Mayor Nagin, Chief Riley and the city’s attorney have repeatedly failed to communicate with our legal counsel, even for the most trivial of matters related to this lawsuit.

...

There comes a time when patience runs out and people need to be held accountable for what amounts to an arrogant disregard for the seriousness of this lawsuit and the rights of New Orleans gun owners.

...

The city’s behavior in this matter, and particularly that of Mayor Nagin and Chief Riley, has been deplorable, and it is time for them to behave like adults. Since the day the city began seizing firearms, Nagin and Riley have acted as though they are above the law. It is time they learned otherwise.

Alan Gottlieb
January 17, 2007
SAF FILES MOTION TO HOLD NAGIN, RILEY IN CONTEMPT

It would be the greatest mistake, certainly, to think that concessions mean peace.  Nothing of the kind.  Concessions are nothing but a new form of war.

V. I. Lenin
[Originally this reminded me of of Israel and giving up land for peace but it also applies to the Muslim extremists everywhere and conceding things to anti-gun bigot and all the socialists and communists in our government.--Joe]

Allah has created the woman, even if she gets a PhD, deficient. She may be suffering from hormones that will make her emotional. It takes two witnesses of a woman to equal the one witness of the man.

Green Lane Mosque Internet broadcast
Via Michelle Malkin's Hot Air
[This is "small potatoes" compared to some of the other stuff I have read in other places. Girls as young as nine are young enough to be married to much older men. A woman who accuses someone of rape must have four Muslim witnesses who witness penetration of the vagina by the head of the penis. If he admits she had sex with someone who is not her husband and cannot prove rape can be punished, by death, as an adulteress. Read Islam Unveiled for far more information than most people want to know.

I had lunch with someone from India today. He said his wife believes their grandchildren will all be Muslim.--Joe]

After the July 7, 2005 bombing in London there was a second wave of bombing on July 21. A bit off topic but a reminder of who we are dealing with; Islam prohibits the killing of innocent in war but the extremist Muslims have declared there are no innocents in Israel and there were no innocents in the World Trade Center. Apparently, according to these animals, there were none in the London Tubes either:

One of the men, Ramzi Mohammed, even turned his homemade device to face a mother and child as he detonated it on a subway train, the prosecutor said.

However, my main point is the information about how they built the bombs. From the same article we find:

The bombs didn't cause widespread death and destruction because they didn't contain a high enough concentration of peroxide to explode properly, Sweeney said.

...

Sweeney told a jury of nine women and three men that the defendants had constructed the explosives out of hydrogen peroxide, chapatti flour and detonators in a ``bomb factory'' in a north London apartment. Each device was designed to carry a main charge of as much as 6 kilograms (13 pounds), sealed in a 6.2- liter plastic tub and encased in screws and nuts to ``maximize the possibility of injury,'' he said.

Hydrogen peroxide is easy to buy (and make) and if someone doesn't know how to find or (make flour) then they probably are so stupid they need to be reminded to drop their pants before defecating. Hence if people can make bombs out of these common materials then we need to defend against criminal bombers by means other than placing restrictions on bomb making materials. Just like gun control, recreation drug control, and alcohol control, bomb control at the manufacturing level is an exercise in futility.

The struggles of the Freedom Riders and the Sit-In Movements have concentrated on a single goal: the right to eat at a lunch counter, the right to sit anywhere on a bus. These are important rights because their denial is a direct personal assault on a Negro's dignity. It is important for the racists to to maintain these peripheral forms of segregation. They establish an atmosphere that supports a system. By debasing and demoralizing the black man in small personal matters, the system eats away the sense of dignity and pride which are necessary to challenge a racist system.

Robert F. Williams
Page 38; Negroes With Guns
[Compare this to the rights of gun owners and the indignities of having to be fingerprinted and licensed to exercise a fundamental, Constitutionally guaranteed right. Or the restrictions on us within 1000 feet of a school. Or the abuse we have to deal with if caught with a gun while driving through New Jersey, Washington D.C. or Chicago, even though we are theoretically protected by the Gun Owners Protection Act of 1986. Even that we if are allowed to exercise our right we must keep it concealed if we are to do it in public. What we are fighting for shares some remarkable parallels with the civil rights battles others have fought. I think there is a lot to be learned from them.--Joe]

I got an email earlier today asking for permission to post a copy of Just One Question on a website along with a link back to my original post. I said "go for it" and it has appeared here as well as on the front page of their website (which I suspect is temporary).

Nice.

Everyone in Germany is a National Socialist - the few outside the party are either lunatics or idiots.

Adolf Hitler
[This reminds me of how the Democrats treat anyone outside their party. But I guess that shouldn't be surprising since they share socialism as a base ideology.--Joe]

Expect perennial gun haters like Paul Helmke to ramp up the rhetoric against sensible concealed carry laws that are proving their effectiveness in some 40 states. With violent crime on the upswing, and experts predicting it will keep rising, this is no time to advocate victim disarmament laws. May as well put wolves in the sheep pasture and bid them "bon appetit!"

Alan Gottlieb
January 12, 2007
Another view: Violent crime rise proves need for personal protection capability
Gottlieb is founder of the Second Amendment Foundation and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Bellevue, Wash.
Paul Helmke is president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership Violence.

I received this email today:

From: alexander [mailto:ali-blink@XXXXX]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 12:45 PM
To: joeh@boomershoot.org
Subject: BIG BANG!!

hi,

i was wondering if u could e-mail me on how to make a kiff bomb just to have some fun with friends i live in cape town (south africa)..
i want it a bout the size of your fist and you must be able to ignite it wid an electric fuse..
as in you put it down and run away and i hav a remote and blow it up...
and i want it power ful enuf to make a hole in a standard wooden door..

from alex

Yeah right, just some fun with friends--with enough power to make a hole in a standard wooden door.

But what is a "kiff bomb"? I suspect some sort of slang but haven't been able to track it down yet.

To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.

Richard Henry Lee
[Read that sentence carefully and try to resolve that with the claim by the anti-gun bigots that the 2nd Amendment is about the States being able to maintain a militia/national-guard. And note that Lee wasn't just some rabble rouser. He was the sixth President of the United States in Congress assembled under the Articles of Confederation.--Joe]

My previous post resulted in some serious topic drift in my mind so I decided to make a separate post of it.

You may have noticed that I have a subtitle on this blog of "Ramblings of a red-necked, knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal". There are two reasons for that.

One reason is if you call yourself something worse than what your enemies can come up with you take a lot of their power away. This was pointed out to me by firearms/self-defense instructor Greg Hamilton who I am quite fond of quoting. He said when someone calls him some derogatory name in a potentially hazardous situation (as in someone trying to pick a fight) he corrects them by saying, "Nope, I'm a goat f****er." What are they going to do after that? It's tough to say anything worse than that about you and they don't have real means of escalating the situation without getting physical with you. And how can they justify that in their minds? It's pretty much "game over" unless they planned on going the physical route to begin with anyway--in which case you aren't any worse off than you were to begin with.

The second reason I do that is because it encourages my enemies to underestimate me. When they then apply their stereotypes to me and engage with their already half-empty brains in a haphazard way they are in for a rude awakening. I think this is part of what happened with PNNL. I suspect they believed I would never know the real reason they went looking for a pretense to fire me or that I would find out for certain they didn't actually have sufficient grounds to do so. On some level they believed I was stupid. Never mind that my official title there was "Senior Research Scientist II" or that I have a masters degree in Electrical Engineering. I was just a uppity gun nut who needed to be put in his place. Never mind that they put a pile of papers in front of me, told me they were printouts from from my websites, that I needed to "fix things", but then refused, multiple times, to let me see them. What did they think I was going to do? I wanted, nay needed, to see what it was they were talking about. I was a researcher in "Cyber Security". Did they think I wouldn't figure it out or wouldn't at least give it a try? They seriously underestimated me.

Of course allowing and even encouraging your enemies to underestimate you has it hazards. Had the bigots at PNNL not underestimated me they might left me alone rather than commit a felony against me. Or they could have just been smarter about things and made in nearly impossible for me to gather up the facts. One never knows how things might have been different but two thing are certain:

1. They were found out and in a big way. Not only the initial hard evidence I found in the website log files but confirmation from the inside that is overwhelming. The points of fact in this lawsuit will never be in question. This was about guns (and a little bit of explosives) and me being an advocate for gun rights.
2. Because in the general case it is so hard to prove discrimination when you do have the proof you must make the punishment much more extreme than if it were trivial to detect this sort of discrimination. It all boils down to, depending on which method of modeling is more comfortable for you, economics or risk analysis. Because of this I have an obligation to punish these bigots to the maximum extent I can. What I really want is to see them be financially ruined and go to prison. But despite talking to several lawyers none of them believe I can obtain that sort of relief from the courts. I'm not so sure, I still think it is possible, but I won't be revealing those plans, until some future date when our enemies have less opportunity to evade my goals.

I'd like to explain this second point because it's may not be obvious to everyone. Suppose, as a child, you really liked cookies and your parents rationed them out at the rate of one per day. Further suppose you could conduct one raid per day on the cookie jar, score one cookie, and get away with it nine times out of ten. If you were caught the punishment was you had to do without your cookie ration for two days. You, knowing your math well enough to compute your total cookie consumption over a ten day period with and without the raids would conclude you should continue raiding the cookie jar.

Supposing it was impractical to make it more difficult for you to conduct a successful raid your parents would have two choices to get you to obey the rules. They could either increase the probability of detecting a cookie jar raid or they could increase the cost when they did detect a raid. If you were to get away with a raid only one out of ten times the cost of conducting the raids would exceed the benefits and you would likely stop the raids. Alternatively they could raise the punishment to be ten days without your cookie ration and you again would conclude you would be better off without conducting the raids.

The same sort of thing applies to big time criminal activity. Except for certain cases like "crimes of passion" and insanity there is a weighing (perhaps at an unconscious level) of the risks and rewards. In most cases of employment discrimination against gun owners the bigots will probably go undetected. When they do get caught the chances of punishment are very near to zero. In fact, to the best of our knowledge there has never been a legal case of anti-gun owner bigotry resulting in the punishment of the bigots. That will likely be my toughest problem to solve in my battle. Because it is so rare to be detected and even when detected it is unheard of to be legally punished I really don't have a choice if I want to make a difference for anyone but me. I must go for the largest punishment I can possibly achieve. This is because in the future I cannot allow them, or others, to weigh the risks and conclude committing the crime is worth the risk.

There are certain thresholds that must not be crossed without punishment being severe and perhaps out of proportion to the crime. And yes, I agree that life, perhaps death, in prison is too harsh a punishment for the crime of anti-gun owner employment discrimination--provided the crime could be detected and punished with some regularity when it happens. That's currently not the case so we have to "make an example of them". And the example I want to make of them is, literally, to have them spend the rest of their lives in prison. This is my Biggest, Hairiest, most Audacious, Goal (BHAG) in this case. I know it's possible, just unlikely. But I want them to be aware that is what they are facing. I want them to know that is possible. And even if I can't achieve it in this case I may be able to enable others to get closer in the next case. And the closer we get to achieving that sort of BHAG the less likely the bigots are to take that kind of risk in the future. Given their conclusions about "benefits" of gun control I have serious doubts about many of these bigots being able do enough math to solve even the cookie problem above. But if we make the price of their overt bigotry a significant chance at being rented out by the quarter hour to the person with the most cigarettes they won't have to know much math to conclude they don't want to go there.

Hence by giving myself the title of "a red-necked, knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal" I lured the bigots into attacking me. I didn't intentionally do that but now that they have and I've had an opportunity to regroup I realize I'm in a much better position than anyone I know, or have even heard of, to do what needs to be done. Not that I consider myself on par with him but this reminds me of a Winston Churchill quote, "I was not the lion, but it fell to me to give the lion's roar." Just as Hitler underestimated his enemies so have the anti-gun bigots in this case. And just as the only acceptable conclusion of Hitler's war was his unconditional surrender I see no reason to accept anything different in my war with the bigots at PNNL.

Update: Minor changes were made upon the advice of an attorney.

Kevin pointed out a story. I probably read about half of it before I became so concerned about popping a blood vessel in my brain that I just stopped reading. I'd need blood pressure meds or a Valium to complete the reading. But in truth I read all I needed in the first two paragraphs. He didn't even try to hide it. Here's a sample of the blatant bigotry:

Welcome to the South! Put On a Kevlar Vest and Sit a Spell!

...

Speaking of backwoods detritus, it appeared several hollers had vomited their inhabitants into the room I occupied. Men who had never heard the term “mullet” used derisively milled about comparing guns. They wore camouflage jackets to better avoid detection by animals and bright, obscenely orange caps to hopefully avoid being accidentally shot by one of their drunken cohorts. They wore Levi’s with tapered legs that ended over work, cowboy or hiking boots. Dirty, bushy beards abounded. Full sets of teeth were scarce.

...

And yet, here I was, in close proximity to 25 of America’s more than 200 million firearms, not to mention the 25 people who didn’t look a bit distressed at the notion that they were the killers and not their guns. I kept shifting around to check out the strange characters that shared this trashy little space with me.

I may call myself a red-necked, knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal but that's so bigots, like the one who wrote this article, will underestimate me. This bigot apparently thought gun owners are so stupid and back-woodsy they wouldn't notice his posting of bigotry on the web. He was wrong and gets taken to task in a very big way in the comments.

I prefer a small government which may permit some evil to a large government that promotes evil at my expense.

Michael Lee
[This basic point is lost on most people--evil exists and will always exist. It's just a matter of limiting it such a way that the least damage is done. And the history of the 20th centry reveals that evil governments unjustly kill more of the citizens than all other sources of evil combined.--Joe]

As pointed out by Say Uncle we have the media and a prosecutor demonizing an ordinary revolver as an "assault handgun":

Maryland Assistant Attorney General Clarence E. Goetz had recommended Vaisman serve five years in the Maryland Division of Correction.

...

Seized from Vaisman's residence were a broad range of weapons including assault handguns. Among the weapons were at least one Colt Cobra and at least one Colt Diamondback.

Don't think for a single nanosecond that the bigots will stop with "Saturday Night Specials", "Assault Weapons", or "50 caliber Sniper rifles". They didn't stop with short barreled shotguns or machine guns. The didn't stop when convicted felons were prohibited from firearms possession. They didn't stop when they prohibited mail order of firearms. They didn't stop with the Brady Act or the assault weapon ban.

They won't stop until WE stop them. They must be politically exterminated. The way we do that is to have the proper state of mind when we advocate for gun owner rights. We have to make membership in organizations like the VPC, the Brady Bunch, and The Gun Guys look like membership in the KKK--because it is.

Via Wayne LaPierre:

Montana's Castle Doctrine bill also contains a provision stating that if companies forbid employees from legally and lawfully carrying a firearm, and an employee is a victim of a crime, then the employee can sue his or her employer for failing to protect him (or refusing to allow him to protect himself).

This is wonderful! We need more of this.

One of my first firearms students was a lawyer and suggested something I have never had the courage to try. His suggestion was that employees who are otherwise legally able to carry a concealed firearm but are prohibited by company policy should have their lawyer send the employer a letter. This letter would state the employee would obey the company policy. But should a situation arise where the lawful possession and use of a firearm in the work environment could have saved the life or prevented serious injury to the employee or others that the company was on notice that it would be held liable because of the company policy.

If I was ever in a position where the job just didn't matter that much I might try that as a means to change company policy. But in most situations I figure it would just result in the company putting you at the top of the list to get rid of should there be a real or imagined downturn in business.

In my list of BHAGs with the PNNL lawsuit is to make it such that having a "no guns" policy is direct evidence of an anti-gun bias. Hence if a gun owner gets fired the no guns policy lends credence to the claim it was his gun ownership that was the real reason. Just as separate bathrooms or drinking fountains for blacks would be evidence that a company had a bias against non-whites. We need to make the cost of anti-gun bigotry as high as we can and I am going to do my best to enable others to inflict a cost on other bigots.

Yesterday I was chatting with friend Sean, discussing this situation in regards to PNNL. I told him PNNL is probably trying to find the source of the leak. Sean, almost never at a loss for just the right thing to say said, "I, personally, would lay it all at the feet of Wen Ho Lee."

I would like to remind my PNNL visitors that there are laws against retaliation against whistle blowers and that I will gladly discuss my sources with law enforcement officials investigating the crimes of PNNL employees. But PNNL efforts to use me to retaliate against people who cooperate with me and/or law enforcement will be vigorously opposed.

Women in the Seattle area, you could probably do a lot of good for the gun rights movement in Washington State by attending this meeting tonight:

Directions and parking information is here.

Men in camouflage or "Vote from the rooftop" t-shirts with beer bellies would not be productive.

I received a couple more hits from PNNL yesterday. Both were direct hits on Funny Stuff. This was the post where I told about two different people who just recently gave me exceedingly useful information about PNNL. Not that I didn't already have direct evidence of felonies by PNNL people, but this was further evidence of their crimes and other crimes as yet unreported. One has to wonder how the DOE is going to view it when these criminals, most of whom have security clearances, are not reported to law enforcement and dealt with appropriately.

From the nature of the hits it appears they are either typing in the URL directly or clicking on a link in email--whatever.

I laughed so hard my stomach hurt.

2007 is getting off to a great start:

Domain Name		pnl.gov ? (United States Government)
IP Address		130.20.181.# (Battele Pacific Northwest Laboratory)
ISP		Battele Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Location		Continent  :  North America Country  :  United States  (Facts) State  :  Washington City  :  Richland Lat/Long  :  46.3282, -119.3222 (Map) Distance  :  114 miles
Language		English (United States) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 7.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; Q312461)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution  :  1152 x 864 Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit		Jan 9 2007 9:50:25 am
Last Page View		Jan 9 2007 9:50:25 am
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../08/Funny Stuff.aspx
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../08/Funny Stuff.aspx
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-8:00
Visitor's Time		Jan 9 2007 9:50:25 am
Visit Number		125,716

Domain Name		pnl.gov ? (United States Government)
IP Address		130.20.96.# (Battele Pacific Northwest Laboratory)
ISP		Battele Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Location		Continent  :  North America Country  :  United States  (Facts) State  :  Washington City  :  Kennewick Lat/Long  :  46.2131, -119.1682 (Map) Distance  :  109 miles
Language		English (United States) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution  :  1280 x 960 Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit		Jan 9 2007 1:44:37 pm
Last Page View		Jan 9 2007 1:44:37 pm
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../08/Funny Stuff.aspx
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../08/Funny Stuff.aspx
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-8:00
Visitor's Time		Jan 9 2007 1:44:37 pm
Visit Number		125,778

But the problem is that you don’t want anyone carrying concealed weapons around. Even in the hands of retired police officers, firearms are a threat.

Gun Guys
Ocean City, MD Reluctantly Changes Concealed Weapons Law
January 5, 2006
[Just so you realize how warped these bigots are. The very existence of firearms are threats, apparently not just to predatory criminals, but to all life.--Joe]

I hate guns. In today's society there is no need for the average citizen to own or carry a gun except to protect yourself from those who do carry guns and intend to use them in a crime. Oh, wait! I just contradicted myself. No. I just pointed out the vicious circle created by gun advocates. They say, "Guns don't kill, people kill." I'd say you're correct. But the government and law enforcement have done a lousy job of keeping guns out of the hands of those who kill, and longer jail sentences are not the answer because that occurs after a crime has been committed.

Tighter gun control? I'll go so far as to say ban guns. That's the only way.

Carol Solnom
There's no need for most to carry a gun
January 9, 2007
The Enquirer
[<sarcasm> Putting prostitutes in jail after they commit the crime is not the answer. We need to put chastity belts on all women except when under strict police supervision. </sarcasm>

At least Ms. Solnom admits her hate. Such an admission is the first step to recovery.

Banning guns didn't make people in the U.K., Canada, or Australia safer. It didn't make people in Washington D.C. or Chicago safer. I have Just One Question for Ms. Solnom.--Joe]

It's possible we won't have to liberate the U.K. after all. They may be in the process of liberating themselves if this report via Kevin is true and the trend continues.

Socialism is for the good of the people, right? It's not right for the rich industrialists to own the means to production. So the enlightened thing to do is for the people to own it. At least that is the way I understand it is supposed to work. So now we get this from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez who is nationalizing the oil, banking, communications, and electricity:

In his speech, he said he will ask the Venezuelan congress to allow him to rule by decree, a power he enjoyed for a year in 2000-2001. Last month, the 52-year-old president said he would seek to change the constitution to end presidential term limits.

So in this case it's for the good of Chavez instead of "the people".

Socialism--The Road to Serfdom. In this case they are becoming the serfs of Hugo Chavez.