they function to demonstrate one's membership in a trusted group.

I am impressed. That helps me understand better.

That's impressive. I'm going to have something to drink now.

James Huffman-Scott
July 6, 2006
[James just met "The Man" at Dixies.--Joe]

This "Gun Guy" must have been inspired not only by Orwell's writing but by Gobel. From his daily email:

The gun lobby wants everything to be the fault of the trigger-pullers.  If someone shoots someone else, they only want one person to go to jail: the person who pulled the trigger.  They don't want any blame placed on any of the other parts of the network of people who delivered the gun used in the murder to the trigger-puller.  They don't want the illegal gun dealer who sold them that gun to have any responsibility.  They don't want the legal gun dealer who sold that gun (likely through a straw purchase) to have any responsibility.  And they definitely don't want the industry that made that gun to have any responsibility at all, even though they likely knew that gun would be used by a criminal (because the legal gun market is already flooded with firearms).

...

And it's a very important first step in realizing the truth about gun violence in America:  It's not just the fault of the trigger-puller.  We all are involved in a gun culture that allows children to shoot up schools, and criminals to own handguns by the case.  If we really want to stop the violence, we're all going to have to take responsibility.

The manufacture should "take responsibility"? Why not the provider of the steel for the gun? Or the miner of the iron ore?

Mental problems, that's the only way I can make sense of these type of bigots.

I suspect it was a troll trying to fly just under the radar that brought it up but still it was entertaining to see the DU people squirm. It appears the best they could come up with to Just One Question was this:

The author goes on to say:

There are three possible answers to this question.

1. "I don't know." In which case my response is, "Come back to the debate when you can answer 'Yes' or 'No'."

2. "No." In which case my response is, "Then you should be advocating the repeal of ALL gun control laws and I don't want to hear a single anti-freedom word from you on this topic again."

3. "Yes and here is my demonstration."

Well, he's wrong. There is another answer -- my answer, the only good answer. And it is:

What colour is orange:
True or False?

If he really claims not to get it, then he can be given a clue: ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.

It's better than what I expected. As Ry said in another situation, "Ah, the voice of reason."

Ry wrote about commitment the other day. Here is another example.

Both examples cause a severe cringing reaction in me.

It turns out new research has shown Dr. Joe's cure for everything, more sex, is worth about $50K/year in terms of happiness:

English economists reckon having more sex can be as beneficial to lifelong happiness as an extra $50,000 in the pocket.

The study, done by no-sex-please-we're-British economists and titled Money, Sex and Happiness: an Empirical Study, said that increasing the frequency of sex from once a month to once a week caused the same amount of happiness as getting a $50,000-a-year pay rise.

Researched by Dartmouth College economics professor David Blanchflower, along with Warwick University's Andrew Oswald, the study took 1990s American data of about 16,000 people and generalised the results for males and females of all ages.

"The most interesting thing this study shows is that money buys happiness, but not as much as you would think," Blanchflower said in his summary.

For a limited time only (until Barb finds out) Dr. Joe is offering qualified customers a 20% discount on treatments. Send a recent picture and if you qualify I'll work you into my schedule.

Anti-gun people are anti-liberty people. There is no such thing as a righteous, good faith anti-gun position. Good people cannot endorse gun control.

John Longenecker
July 4, 2006
Repeal All Gun Laws, Part IV: Motivation Influences Perception