The View From North Central Idaho

Kevin sent me an email today asking if I had seen this:

TAMPA - Two Egyptian students at the University of South Florida were indicted Friday on federal explosives charges, but prosecutors would not say whether the men planned to carry out an attack or hurt anyone.

Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed, 24, an engineering graduate student and teaching assistant at the Tampa-based university, and engineering student Youssef Samir Megahed, 21, have been held in South Carolina since Aug. 4 when they were stopped for speeding and authorities found explosives in the trunk of their car.

They were indicted by a grand jury in Tampa on charges of carrying explosive materials across state lines. Mohammed also faces terrorism-related charges for teaching and demonstrating how to use the explosives.

Referring to the "teaching and demonstrating" aspects Kevin then asked, "So running the Boomershoot makes you a criminal, or are you safe because you're licensed?"

The answer to the first question, "Have I seen this?" is no. The other two questions are not so easily answered.

I'm almost certain running Boomershoot doesn't make me a criminal. But as we know from experience with the Second Amendment and the lack of politicians and law enforcement being prosecuted under 18 USC 242 for enforcing illegal laws infringing the 2nd Amendment our government doesn't follow the letter or even some vague shadow of the law. They will do basically whatever they want and then find a law, or loophole in the law, that gives them plausible authority and justification for their actions. Numerous example abound:

• The early restrictions on firearms were aimed at, and only enforced, when the suspect was black.
• Literacy tests for voting required that the prospective voter could read the newspaper--and blacks were given a Chinese newspaper to read for their test.
• In New Jersey--"the legislative branch may as a matter of sound public policy and without impairing any constitutional guarantees, declare the act itself unlawful without any further requirement of mens rea or its equivalent... When dealing with guns, the citizen acts at his peril."

So with that caveat, no, Boomershoot does not make me a criminal.

As to the final question, "Are you safe because you're licensed?" I'm probably safer but as long as I'm alive I will never safe from harm. My license gives me visibility with the ATF and they can comfortably call me up and ask what is going on or ask if I know something about some event should the need arise. They can come out and visit the Taj Mahal where I make and store my explosives and can inventory it (my inventory is zero 99+% of the time). It is my belief they will be less likely to send the SWAT team on an early morning visit when they can sit down over a meal at the local restaurant and chat about things (as they have done on more than one occasion).

So what's the story with "teaching and demonstrating how to use explosive" being a crime. It's typical MSM getting details wrong. What is misleading about the newspaper report is what the law actually says versus what they reported. Here is the actual law:

(p) Distribution of Information Relating to Explosives, Destructive Devices, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.—

(1) Definitions.— In this subsection—

(A) the term “destructive device” has the same meaning as in section 921 (a)(4);
(B) the term “explosive” has the same meaning as in section 844 (j); and
(C) the term “weapon of mass destruction” has the same meaning as in section 2332a (c)(2).

(2) Prohibition.— It shall be unlawful for any person—

(A) to teach or demonstrate the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction, or to distribute by any means information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture or use of an explosive, destructive device, or weapon of mass destruction, with the intent that the teaching, demonstration, or information be used for, or in furtherance of, an activity that constitutes a Federal crime of violence; or
(B) to teach or demonstrate to any person the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction, or to distribute to any person, by any means, information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture or use of an explosive, destructive device, or weapon of mass destruction, knowing that such person intends to use the teaching, demonstration, or information for, or in furtherance of, an activity that constitutes a Federal crime of violence.

So, unless I know that someone I am teaching, demonstrating, or providing information to about explosives intends to use it in an illegal manner, technically, I am fine. But, numerous times in the past people have claimed to know what I was thinking even though they were clueless. I don't think like other people and when people are certain I must know or think something they are frequently wrong. Therefore I can't be certain that some zealous prosecutor won't decide I must be thinking something bad and decide to prosecute me.

There is a short side story to this law and Boomershoot. It was Dianne Feinstein that introduced the above law in 1995. It was this law, by Ms. Feinstein, specifically aimed at the Internet and the growing "militia movement", that helped motivate me to create what is now known as Boomershoot and put information on how to make reactive targets on the net. I was, and am, deliberately thumbing my nose at her with Boomershoot by treading as close as I can but still staying within the law.

Hot off the AP press:

Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig will resign from the Senate amid a furor over his arrest and guilty plea in a police sex sting in an airport men's room, Republican officials said Friday.

Craig will announce at a news conference in Boise Saturday morning that he will resign effective Sept. 30, four state GOP officials told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity.

It's a significant blow to the gun rights movement at the Federal level. He is one of our strongest allies. Even if he is replaced with someone as rock solid on the issue they won't have the seniority and hence the power Craig had.

As Sean and I were discussing at lunch today--I don't care what he does with consenting adults in private. Hooking up in public restrooms (assuming he was doing that) is just plain stupid.

Twice now I have tried to add a comment to Robyn Ringler's post. In this post she hypothesizes an advertising campaign where the appearance of a gun shot victim is used to discourage gun ownership. She credits this idea to an anti-smoking campaign aimed at women:

Previous attempts on the smoking campaign, wrote the author, had not worked. Women weren’t moved by portraits of people dying of lung cancer or by campaigns about health or social problems like the fact that smoking causes bad breath and smelly hair. But the one thing women did respond to was a campaign about their looks. The fact that smoking causes wrinkles, discolors and dries skin, and ruins your appearance made a difference.

A couple days ago I made a comment and after clicking on the submitting button was given the message that the comment would have to be moderated. As of this afternoon the comment still had not appeared so I tried again. This time I kept a copy of the message to show that it wasn't something rude or obnoxious. This time after pressing submit I didn't even get a "moderated" message. It appears that comments from me go straight into "the bit bucket". My comment was this:

It might backfire too. The thought process could be, "That is what will happen to the other guy if I carry a gun and someone messes with me." The effects of smoking obviously happen to the smoker so it's a different situation.

The comment I made a couple days ago was a sentence or two longer but otherwise was essentially the same.

I could maybe understand it if I had been leaving comments in the past which were crude, rude, or hostile, but I think these were the first attempts I have made to leave a comment on her blog. I have been rather blunt about her on my blog but on her blog I have done nothing even remotely offensive.

I guess it's all part of Reasoned Discourse^TM.

Few influential people involved with the Internet claim that it is a good in and of itself. It is a powerful tool for solving social problems, just as it is a tool for making money, finding lost relatives, receiving medical advice, or, come to that, trading instructions for making bombs.

Esther Dyson
[The gist of this can be said of virtually all technology (including firearms and explosives) and many other things such as free speech. Technology can used for both good and evil. It's the user not the technology that is important. As with most bigots the anti-gun people are very narrow minded and can't or refuse to see the big picture. Even pointing out analogies such as this fail on most of them. The most typical response I get when trying to make this point is, "But we are talking about guns!" as if they were the equivalent of letting cobras roam around in your home. Guns do not have minds and actions of their own. They are tools of the individuals in possession of them. Among other things firearms are used for recreation, to protect innocent life, and the much more rare, taking of innocent life.--Joe]

We've heard the story (via Kim).  We're now told (by people who apparently have nothing productive to do, unless they happen to be working in market research for a gun company) that we in the U.S. have about 90 guns per 100 people, making this the most heavily armed nation in the world.

Not so fast.  They didn't say 90 out of 100 people in the U.S. own guns.

In fact, something like half, or less than half, of American households are armed.  The 90:100 figure looks only at guns per capita.  Those who own guns tend to own several, and one person can only operate one gun (or in some cases, two, but mostly as a gimmick) at a time.  Are you more heavily armed if you own 10 guns than if you own one or two?  Not really.

I have a pile of guns, but if I really needed to use a gun for protection, I'd be able to use only one of them, leaving the others stowed in their cases and out of action.  At best I'd have a long-arm in my hands and a side arm on my hip.  At the worst I might be overcome by my assailant while trying to decide which gun to use (Let's see; do I want the Italian auto-loader, the 870, the AK, or the...)

In Switzerland, most households contain at least one assault rifle, or such is the word on the street (I'm using the term "assault rifle" correctly here, which is an anomaly most in the media would not understand, but just so you know).   If you count the percentage of armed households (a dwelling containing at least one serviceable firearm) rather than the total number of guns per capita, which makes far more sense if we're considering the armed, quick-response potential of a given population, the Swiss have a more heavily armed society than we Americans.  Only in the case of a sustained need (wherein you might find I would skillfully load all my guns and copious ammo supply into my full-sized, American, V-8 powered, four-wheel-drive pickup, transport them to a predetermined and communicated distribution point, and start handing them out to my neighbors) would the number of guns this individual owns ever be an issue, so long as its more than one or two.  So you can take about 20 guns out of Reuters' figures, just for me alone.  In my home town though, I would estimate that there are more guns than people (its a very polite, peaceful town) so the number of skilled and determined marksmen, plus the ammo supply, would be the important figure.

But what are we talking about?  Maybe we're talking about confiscation and don't know it.  Reuters?

If we're discussing issues of security related to the fighting readiness of a population as can be learned from history (the actual point of the Reuters article is not stated, but why else talk about how many guns the Joneses have?  Jealous?) we could count the number of legally disarmed Jews in Germany in the 1930s for example, compared to the number of armed Nazis.  Closer to home; we could count the number of unarmed students, combined with the number of unarmed faculty and unarmed staff (disarmed by campus rules) at Virginia Tech compared to the total number of armed assailants on campus that day, and by so doing we might come to a heightened level of actual shared wisdom (Reuters: take note).

Cases of mass death among unarmed populations abound, as is currently being demonstrated in parts of Africa and will yet again be demonstrated in another "gun free zone" in America no doubt, we having failed to learn from reality.  Hence it would seem that China, with only three "estimated" guns per 100 civilians, is ripe for yet another purge.  In Nigeria its 1:100.

This last I found bizarre:

Only about 12 percent of civilian weapons [worldwide] are thought to be registered with authorities.

"Thought to be registered"? Thought by whom?  We don't know what's registered?

Exactly why would it matter which guns are registered?  Is a registered gun more useful for self defense, or less so?  Is it more accurate, more powerful or less likely to malfunction?  Is a registered gun more likely to be confiscated by tyrants or less likely to be confiscated by tyrants?

Do criminals and tyrants register their guns, or are their victims' guns the only guns being registered?  No one at Reuters seems to have a clue.

Just between you and me, I think I hit it up above:  Some people are screaming inside with jealousy and envy toward citizen gun owners, and its tearing them apart.

I'd like to see Reuters do a story on how much freedom people have around the world.  Maybe we'd find some wisdom there.

What if we could build a society where the information was never collected?  Where you could pay to rent a video without leaving a credit card number or a bank number?  Where you could prove you're certified to drive without ever giving your name?  Where you could send and receive messages without revealing your physical location, like an electronic post office box?

That's the kind of society I want to build.  I want a guarantee - with physics and mathematics, not with laws - that we can give ourselves things like real privacy of personal communications.  Encryption strong enough that even the NSA can't break it.  We already know how.  But we're not applying it.  We also need better protocols for mobile communication that can't be tracked.

John Gilmore
A transcript of remarks given at the First Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, March 28,1991

We are in the middle of a culture war. The anti-gun bigots against gun owners. Yesterday they gave it their best shot and, here in Seattle, only two showed up:

The demonstration didn't take long at all. In fact, it might have been the shortest in recent local history.

It might have been the smallest, too.

Two activists showed up. They stretched out on the ground for 32 seconds. Then they rolled up their banner -- www.protesteasyguns.com -- and headed for the parking lot.

To a certain extent it has been that way for years. The press just didn't report it. I've attended protests where the pro-gun people outnumbered the anti-gun people 10 to 1 but the TV crew drove away without getting out of their van and the newspaper gave the bigots some polite words and failed to mention all the pro gun people present with signs.

The war isn't over though. It's not over until politicians and law enforcement who enforce unconstitutional gun laws are arrested and sent to prison without a moments hesitation.

Lots of interesting info here:

The FBI has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-click surveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost any communications device, according to nearly a thousand pages of restricted documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The surveillance system, called DCSNet, for Digital Collection System Network, connects FBI wiretapping rooms to switches controlled by traditional land-line operators, internet-telephony providers and cellular companies. It is far more intricately woven into the nation's telecom infrastructure than observers suspected.

It's a "comprehensive wiretap system that intercepts wire-line phones, cellular phones, SMS and push-to-talk systems," says Steven Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor and longtime surveillance expert.

[...]

Together, the surveillance systems let FBI agents play back recordings even as they are being captured (like TiVo), create master wiretap files, send digital recordings to translators, track the rough location of targets in real time using cell-tower information, and even stream intercepts outward to mobile surveillance vans.

FBI wiretapping rooms in field offices and undercover locations around the country are connected through a private, encrypted backbone that is separated from the internet. Sprint runs it on the government's behalf.

The network allows an FBI agent in New York, for example, to remotely set up a wiretap on a cell phone based in Sacramento, California, and immediately learn the phone's location, then begin receiving conversations, text messages and voicemail pass codes in New York. With a few keystrokes, the agent can route the recordings to language specialists for translation.

Big brother is listening.

Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping tom to install your window blinds.

John Perry Barlow
[Tell this to every person that tells you laws are the proper solution to privacy issues.--Joe]

Caleb and I loaded up about 500 rounds of .40 S&W for the practice and match last weekend. We shot up almost all of them too.

The load we used was 180 grain Montana Gold CMJ's over 6.1 grains of True Blue using Winchester primers. I'm not entire happy with this load. There is enough room in the case it would be very easy to get a double charge in there. I wouldn't be surprised if a triple charge would fit. A friend suggested Competition instead. I'll probably pick up a pound to test out. I have used N350 (6.2 grains) for years and it's a great powder but a bit expensive and hard to find. I was thinking True Blue would be my replacement but now I'm not so sure.

The Montana Golds sure are pretty:

I have thousands of bullets to contribute to the cause. I went to Wade's Eastside Guns today to pick up a few thousand primers but they don't stock reloading components anymore. I'll have to get them someplace else, I'm thinking Kesselring's could use some of my business and they usually have N350 as well if the price isn't too much different I'll get a few pounds of N350 as well as a pound of Competition if they have it.

I hope the Brady bunch appreciates how much thought and effort I put into making this a special day.

Son-in-law Caleb and I went to the range on Saturday to practice for the steel match on Sunday. He hasn't shot pistol much. A lot of rifle shooting under his belt but hardly any pistol experience. He did okay on Sunday. There was a certain amount of symmetry in the results--he came in third from the bottom and I came in third from the top.

That placement isn't really fair however. Two of the shooters that came in above Caleb were shooting a .22. Caleb was shooting full power .40 S&W loads.

I still have some work to do with him. He'll get better. I'll let Kim keep him for a while longer.

Here are some pictures from the match:

Match winner, "Bad Bad Michael Brown" leaving the box under full power and doing a mag change at the same time

Caleb needs a few lessons on grip and posture

I didn't realize it but Caleb took some pictures of me as I was leaving the same box as Mike above--mag change in progress as well.

If I had my way, the gun lobby would be looking at three yards and a cloud of dust. Let's get organized and shove tougher gun policies right down their throats.

Laura Washington (novakevans@aol.com)
Gun lovers disarm control advocates
[As Ry once said, "Ah, the voice of reason." No data to convince people "tougher gun policies" would make anyone safer. Just shove it "right down their throats". But, what do you expect of a bigot? Uncle deals with her as well.

Update: Kevin wrote her a nice, but long (it was Kevin, what do you expect?), email and she responded. It was all very civil and nice.--Joe]

Someone in Greece was looking for "boomershoot survialist shop"? Whatever... they ended up finding my blog.

Your guess is as good as mine.

Domain Name		(Unknown)
IP Address		213.249.57.# (Mega TV, Tiletipos)
ISP		PANAFON S.A.
Location		Continent  :  Europe Country  :  Greece  (Facts) State/Region  :  Attiki City  :  Athens Lat/Long  :  37.9833, 23.7333 (Map) Distance  :  6,097 miles
Language		Greek el
Operating System		Microsoft Win2000
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution  :  1280 x 1024 Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit		Aug 27 2007 10:16:29 am
Last Page View		Aug 27 2007 10:16:29 am
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL		http://www.google.gr...rvivalist shop&meta=
Search Engine		google.gr
Search Words		boomershoot survivalist shop
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffman.org/CategoryView,category,Boomershoot.aspx
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffman.org/CategoryView,category,Boomershoot.aspx
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC+2:00
Visitor's Time		Aug 27 2007 8:16:29 pm
Visit Number		185,007

As Bruce asked, "Are the police taking stupid pills?":

Two people who sprinkled flour in a parking lot to mark a trail for their offbeat running club inadvertently caused a bioterrorism scare and now face a felony charge.

The sprinkled powder forced hundreds to evacuate an IKEA furniture store Thursday.

The police charging them with a felony is evidence of a serious lack of brain cells but the mayoral spokeswoman probably could be outsmarted by police dog feces.

Mayoral spokeswoman Jessica Mayorga said the city plans to seek restitution from the Salchows, who are due in court Sept. 14.

“You see powder connected by arrows and chalk, you never know,” she said. “It could be a terrorist, it could be something more serious. We’re thankful it wasn’t, but there were a lot of resources that went into figuring that out.”

Via Sebastian I discovered our NRA Board Member, and Idaho Senator, Larry Craig was arrested and plead guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct. Here are the articles I've read so far:

• Idaho's Craig Arrested in June at Minnesota Airport
• Larry Craig denies police account, says he should not have pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct
• Idaho senator pleads guilty after airport arrest

From the second article:

According to the police reports, a man, later identified as Craig, kept watching the undercover police officer through a crack in the stall, Roll Call reported. Craig then entered the next-door stall and placed his luggage against the opening under the stall door.

"My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall," said the officer, Sgt. Dave Karsnia, in the report cited by Roll Call.

The report continued: "At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area."

The report said Craig swiped his hand beneath the stall divider several times, and Karsnia showed his police identification under the stall.

It doesn't appear anything happened beyond a creepy game of footsies, but it's conduct unbecoming a Senator. Especially so for one that is one of gun rights strongest supporters.

On a local email list the subject line of the thread discussing this is "Is Larry a Fairy?".

Update: The police report can be found here.

The argument for gun control has always been based more on utopian visions than empirical facts. That, and the left simply does not trust an armed citizenry.

The media’s incessant attacks on the Second Amendment demonstrate clearly their liberal bias against gun ownership.

David Niedrauer
The Media Assault on the Second Amendment
Culture and Media Institute
Eye on Culture, Volume 1, Issue 11
[This just released report, written by a intern, is short but it has some good stuff in it. And the Brady Bunch is on the defensive about it. In the old days they would have just ignored it.--Joe]

I saw the headline, Experts: Chicago mob diminished, but still going and my first thought was maybe they were putting the heat on Mayor Daley, but I was wrong. At least they didn't mention it in this article. Daley really should be convicted of the felony, 18 USC 242, for his denying people their right to keep and bear arms under the color of law and the resultant deaths of hundreds of people. But it's not going to happen anytime soon, if ever. We need to keep working in that direction though. Baby steps, if necessary, but that is my ultimate goal.

Obama, he’s a piece of shit. I told him to suck on my machine gun. Hey Hillary! You might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.

Ted Nugent
Ted Nugent Threatens to Kill Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton During Vicious Onstage Rant
Rolling Stone
August 24, 2007
[I find Nugent's statement only worthy of particular note as a bad example for gun owners. But as pointed out by numerous people in the comments to the article Nugent did not threaten to kill anyone. Yet the headline and "The Gun Guys" claim he did threaten to kill them. I guess it's just another case of the bigots not caring what the truth is.--Joe]

Robyn Ringer, in her blog posting Unfettered Access to Guns Makes No Sense, says:

Restrictions must exist in regard to who can own a gun.  Allowing criminals, the mentally ill, and children easy access to guns makes no sense.  And restrictions must exist in regard to the types of guns that may be purchased.  Allowing the ownership of guns that can shoot down airplanes or cause massive numbers of casualties in just seconds or minutes makes no sense.

It's actually Ringer that makes no sense. If someone is allowed "unfettered access" to gasoline and matches then they should have the same access to firearms. Either you can trust them to roam the streets or they should be locked up or, in rare cases, executed. Molotov Cocktails can take out tanks but you don't hear the anti-gun bigots trying to restrict access to gasoline and bottles. It's just guns their irrational minds cannot tolerate. These bigots need to be answer Just One Question. But of course they can't answer it.

Heather and Jon were married twenty six years and four days after Barb and I. Heather is the origin of the word "dooced". She now blogs full time successfully enough to support her husband and child.

This week I received my first performance review after going to work full time at Microsoft last year. I was shocked to discover the size of the bonuses and stock grants (James called me up immediately after his review and reported similar shock, "That is a lot of money!"). Even counting the lost pay after being dooced myself (I still need to finish writing up the full story--lots of interesting details about what really happened) in about four or five years I will be financially better off that I would have been had I stayed at the lab. I would rather do the work (for the most part) I was doing at the lab but financially I can't complain.

Via Bruce we find out they are drug testing sewage.

So, here is how it works... They test at the main outlet for drugs, then start moving up the pipe and at each junction they mark it "clean" or "dirty" and keep moving upstream on the "dirty pipes" to the individual homes. When the arrive at your back door they have probable cause and you are busted.

The same sort of methodology will find gun owners (gun powder residue) and Jews In The Attic (DNA markers) and can also be applied to your trash at the landfill and the air downwind from your community.

I love the comment to Bruce's post by John Thurston:

This opens a new form of blackmail:
"Be nice to me or I'll pee in your toilet."

Left Wing Wackos for Guns is an interesting read even if it's all old news to us at the forefront of the gun rights movement. It's more evidence that we are winning. I look forward to the day when I can put gun rights on the "back burner" to simmer and increment by two the Constitutional Amendment of my primary focus.

But now, like the US, the UK has a crime problem. And believe it or not, except for murder, theirs is worse than ours.

Dan Rather
June 2000
Britain is capital of crime, says US TV channel
[See also Gun Control's Twisted Outcome--Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.--Joe]

This is in response to a comment by Frish, from this post.

You must start with an understanding of the word.  You can look it up in history, but Fascism is an appropriate description for the process whereby a group of people attempt to wrest control away from other people by force (specifically of other people's property) and control it centrally.  The eco movement's focus on legislation and treaties, rather than free choice, is exactly that.

The term came from Benito Mussolini's Fascisti in Italy in the 1930s (he ruled from the late '20s to early '40s).  Mussolini was a devout communist who had his own plan for bringing about a communist regime.  His vision, his method for arriving at pure communism, was called fascism.

There is a common thread running through today's eco-movement, regardless of what particular group is involved:  They all are striving for less individual rights, particularly less property rights, and more centralized control, i.e. fascism.  Q.E.D.

We can argue over whether a free market economy, based on the principles of liberty, on one hand, verses a centralized, authoritarian system wherein those in control see humanity as a stain on the face of the Earth on the other hand, is most likely to produce a prosperous, clean, healthy, successful, long-lasting society that would be worth living in.  What we must first agree on is that fascism (now that you know what it means) is almost universally favored by the eco movement in this country.  The use of force (laws) is their primary if not their sole focus.  To the extent that they urge voluntary compliance, I submit, they are preparing their followers and priming the rest of us for future laws forcing compliance.  Once the voluntary bit fails, which it will because there is no possibility of "success", force becomes necessary, as we've seen in places like China, where there have been hideous anti-procreation laws.

As soon as you ecofascists start offering only free-market solutions to the problems you say in your wisdom exist, some of us who believe in freedom just might start taking you seriously.  But then a fascist is a fascist, regardless of the particular cause they've latched onto for a given day, so asking a fascist to embrace free-market solutions is a bit like asking Ted Bundy to look after a sorority.  The problem is in the basic world-view, and that has to change first.  Stop hating humanity, seeing freedom as loathsome and frightening, and start respecting humanity, seeing freedom as hope.

On that note I will give you a practical example of what I mean:  The Sierra Club spends enormous resources attempting to get legislation passed-- land use restrictions, limits on businesses, etc..  The proper, polite, human rights-friendly, American method to achieve their stated goals (large tracts of land void of humanity, more animal habitats, etc.) to an extent far greater than mere legislation (which can be overturned at the next election cycle) would be to purchase those large tracts of land.  I can' remember that last time I saw then in a TV ad, trying to raise awareness or money.  Instead they waste their money on lobbying efforts which must by necessity continue on without end if the laws they favor are to remain in force.  By buying land, asking for voluntary conributions, or through a multitude of possible free market offerings, and nothing more, they would be favoring the same things that real Americans are favoring-- respect for property rights, and low taxes.  We wouldn't be correctly referring to them as fascists, but would get along nicely with them as fellow Americans instead.

Bottom line:  You either respect humanity, respect human rights, and want to further a system of liberty, of which capitalism is an inseparable component (and are therefore an American) or you see humanity as a threat, a stain, a bunch of unworthy sinners, etc., and want to keep people from pursuing their dreams by using government as a means of initiating force to bend them to your will (and are therefore a fascist).

I really did comprehend, intellectually at least, that I was engaged in one of the most profoundly thrilling endeavors in human history.

How conservative can you be if you have jumped off the edge of the solar system?

Do conservative people travel at relativist speeds?

By the end of the first year of our voyage we were already traveling at more than a third of the speed of light. And even though there were no sensory cues at all to confirm that we were all well of it and believed it. And I think I can safely say we all found it more than a little thrilling. By the time we reached turn over in nine more years our velocity was going to peak at a hair frying 0.99794 C.

Does a conservative man race photons?

Joel Johnston
A character in the book Variable Star by Robert A. Heinlein and Spider Robinson.
[Johnston is referring to a literal definition of conservative, not the present day political definition. I have another 20 minutes worth of the book to listen to. Both James and I are enjoying it a great deal.--Joe]

I consider the ownership of arms not only a right, but the duty of a free people to themselves and future generations.

"Dan" in Pennsylvania
Armed America page 60.
[Do your duty.--Joe]

Dear Jamie,

Money is the root of all evil. A man does need roots.

Remember to dream with your eyes open so you can act on them to make them real.

G. Eric Engstrom
March 23, 2000
Inscription inside the front cover of Renegades of the Empire: How Three Software Warriors Started a Revolution Behind the Walls of Fortress Microsoft
[This inscription was addressed to our son James--who now works at Microsoft. The book is about Eric, Craig Eisler, and Alex St. John. I worked for them when I first started doing contract work for Microsoft in 1995. I've known Eric for about 20 years now starting when we both worked for Zortech (they sold a C/C++ compiler for MSDOS and later OS/2 and Windows). While researching this quote, much to my surprise, I discovered Craig is now back at Microsoft.--Joe]

As I (and others) have been saying for quite some time we are winning:

A recent Zogby International poll question conducted for Associated Television News found that 66% of the American voting public in a recent poll of 1,020 Americans from August 8-11, 2007 (margin of error of +/- 3.1%) found that the American public rejects the notion that new gun control laws are needed.

The poll asked: "Which of the following two statements regarding gun control comes closer to your own opinion? Statement A: There needs to be new and tougher gun control legislation to help in the fight against gun crime. Statement B: There are enough laws on the books. What is needed is better enforcement of current laws regarding gun control.

Conversely, only 31% of the American public think new and tougher gun control legislation are needed.

A majority of voters who support enforcement of gun laws already on the books exists virtually across all demographic groups and in all regions of the country with the only exception being Asian and liberal voters.

Don't slack off, don't celebrate for more than a day. We need to politically exterminate them. Our job isn't done until they are as unpopular as the KKK and the neo-Nazis.

When our first child was born, and again after the second, a state case worker was assigned to visit us, inspect our new house, ask us a list of questions and determine whether we were deemed by the state to be fit to keep our own child.  We were allowed, but only after installing fire extinguishers and making a few minor changes around the house, which I had planned anyway.  I had almost forgotten about that small, (to me then) but at the same time insidious, outrage.

Fast forward 14 years, to a post I’d already been working on:

***

Your Doctor as a Politician, Politicians as Doctors

My wife took our son in for a sports-physical the other day.  The kid's as healthy as any.  I can almost be persuaded to go along and agree with the school's requirement, but only in empathy with the administrators, in light of what the trial lawyers have done to our society.   Football is strenuous, sure, but so are a lot of things.  We don't get a checkup every time we plan a bicycle trip, or for doing farm work, which he did this summer, or shoveling the snow...

The typical string of health related questions was asked, then this question, tagged on at the end:

"Are there any guns in your house?"
"Yes, several"
"Are any of them loaded?"
"Uh, I don't think so."
"Well.......stay safe!"

Aside from being completely irrelevant to a sports exam, it’s a bit of a trick question, isn't it-- are any of them loaded?  We teach our kids to treat every gun as if its loaded, never to assume it is unloaded, but I digress.

I wish I'd been there, so I could have explained my point of view to the good doctor, preferably while holding a baseball bat, you know, just to demonstrate that although we keep baseball bats in our house, we keep them for sporting purposes only.

We all need a medical doctor once in a while.  Sometimes our lives may depend on it.  This of course is why people who desire control over other people are trying so desperately to get hold of the medical industry.  Our doctor had ceased being a doctor with those gun questions, and had become a schlep/tool for anti-gun activists, fishing for potential leverage against gun owners.  Remember during the 1990s when they were defining "gun crime" as a "public health" issue?  That was about the same time our co-president was pushing for full nationalization of health care (I say “full” because we’re already halfway there).

Our doctor asked no questions about any of several more common and statistically far greaterd dangers found in a typical home.  "Do you have any insect poisons? for  instance, was not asked.  Nor was anyone in the medical field interested in how much time our kids are spending on bicycles, around a swimming pool, around matches and gasoline, in the sun without sunscreen, or whether there are stairs in the house, or unlocked liquors (which there are, by the way).  They didn't ask about access to sharp knives, time spent on the highways, running with scissors, unprotected sex, or the condition of our house wiring.  Therefore the gun questions can without hesitation be said to have been motivated exclusively by politics.

***

After writing that, I came across the following, courtesy of K. Dutoit.  The Britts are taking kids away from parents by the thousands, it seems:

He tells Mrs Brookes: "I would like you and your baby to stay in hospital until the courts have made a decision."

As though they were being given a choice.  That's cute.  Its also dishonest and sickening.

The social worker says the two or three days the mother has with her baby in hospital will allow her to begin breast-feeding and that once the infant is taken away, social services will pick up expressed breast milk from her home and deliver it to the foster carers (sic) for bottle-feeding.

I can imagine the Social Services (SS) worker speaking in a German accent:  Vee haff come for zee breast milk.  If you haff not met zee quota, schnell! (Those of you with children will understand.  The rest of you will think I'm trying to be funny.)

The social worker admits to the couple that a back-up plan is being drawn up in case the judge refuses the application for a care order. He says: "What we also have to think about is a child protection plan that looks at you, at home, with your baby. There is no immediate risk to your child from yourselves, that's my understanding from reading documents."

Throw 'em a bone of hope in an insane situation, like you're on their side.  F*<%ers!  Those of you with children will understand.  Those without children:  You can never understand the extent of the pure evil of this.  Its how they get you.  You cannot fight them.  You cannot do anything but hope you can have your child back.  Its all that matters to you, and you won’t do anything to risk upsetting those in charge of your baby’s fate.  It is a hell like you cannot imagine.  Nothing alleged to have happened at Abu Ghraib under U.S. control comes anywhere close. I am not kidding.

Juxtapose the UK story with our doctor's incongrous gun questions for my son here in the U.S., and I submit that unless we stop this sort of thing, smack it down wherever it pops up, we'll end up with our very own police state, with the medical profession, social services, and lets not forget education, as integral parts of the enforcement system.  All acting very polite of course, saying, "Please do this" and, "Please do that" while they have absolute power over you.

Hillary-Care anyone?

No.  I'll opt for Liberty, thank you very much.

Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, among others, is telling us that we might "honor" our troops.  This "honor" is not to come in the form of allowing them to win, and not through convincing the enemy that they will be utterly defeated no matter what it takes, but by bringing our troops home.

Lets apply that same logic to our firemen:  Lets "honor" our firemen by keeping them out of fire trucks and away from fires.  While we're at it, we can "honor" our public school teachers in similar fashion, by sending them home, sparing them the difficult and often unpleasant task of dealing with the ins and outs of teaching kids: Planning course syllabi, meeting on-going certification requirements, writing and grading assignments, dealing with administration and parents, etc..  We can further "honor" our poor, suffering teachers by accusing them of torturing kids.  We can then "honor" them by launching false prosecutions and endless investigations against them.

As long as we're "honoring" whole cross sections of society, we might consider "honoring" our senators by reducing legislative sessions (and adjusting pay, of course) to one day per year.  Would could at least "honor" Hillary by "redeploying" her out of Washington, possibly to the Philippines, where she could be called in on two or three-days' notice in the event we desperately need her inside an hour.

As is typical with other words misused by leftists, it seems the words "honor" and "support" have taken on new and diametrically opposite meanings.

I would therefore like to; "Honor Hillary.  Send her home!"  She can't win anyway.  Her war against America is a lost cause, based on a lie.

If you have sometimes suspected that the ecofascists hate humans then you may be pleased to see the evidence to support that hypothesis--The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement:

Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.

"Crowded conditions" are either voluntary or imposed by government action. They are not an inevitable result of our present population.

"Resource shortages" would get worse if there were far fewer people on the planet. This point might not be obvious so I will explain. Imagine you and a few hundred others are marooned on a large isolated island that in addition to the sand, has tillable soil, fresh water, metal ores and, deep underground, oil. How long before you will have tractors and cultivators such that you can raise a surplus of food? How long before you will have electrical power, air conditioning, computers, and cell phones? There are a great many things that are only possible because there is a large enough market to justify the initial investment.

VHEMT apparently lives in a fantasy world.

Update: VHEMT responded on their Yahoo email group confirming my suspicions:

I think this is one of the funniest views of VHEMT I've seen so far:

[...snip of my post above...]

I don't know what "Crap for brains" refers to at the end. It was
placed to the right like a signature.

Les

Apparently he was unable to determine that "Crap for brains" was a topic tag.

Obviously Joe Huffman has never lived off the grid without A/C,
refrigeration or phone service.  I have, and must confess I prefer life
without all the amenities.

Camille

Camille (and Bob) have a Yahoo profile. Occupation: Eco-Smugs.

Does anyone else find it ironic their favorite quote is "The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind. Albert Camus"?

When growing up on the farm there were several years we did not have a phone or A/C. However, we did always have refrigeration. I've been camping and backpacking many times without any of the amenities. It's enjoyable for a few days but I wouldn't want to live my entire life like that. I find it ironic that Camille is posting on the Internet about her preference for living without "all the amenities".

Well, his blog is subtitled, "Ramblings of a red-necked,
knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal" so I do think "crap for brains" is a
signature!


Doris

Another person in the group that couldn't figure out the topic tag "Crap for brains"--confirming the correctness of my categorization.

I consider Stottlemire's actions unethical. But he does have a point:

Stottlemire, 42, of Fremont, California, insists there was no encryption or hacking involved, and therefore he did not violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. "I honestly think there are big problems when you are not allowed to delete files off of your computer," says Stottlemire.

I also think he is on shaky, at best, legal ground. The law says:

`(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--

`(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

`(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or

`(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

The law doesn't say the circumvention has to have anything to do with "encryption or hacking".

Where it gets interesting to me is that if someone were to design their copy protection based on the existence of a browser cookie such that if you had the cookie you couldn't copy the "protected work" and if you didn't you could do the copy. Then if someone make a program or script that selectively deleted just that one cookie they would be violating the law. But a web browser which allowed the user to selectively delete cookies would apparently not subject the authors to legal action. And furthermore someone who told you how delete the cookie with the browser or even the command prompt would not be subject to legal action either.

I grew up in Idaho and when I wasn't residing there I lived in next door Washington. As I have reported before my interactions with and knowledge of local law enforcement have been what I considered very fair. And as I have also reported before that isn't the case in New Jersey. And apparently it isn't the case in New York City either:

When motorists see traffic-control officers breaking the same rules they are paid to enforce, it can send them over the edge.

Meet “Jimmy Justice,” one of those frustrated motorists.

But instead of railing against fate, he decided to do something about it. Taking camcorder in hand, he’s compiled nearly 30 hours of video — most of it accompanied by his own highly indignant commentary — of traffic enforcement officers parking in front of fire hydrants while going for lunch, making illegal U-turns, and breaking every other traffic rule in the city.

“The traffic cops in New York City are especially mean-spirited and very aggressive,” the 36-year-old video vigilante told TODAY’s David Gregory.

“Although they’re doing their jobs, they go over their bounds a lot. What hurts a lot more than getting a ticket — especially if you didn’t deserve a ticket — is watching the same person who gave you a ticket go and commit the same violation with their official vehicle. That’s just wrong. The whole goal of traffic enforcement is to increase safety in the city for pedestrians and motorists.”

[...]

Keeping his real identity secret is, he said, is a matter of self-defense

“I think there will definitely be reprisal attacks against me by different city agencies that I’m embarrassing by showing the public the truth,” he said.

Gregory asked Jimmy how he can be sure the officials he tapes are not on official police business.

“It’s pretty obvious if they park blocking a fire hydrant and then walk into a restaurant and then stand on line ordering their lunch,” he said. “That’s not doing their job, that’s ordering lunch. We’re not allowed to block a fire hydrant — it’s a matter of safety. What’s the difference if it’s my vehicle blocking a fire pump or the vehicle of a traffic enforcement agent?”

Is this just an "east coast thing"? Or is it because cops are the only ones who can legally possess firearms in public and they feel superior to the people that supply their paycheck?

If we had less guns on the street, more people would be alive today.

Traci Hughs
August 21, 2007
D.C. police spokeswoman
In Study Of Gun Traffic, Va. Stands Out
[She doesn't address the issue of whether the homicides she is referring to were felonious, justified, or praiseworthy. She doesn't address the issue of substitution of other weapons as a means of homicide. She doesn't address the issue of felonious homicides that are committed without a gun that could have been prevented had the victim possessed a gun. And I'll bet she can't answer Just One Question. And I don't think it is a misunderstanding of the English language that throughout the article author, Alison Klein, refers to firearms being seized by law enforcement as being "recovered". "Recover" means "to bring back to normal position or condition".--Joe]

You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.

John Perry Barlow
[Barlow was speaking of the Internet but he just as well could have been talking about the gun culture in our country.--Joe]

Lots of people have been reporting on the high price and shortages of ammo recently. I know the folks over at Master Blasters Bullets and they told me the price they pay for lead has increased something like a factor of four in the last two years.

And if you are, or will be, into reloading you should buy some bullets before the price goes up again. I know the prices at MBB will be going up very soon and I have my order in at the existing prices.

And stocking up now is a good idea just to help counteract the anti-gun bigots.

Recently I posted a quote about sociopaths. Auntie Tam tells us of how one such sicko died a violent death after being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands including:

In 1868, when the allies were pressing him hard, he convinced himself that his Paraguayan supporters had actually formed a conspiracy against his life. Thereupon several hundred prominent Paraguayan citizens were seized and executed by his order, including his brothers and brothers-in-law, cabinet ministers, judges, prefects, military officers, bishops and priests, and nine-tenths of the civil officers, together with more than two hundred foreigners, among them several members of the diplomatic legations (the San Fernando massacres). During this time he also had his mother flogged and ordered her execution, and also attempted to have himself canonized by the local bishops.

Sociopaths; just one of the many reasons gun control fails my Jews in the Attic Test.

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

John Gilmore
[This, or a similar, quote is often attributed to John Perry Barlow but Barlow gives credit to Gilmore (and here) for at least the concept if not the exact words. Regardless, this point is being hammered into the psyche of the anti-gun bigots. They no longer have their hand on the throttle of information dissemination. Freedom of information is something some people just can't tolerate.--Joe]

She tends to put her best face forward but sometimes she is a slacker and just doesn't care.

A number of sources on the left held up for praise in the decision the one dissenting judge, Karen LeCraft Henderson, whose opinion that the gun ban was constitutionally permissible was based on at least two stellar deductions. The first was that since the District of Columbia is not a state (as in "necessary to the security of a free State…"), then the 2nd Amendment did not apply in that part of America. This is a wonderful precedent, not only for the District, but also for America's other territories such a Puerto Rico.

According to this same logic, Amendments 14, 15, 19, 24 and 26 (among others) do not apply in the District either, which means the District is free to a) deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, b) deny the vote to blacks, c) deny the vote to women, d) institute a poll tax, and e) deny the vote based on age. Clearly, Henderson deserves her new status as a liberal hero.

Mac Johnson
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other 'Rights' May Soon be Found
March 15, 2007

I've installed a new version of the blogging software. It seems to have fixed the problem I had with comments bringing down the server CPU. It runs just fine on my 32-bit Vista Ultimate home machines. But there are some problems on my website and on my 64-bit Vista machine.

Patience please...

Update: The most serious problems are solved! I can now log in and create/edit posts on the site rather than editing them on my local machine then uploading the new entry to the website, then "touching" web.config to reload the content. The comment preview still doesn't work and the comment box overlaps the right panel if your screen width isn't wide enough. But it's now usable.

You can make a crude stun gun from a disposable camera. A better quality flash unit will have a faster recycle time.

There is no limit the number and type of weapons that can be easily made and gotten past the Theater Security Agents (TSA). I've already mentioned making dust explosions with flour (powdered coffee creamer works too). It's long past time to consider some alternatives to existing airplane security.

Via Bruce:

Unlock Plastic Handcuffs! Police Style!

Daughter Kim and Caleb are on their (belated) honeymoon. They have sent us over 500 pictures so far. Here is one of the better ones:

As usual Kim is wearing a smile that would make my face hurt, although Xenia claims Kim has my smile.

It’s a gun. It’s an instrument of death. It’s the most violent, the most vile instrument of death you could have in your house.

[...]

I’d love to be able to take your hand gun.

Tim Heyne
August 16, 2007
TIM HEYNE TURNS TRAGEDY TO TRIUMPH
From VC Reporter

It's a frequent complaint of mine when dealing with neurotypicals. Some people believe they know something about which they cannot possible know and most often they get it wrong. Garen Wintemute, director of the violence-prevention research program at the University of California, Davis is no different. In an August 12 article in the Star-Telegram, Gun control back as national issue it is claimed:

In 2005 and 2006, Wintemute attended 28 gun shows in Texas (in Dallas and Houston), Nevada, Florida, Arizona and California -- areas where he said guns are acquired and later used in crimes in California. Afterward, he urged lawmakers nationwide to put more restrictions on gun shows.

"I would like to see a policy change that makes direct private-party transfers of guns illegal," Wintemute said. "And I'd like much more vigorous law enforcement presence at gun shows. I noticed the illegal stuff was conducted right out in the open.

"Bad guys had no concern they might be caught."

What "illegal stuff" did he observe? Whenever I've confronted people about this sort of thing it turns out they confuse what they would like the law to be with what the law really is. They frequently claim they saw "criminals" buying guns--but they can't explain how they knew they were criminals. As near as I can tell they imagined they were criminals. They thought they just knew from looking at someone. Apparently they believe they have some sort of extra sensory perception I guess.

Wintemute should be asked to explain how he knew who the "bad guys" were. Did they have "FELON" tattooed on their foreheads? Or maybe it was their skin color--were they "bad guys" because their skin was black? Or was it because it was white? Did they have their baseball cap on backward? Or were they wearing camo pants?

I suspect Wintemute is just another anti-gun bigot. I sent the following email a few minutes ago. I'll let you know if he responds.

From: Joe Huffman
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 7:22 AM
To: 'gjwintemute@ucdavis.edu'
Subject: A question about your study.

 

In the article Gun control back as a national issue you are quoted as saying “I noticed the illegal stuff was conducted right out in the open. Bad guys had no concern they might be caught."

 

Could you tell me what sort of “illegal stuff” was conducted? And how did you identify people as being “bad guys”.

 

Thank you.

The mystique of the Western gun rested on an inflated belief in the individual and the power within reach of an ordinary human being.

[...]

The gun has become a fetish--an emotional response to a changing America, the idea that somehow, the social problems of the U.S. will be solved through private gun ownership and a lot more guns.

Joan Burbick
Professor of English and American Studies at Washington State University
Author of Gun Show Nation: Gun Culture and American Democracy
Quotes found at Guns R Us -- Is it time to re-examine the West’s fascination with firearms? in Missoula Independent By: Ray Ring August 16, 2007
[It's interesting to me that Mr. Ring referred to Ms. Burbick as "Jean Burbick" instead of "Joan Burbick". Typical of an anti-gun bigot--getting the facts straight don't seem to matter. Please note that Burbick is engaging in a bit of projection with her claim "the gun has become a fetish". It's the anti-gun bigots that believe gun regulation have magical power to protect people. And Burbick also overlooks that the concept of individual power, and even the individual itself, is the one distinguishing difference between Western Civilization and all others. For her to denigrate the concept of individual power and rights is to undermine the very basis of our culture.--Joe]

Shall we modify and make new laws such that (A) probation and early release are eliminated, (B) the limit of DUI is set at zero and pictures from advanced technology cell phones with timestamps of drinking or drug taking is acceptable in any court, and (C) all violent offenders must have Global Positioning System (GPS) chips installed in their body by the government. The ATG must sue if non-conformance exists anywhere.

INITIATIVE 971
Washington State
[Some people just won't be happy until they have a police state.--Joe]

Here are the results of the poll done by the Lewiston Morning tribune, and which Joe referenced in an earlier post:

Should private citizens be allowed to carry guns into public buildings?

74% Yes
26% No

It shows the most lop-sided poll result currently displayed on the LMT poll page, and the largest number of voters, i.e. more people care about it and their opinions are the most clear.  That's encouraging as it shows we are making progress, at least in North Idaho where peace and hard work are more important than fear-mongering and scheming.

Now I wonder how many of those who voted "No" are the regular recipients of a government paycheck as compared to the "Yes" voters.  I submit that a disproportionate number of the "No" votes are coming from public employees.  If so, shouldn't we be hiring servants who protect our rights (or in a worst case scenario, just do nothing) rather than trying to force us to comply with their personal wishes and soothe their irrational fears?

To put it another way; If our public servants are even slightly uncomfortable with us having our civil rights intact, are they right for the job or are we better served by people who are glad for our civil rights and who have the maturity, strength and courage to protect them vigorously?

James and I just finished the last episode of season one of Andromeda. They really know how to do a cliff hanger. The odds are several trillion Magog (really nasty types that think humans are only good for their carcasses to lay eggs in) to "no one left conscious" except one who appears to have switched sides.

James and I are liking it--especially Tyr. Tyr reminds us a lot of Jayne in Firefly only much smarter. But that means he is smart enough to have some tact if it's needed. Jayne is much more entertaining but as a crew-mate I'd choose Tyr.

Barb and I are going to be visiting Columbia Falls Montana next month. If you are in the area and would like to meet for lunch or go on a hike in Glacer National Park send me an email and we'll see if our schedules match.

From the guy that brought us THE WHITETAIL HUNT WITH A MOUNTAIN HOWITZER (my post about it is here) we now have (via ahab at Say Uncle), How to Hunt Feral Cats in Wisconsin with a 12 pound Coehorn Mortar Cannon.

I was okay with the whitetail hunt because the odds of a clean kill were probably better than with a conventional rifle. And while dropping a 2 1/4 pound hard rubber ball on a cats head at terminal velocity is, well, terminal the odds of a head shot from 400 yards away are low. A hit to numerous other body areas is going to result in a crippled cat that might get away before you can put it out of it's misery.

Doing this sort of crap puts hunters, and gun owners in general, in a bad light. Although I think it would be cool to have a similar toy I do not approve of the activities advocated.

It's back to school time. Time to buy your child a new back pack. Rated at level II it's available here.

One of the suggestions I received from my Boomershoot 2007 crew was to have more water available for cleaning up the equipment, first aid, and fire supression when we are making the targets. What I typically do is bring about two or three gallons of water and we are very stingy with it as we clean the tables, mixers, blenders, bowls and other kitchen tools we use to mix up the Boomerite (I just updated this page with new information so visit again even if you have seen it many times before). It was a great idea. I tried boring a hole in the ground with the plan of having a real well. This was in June and being it was a dry year I had nothing but a dry hole. It would have water in it April and early May but if I ever wanted to do some experiments in the middle of the summer I would be stuck bringing more water in. So after discussing it with Ry, my brother and Dad I settled on putting a "tank" in the ground to collect rain water and ground runoff. The tank had to be at least two or three feet underground so it wouldn't freeze in the winter. On the farm it frequently gets down to -10 or -15 F for at least a few days. In the winter of '68/'69 it got down to -30F and didn't get above -20F for nearly a week.

There was already drain tile around the foundation of the Taj Mahal so I just had to extend the tile a bit to the tank and provide a means of getting the water to the surface. Here are photos, mostly taken by daughter Kim, from August 5^th when Kim, her husband Caleb, and I worked on supplying water to the Taj:

Caleb dug the ditch from one end of the tile line to the hole which I dug for the "tank".

Caleb isn't much bigger than Kim so even though he is nearly thirty years younger I moved a lot more dirt than Caleb. Of course most of the time I also used a bigger shovel. While Caleb and I moved dirt Kim put the two new tables into the Taj.

Me, making sure the plastic 55 gallon barrel was deep enough underground to avoid freezing.

Kim and Caleb working on the plumbing for the barrel.

Still working on the plumbing.

We managed to get it all plumbed except for the joining of the two tile lines. We decided the angles were such that we really needed a "T" inside of the "Y" I had purchased. We filled in almost all of the dirt and went home. We were tired, very dirty, and pleased with our accomplishment.

Then last Sunday, the 12^th, I finished off the project.

On the way back to Moscow as we went through the not even a wide spot in the road known as Joel we saw this:

Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay--and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert A. Heinlein
Double Star
[I was looking for this when I ran across the Bruce Willis quote I posted yesterday. I thought I had read all the Heinlein books but as I listened to this book on the way to and from Idaho last weekend I didn't remember a single thing from it. Perhaps I had missed it when I was doing all my Heinlein reading 30 years ago. Or it could be that I am just getting old. There are three signs that indicate you are getting old. The first one is losing your memory so that could explain it. I don't remember what the other two signs are.--Joe]

She's almost 19 years old now so we figured it was time she could have a real bed rather than that broken down, hand-me-down crib she has been sleeping for the last 18+ years. The older kids got a bed as soon the next kid came along and needed the crib. Xenia is the youngest and we kept telling her that "Just like with James and Kim, when the next kid comes along you can have a real bed."  She finally figured out there wasn't going to be another kid and she demanded we replace the crib. We knew she would figure it out eventually, but we were hoping she would get job or something first so she could pay for it. No such luck.

A co-worker of Barb's gave her a queen-size bed frame a week or so ago and we "just" had to find a box spring and mattress for it. Barb had to work this weekend so Xenia and I went shopping for several hours on Saturday. Those things are really expensive! We saw one set that was $1500. The very cheapest was $400. Xenia tested them all and her happiness at the prospect of getting a "real bed" was clearly visible:

We selected one of Xenia's favorites that was on the low end of the price range and scheduled delivery for today. They said "1:00 o'clock". At 1:03 Xenia called me to tell me they weren't there yet. I tried to keep her calm until they showed up but after 16 minutes (and 27 seconds) I gave up and told her to wait until 1:30 and then, if she wanted, to call them and ask.

The mattress finally did arrive, Xenia put on the new sheets and comforter, took pictures, posted in her Live Journal about it, then promptly went to sleep on it--in the middle of the afternoon. She was still asleep when Barb came home from work.

P.S. I was just messing with you during the first paragraph.

I HATE being shocked. I really, really, hate it. Mild shocks that some people find "interesting" or "entertaining" cause me to question their sanity. Even therapeutic use of electricity puts me in a really grumpy mood. Don't bother to remind me about having two degrees in electrical engineering. I am in control of electricity. It goes where I want it to and it does what I want it to do. It doesn't flow through any part of my body unless a doctor or therapist prescribes it.

With that background imagine the response I had when reading this report (found via DrX):

It was obvious that the couple was engaged in sexual relations when they died. The deaths apparently were related to the use of an elaborate apparatus utilizing electrical current for stimulation. A heavy metal rod measuring 22 cm in length and 2.5 cm in diameter was inserted 18 cm into the male's rectum. A small wire was attached by a rubber band leading to a Variac voltage regulator. There was a metal rod 20 cm long with a rounded tip 1 cm wide tapering to 0.75 cm in the shaft. A metal ring was attached to the exposed end and the male partner's index finger was touching it. The rod was inserted 18 cm into the female's rectum with a similar wire attached and leading to the voltage regulator. The regulator was set at 90 volts, but the dial could be turned up to 130 volts. In the room nearby were other stimulation devices, including a La Vida vibrator on a bed table and a Niagara type vibrator found under the bed. On the bed table was also noted a 1-lb. jar of lubricating cream. The couple was last seen alive more than 24 hours before. Third-degree burns were found in the rectum and vagina with perforation of the posterior vagina and anterior rectum in the female victim. In the male victim, third-degree burns were noted on the tip of the left index finger, the rectum, and the penis. The voltage regulator was plugged into a wall socket when the police arrived.

If you take guns away from legal gun owners then the only people who would have guns would be the bad guys. Even a pacifist would get violent if someone were trying to kill him or her. You would fight for your life, whatever your beliefs. You'd use a rock or tear one of these chairs out of the floor.

Bruce Willis

Last weekend Kim, Caleb and I spent some time working on a water supply at the Taj Mahal. Kim and Caleb are on their belated honeymoon at Lake Tahoe today so I finished it off by myself.  And since we have WiFi onsite I'm blogging from the Taj. I'll post more pictures of the intermediate steps later but here is the final result:

I already explained this but apparently some people didn't get the memo--Sex survey numbers don't add up, mathematicians say:

But there is just one problem, mathematicians say. It is logically impossible for the mean number of partners for men to be different from the mean for women in any given population with equal numbers of heterosexual men and women, although the mean, or mathematical average, can differ from the median, the middle point of a range. Surveys typically report the median.

Still, mathematicians should set the record straight, said David Gale, an emeritus professor of mathematics at the University of California.

"Surveys and studies to the contrary notwithstanding, the conclusion that men have substantially more sex partners than women is not and cannot be true, for purely logical reasons," Gale said.

...

Sevgi Aral, who is associate director for science in the division of sexually transmitted disease prevention at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said there are several possible explanations, and all are probably operating.

One is that men are going outside the population to find partners, to prostitutes, for example, who are not part of the survey, or are having sex when they travel to other countries.

Another, of course, is that men exaggerate the number of partners they have and women underestimate.

Aral said she could not determine what the true number of sex partners is for men and women. "I would say that men have more partners on average," she said, "but the difference is not as big as it seems in the numbers we are looking at."

Gale is still troubled. He said invoking women who are outside the survey population cannot begin to explain a difference of 75 percent in the number of partners, as occurred in the study saying men had seven partners and women four. Something like a prostitute effect, he said, "would be negligible." The most likely explanation, by far, is that the numbers cannot be trusted.

Ronald Graham, a professor of mathematics and computer science at the University of California, San Diego, agreed with Gale. After all, on average, men would have to have three more partners than women, raising the question of where all those extra partners might be.

It's easy to explain, there is no mystery, other studies have shown the "prostitute effect" is not negligible. Read my previous post for an example that makes it all clear. These guys are professors in California. You shouldn't expect anything but crap for brains from people like that.

The anti-gun bigots in Massachusetts are happy:

The number of licensed gun owners in Massachusetts has declined by more than a quarter in the past six years, a falloff driven by restrictive laws, higher licensing fees, and cultural change, according to police officers and gun owners.

The drop is especially dramatic in the eastern part of the state and in urban areas. The number of licensed gun owners fell at least 30 percent in Boston, Springfield, Quincy, Fall River, and Waltham. It dropped at least 20 percent in more than 220 of the state's 351 communities.

Fewer firearms on the street makes life safer for everyone," said Robert F. Crowley, Quincy's police chief.

[...]

In Boston, the number of licensed owners fell from 7,577 in 2001 to 4,374 this year, a drop of 42 percent. In the same period, gun licenses in Cambridge dropped 25 percent to 782; 71 percent to 484 in Brookline, and 33 percent to 1,150 in Newton, state records show.

"We're pleased that the number of gun owners has decreased in our city, but the real issue is illegal guns, and we need more laws to deal with illegal guns in our cities," Mayor Thomas M. Menino of Boston said in a statement.

Here is one of the contributors to that reduced number of gun owners: 

Edward Arsenault, 70, of Fairhaven, was turned down for his license renewal earlier this year because he had been convicted in juvenile court of stealing a chicken from a chicken coop when he was 9 years old, in 1946.

With a 30% decline in the number of gun owners one should expect the number of "gun crimes" should decrease by a similar amount wouldn't you think (at least if you were a rational gun-control advocate)? But of course they aren't reporting on that or even hinting that anyone has considered that line of thinking. A quick scan of the FBI's UCR didn't yield the information I wanted so I'll just leave it as "interesting" they didn't report on the dramatic drop in crime compared to other states that didn't put so much effort into eradicating gun owners.

This year will go down in history.  For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration!  Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future. 

Adolph Hitler
One attribution has it as:
'Berlin Daily' (Loose English Translation) April 15th, 1935 Page 3 Article 2 by Einleitung Von Eberhard Beckmann - "Abschied vom Hessenland!"
[This is such a wonderful quote that it falls into the category of "too good to be true". People have a strong tendency to believe what they want to believe. Resist that temptation.

From http://www.rkba.org/research/rkba.faq:

This quotation, often seen without any date or citation at all,
suffers from several credibility problems, the most significant
of which is that the date given (*in alternate versions, the
words "This year..." are replaced by "1935...") has no correlation
with any legislative effort by the Nazis for gun registration,
nor would there have been a need for the Nazis to pass such a
law, since gun registration laws passed by the Weimar government
were already in effect.  The Nazi Weapons Law (or_Waffengesetz_)
which further restricted the possession of militarily useful
weapons and forbade trade in weapons without a government-issued
license was passed on March 18, 1938.
   The citation usually given for this quote is a jumbled mess,
and has only three major clues from which to work.  The first is
the date, which does not correspond (even approximately) to a date
on which Hitler made a public speech, and a check of the texts of
Hitler's speeches does not reveal a quotation resembling this
(which is easily understandable when you realize that "Hitler"
is commenting on a non-existent law).  The second clue is the
newspaper reference, which if translated into German resembles the
title of a newspaper called _Berliner Tageblatt,_ and a check of
the issue for that date reveals that the page and column references
given are to the arts and culture page!  No Hitler speech appears
in the pages of _Berliner Tageblatt_ on that date, or dates close
to it, because there was no such speech to report.  Finally,
the citation includes a proper name "Eberhard Beckmann," which
is sometimes cited as "by Einleitung Von Eberhard Beckmann,"
which is an important clue itself, because it reveals that the
citation was fabricated by someone who had so little knowledge of
the German language that they were unaware that "Einleitung"
isn't the fellow's first name!  The only "Eberhard Beckmann"
which has been uncovered thus far did indeed write introductions,
but he was a journalist for a German broadcasting company after
WWII, and he wrote several introductions to_photography books,_
one of which was photos of the German state of Hesse (or Hessia),
which may be the source of the curious phrase "Abschied vom
Hessenland!" which appears in the citation.  This quotation,
however effective it may be as propaganda, is a fraud.

Check your facts before you publish them. I wear size 14 shoes and even though my mouth opens wider than most people it's much preferable to not insert my foot into my mouth rather than extracting it after I have.--Joe]

Barb and I will be at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in October at Reno. We haven't made our reservations yet but the vacation time is scheduled and currently the plan doesn't have any obstacles.

This year I'm going to bring what I call my spud gun. It actually shoots 210 grain Berger VLDs at 2915 fps rather than Idaho's famous vegetables. It was custom made by a gunsmith in Idaho and a friend of mine figured it couldn't be as a good a rifle as the one made by Arnold Arms north of Seattle. I started referring to my rifle as my spud gun just to neutralize his criticism of my choice of gunsmiths. I could have the last laugh by reminding my friend of the tens of thousands of dollars he had invested in Arnold Arms--which he lost when they went bankrupt--but that would be cruel.

I got in trouble with PNNL because someone thought my daughter might have had access to "Official Use Only" material. The material in question was marked OUO but was never OUO. We managed to get evidence of that after filing a motion to compel with the judge but legally it just didn't matter. Someone saw the markings, didn't bother to check to see if the markings were valid, see if Xenia actually had access, and acted accordingly--I lost my job. Here is another document marked OUO: I Found Ted Kennedy's Safe! (nice demonstration video of .50 BMG capabilities). I reported the OUO material from the TSA about three weeks ago.

What's interesting to me is that you find quite a lot of stuff if you do a search for "Official Use Only" on Live Search (142,637 items) or Google (about 815,000 items). Most of that is not actually government OUO material but some of it is and was put on websites and indexed when it really shouldn't have been. And then there is the stuff marked as OUO for political purposes. And even some of the material marked and protected as OUO is still available under the Freedom of Information Act:

The For Official Use Only designation is also used by CIA and a number of other federal agencies, but each agency is responsible for determining how it shall be used. The categories of protected information may be quite different from one agency to another, although in every case the protected information must be covered by one of the nine categories of information that are exempt from public release under FOIA.

Some agencies use different terminology for the same types of information. For example, Department of Energy uses Official Use Only (OUO). Department of State uses Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU), formerly called Limited Official Use (LOU). The Drug Enforcement Administration uses DEA Sensitive. In all cases the designations refer to unclassified, sensitive information that is or may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act.

The fact that information is marked FOUO does not mean it is automatically exempt from public release under FOIA. If a request for the information is received, it must be reviewed to see if it meets the FOIA dual test: (1) It fits into one of the nine FOIA exemption categories, and (2) There is a legitimate government purpose served by withholding the information. On the other hand, the absence of the FOUO or other marking does not automatically mean the information must be released in response to a FOIA request.

Part of why I'm doing all the FOIA requests is to demonstrate that the material Xenia supposedly had access to, which was a major component the supposed reason I was fired, is in fact available to anyone that asks for it. This doesn't matter in a legal sense in terms of a wrongful termination lawsuit--they could make up a rule that says people can't trim their nose hair or some such thing and fire people that do. Of course this is all rather embarrassing to PNNL and they are just ignoring the FOIA requests--because they think the law doesn't apply to them. The person that said "See this badge?  This means the law doesn't apply to us." was Newton Brown, who instigated the investigation against me.

More details on the entire story of what happened to me at PNNL including how they let unauthorized people, perhaps including foreign nationals, have access to hundreds of computers with OUO material on them, some other time--I want to reload some ammo this morning before I have lunch with Barb.

How can government eliminate poverty? Poverty is government's stock in trade.

Tamara K.
August 11, 2007
Yes, wouldn't it?
[Read the post if this out of context quote doesn't make sense to you. Beyond what is in the post think about all the lost wealth complying with filling out paperwork, wasted government projects, and complying with pointless government regulations.--Joe]

I knew about the article from the chatter on the local email lists but hadn't actually seen it because the Lewiston Morning Tribune doesn't have free access. But thanks to Uncle I found the AP version of the story. Here is the gist of the story:

MOSCOW, Idaho (AP) - The sheriff of a north-central Idaho county where a shooting rampage left four dead and three wounded last May wants more people to obtain concealed weapons permits and carry guns, including on the University of Idaho campus, to improve public safety.

"In my opinion, if there were more students with (concealed weapons permits), the world would be safer," Latah County Sheriff Wayne Rausch told the Lewiston Tribune on Tuesday. "Just because we (law enforcement officers) are charged with protecting the public, doesn't mean the public shouldn't be able to protect itself."

And the most memorable part of the story:

"When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away," David Klingenberg, 36, told the meeting. "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy."

David was the Secretary/Treasurer of the now defunct Palouse Practical Shooters. The PPS range and functions have been taken over by the Lewiston Pistol Club and David shot at a couple LPC IPSC matches (here and here).

Also related is that the Lewiston Morning Tribune currently has a poll up, "Should private citizens be allowed to carry guns into public buildings?". You might want to participate.

I don't know of a single incident where CCTV has actually been used to spot, apprehend or detain offenders in the act.

The presence of CCTV is irrelevant for those who want to sacrifice their lives to carry out a terrorist act.

You need to do this piece of theater so that if the terrorists are looking at you, they can see that you've got some measures in place.

Steve Swain
August 3, 2007
'Ring of Steel' coming to New York
Swain served for years with the London Metropolitan Police and its counter-terror operations and now works for Control Risk, an international security firm.
[Found via Bruce. If you don't see the folly of the security theater argument send me an email and I'll explain.--Joe]

Some of my FOIA requests to PNNL are over two years old. And even after I won an appeal from an early denial they still are refusing to send me the data. We'll, not exactly refusing. Every week when my lawyer calls them up asks what the status is they say, "I'll have to get back to you on that." And, of course, they don't. Repeat the next week.

In another case, in response to a FOIA request, they deleted a bunch of material (I found out via a late night anonymous phone call) and told me they did a "thorough search" and no such documents were found. My lawyer reworded the request and resubmitted it. They ignored both it and my congress critter's repeated requests to comply.

Remember the batch of requests I made almost seven weeks ago? They had 20 business days to respond and I've not received even a "go pound sand" response. Like I have said before they think the law doesn't apply to them.

This may make it easier for me to change their tune:

The Senate on Friday unanimously approved a measure that would extend the open-government requirements of the Freedom of Information Act to private contractors and increase penalties for federal agencies that do not comply.

[...]

Sens. Patrick Leahy and John Cornyn, R-Texas, sponsored the legislation to speed agency responses and compel the government to more accurately track pending requests. The legislation was blocked from a floor vote for months because Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and the Justice Department objected to several provisions.

One would have allowed requesters who file lawsuits to recover their attorney fees. Under the compromise, a requester would be able to recover the fees unless the claim is found to be "wholly insubstantial."

[...]

Other provisions would extend FOIA compliance to private contractors who keep records on government work and would protect fee waivers for "legitimate journalists, regardless of institutional association." That means waivers would apply to bloggers and others based on the Internet.

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform.

Mark Twain
[It's a bit simplistic but as a general rule I'm inclined to agree. Majorities have a strong tendency to ignore inalienable rights and abuse minorities. And I'm talking about all types of minorities including those based on things like sexual orientation and habits (include "sex workers"), recreational drug use, gun ownership, and types of hobbies (think "model rocketry").--Joe]

The headline reads SF Leads Nation With Toughest Gun Control Law. It's not true, Washington D.C. and Chicago are tougher with near complete bans on handguns and severe restrictions on long guns. But that's not my main point. The headline could just as accurately be SF Bigots Implement Repressive Law Against a Minority but that might make the bigots feel bad about themselves.

The field of explosives engineering incorporates a broad variety of sciences and engineering technologies that are brought together to bear on each particular design problem. These technologies include chemistry, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, aerodynamics, mechanics, electricity, and electronics, and even meteorology, biology, and physiology.

Paul W. Cooper
1996
Preface to Explosives Engineering
[Chemistry? Check. Thermodynamics? That class was lots of fun. I got an A+ in it. Fluid dynamics? Check. Aerodynamics? Check--see Modern Ballistics. Mechanics? Check, Electricity and electronics? I have a BSEE and MSEE. Meteorology? I'll keep the explosive events to a size that shouldn't be affecting the weather. Biology and physiology? Not particularly--That's what the flak jacket, mask, gloves and apron are for--keeping explosives components, by-products, and accelerated objects out of my body.--Joe]

A person without conscience, even a smart one, tends to be a short sighted and naive individual who eventually expires of boredom, financial ruin, or a bullet.

Martha Stout
The Sociopath Next Door
[At first I was rather depressed by the book. In the U.S. one in 25 people has no conscience. They can do anything they want and not feel the least bit of guilt. Fear of getting caught and punished yes, but that just means they work a little hard and smarter to get away with whatever they want to do. Torturing animals, torturing humans, lying, cheating, backstabbing, murder, rape, whatever relieves their boredom. Those that follow the rules are stupid and naive. All part of the mindset of the sociopath. And it is the sociopath that is the dictator, the corrupt politician, the serial killer, and one of the reasons the average person needs to own a gun. As I got near the end of the book I heard about what serious deficits they have in their emotional lives and how their lives frequently end. This gave me hope. Hope that perhaps justice is more sure than it sometimes appears to be.--Joe]

I asked Barb to sit on my lap while I watched the video about Beth's 12 egg omelette (via Ry). When it was over Barb asked, "What's CaTTy about?" I had no idea so we watched it. Barb laughed so hard I thought she was going to tip over our chair. When it was over she said, "Send that to Xenia." Xenia has two cats.

Yup. It is pretty good.

Video: CaTTy

We’re hearing rumors that the Moscow, Idaho Mayor, Nancy Chaney, is plotting to ban guns in “Public Places”.

One’s right to self defense is under attack right here in Idaho.  Do I need to look up the political affiliations of the Mayor?  Does anyone wonder?

AP has it now, so the story is repeated verbatim on several sites.  As anyone could predict, it starts out describing a multiple murder committed using firearms.  The conclusion is always the same:  We must "prevent" further incidents of people breaking the law by passing more laws.  That way, when criminals obey this new law, they won't be able to break the old ones.

"I think there is probably some nervousness about that, of course."

Chaney said the shooting at the courthouse made her concerned about how vulnerable people might be at public meetings. She said she was also concerned about armed citizens who might be inclined to "swoop in to protect people" in situations that police should deal with.

"We don't want to tread on anyone's Second Amendment rights," Chaney told the Lewiston Tribune. "We want to find out what is within our legal prerogative."

She doesn't want to tread on anyone's rights, she just wants to ban guns.  Its hard to find anything on this locally, so apparently its being kept pretty hush.

Chaney, Girl, you be trippin'!  People may be "nervous" about a lot of things.  Some people at one time were very nervous about black people wanderin' all over free and what not, too.  It doesn't mean they had any right to keep black people out of public places, any more than you have the right to ban self defense.  If you're too nervous to do your job properly while respecting and appreciating the rights of your neighbors, I'm sure we can find a more level-headed replacement for you.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.

Henry David Thoreau
(1817-62)
U.S. philosopher, author, naturalist.
On the Duty of Civil Disobedience (1849).
[Does this remind you of Gandhi in any way? It should. Gandhi studied Thoreau's writings and put a lot of the theory into practice.--Joe]

If there ever comes a time when I have to defend my life, I wouldn't trust that to anybody else -- no matter what oath they took or what contract they signed. I came to America from Brazil. The Second Amendment, I think, is one of the best things about this country.

Diego
Pennsylvania
Armed America--Portraits of Gun Owners in Their Homes
Page 48

As Uncle pointed out (and here) we have a new kid on the block. I left a comment in response to his post Happiness is a warm gun. Comments require approval before they show up so I decided to post it here because I expect the probability of anti-gun blogger Bryan Miller approving the comment are no better than 50-50.

My comment:

I find the following data points about Miller very interesting:

1. He refers to gun rights activists as “boys”.
2. When people call him on his inaccurate use of the phrase “assault rifle” he says, “It’s just a name.” Yup, it’s just a name. Just like “n****r” is “just a name” for people with dark colored skin.
3. He questions the mental qualifications of people with a fondness for a particular hobby that he doesn’t share.
4. He wants to restrict the rights of certain people.

It’s all part of the mindset Miller has. He apparently believes he is better than others, specifically he is better than people that own or want to own guns. It took me a long time to understand anti-gun people like Miller. I grew up in a place with a very homogenous population and hence there was virtually no elitist mentality other than the typical school stuff of the fourth graders looking down on the second graders and the high school seniors looking down on the freshman. It took some long discussions and email with a recovered liberal friend of mine (see here and "Comments from ‘Mike’ at the bottom of this page) and seeing the racist roots of gun control before it finally clicked into place. It’s even more clear to me from the many discussions I have had with these type of people about what they are trying to do. You can ask them just one question and they will dance around the question and even call you stupid for asking the question--but they won’t answer the question. To them it’s perfectly clear that the question doesn’t need to be answered. What they are doing, what they want to accomplish makes perfect sense and needs no justification. The conclusion was finally obvious to me--the anti-gun people are the bigots of the 21st century. It took me a long time to realize this because I didn’t have any real contact with the more typical bigots until a few years ago. The parallels in mindset and thinking processes were astonishing—but that is a topic for an entire blog post, not just a comment on someone else’s blog. I now have Just One Question for Miller:

Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?

Also, Mr. Miller, when you “explain the Second Amendment” to us, please address the points in this blog posting: An Individual Right. Thank you for providing us with this forum where you show us your true colors and allowing us to show ours.

These high-sounding lectures from you and your colleagues in the so-called "gun rights" crowd are not even slightly impressive (they are amusing, though). As I've written above, society has a duty to mediate between individual privilege (that's right - privilege - neither you nor any other American has an unfettered "right" to own any weapon he or she wants) and public safety. In this case, the choice is clear. The public safety demands that massively destructive weapons like the Big 50 be prohibited from public purchase. And, you are in a tiny minority if you think Americans, and especially New Jerseyans (who suffered so from 9/11), would rather face the issue AFTER some terrorist knocks over a chlorine plant or similar disaster and hundreds die. Nuff said.

Bryan Miller
July 27, 2007
Put down the ducky -- I mean, gun
[Typical elitist mindset--He can't be bothered to address the points made. Furthermore he is willing to give up, and demand that others give up rights, in the name of "crime prevention". What a disgusting, revolting, frightening mindset.--Joe]

Interesting. My most recent post about the TSA is getting more and more attention. Most recent is this mention in a forum:

If you really need to believe that you're safe when you get on a plane, don't read the above. If you want to realize what a bullshit fantasy "safety" through a "security" agency is, then take the red pill and click the link.

I like how he expressed that. Very nice. I remember one time not too long after 9/11 Ry was having Thanksgiving dinner with us and our extended family at my parent's place. Somehow Ry (software tester extraordinaire--finding flaws is what software testers do) and I started talking about all the vulnerabilities in our country that someone could use to cause us great damage. We were rattling things off so fast that someone had to raise their voice to get in a command to "STOP". People didn't want to know. They wanted ignorance. This is baffling to me, but whatever.

Anyway, on to what makes particular posts interesting...

Uncle and Existing Thing (via Uncle) linked to my TSA post. I was thinking Uncle would link to it when I made it. He links to almost anything of mine that is a little out of the ordinary (honest, I have only made him one offer for a free position at Boomershoot--which he hasn't acted upon. I don't think that constitutes bribery). Thinking about what makes a post interesting I made the connection to the recent career advice from Scott Adams (via Kim). I have expertise in more than one field and combining that expertise with a somewhat rare political viewpoint (pro-freedom) increases my "value". In this case it was my expertise in explosives and (computer) security.

I keep wondering if there is a way to combine all my hobbies in an interesting way. But at least for me guns, explosives, and sex just don't mix.

I say, what do you expect? Disarming potential victims is almost never a good idea. As long as predators exist their prey will need to defend themselves. Taking away the tools used for defense is just asking for more victims. That the daughter of a gun control activist gets shot gets two responses from me:

1. (Outwardly) I'm so sorry, is there anything we can do to help?
2. (Under my breath) Well, duh! Would you like some firearm training for your family so this is less likely to happen again?

Regarding predators... I'm listening to a book on my iPod Nano now: The Sociopath Next Door. Four percent of the population are sociopaths. Not all are violent, but more than enough are. There is no cure. As long as sociopaths exist in the general population, and probably even if there weren't, the innocent will need tools to defend themselves. People that argue "economic justice", "midnight basketball", or even "two parent families" will make ownership of defensive tools obsolete is exceedingly naive.

Democracy is a bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people.

Oscar Wilde
[My original source claimed it was Wilde but I can't confirm it. But in any case--this is part of the reason why we have a republic rather than a democracy. But these days one could make the case there isn't all that much difference between the two.--Joe]

I can't endorse the bill because it is wasteful and supports an unconstitutional program, but I won't oppose it because it contains provisions that I consider critically important -- things I've been writing about for years -- correcting the injustices of permanently denying Second Amendment rights, without recourse, to tens of thousands of people. Maybe I'm missing something and maybe I'm wrong, but at this point, I think our energy can be expended in much more productive ways -- making sure Tiahrt passes comes to mind.

Jeff Knox
Hard Corps Report
May - June 2007
Volume 4, Issue 3
[Jeff captures my take on it quite well. I wish I had got around to reading it before I posted my own opinion of the Tiahrt amendment.--Joe]

From Canada, Turning Legal Gun Owners Into SOCIAL LEPERS:

Citing concern over the "sinister uses" of guns, University of Toronto officials are closing down their 88-year-old shooting range. No word yet on the fate of the university's chemistry labs.

More than just one more example of political correctness run amok (which of course it is), I take this gesture as academic ideologues' invitation to government to follow suit and ban gun sport and gun collecting nationally. Alas, I think the initiative might find broad public support. To many liberal Canadians nowadays, tolerating gun use in any capacity is akin to complicity in Bambi's mother's murder, fatalism regarding school massacres and genuflection to American imperialism.

And from the same article it looks like I have a new book to read:

In a recently-published book discussed on these pages last Thursday, Mistakes Were Made:Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts, social psychologists Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson argue that many social and cultural problems spring from humans' inability to admit when they're wrong. How right they are. And as further evidence to those adduced in their book, I would cite: the blinkered ideologues who punish responsible gun users for the sins of criminals; police who automatically privilege the idle or fabricated concerns of disaffected women over men's property and civil rights; and governments who continue to throw good money after bad in perpetuating an institution that fails utterly to deter gun crime, but succeeds magnificently in stigmatizing an identifiable minority of law-abiding citizens as criminals in waiting.

Our future as gun owners doesn't have to be same as that of Canadian gun owners. Right now we essentially have the bigots at a standstill. We need to keep pushed them and change the attitudes in this country. We have to have the right mindset and turn the anti-gun bigots into the social lepers.

It is late at night and I got a little agitated reading some of the comments at Schneier's blog post about airplane security. When I'm tired my inhibtions drop and I write things I might not normally. Here's a duplicate of the rant I left in Schneier's comments:

Regarding dust explosions...

This is about 8 ounces of flour over an ounce of black powder (the original gun powder): http://www.joehuffman.org/FlashTek/06-FFFFgFlour.mpeg

That is in open air. In an enclosed room of an abandoned house a similar test brought the house down. Sorry, that wasn't my test and I don't have any video for it.

Shaped charges made from match heads? I don't think so. The "detonation" velocity is just too slow. It's more properly called deflagration than detonation for that type of "explosive". Shaped charges require MUCH faster propagation rates.

Binary explosives are available here: http://www.tannerite.com/ No background check, no license required, delivered to your door via UPS. Now THAT is something you can make a crude shaped charge with.

The "projectile" (typically a slug of molten copper) from a shaped charge is moving at 6 to 10 kilometers per second. At the pressures generated when it hits a "target" everything is "plastic". Hardened steel develops a hole just like a high velocity stream from your garden hose nozzle punches a hole in a dirt bank. Penetration for a properly configured 10 (ten) gram shaped charges is about 2 inches of steel. Yes--a shaped charge using less than one half ounce of explosives will penetrate two inches of steel. See Explosives Engineering by Paul W. Cooper, ISBN 0-471-18636-8 page 442. Or do you think the doors to the cockpit are more resistant than two inches of steel?

Do you think someone could not get a half ounce of explosives through TSA security? You could probably successfully hide that in your mouth or arm pit if you didn't want to use some other body cavity.

Oh, and you know why the explosives detectors work fairly well with plastic explosives? It's, by international agreement (Montreal, March 1, 1991, Article XIII of the Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives -- http://www.atf.gov/explarson/fedexplolaw/subpartj.pdf ), that all plastic explosives be "marked" by their manufacture with a chemical that is easily detected. Do you think Iran and others are going to abide by that International Convention if they want to provide some terrorists plastic explosives?

We really should spend the $2 billion/year, or whatever it is, on finding and stopping the bad guys before they arrive at the airport/train-station/shopping-mall/etc. than on pointless screening. The bottom line is that the acronym TSA should be reversed--it really stands for "A Security Theater".

It's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for.

Will Rogers