# Tuesday, January 24, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, January 24, 2012 5:53:36 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

With all the permit holders, it's getting to where violent crime isn't safe anymore.

Dave Hardy
January 23, 2012
CCW customer kills robber
[I've been listening to another economics book by Thomas Sowell. He gave many examples where criminals were entirely rational and responded to "economic" pressures. Sowell's definition of economics is "the study of allocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses". When a violent criminals scarce resource is their body and that it might be reallocated by someone else as worm food most probably come up with the correct answer when they ask themselves the question, "Do I feel lucky?"

That violent crime is going down and the murder rate is at it's lowest level in 50 (I think, I don't want to bother looking it up right now) years could be because of the dramatic increase in CCW and the number of gun owners in general.

I may just be that the anti-gun people were wrong and the NRA, SAF, CCRKBA, JPFO, GOA, etc. was right (again).—Joe]

# Monday, January 23, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Monday, January 23, 2012 4:38:15 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights | Markley's Law | Quote of the Day )

It’s like having a .60 caliber penis in your pants. Only you can kill a person with it.

Vic Frasier
June 21, 2009
Five Guns That Are Clearly Compensating for a Tiny Penis
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

And if he thinks .60 caliber is a large for a human penis then he needs some anatomy lessons as well as psychological help.—Joe]

By: Joe Huffman Monday, January 23, 2012 3:51:18 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

New York state has enacted rational gun laws for one very simple reason: to protect everyone visiting, living, or working in New York.

Erin M. Duggan
January 21, 2012
Director of communications for the New York City district attorney's office.
New York gun law triggers confusion, arrests for visitors
[“Rational”? What part of “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” does Duggan have trouble understanding?

This is the same sort of person that would claim separate restaurants, drinking fountains and toilet facilities is “rational” too. I’m looking forward to the day when a Judge strikes those laws down and threatens the bigoted politicians, prosecuting attorneys, and police officers with arrest and jail time when they fail to obey in a timely manner.—Joe]

# Sunday, January 22, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Sunday, January 22, 2012 6:54:48 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Boomershoot | Boomershoot 2012 )

Barron and I drove out to the Boomershoot site today for some more testing of the potassium chlorate. There was a large snow berm blocking the road out to Mecca and the snow was too deep to drive across anyway. We parked at my cousin Dennis’ place, packed up our stuff and started to walk. It is only 789 yards (I wrote an app for that!) but the crust on the snow was weak enough that I broke through about every other step and Barron broke through almost up to his knees with each step.

The wind was coming up and it was starting to snow and I decided (after getting confirmation from Barron) that this wasn’t a good idea. It was going to be a lot of work getting out there and back. So much work that it was bordering stupid to even try. We drove back to Moscow without doing the testing.

I’ll be back in town in two weeks. Maybe the weather will be more cooperative and if not we’ll bring snowshoes and we will win the battle with the snow.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, January 22, 2012 6:36:30 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

New York state has enacted rational gun laws for one very simple reason: to protect everyone visiting, living, or working in New York.

Erin M. Duggan
January 21, 2012
Director of communications for the New York City district attorney's office.
New York gun law triggers confusion, arrests for visitors
[“Rational”? What part of “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” does Duggan have trouble understanding?

This is the same sort of person that would claim separate restaurants, drinking fountains and toilet facilities is “rational” too. I’m looking forward to the day when a Judge strikes those laws down and threatens the bigoted politicians, prosecuting attorneys, and polices officers with arrest and jail time when they fail to obey in a timely manner.—Joe]

# Saturday, January 21, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:46:41 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Fun | Gun Rights )

The Washington Post, notoriously anti-gun, published a book review written by Mark A. Keefe IV -- editor in chief of American Rifleman. The book reviewed is Glock: The Rise of America's Gunby Paul Barrett. The review was quite positive without even a hint of anti-gun sentiment between the lines.

It is a good book (my review is here). But in the Washington Post?

Wow!

By: Joe Huffman Saturday, January 21, 2012 11:21:18 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

Dear Lord: Please keep them that stupid until they disappear.

Amen.

Miguel
January 20, 2012
Comment to What That Flushing Sound Is...
[While carefully controlled experiments have failed to demonstrate the efficacy of pray I remain confident the stupidity of the Brady Campaign will continue for quite some time. Whether it will be sufficiently severe in depth and duration to cause them to disappear will require the experiment be run to completion.—Joe]

# Friday, January 20, 2012
By: Lyle at UltiMAK Friday, January 20, 2012 8:45:42 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Economics )

Don't waste your time or mine by calling me on the phone, asking me for my company's name, address and such like.  Everything you need to know (and a thousand times more) to list my company in your 'directory' is right there on my web site.  If you haven't looked at my web site, you don't really care at all, and in that case I don't understand what you think you're doing.  You make no sense.  You're phony.  Go away.

On a not altogether unsimilar note; Dear customer; I continue to fail to understand why you get on your computer, find our web site, and then e-mail us from the web site asking for a catalog.  There has never, in the history of retail been a print catalog that has as much information and imagery (including moving and talking pictures) as you have right now in front of you on the web site.  It's always there, you can't lose it in a stack of magazines and mail, you can access it from anywhere in the developed and semi-developed worlds, it won't get damaged by your kids and pets, it won't sit around getting in your family's way, and your spouse won't have to ask you six months from now if it can finally be thrown out.  I know that you, as the customer, are always right, and I appriciate your interest.  I just don't understand some of your aspects.

Dear computer, computer software company, mobile device manufacturer or sellers and ISPs.  I frequently talk with people who do not have internet access.  I was told just today by a customer, for example, that he didn't have a computer because he though he'd have to take a computer class and he just didn't have that much interest or willingness to undergo what he believed would be a pain in the neck.  There are thousands and thousands of these people out there.  Maybe you don;t care about them one teeny tiny bit and that's why you're njot making any effort to get their business.  Instead all I can remember from any comercials is; "Spam, Malware, Viruses, SPY WARE!!!!  You could lose all your personal data!!!  Identity theft!!!  Your hard drive Will Crash, FOR SURE!!  Subscribe to our backup service or you'll LOSE EVERYTHING!!!"  That's your industry's image in the minds of the people who represent the pieces of the pie you're not going after.  They're afraid, and for some good reasons.  It's fine and understandable going after your competition's customers, but there are a whole bunch of other potential customers no one's going after.  Grow the pie, Man.

Yes I know; paragraphs two and three are closely related and both apply to my own business.  Yes, I'm being slightly hypocritical.

By: Lyle at UltiMAK Friday, January 20, 2012 7:11:27 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom )

We're hearing it more and more lately.  It's being said because we're starting to have a good influence; "The tone in politics has gotten so nasty lately..."  I heard it from my mother last night too.

It's like everything else in politics-- if the Progressives like it, it's great, no matter what, but if you love liberty and say things in support of it, you're being "mean and combative".

Our freedom can be attacked from all directions, and there's never a problem with that.  We can be told we should just back down and shut up, or guns are good for one things and one thing only: Murdering.  That sort of thing has been said for decades.  The very process of making a living in business can be maligned, vilified and smeared for generations, ownership of certain cars or trucks, or of guns, or simply being successful can be said to be a sign that we're (ehem) "Compensating for something".  We can be accused for generations of being racist if we want all people to live as equal under the law, and that's not "nasty".

Until we push back in favor of liberty-- Then we are being "nasty".  Then we're being told how unfortunate it is that things are getting so vitriolic. 

Well sure; the ideals of statism/Progressivism/socialism, and plain old blind-and-stupid anti-Americanism cannot coexist with the principles of liberty.  One destroys the other.  So it's been nasty all along.  As nasty as nasty gets.  How can a 100+ year long attack on the very ideal of human freedom and liberty be anything other than scum-sucking, in-the-gutter nasty?

So let's not play stupid mind games.  Leave that to the Left, to play on each other.  For generations we've been cowards.  We let them get away with it for fear of being ostracized from polite society.  We let them play us for fools, always hoping against hope that that would somehow buy us something with them, and always failing.

On that note; I notice a lot of our own using disclaimers.  "I don't work for so and so" etc. after giving a good review on a product or service.  Well how about this?  I love you, I respect you, I appreciate your input a LOT, but SCREW YOU!  That is to say; you don't need to excuse yourself for saying good things about something.  If it turns out you were being dishonest, we'll eventually find out and stop taking you seriously.  If it turns out you were right, as I suspect you are, I'll listen to you next time with heightened interest.  See?  Understand that your eagerness to put in with the disclaimers comes from your having been cowed all your life into believing that there is something wrong with what we've come to call "commercialism" (with a little cringe at the distastefulness of the word).  Stop it, gawdamit.  If we can't promote products for our own benefit, how long before selling ideas or principles for our own benefit becomes taboo?

How about this, just as an attempt to jolt you out of your life-long anti-capitalist hypnotic state (even though you think you've overcome it); How DARE you come here with nothing to sell!  How DARE you make comments with no products or services to offer your fellow Man.  How DARE you come here empty-handed, with naught but words.  Get your wits about you, Man.  Shake off the perpetual apologetic state and start selling something.  And no-- don't even go along in sarcasm, making disclaimers just to show how stupid they are.  That's how it starts you doing out of habit.

OK;  Buy UltiMAK.  See?  That didn't hurt a bit, did it?  Maybe I own the company and maybe I don't, and it's none of your business if I don't feel like telling you for some stupid reason.  I do own it, and if I didn't want you to know it would probably be because I was embarrassed by it and that should make you wonder why.  I'll let the products speak for themselves, mainly, and my opinions of them will be tested by time and experience.  Anything I say about them will either be proven a; true, or b; not so true, and my reputation will go likewise.  And if someone comes busting your door in for trying to make a living in your own way, or they try to seize your bank accounts, fuck with your family, etc., you can always shoot them.  So what's to lose?  You life, your liberty and your sacred honor.  That's just three things.  At the end, which will be most important to you?

I the spirit of keeping the tone polite and cordial; anytime anyone spouts the slightest bit of even semi socialist, quasi-moderate or anti capitalist, anti corporate drivel, any time, anywhere, in any company, tell them to sit back and shut up because you're sick and tired of the divisiveness and the nastiness.

By: Joe Huffman Friday, January 20, 2012 4:43:25 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

Gun control laws in the United States originated as a scheme for keeping blacks disarmed. By turning gun rights into privileges, granted at the discretion of local police chiefs and county sheriffs, whites could keep blacks from bearing arms while still in practice maintaining their own rights. The slope turned out to be slippery and, in all but eight states, whites lost their gun rights too. Finally in 1987 people of all races started to reclaim their gun rights through the "shall issue" movement, requiring police chiefs and county sheriffs to issue gun permits to all adult applicants who are not disqualified by history of crime or mental illness.

Alec Rawls
2002
Blacks and Guns
[Another one via Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms  by Philip Mulivor.

It's the dirty little secret of gun control. And it's just one more thing anti-gun people have in common with the KKK.—Joe]

# Thursday, January 19, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:40:46 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

When I read stories like this (via Sebastian) I can't help but think of the story The Emperor's New Clothes.

Gun control activists are like the two tailors who keep telling the media and politicians (the Emperor) something that obviously isn't true. The people have finally stopped the pretense and are now laughing at those still attempting to maintain the pretense.

By: Joe Huffman Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:27:26 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
May 11, 1921
Stave v. Kerner, 181 N.C. 107 S.E. 222
[From Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor.

Mulivor sent me a free copy which I am enjoying immensely. I will be stealing more quotes from it in the coming weeks.—Joe]

# Wednesday, January 18, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Wednesday, January 18, 2012 6:45:56 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Boomershoot | Boomershoot 2012 | Gun Fun )

For people in the Lewiston, Clarkston, Moscow, Pullman area this may be of interest. Others, not so much.

If any Boomershoot staff wish to attend the class Boomershoot will pay the class fee (but not the USPSA membership fee) and provide transportation between Moscow and Lewiston on the days of the class.

If you are interested but don't have John's email address send me an email (ROClass@joehuffman.org) and I'll forward your email on to him.

I’ll be attending the class if that makes any difference to you.

From: John Grimes
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 4:37 PM
Subject: USPSA Range Officer 1 class in Lewiston on March 24 & 25!

Hi folks,

The Lewiston Pistol Club will be hosting a USPSA Ranger Officer 1 training by our own Kevin Imel, the newest instructor for the National Range Officers Institute, on March 24 & 25, 2012 at the LPC Indoor Range (2419 16th Ave., Lewiston, ID). 

Those who complete the RO training will become official USPSA certified Range Officers.  For those who don't know, ROs are the ones who run each shooter and do all the shouting at our monthly matches (the shouting is my favorite part).  Here are some more details: http://www.uspsa.org/about_NROI_new.php.

You do have to be a USPSA member to become a USPSA Range Officer when the class begins ($40, https://www.uspsa.org/uspsa-join-renew.php). You will be able to join or renew and pay for a USPSA membership on the morning of the class (via a separate check made out to USPSA).  There are some other advantages in joining the USPSA, most importantly, showing the number, variety and integrity of people who shoot.  The magazine's kind of nice, too.

This is also a great opportunity for seasoned ROs who have let their credentials slide to get right with the Range Gods.  You know who you are.

The class itself is $40 payable by cash or check made out to the Lewiston Pistol Club at the door on March 24th.  The class starts on Saturday at 8:30 AM sharp and runs through about 5 PM.  The Sunday class start time will be set by the instructor and will end in the afternoon, probably before 5. 

All participants will need to bring a rulebook and a notebook for use during the seminar.  You can print your own copy from here: http://www.uspsa.org/rules/2010HandgunRulesProof3web.pdf.

The Sunday class includes some hands on practice running shooters, so you will also need your eyes and ears, firearm and 100 rounds of ammo.  You will not need your own timer for the class, but in practice, most ROs buy them at some point.  We have examples of all three main brands at our monthly matches.

[…]

Questions - send them in.

John Grimes
LPC Action Match Director

By: Lyle at UltiMAK Wednesday, January 18, 2012 12:55:37 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Freedom )

Getting ready to make the left turn into our industrial park this morning, I find that the snow berm in the middle of the road is much too large to try to hop overt, even with a large 4 x 4, so I have to continue on, find a place to turn around and come back from the opposite direction.  In so doing I come across a guy in a sedan with a handicapped tag in his window, and he's hopelessly stuck in the cold, loose snow, with ice under it, at the edge of the road.

It turned out he's driving for the handicapped person, and he's a young, healthy guy.  First problem; get a shovel and learn how to use it, Dude. Second Problem; he's running street tires-- great in the South on a hot, dry day, but worthless here in the winter.

I ask him; "Do you have a tow hook on this thing?  I have a tow strap and I can pull you right out."

Third problem; "I don't know" he says, so I crawl down in the snow to look for one.  Fourth Problem; his rig has a stupid f-ing air dam.  It acts as a plow blade, working against his forward progress in the snow.  Fifth problem; no tow hook-- everything under the front end is plastic. So I tell him to back up some distance, get a run at it, and try to get up enough momentum to crash through the deep stuff and onto the road.

Sixth problem; I have to alert him to the fact that there's a car coming on the road, and so wait a second, Skippy.  We make a couple of tries at it, and it becomes obvious that he's never done this before.  "Stay in your old tracks each time and you'll be able to get up more speed" I tell him.

"I can't see my tracks."  Oh boy.  He's for sure never done this before.  Ever heard of hanging your noggin out the window so you CAN see, if that's what it takes?  He keeps closing his window so I can't communicate with him.

"Do you have tire chains?"

"Yeah, but they're on so-and-so's car over there..."  Oh boy...

Then; "Thaaaanks!" comes the voice from the passenger seat.  I'm in the middle of trying to explain how easy it would be, still and all, to get them out and on their way, and again; "Thaaanks!"

OK then.  You're welcome.  Bye.

Not to brag, since it isn't bragging if it's true, but I've been in a freaking sedan in the freaking mountains on a freaking logging trail, with more snow than this.  We used to do that sort of thing just for fun, because that was the sort of thing kids did-- you go out and see just how far you can push it, then you go a little more, get stuck, and figure out how to get un-stuck and back 15 miles down the trail to a plowed road.  In the dark.  It made for some great adventures.  So yeah; I know how to get this guy out, for a fact, even though he's made no effort, and no pre-planning on his part.

The conditions are dangerous right here and now, but it's still what I call Karmann-Ghia weather.  A friend once had one of those rigs, and he'd drive that thing no matter what, because it was all he had.  He made it work.  If you can get around in a Karmann-Ghia with some modicum of planning and experience and some willingness to work a little when it's required, I figure the roads are fine, they don't need plowed, and there's just no excuse.

But as it often happens, the most knowledgeable and capable person present is the very one you endeavor to ignore or actively try to get rid of.

By: Joe Huffman Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:15:27 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Fun | Quote of the Day )

Guns are (pardon the pun) loaded with so much cultural baggage that you think you know what to expect. You don’t. TV gunshots sound and act no more like real gunshots than construction-paper snowflakes resemble real snowflakes.

My next thought is, I want to do that again! I have an immediate, exhilarated reaction. Partly it’s that what I’ve just done initially frightened me, so there’s a sense of a limit overcome. For many people I know, guns remain unreal—the accessories of fictional characters, or at least of the Other, not you and yours. Yet to fire a gun is to realize you can do it: You can operate one, understand how it works. Shooting gives me a rush that comes from a feeling of (admittedly incomplete) mastery.

Amanda Fortini
January 12, 2012
Should I Buy a Gun? -- After falling victim to a string of traumatic crimes, Amanda Fortini considers a controversial means of protection
[Via email from Mitchel at work who said, "If I knew a lady that’s been through as much as she’s been through I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT HER A GUN."

I would have too.—Joe]

# Tuesday, January 17, 2012
By: Lyle at UltiMAK Tuesday, January 17, 2012 11:45:41 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Ballistics | Gun Fun )

Why is it that so many rifle scopes, even very high-end scopes, have their BDC or BDC/rangefinding reticles on the second focal plane, such that the reticles features are only valid at one specific magnification setting?

That seems like a handicap to me.  What are the arguments for or against?

By: Joe Huffman Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:16:15 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

We have passed the point, to be honest, where these folks deserve the dignity of being treated like reasonable adults. As they have plainly demonstrated, they are incapable of acting in such a manner.

Sebastian
January 16, 2012
The State of the Debate
[As I have said before, we do not have a common basis to even communicate with these people.

Their "political currency" is the tragedy of their victim "heroes". Ours is the enabling of self reliance and determination. There is no common ground upon which to compromise or even talk.

There is very little to be gained by engaging them. Point out the absurdities of their claims on our own and public turf then let them fade away into the dustbin of history.—Joe]

# Monday, January 16, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Monday, January 16, 2012 10:53:27 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Gun Rights )

The anti-gun people have expressed rage and claim we misunderstood and mocked them. The video Barron and I made was "the most offensive" of the responses. My impression is that this was because people in the video repeatedly said, "Candles don't stop violence." The anti-gun people said their candle-light stunt was to remember the victims; not to stop the violence.

But if you remember the Brady Campaign did say, "Imagine stopping a bullet before it kills a child. Impossible? Not with your help! All across America people are coming together to save lives from preventable gun violence. Will you join them, and the Brady Campaign, as we host a nationwide candlelight vigil to honor victims of gun violence?”

Our message, as stated by daughter Kim in the video, was, "Your time would be better spent going to the range and practicing..."

For them to be surprised we would regard their publicity stunt strictly as a remembrance vigil is for them to say they were stupid or incredibly naive. They literally said, "…people are coming together to save lives from preventable gun violence…" But in the words of a famous gun blogger, "Gun control: What you do instead of something." He, and others, have been saying this for years.

They should have known their claim to be "doing something" would be derided. Barron, Kim, and I just cranked it to 11.

By: Joe Huffman Monday, January 16, 2012 10:49:55 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights | Markley's Law | Quote of the Day )

It sounds like the shape of the weapon works like Viagra for gun owners.

CanadianGuy
January 6, 2012
Comment to RCMP to seize more ‘scary-looking’ guns before registry dies.
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

# Sunday, January 15, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Sunday, January 15, 2012 8:06:27 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom )

As I and many others have pointed out many times progressives have a thing about "education" and "labor" camps.

I pointed out an article to wife Barbara a few minutes ago with this information:

North Korea's hardline regime is punishing those who did not cry at the death of dictator Kim Jong-il, according to reports.

Sentences of at least six months in labour camps are also apparently being given to those who didn't go to the organised mourning events, while anyone who criticised the new leader Kim Jong-un is also being punished.

Those who tried to leave the country, or even made a mobile phone call out, were also being disciplined, it has been claimed.

Her first words were similar to my thoughts. I could see that happening here.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, January 15, 2012 3:46:02 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Blog stuff )

As I mentioned last month and Kevin noted earlier today I have been having some problems with my hosting provider. I finally had the time to call them while the site was down. At first they were looking just at the blog software but I managed to head them off by pointing out that the very simple web app blacklist.joehuffman.org was also down. Confusing them further was that www.joehuffman.org was working just fine.

They finally agreed that something was wrong with the ASP.Net portion of their server and they "created a ticket" for the problem. In the minutes that followed it appeared they temporarily changed some configuration files for diagnostic purposes and then everything came up.

In the most recent contact I had from them they said it should be fixed in 24 to 48 hours. That mean would the problem should be fixed no later than about Tuesday January 17, 15:00 PST. If you see this site is down for more than a minute or two after that send me an email so I can investigate and escalate as needed.

Thanks.

Update: I received two identical email from tech support, 10 minutes apart, saying they "have recycled the Application Pool" and all is well. I'm not entirely convinced this was the problem since the probably has come and gone many times in the last couple of months. Let me know if it appears to have gone down again.

Thanks.

Update2: I'm still having problems. My provider suggested some changes on my end that will take a couple hours. I won't be able to get to that until at least late tonight. You can hold off on the reports of outages for a couple days.

Thanks.

By: Joe Huffman Sunday, January 15, 2012 3:11:57 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom | Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

I cannot help to see Joan and every other “gun control” supporter like her as being roughly analogous to book burners, especially when viewed in the light of their infatuation with censorship and controlling the message.  Not only do they want us defenseless and easy prey for criminals, they want us quiet, docile, controlled.

Linoge
January 15, 2012
tellin’ riddles in the dark
[There is lots of evidence to support this. Reasoned Discourse, telling us we should just sit back and shut up, and of course the violence and threats of violence from these people.

It's as Weer'd Beard has said, "Anti-Freedom, not just Anti-gun!"—Joe]

# Saturday, January 14, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Saturday, January 14, 2012 10:24:36 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Freedom | Politics | Quote of the Day )

Both of the big parties -- matched set of jackboots that they are -- assume they own women's bodies. They just have differing plans for them.

Roberta X
January 14, 2012
They Both Think They Own Me
[I was just listening to Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One by Thomas Sowell. One of the things he pointed out that it's the wrong question to ask, "Where did slavery come from?" As near as we can determine slavery has been around (and continues to exist) since before writing was invented. The real question is, "Where did freedom come from?"

With this background it seems likely that the desire to "own" other human is hardwired into some primitive part of most peoples brains. This manifests itself in many different ways.

Some people are more aware of these urges than others and outright claim, "I was born to regulate." Others have claimed a divine right from the god(s) to rule other people. Even many of those who do not claim ownership or the right to rule others for their personal benefit will insist there be a ruler to take ownership of both them and their neighbors.

It may be that brief twinkle of freedom in history was an aberration and those reaping the benefits of freedom grew too fatigued to support it (see Thomas Paine). I know that at times I feel the fatigue and yearn to have the burden lifted even as I see our freedoms rapidly disappearing.—Joe]

# Friday, January 13, 2012
By: Joe Huffman Friday, January 13, 2012 10:40:09 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights )

As I understand it a person charged with a crime can plead legal insanity if at the time of the crime they lacked the mental capacity to determine that what they were doing was illegal.

I keep wondering if the Joyce Foundation allows a plea of that type with the people who spend their money. Some of the things the anti-gun people have been saying and doing lately is just nuts.

Of course if the parallel to our legal system were to remain true they would still be required to spend time in a mental hospital and that isn't going to happen. A more likely result is that once the Foundation money runs out they will get jobs in the ATF as gun experts.

By: Joe Huffman Friday, January 13, 2012 7:51:03 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) ( Crap for brains | Gun Rights | Quote of the Day )

The fatal shooting of Park Ranger Anderson was a bitter reminder of the human cost of appeasing the gun lobby – the Coburn Amendment passed two years ago legalizing loaded guns in national parks.

Dennis Henigan
January 11, 2012
Thousands Lit Candles Against The Darkness of Gun Violence
[Thirdpower already covered the lie about the numbers so I will ignore the lie in Henigan post title.

Let me get this straight… it was because it was legal to have loaded guns in national parks that Anderson was murdered? If that were true then doesn't it follow that because it was illegal to have loaded guns at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech that those murders could not have occurred?

As was pointed out to me years ago by Rolf; If crime goes down after some gun law goes into effect the anti-gun people will claim it as proof we need even more strict laws. If the crime rate goes up after the law goes into effect then that is proof, to them, that stricter laws are needed.

As near as I can tell there are no facts that can be presented to anti-gun people like Henigan which will convince them any gun restriction should be repealed.

I must therefore conclude Henigan and his kind have crap for brains.

This is actually a good test to discover whether someone is worth your time to discuss the subject. Ask, "What would it take to change your mind? No matter how improbable, what data would convince you that some law restricting firearms should be repealed?" You will be surprised at how many people say there is nothing that will change their mind.

As you walk away suggest to such people that they look up the definition of "bigot" in the dictionary.—Joe]