The View From North Central Idaho

John Sigler, NRA President, has an article on Barack Obama's playbook of deception on guns. In it he articulates the carefully crafted words and phrases used by Obama and friends in their attempt to deceive Americans about guns and where they came from. Examples:

The bait-and-switch gimmick of employing rhetorical tricks to hide very real gun control agendas, and to create a fraudulent history to assure that “your gun record does not define your candidacy” are the central lessons offered in a political/propaganda playbook or script proffered by something called the Third Way.

...

The problem that progressives have on the gun issue has far less to do with the typical policies they espouse than the rhetoric they employ.” - The Third Way

“It’s critical that progressives recognize that only an aggressive outreach strategy to gun owners will ensure that your opponent’s message about your gun record does not define your candidacy.” - The Third Way

He doesn't mention it but there is another source for Barack Obama's rhetoric. I have an Americans for Gun Safety document from 2003 which provides the details of the research done which contributed to the "Third Way" plans published in 2006 and earlier this year.

From the 2003 document comes this advice (next to the last page):

Our gun rights come with the responsibility to keep them out of the hands of criminals terrorists and children.

I support gun safety measures like criminal background checks on all sales at gun shows and tough enforcement of existing gun laws.

I agree with President Bush that we need to renew the ban on assault weapons.

I take a back seat to no one in support of second amendment rights but I also support requiring criminal background checks at gun shows and continuing the ban on assault weapons.

From 2006 (read the document for the details of what these steps mean):

Step 1: Reject the Conventional Wisdom on Guns

Step 2: Own the Second Amendment

Step 3: Redefine the Issue from Gun Control to Gun Safety

Step 4: Criticize Conservatives for Failing to Enforce Existing Gun Laws

Step 5: Promote Centrist Gun Policies with Centrist Language

Step 6: Take Your Message Directly to Gun Owners – Don’t Let Your Opponent Define You

Step 7: Implement Your Gun Plan and Watch the Gun Votes Roll In 

Here is what they say about guns in September 2008:

One of the greatest predictors of voting behavior is gun ownership, and roughly 45% of the nation has a gun in the home. For most of the past eight years, John McCain has been enemy number one among NRA enthusiasts (based on his authorship of the gun show loophole bill and campaign finance reform). He has now made amends with NRA leadership and the choice of Palin makes this a NRA dream ticket. (See the cover of this week’s Newsweek.)

Be aware that while Americans generally hate special interest groups, they have a modestly positive view toward the NRA. At the same time, they are tired of the fight on this issue like on other culture issues. We suggest the following message:

I take a back seat to no one in support of Second Amendment rights, but those rights don’t extend to terrorists and criminals. That is why I support the John McCain bill to close the gun show loophole.

Conservatives are up to their old tricks. There is no argument over the Second Amendment; they just want to pick a fight and divide this nation for short term political gain.

Progressives should make clear that they support both an individual’s Second Amendment right to own firearms for protection, collection, and sport, and also reasonable restrictions to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists. There is no contradiction in this message, and it’s also popular. A poll we conducted on guns revealed that 89% of voters believe the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own firearms; however, 73% believe that the right allows for reasonable restrictions.

Nowhere do they say "progressives" need to change their objectives. They only need to change their language.

Barack Obama is reading his lines from anti-gun people who have been carefully researching for years what words work best so the target audience hears what they want to hear while still leaving him open to ban certain guns and destroy gun shows.

Paul Simon could have been singing about what Barack Obama is hoping will happen with gun owners:

All lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.

Paul Simon
Recorded 1968
The Boxer

It's been a long time since I got hate mail like this. And for me it was just the one person.

Some people have all the fun.

I'm need to go blow up some pumpkins tomorrow to make myself feel better.

I call myself a loser if I lose when everyone plays by the rules. Obama supporters lie and cheat. It's what socialists do. It's in their rule book (written by Marx).

Update: The link above is broken. Here is the original content I was linking to:

NRA-ILA Alert Members of Deceptive Tactics By Obama Supporters

Friday, October 31, 2008
Fairfax, VA--The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today sent the following email alert to members following reports of deceptive phone calls in support of Barack Obama. The callers falsely claim to be from NRA and attribute Senator John McCain's pro-gun voting record to that of Obama.

Dear NRA Member,
It has come to our attention that with Halloween upon us, the Barack Obama campaign and its allies are up to dirty political tricks.

NRA members in key presidential battleground states have informed us they have received deliberately misleading phone calls from someone professing to represent the NRA, asking voters to support Barack Obama. This is an absolute and intentional lie.

NRA has long been on record as opposing Barack Obama, as Barack Obama has long been on record as opposing the rights of law-abiding gun owners. For example, Barack Obama:

• Voted to allow the prosecution of citizens who use a firearm for self-defense in the home (Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165. 3/25/04);
• Voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to put America’s firearms industry out of business (S.397, vote 219, 7/29/05);
• Voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting (United States Senate, S. 397, vote 217, 7/29/05);
• Supported a 500% increase in federal taxes on guns and ammunition (Chicago Defender, 12/13/99);
• Voted to ban hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting, including single-shot, over-under and side-by-side shotguns (Illinois Senate SB 1195, 3/13/03); and,
• Proposed restrictions that would close 90% or more of all gun stores in the U.S. (Chicago Defender, 12/13/99).

For more information on the TRUTH about Barack Obama's hostility toward the Second Amendment, please visit http://www.gunbanobama.com/.

If you receive a call to this effect, please know that it is a deliberate attempt by Barack Obama supporters to mislead gun owners. Our opponents know that you can make the difference in this election, and they’ll stop at nothing to try and deceive you!

Thank you for your support, and remember to "Vote Freedom First"! on November 4th.
Sincerely,
Chris W. Cox
Executive Director, NRA-ILA

It's amazing to me. I've been reading more of the comments on mainstream news articles about Obama and guns. People say things like "Obama has clearly stated he supports the Second Amendment".

Well, yes, he has said that. But he also says on his website:

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

He clearly states he supports a gun ban. That is his way of supporting the Second Amendment?

One commenter wrote:

Also, Obama doesn't want to take your gun away. He has stated that he does not see why citizens need semi and fully automatic weapons. That's it.

My response was:

"That's it."?? That would eliminate about half the the firearms currently being sold and nearly all of my guns. Let's translate that into 13th Amendment infringement language instead of Second Amendment infringement language: "Our candidate just wants to enslave Jews, Blacks, Asians, Mexicans, Muslims, Catholics, and homosexuals. That's it."

It just doesn't get any more clearly stated than that yet they can't seem to get why we are upset with Obama's position on guns.

Here is a video with Chris Cox of the NRA on Fox News and Fox only quotes the part of Obama's website where he says he supports the Second Amendment. Not the part I quoted above where he says he wants to ban guns.

What media bias?

Update: And via Sebastian I find we now have audio of him saying he supports a Federal ban on concealed carry laws. That is how he "supports" the Second Amendment.

You understand when a politician says that he wants to 'spread the wealth' that what he is going to do is confiscate your wealth and give it to other people. You understand that, right? Confiscate...Your...Wealth! Your home, your property, your 401k, your bank accounts, your stocks and bonds, your health accounts - all are in the process of becoming the property of 'the state'. All of it. Thats what "spread the wealth" actually means, it means CONFISCATE and then "distribute along party lines'. This is no longer about this tax rate or that tax rate or what party has a better plan to grow the economy, its about the Government of the United States - all three branches of it - that is now actively and aggressively pursuing and acting on a plan to confiscate private wealth (your wealth) and punish those who create it (you).

Varifrank
October 24, 2008
Monster
[H/T to Kevin. When the politician claims he is only going to take from other people I can see why some people might go for this. But how those people justify themselves is beyond me. That is the sort of thing you would expect from people put on masks and drag people into an alley to "spread the wealth". It's the same thing except in the case of the politicians case they have enough people with guns at their disposal they don't need to wear a mask when they rob you.--Joe]

If it ever seems all is lost keep those neurons firing, keep trying things, and don't give up. Things you thought were insolvable problems might have a solution.

I have no category for this. This is in a category all it's own for which I do not have the words. Maybe Tam does. Planes are within her area of expertise and her skill with words exceeds mine by an order of magnitude or more.

H/T to Joe D. from an email list.

A few weeks ago a new co-worker noticed the newspaper clipping (actually it's two full pages) on my door about Boomershoot and started asking questions about guns. He wanted to buy a rifle, handgun, and shotgun. Which would I recommend?

<heavy sigh>

I asked, What is your intended purpose? He was hesitant but it finally came out that it was for "home defense". For the rifle he expressed an interest in an AR-15 type gun. And probably a 9mm or similar in the handgun. "Not something with as much recoil as a .45." But he hadn't ever fired anything but a .22 rifle which was "years and years ago".

This evening we went to the range after work. This was the first time I have ever seen the parking lot at Wades completely full. I had to find parking on the street nearby. I wonder why that is...

I went over the safety rules, taught him how to grip the gun, and did a bunch of dry firing and then he put about 50 rounds through a Ruger MK III from about 15 feet away into an IPSC target. He did very well. When I had him doing slow fire he was putting about half of his shots into one ragged hole and the other half within an inch or so. This was more accurate than he thought possible with a pistol. He took his target home with him. I'm wondering if it will show up on his office door at work tomorrow...

Next week we'll visit the range with larger pistol calibers, revolvers, and an AR-15.

And his politics? He's a self described liberal. Before Tuesday I'm going to let him know what Obama thinks of the guns he likes and wants to buy.

There is a huge gap between the world viewpoints of the reality that I live in and that of some other people:

While most nations recognize that absolutely no good can come of exposing children to guns at a young age, we live in a gun culture that promotes romantic notions of generations of families hunting and shooting together.

...

Sadly, it took us no longer than 5 minutes to find a broad range of videos, showing what could be considered in some cases to be blatant child endangerment.

There is no telling how many more of these videos exist on the Internet or how many other children have participated in or been exposed to these kinds of events-- but no doubt it's expansive if you have the time to do the research.

There is no mistaking it, as these images show, this is an outrageous problem unique to American culture that is perhaps more common than many of us even realize.

No so called "enlightened" country could possible delude themselves into thinking this is normal behavior that should be protected even under the loosest interpretation of the Second Amendment.

The gun pushers in the gun lobby have gone too far as have the sponsors and supporters of these events. This kind of activity needs to be exposed and outlawed immediately. Children's lives are at risk and as adults, we need to demand that our lawmakers do more to protect them from dangerous activities like these.

Think about it. While you are taking your kids to swimming or soccer, these kids--encouraged by their parents and other trusted adults--are blasting away at their target.

This issue of children firing machine guns, encouraged and emboldened by parents, demonstrates to us the need to change our perspective and the way we think about gun culture in the United States.

We are in a culture war. Their objective is to extinguish the last great hope for freedom on this planet. Our objective can be no less than to completely and totally defeat them.

Via Sebastian, who is called a wacko, I found the USA Today article about Cooper getting fired. It says "he [Obama] has said he respects the Second Amendment.". Numerous commenter's say similar things. I left a couple comments:

Obama says he supports the Second Amendment. He also says he wants to ban guns.

He can't have it both ways. His record of the past is clear. His words of the future are clear and consistent with his record. The only reasonable conclusion is that he is attempting to deceive voters here and now by saying "he supports the Second Amendment".

And:

If this were about someone donating money to the KKK, the company then found it was facing a boycott, and the company fired the idiot that donated money to the KKK then almost everyone would agree it was the right thing to do.

Well guess what--gun ownership is a specific, enumerated right, in the Bill of Rights (read the D.C. v. Heller decision).

Who would vote for someone that said, "I support the 13^th Amendment but I also believe we can have reasonable regulation of blacks to keep them in their proper place."?

Senators Obama and Biden and the people that vote for them are to the gun owners what the KKK was to blacks.

Maybe I'm competing for a more extreme title than the "wacko" title given to Sebastian but these guys really got me annoyed.

Update: It's time to put them on the defensive. I left another comment:

Melo_D wrote: Are you comparing Obama to the KKK?

The nonviolent aspects of the KKK--yes. He has publicly stated on his website he wants regulated and ban guns. This is infringing on a specific enumerated right just as if someone wanted to regulated and ban blacks (or other oppressed minority) from certain aspects of society.

Melo_D wrote: Less guns= less violence.

I have Just One Question (http://blog.joehuffman.org/2004/12/15/JustOneQuestion.aspx) for you:

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

Via Ry. Post Zumbo, post Cooper. How many more are there out there than need to get their asses kicked for supporting Obama in this election? Gentlemen, we can out them. We have the technology. We have the capability to spend our dollars only with those gun companies that support our specific, enumerated, individual right to keep and bear arms.

So, lets do it.

Via an email from Ry a letter posted on ARFCOM:

Mr. Obama,

Given the uproar about the simple question asked you by Joe the plumber, and the persecution that has been heaped on him because he dared to question you, I find myself motivated to say a few things to you myself. While Joe aspires to start a business someday, I already have started not one, but 4 businesses. But first, let me introduce myself. You can call me "Cory the well driller". I am a 54 year old high school graduate. I didn't go to college like you, I was too ready to go "conquer the world" when I finished high school. 25 years ago at age 29, I started my own water well drilling business at a time when the economy here in East Texas was in a tailspin from the crash of the early 80's oil boom. I didn't get any help from the government, nor did I look for any. I borrowed what I could from my sister, my uncle, and even the pawn shop and managed to scrape together a homemade drill rig and a few tools to do my first job. My businesses did not start not a result of privilege. It is the result of my personal drive, personal ambition, self discipline, self reliance, and a determination to treat my customers fairly. From the very start my business provided one other (than myself) East Texan a full time job. I couldn't afford a backhoe the first few years (something every well drilling business had), so I and my helper had to dig the mud pits that are necessary for each and every job with hand shovels. I had to use my 10 year old, 1/2 ton pickup truck for my water tank truck (normally a job for at least a 2 ton truck).

A year and a half after I started the business, I scraped together a 20% down payment to get a modest bank loan and bought a (28 year) old, worn out, slightly bigger drilling rig to allow me to drill the deeper water wells in my area. I spent the next few years drilling wells with the rig while simultaneously rebuilding it between jobs. Through these years I never knew from one month to the next if I would have any work or be able to pay the bills. I got behind on my income taxes one year, and spent the next two years paying that back (with penalty and interest) while keeping up with ongoing taxes. I got behind on my water well supply bill 2 different years (way behind the second time... $80,000.00), and spent over a year paying it back (each time) while continuing to pay for ongoing supplies C.O.D.. Of course, the personal stress endured through these experiences and years is hard to measure. I do have a stent in my heart now to memorialize it all.

I spent the next 10 years developing the reputation for being the most competent and most honest water well driller in East Texas. 2 years along the way, I hired another full time employee for the drilling business so that we could provide full time water well pump service as well as the well drilling. Also, 3 years along the path, I bought a water well screen service machine from a friend, starting business # 2. 5 years later I made a business loan for $100,000.00 to build a new, higher production, computer controlled screen service machine. I had designed the machine myself, and it didn't work out for 3 years so I had to make the loan payments without the benefit of any added income from the new machine. No government program was there to help me with the payments, or to help me sleep at night as I lay awake wondering how I would solve my machine problems or pay my bills. Finally, after 3 years, I got the screen machine working properly, and that provided another full time job for an East Texan in the screen service business.

2 years after that, I made another business loan, this time for $250,000.00, to buy another used drilling rig and all the support equipment needed to run another, larger, drill rig. This provided another 2 full time jobs for East Texans. Again, I spent a couple of years not knowing if I had made a smart move, or a move that would bankrupt me. For the third time in 13 years, I had placed everything I owned on the line, risking everything, in order to build a business.

A couple of years into this, I came up with a bright idea for a new kind of mud pump, a fundamentally necessary pump used on water well drill rigs. I spent my entire life savings to date (just $30,000.00), building a prototype of the pump and took it to the national water well convention to show it off. Customers immediately started coming out of the woodworks to buy the pumps, but there was a problem. I had depleted my assets making the prototype, and nobody would make me a business loan to start production of the new pumps. With several deposits for pump orders in hand, and nowhere to go, I finally started applying for as many credit card as I could find and took cash withdrawals on these cards to the tune of over $150,000.00 (including modest loans from my dear sister and brother), to get this 3rd business going.

Yes, once again, I had everything hanging over the line in an effort to start another business. I had never manufactured anything, and I had to design and bring into production a complex hydraulic machine from an untested prototype to a reliable production model (in six months). How many nights I lay awake wondering if I had just made the paramount mistake of my life I cannot tell you, but there were plenty. I managed to get the pumps into production, which immediately created another 2 full time jobs in East Texas. Some of the models in the first year suffered from quality issues due to the poor workmanship of one of my key suppliers, so I and an employee (another East Texan employed) had to drive across the country to repair customers' pumps, practically from coast to coast. I stood behind the product, and made payments to all the credit cards that had financed me (and my brother and sister). I spent the next 5 years improving and refining the product, building a reputation for the pump and the company, working to get the pump into drill rig manufacturers' product lines, and paying back credit cards. During all this time I continued to manage a growing water well business that was now operating 3 drill rig crews, and 2 well service crews. Also, the screen service business continued to grow. No government programs were there to help me, Mr. Obama, but that's ok, I didn't expect any, nor did I want any. I was too busy fighting to make success happen to sit around waiting for the government to help me.

Now, we have been manufacturing the mud pumps for 7 years, my combined businesses employ 32 full time employees, and distribute $5,000,000.00 annually through the local economy. Now, just 4 months ago I borrowed $1,254,000.00, purchasing computer controlled machining equipment to start my 4th business, a production machine shop. The machine shop will serve the mud pump company so that we can better manufacture our pumps that are being shipped worldwide. Of course, the machine shop will also do work for outside companies as well. This has already produced 2 more full time jobs, and 2 more should develop out of it in the next few months. This should work out, but if it doesn't it will be because you, and the other professional politicians like yourself, will have destroyed our countrys’ (and the world) economy with your meddling with mortgage loan programs through your liberal manipulation and intimidation of loaning institutions to make sure that unqualified borrowers could get mortgages. You see, at the very time when I couldn't get a business loan to get my mud pumps into production, you were working with Acorn and the Community Reinvestment Act programs to make sure that unqualified borrowers could buy homes with no down payment, and even no credit or worse yet, bad credit. Even the infamous, liberal, Ninja loans (No Income, No Job or Assets). While these unqualified borrowers were enjoying unrealistically low interest rates, I was paying 22% to 24% interest on the credit cards that I had used to provide me the funds for the mud pump business that has created jobs for more East Texans. It's funny, because after 25 years of turning almost every dime of extra money back into my businesses to grow them, it has been only in the last two years that I have finally made enough money to be able to put a little away for retirement, and now the value of that has dropped 40% because of the policies you and your ilk have perpetrated on our country.

You see, Mr. Obama, I'm the guy you intend to raise taxes on. I'm the guy who has spent 25 years toiling and sweating, fretting and fighting, stressing and risking, to build a business and get ahead. I'm the guy who has been on the very edge of bankruptcy more than a dozen times over the last 25 years, and all the while creating more and more jobs for East Texans who didn’t want to take a risk, and wouldn't demand from themselves what I have demanded from myself. I'm the guy you characterize as "the Americans who can afford it the most" that you believe should be taxed more to provide income redistribution "to spread the wealth" to those who have never toiled, sweated, fretted, fought, stressed, or risked anything. You want to characterize me as someone who has enjoyed a life of privilege and who needs to pay a higher percentage of my income than those who have bought into your entitlement culture. I resent you, Mr. Obama, as I resent all who want to use class warfare as a tool to advance their political career. What's worse, each year more Americans buy into your liberal entitlement culture, and turn to the government for their hope of a better life instead of themselves. Liberals are succeeding through more than 40 years of collaborative effort between the predominant liberal media, and liberal indoctrination programs in the public school systems across our land.

What is so terribly sad about this is this. America was made great by people who embraced the one-time American culture of self reliance, self motivation, self determination, self discipline, personal betterment, hard work, risk taking. A culture built around the concept that success was in reach on every able bodied American who would strive for it. Each year that less Americans embrace that culture, we all descend together. We descend down the socialist path that has brought country after country ultimately to bitter and unremarkable states. If you and your liberal comrades in the media and school systems would spend half as much effort cultivating a culture of can-do across America as you do cultivating your entitlement culture, we could see Americans at large embracing the conviction that they can elevate themselves through personal betterment, personal achievement, and self reliance. You see, when people embrace such ideals, they act on them. When people act on such ideals, they succeed. All of America could find herself elevating instead of deteriorating. But that would eliminate the need for liberal politicians, wouldn't it, Mr. Obama? The country would not need you if the country was convinced that problem solving was best left with individuals instead of the government. You and all your liberal comrades have got a vested interested in creating a dependent class in our country. It is the very business of liberals to create an ever expanding dependence on government. What's remarkable is that you, who have never produced a job in your life, are going to tax me to take more of my money and give it to people who wouldn't need my money if they would get off their entitlement mentality asses and apply themselves at work, demand more from themselves, and quit looking to liberal politicians to raise their station in life.

You see, I know because I've had them work for me before. Hundreds of them over these 25 years. People who simply will not show up to work on time. People who just will not work 5 days in a week, much less, 6 days. People always looking for a way to put less effort out. People who actually tell me that they would do more if I just would first pay them more. People who take off work to sit in government offices to apply to get free government handouts (gee, I wonder how things would have turned out for them if they had spent that time earning money and pleasing their employer?). You see, all of this comes from your entitlement mentality culture.

Oh, I know you will say I am uncompassionate. Sorry, Mr. Obama, wrong again. You see, I've seen what the average percentage of your income has been given to charities over the years of 2000 to 2004 (ignoring the years you started running for office - can you pronounce “politically motivated”), you averaged of less than 1% annually. And your running mate, Joe Biden, averaged less than ¼% of his annual income in charitable contributions over the last 10 years. Like so many liberals, the two of you want to give to the needy, just as long as it is someone else’s money you are giving to them. I won’t say what I have given to charities over the last 25 years, but the percentage is several times more than you or Joe Biden (don’t you just hate goggle?). Tell me again how you feel my pain.

In short, Mr. Obama, your political philosophies represent everything that is wrong with our country. You represent the culture of government dependence instead of self reliance; Entitlement mentality instead of personal achievement; Penalization of the successful to reward the unmotivated; Political correctness instead of open mindedness and open debate. If you are successful, you may preside over the final transformation of America from being the greatest and most self-reliant culture on earth, to just another country of whiners and wimps, who sit around looking to the government to solve their problems. Like all of western Europe. All countries on the decline. All countries that, because of liberal socialistic mentalities, have a little less to offer mankind every year.

God help us...

Cory Miller, just a ordinary, extraordinary American, the way a lot of Americans used to be.

P.S. Yes, Mr. Obama, I am a real American... http://www.cmillerdrilling.com/

Follow up comment from Lyle in the email thread:

“Liberals are succeeding through more than 40 years of collaborative effort…”

Uh, try “more than 70 years” and you’ll be closer to the mark.

What Cory doesn’t seem to understand is that the Socialists don’t care if he’s right.  If they cared, they wouldn’t be socialists.  That makes his very well-reasoned and well-written message into that “rattling noise” you’ve mentioned before.

In essence they’re jihadists.  They want to bring the Corys of the world down.  It’s a purely emotional/visceral motivation and any such arguments as Cory’s will be rationalized away as “Rush Rhetoric” or as “Right Wing propaganda”, and ignored completely.

Things could go either way, but McCain won’t have had much to do with it.  What we need is someone who’ll run on the “I’m going to kick the socialist’s asses out of government altogether and then put them in cages for public entertainment” platform, but as usual we’re faced with a decision of more socialism, slower, verses more socialism, faster.

Have you seen Thomas Sowell’s latest bit?  He sees this problem as about as serious as it gets:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1029b08.php3

As I say; jihadists.

As pointed out in comments (Lyle in the second comment) it would be very interesting to know "What in the world were you thinking?"

Caleb is putting some effort in to answering the question.

Policies that he proposes under the banner of "change" are almost all policies that have been tried repeatedly in other countries— and failed repeatedly in other countries.

Politicians telling businesses how to operate? That's been tried in countries around the world, especially during the second half of the 20th century. It has failed so often and so badly that even socialist and communist governments were freeing up their markets by the end of the century.

The economies of China and India began their take-off into high rates of growth when they got rid of precisely the kinds of policies that Obama is advocating for the United States under the magic mantra of "change."

Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at home? That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great Depression.

Unemployment was 9 percent when that tariff was passed to save jobs, but unemployment went up instead of down, and reached 25 percent before the decade was over.

Higher taxes to "spread the well around," as Obama puts it? The idea of redistributing wealth has turned into the reality of redistributing poverty, in countries where wealth has fled and the production of new wealth has been stifled by a lack of incentives.

Thomas Sowell
October 29, 2008
A perfect storm
[Via an email from Lyle. I had so many possibilities for quotes today that it was tough to choose. And all of them are time sensitive too. <heavy sigh>--Joe]

In regards to Cooper Firearms incident it appears the board of directors has taken swift and decisive action. David has the story.

It's the power of the Internet at work. It's a new world out there.

I've had two requests from people for help celebrating Halloween this year. Son-in-law Caleb and a friend from my work both want to blow up some pumpkins. That is planned for this Saturday.

This morning I got a report from someone else on the same topic:

As the crowd thinned, we started the good stuff. Saturday I had placed a baggie of amn mix in the seed cavity and shot it with the 300 weatherby loaded with 125 grain ballistic tips. I wanted to tell folks that I had acquired some new bullets and demo their performance. The pumpkin absolutely vaporized.

Yeah. That's what happens alright. I'll try to have pictures and video next week sometime.

Update: Video from November 2000 is here.

The Washington Arms Collectors have done the homework for gun owners in Washington State. Here are their recommendations.

The NRA has some advice for everyone in the states.

Brian Doherty’s Gun Control on Trial is to the Heller case what Richard Kluger’s Simple Justice is to the Brown decision—an essential history made up of equal parts legal theory and personal struggle, presented in page-turning fashion.

Glenn Reynolds
Professor of Law, University of Tennessee
Founder, Instapundit.com
From What Others Have Said on the Cato website about the book.
[You can preorder the book on Amazon for only $11.53. I was interviewed for this book. I don't know if I actually made it into the book but I'm buying a copy to find out and get the rest of the story.--Joe]

I have been having pain in one of my teeth off and on for about three weeks now. Over the weekend it got bad enough and persistent enough that I decided it was time to seek medical attention.

I called the dentist yesterday but they couldn't get me in until this morning. I made it through the night without much difficulty. I woke up a couple times and had trouble getting back to sleep but not that big of a deal.

Today was pretty much consumed with visiting the dentist, doing paperwork at the doc next door who would do the root canal, handling a few things at work, going back to the dentist office and getting the work done.

Hunter006 has some more details from an email exchange and there are some more details on Twitter.

All is better now but I need to catch up on some sleep.

A point I heard Glen Beck make this morning was that history shows us the more the difficult the economic situation is the more people support/demand socialism and communism. This was true in Russia, China, Nazi Germany, Western Europe and in the United States earlier this century. But in all cases it extended and worsened the economic situation.

Via Robb Allen we have this ad. But what occurs to me is that this may actually make him more popular rather than less. But like sick children given a choice between bitter medicine that works and a candy placebo most will go for the candy.

Do you think Newsweek will pick this up?

A new story by Brooks Jackson on the FactCheck.org website once again shows that FactCheck cherry-picks “facts” to suit its anti-NRA, anti-gun, anti-self-defense agenda—an agenda that the American people do not share.

...

Obama has also supported a federal ban on carrying concealed handguns, even though 40 states now respect this right. Obama’s home state of Illinois is one of only two that provide no means whatsoever for people to carry guns outside the home for self-defense. In the Illinois state senate, Obama even sided against crime victims by opposing a bill that would have allowed people who receive protective orders—such as domestic violence victims—to carry firearms. Why? Because, in his words, “authorizing potential victims to carry firearms would potentially lead to a more dangerous rather than less dangerous situation.”

With all this information from independent sources readily available, why did Jackson and FactCheck choose to highlight facts and details that bolster only one side of the story? Is it because the points they chose to highlight advances their preordained beliefs? Do Brooks Jackson and FactCheck have an intrinsic bias against gun owners?

These are legitimate questions that we encourage everyone to ask before buying Brooks Jackson’s or FactCheck’s perspectives.

Maybe after the election and hell freezes over.

Via reader and blogger William I received this link regarding Cooper Firearms:

Dan Cooper, a proud member of the National Rifle Association, has backed Republicans for most of his life. He's the chief executive of Cooper Arms, a small Montana company that makes hunting rifles.

Cooper said he voted for George W. Bush in 2000, having voted in past elections for every Republican presidential nominee back to Richard Nixon. In October 1992, he presented a specially made rifle to the first President. Bush during a Billings campaign event.

This year, Cooper has given $3,300 to the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama. That's on top of the $1,000 check he wrote to Obama's U.S. Senate campaign in 2004, after he was dazzled by Obama's speech at that year's Democratic National Convention.

Perhaps his hope is that Barack Crocodile Obama will eat him last.*

I know I won't be doing any business with Cooper and I hope other gun owners don't either.

Update: Sebastian has similar things to say.

Update2: Sebastian does the research on Cooper's donations. To say Cooper is trying to put a spin on the story is being generous. He needs to be taught a lesson similar to the one learned by Smith & Wesson a few years ago.

Update3 (10/29/2008): It appears David may have the final word on this bit of ugliness. They apparently didn't need the full lesson--just a reminder.

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in the society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted...

Barack Obama
Chicago Public Radio Interview -- 2001
[H/T to Kevin and Say Uncle.

This may be the deciding factor in the election. My guess it will be a very tight race between "spreading the wealth" quotes and the voting fraud as to which will ultimately decide the election.--Joe]

I've briefly mentioned these guys before but they have updated their website for our current election. They haven't become any more connected to reality since the last time I visited:

The McCain Campaign has denounced Barack Obama for his tenuous association with William Ayers, characterized as a domestic terrorist who hates America. Sarah Palin has her own associations with those who espouse insurrectionist and secessionist doctrines. The doctrines are pervasive in the present political culture. Are these the people who love America?

The problem is both embrace the National Rifle Association's childish political fantasy. A member of the NRA's National Board wrote in the Washington Post in 1989:

Twentieth century military machines are far from invincible when outflanked by armed citizen guerrillas.
http://www.potowmack.org/emerappd.html#ak47
http://www.potowmack.org/parkappe.pdf
p. 40

Ayers can only be faulted for acting out the NRA's childish political fantasy. The Obama Campaign can be faulted for the failed political leadership to turn the whole issue around on the McCain Campaign and exploit the opportunity the courts have given to bring rationality to firearms policy. See below. The gun rights militants need not worry that political and intellectual leadership will emerge anywhere else.

Their most glaring flaw in the above is they seem incapable of distinguishing between violently overthrowing our constitutional established republic (as Ayers attempted) and defending the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution from a tyrannical government attempting to infringe those rights.

As near as I can tell the person or persons at the Potowmack Institute regard all governments as equally valid and deserving of having a monopoly on the use of force. This is a false assumption. The truth is that no government is deserving of a monopoly on the use of force. No government can legitimately claim to possess powers that the individual also does not have and were granted to the government by the individuals. The individuals may grant the government a monopoly on the use of force in certain circumstances such as when declaring war on a foreign state, enforcing contracts, or punishment of criminals. But those are limited monopolies and are subject to revocation by the people.

There are other uses of force the government may never have a legitimate monopoly on such as the use of force to defend ones self and other innocents against imminent serious injury or death. Any government that claims to have a such a monopoly on the use of force is an illegitimate government.

My blog shows up as number four on Goggle when they went looking for it but I didn't have it. And I'm pretty sure none of the top ten do either. Still if someone did have it they could turn it into some money.

What is "it"? See for yourself:

Domain Name		charter.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address		68.117.42.# (CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS)
ISP		CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS
Location		Continent  :  North America Country  :  United States  (Facts) State  :  Minnesota City  :  Saint Paul Lat/Long  :  44.9487, -93.1002 (Map) Distance  :  1,152 miles
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution  :  1024 x 768 Color Depth  :  16 bits
Time of Visit		Oct 27 2008 6:43:52 pm
Last Page View		Oct 27 2008 6:49:54 pm
Visit Length		6 minutes 2 seconds
Page Views		2
Referring URL		http://www.google.co...&q=list of tsa goons
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		list of tsa goons
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../07/11/TSAGoons.aspx
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffm.../07/11/TSAGoons.aspx
Out Click		here http://abclocal.go.c...ews/local&id=6257417
Time Zone		UTC-4:00
Visitor's Time		Oct 27 2008 10:43:52 pm
Visit Number		375,386

From the Crap for Brains file:

The court records say Cowart and Schlesselman also bought nylon rope and ski masks to use in a robbery or home invasion to fund their spree, during which they allegedly planned to go from state to state and kill people.

For the Obama plot, the legal documents show, Cowart and Schlesselman “planned to drive their vehicle as fast as they could toward Obama shooting at him from the windows.”

“Both individuals stated they would dress in all white tuxedos and wear top hats during the assassination attempt,” the court complaint states. “Both individuals further stated they knew they would and were willing to die during this attempt.”

It sounds to me like they weren't getting enough oxygenated blood into their drug circulation system.

According to new research done at Oxford University, people who eat meat are less likely to suffer from shrinking of the brain than those that stick strictly to a vegetarian diet.

...

This doesn’t mean that vegetarians need to immediately start eating meat; it just means that when they decide to attack meat-eaters they should think about their small mindedness before hand.

Jaclyn Cousins
October 13, 2008
Vegetarianism Shrinks Your Brain
[H/T to Phil.

I'm in agreement with Kevin Baker on the topic:

Kevin Baker at the 2008 Gun Blogger Rendezvous on Friday October 10.

Xenia, be sure to eat your eggs and drink your milk.--Joe]

I'm always a little embarrassed and uncomfortable when someone says something nice about me or something I did. This is no exception and for more than the usual reason. The number one reason was that Mark made his post on Friday and I didn't notice until this morning.

Mark gave me a "Superior Scribbler Award":

He had this to say about me:

Joe Huffman, who blogs The View From North Central Idaho, as well as trenchant observations of the political scene from the perspective of a well-trained and -experienced gunny. Joe always seems to have the bons mots for the moment, whereas I generally have the esprit d'escalier.

Additional reasons number two and three were that I had to look up two phrases to figure out exactly what he was saying.

As per the rules of the award I have to post the rules:

• Each Superior Scribbler must in turn pass The Award on to 5 most-deserving Bloggy Friends.
• Each Superior Scribbler must link to the author & the name of the blog from whom he/she has received The Award.
• Each Superior Scribbler must display The Award on his/her blog, and link to This Post, which explains The Award.
• Each Blogger who wins The Superior Scribbler Award must visit this post and add his/her name to the Mr. Linky List. That way, we'll be able to keep up-to-date on everyone who receives This Prestigious Honor!
• Each Superior Scribbler must post these rules on his/her blog.

The five most-deserving Bloggy Friends deserve some thought.

In terms of "Superior Scribblers" I would have given the award to each of my three children had they actually put their best writing works on blogs. From the time they were old enough to write essay's and papers I have been super impressed with the quality of their work. But only Xenia has a blog and it's more social than representative of her writing. Here is something from James and Xenia. I also have stuff from Kim that would definitely qualify but none of it is on the web (hint, hint).

They must have inherited this from their mother. I always had an extremely tough time writing until I was in my early twenties. It was just extremely painful and difficult for me to think of anything worth putting into words.

Barb on the other hand wrote lots of stories and got excellent grades on her writings all through school. And then there was the book she wrote but never bothered to try and get published. She said, "It was just for practice." Here are some samples of her work:

• Can't Say Goodbye Again. Very short romance. Written for a contest in the Writer's Edge Ezine (defunct web site).
• The Medicine Cabinet. This is what I call one of her "Anti-Romance" stories. Others have compared it to Hitchcock because of the suspense, story twists, and surprises. Very good stuff.
• The Rose. Another "Anti-Romance" story. Definitely Hitchcock like.

She would definitely get an award--if she had a blog and put her best work on it.

Enough with the potential nepotism.

In line with having to look up words, as I did with Mark's work, to understand the post I have to give an award to Roberta X for The Adventures of Roberta X. She writes with a vocabulary a little bit above my comfort level at times but she puts interesting twists on things.

In terms of "interesting twists" (extreme snark is a better description) Tamara K with view from the porch also gets an award.

Alan Korwin and his blog Page Nine gets an award for inspiring a lot of my alternate ways of viewing things in the world of gun politics. And that doesn't even count all the books he has written.

I don't know who it is but the VPC Blog has to get an award. Wow! Just Wow! He or she really does a number with the satire.

Yeah, I know, that's only four. But with all the recognition to my family members can't each of those count as 1/4 of an award each?

Well, you'd be no fun if you lost interest.

Roberta X
October 26, 2008
Speaking Of Wood
Regarding a new camo pattern (it's call Morning Wood) she saw at the gun show yesterday.
[I really need to write the post that has been poking around in my head ever since I read Bonnie's Twitter post from over a month ago. It all has to do with the differences between the male and female brain. Read The Female Brain for the long version--you might get the answer sooner than if you wait for me to write the post.--Joe]

Several years ago while debating gun control with someone I claimed the crime numbers from the U.K. were known to be erroneously low. I had read that somewhere but when confronted for proof I looked all over the net for several hours without being able to find my source.

Kevin reports on the story that "just broke".

Ry points out a great article on the evolution of sniping gear and deployment in the last few years.

The article was written by Michael Haugen who attended two Boomershoots. Michael also wrote three articles which are posted on the Boomershoot website:

• Choosing Optics
• Optics and Their Use
• The Truth About Mil Dots

If you have ever heard me tell the story about shooting on the 1000 yard range at Fort Lewis--Michael was the guy next to me with Eugene Econ spotting for both Michael and me.

Michael was the guy that referred to watching me build reactive targets on the tailgate of my pickup as "Bomb Building 101".

I'm glad to hear he is still in the sniping business and apparently is well. I was impressed with his brains, seriousness, and dedication to our country and constitution.

And, as Ry said, I'm happy he calls out American Snipers as Good Thing. I donate money to them which Microsoft matches dollar for dollar.

Tell me why you think a woman should 'lie back and enjoy being raped' instead of shooting a rapist dead with the handgun in her handbag.

Tell me why black Americans should submit to being lynched instead of shooting the lynch mob dead.

Tell me why homophobes should be free to beat up homosexuals without the risk of being shot.

Watch Schindler's List and tell me again why only the police and military should have guns.

Tell me why you think police should be able to shoot an attacker to save their lives but I shouldn't.

Tell me why I shouldn't have the best means of defending myself -- a semiauto firearm with a standard capacity magazine.

Tell me why a woman's right to choose should not include weapon, mag size and ammunition.

Tell me why you think I shouldn't be able to defend my life or my freedom.

More than that, tell me why you should not have that right!

Barrett Tillman
Via Alan Korwin October 25, 2008 -- Liberty Poll Grows

The plan for the next gun blogger meet is for us to get together at the Mexican restaurant on Beacon Hill called La Cabana Cafe:

2532 Beacon Ave S
Seattle, WA 98144
(206) 322-9643

1800 on November 9th.

My political ideal is democracy. Let every man be respected as an individual and no man idolized.

Albert Einstein
[Idolized? Does that remind you of someone? Perhaps Einstein, like me, would have voted against Barack Obama.--Joe]

...We must advocate tougher gun restrictions.  I found this on Oleg's blog.

and part two, "The Carjackers";

That's the way to do it!  Humor.  Blistering sarcasm actually-- illustrating absurdity by being absurd.  There is no other proper response to the anti-rights movement.  Not at the moment.

I doubt this is part of their official campaign:

A knife-wielding man robbed a McCain-Palin campaign volunteer and etched a “B” into her face after he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the woman’s car, Pittsburgh police said.

But socialism does inspire and in fact outright demand (read Karl Marx) violence to achieve Utopia.

So I’m not surprised.

Democrats and crime? Typical. Who do you think some of the most dependable democrat voters are? Why do you think democrats want to register people to vote in prison and those with criminal records?

And the gun bans? If you wanted to get put on your tin-foil hat you could hypothesis they want to enable criminals so the political "leaders" can acquire more power to "protect the little guy". Hitler sent his goons out to break things then claimed he needed more power to "protect the people". What Schumer, Feinstein, Obama, and the others are doing is just a low level, indirect means of accomplishing the same thing. That they have supporters taking it to the next level is just showing us the trend and their roots more clearly.

They hate us and they hate freedom and they are certain they are right. That gives them justification for anything they do that furthers their cause. Think I'm exaggerating? Then read this. Here is a sample:

If a kid in a red state finds his daddy's handgun and blows his head off, we'll feel terrible (we're like that), but we'll try to look on the bright side: At least he won't grow up to vote like his dad.

This is the mindset of the socialists. This is the mindset that resulted in socialist governments murdering tens of millions of their own citizens in the 20^th century. This is the mindset of muggers for Obama.

Update: The attack on the girl was probably a hoax (H/T to Sebastian).

I received an email from someone today asking for information on the military surplus ammo he recently purchased. Here is a picture of the headstamp:

I could make some guesses, but they would be just stuff I pulled out of the air. I'm sure someone can tell me a lot more. Send me an email or leave a comment.

Thanks.

The only reason that Democrats push gun control is that nothing scares them more than the thought of a black man with a gun. All the loudest proponents of gun control laws either have ‘carry permits’ or they surround themselves with armed bodyguards. They don’t push gun control laws to keep guns out of their own hands – because they know that they’ll always be able to get them – they push gun control laws to keep guns out of your hands.

I’m a Republican. I want to see a gun in the hand of every African American in the entire country - including you.

Alex Stone Dale
October 14, 2008
Former cab driver
Manhattan NY (Republican)
http://observers.france24.com/profile/20080707-alexander-dale

When I heard BO talking to Joe The Plumber, saying that when we spread the wealth around, everyone benefits, I agreed with his words.  Any time you help to produce or deliver products or services, you are "spreading the wealth around".  Anytime you trade products or service with another person, both parties in the transaction are "spreading the wealth around".  Any time you buy stock in a company, you help finance that company and you're spreading the wealth around.  Any time you put money in a savings plan, you're helping to finance others, and you're spreading the wealth around.  If you hire someone, you're spreading the wealth around. If you go to work for someone else, you're spreading the wealth around.  Even if you're a miser and you buy gold to bury in your back yard, you're supporting the gold mining and processing industry and all the people they employ throughout the supply chain, and you're spreading the wealth around.

But we all know that Obama wasn't talking about peaceable, voluntary exchange of goods and services between free citizens.  He was talking about spreading the wealth around using force and the threat of force.  To put it another way, Obama, and all who think similarly, does not trust you to produce they way HE thinks you should produce, so he wants to tell you how to do it.  He doesn't trust you to make your own purchasing and financing decisions, so he's going to do more of that for you.

Obama and socialists everywhere are jealous of your abilities to produce and they're jealous of the freedom you've had in spreading your wealth around.  Make no mistake about it-- that jealousy leads to anger and hatred.

We can look at the political struggle in this country in this way; Either you favor spreading the wealth around through peaceable, voluntary exchange, or you favor spreading the wealth around through the use of force and the threat of force.

Lest you be tempted to demand a look at history to find which method of spreading the wealth has a better record of success, I would warn you that the two sides (socialists and capitalists) have incompatible measures of "success".  You may think that success means more people living at higher standards, with more choices in life, more mobility, a better life span and so on.  You'd be wrong if you think socialists will see that as a desirable outcome.

Update; Of course there is a whole lot more to participation in a free market beside "spreading" wealth.  In fact you are creating wealth-- something the socialists have never been able to comprehend.  In the mind of a socialist, to become rich is to deprive someone else.  In fact, and as with virtually all socialist beliefs, the opposite is true.  In the process of building your own wealth in a capitalist market, and in the process of using it in a capitalist market, you are invariably benefiting others.

Wendy Cukier is at it again:

It's one of the many measures that can help," Ryerson professor and gun control advocate Wendy Cukier said yesterday. "When guns are removed from homes, it reduces the chance they are misused or stolen ... That can have an impact on public safety."

The amnesty program, Pixels for Pistols, is a joint endeavour with the 26-store Henry's camera chain, based on Church St. in Toronto. For four weeks, Toronto residents who hand over a gun, legal or not, will receive a digital camera, either a Nikon Coolpix S52 or a Coolpix P60, listed at $230 and $190 on the Henry's website. The offer includes photography lessons.

I find odd she doesn't recommend turning over your car and money to the government too. Those might be misused as well. Oh, wait, the Democrats in this country are saying that. 

Jeff has other comments on the plan.

Peter uses something I wrote over three years ago as he QOTD. Nice.

...[W]hen I get to the moon I'd like a choice of food other than Happy Family Pork Seafood Rice #5. I was kinda hoping for a Big Mac rather than some soy & curry concoction, though. If we want to get back in the game, I say we tell Americans that anything that happens over a hundred miles up is tax-free, and then stand the hell back.

Tamara K.
October 22, 2008
The space race goes on...
[I'd prefer a little lower altitude, like five miles, but we're just quibbling over details at that point.--Joe]

Remember the post from last week? In the article I linked to they said:

It's not an image people would find invasive.

And:

It's not possible to save an image or get it out of the machine, it's physically not possible.

That was in Australia and this is the same technology being tested in Europe:

I wonder why the picture they share with us to demonstrate their technology is cut off the just below the breasts--NOT!

They are arguing about it now but I fully expect arguments that it is "for the children" or "the good of everyone" will prevail and within a year or so it will be back to normal Security Theater as usual with most everyone thinking they are safer when in fact they are not. But maybe it will save the little old ladies from getting their feet broken by TSA quite so often.

Update: Via a comment from Barron we now have more of the picture:

Nice, huh?

Via my Aussie friend at work I found out Australians are going to be prevented from viewing Internet materials their Nanny state deems "illegal". As he put it, "North Korea, China and now Australia all have something in common. Content filtering."

Details here, here, and here:

Details have begun to come out about Australia's Cyber-Safety Plan, which aims to block "illegal" content from being accessed within the country, as well as pornographic material inappropriate for children. Right now, the system is in the testing stages, but network engineers are now saying that there's no way to opt out entirely from content filtering.

It was "for the children" and now it's for everyone.

As pointed out in the articles the concern is what will be considered "illegal". This blog and my Boomershoot web site are blocked by many schools and businesses. I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't some countries it is blocked in as well. Just firearms training videos could be blocked in countries that have repressive gun laws. Even the concept of being responsible for yourself and fighting back when attacked is already essentially illegal in the U.K. Will just talk of the right to self defense soon be considered a thought crime there and other formerly free countries?

As they were getting their guns taken away I kept wondering why they didn't start shooting the politicians then. I can't help but think they are probably now wondering the same thing.

Via Dave Hardy (from last week--I'm still getting caught up from being on vacation) I discovered someone has a serious comprehension problem:

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels says he's hoping for "further clarity" on his authority to ban guns on city property.

He said Wednesday the city has a "moral responsibility" to pursue what he calls common sense gun laws.

Attorney General Rob McKenna issued a nonbinding opinion Monday that says cities lack the authority to ban guns because local laws would conflict with state regulations.

One would think the mayor would have hear of D.C. v. Heller. And if that wasn't enough, in case you forgot, the AG said, using the plain and simple words, "The answer to your question is no."

Perhaps Nickels needs a "clue by four" to assist him in comprehending simple sentences. If so, The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms says they are ready to supply the necessary clarification in the form of a lawsuit.

The first thing I thought of when I read this was the gun bloggers who went to summer camp at Blackwater a couple months ago. The critical portion is this (emphasis added):

The video that spurred the investigation of five men accused of plotting an attack on soldiers on New Jersey's Fort Dix shows some of them in camouflage clothing, firing rapid-fire weapons on a snowy driving range.

An investigator who was on the case from the beginning testified Tuesday that the way the men were firing was unusual.

"They were actually advancing toward a target," said Fred Lang, a member of an FBI anti-terrorism task force who was previously in the military. "Through my years as a firearms instructor, I've never seen that done."

"There's only one reason for that," Lang said. "It's a fire-and-maneuver tactic."

We did that at summer camp (see the video here). We do that in USPSA matches all the time. Yet this is being used against these guys as if it were something essentially unheard of.

It may in fact be these guys were training to kill U.S. soldiers and should be sent to prison for a long time. But this one thing in and of itself should not be conclusive proof of evil intent. I am concerned of precedent being set.

In the right column of this blog in the "Politics" section is a new addition I found at The Peoples Cube--"Random Obama Facts". Each time you refresh the page a random "fact" will be displayed. Some of my favorites:

Obama visited Benjamin Franklin in a dream and told him how to live his life serving the community, but all that Franklin could remember was, how to fly a kite.

Any sentence containing the name "Obama" and ending in a question mark has been determined to be racist.  The only exceptions are rhetorical sentences such as "Is there any way that Obama could be more perfect?"

Obama can calculate your guilt just by looking at the numbers in your checkbook.

Big government is like a thousand foot fishing line with a hook, but efficiency is always an inch beyond the hook. Every time you realize this, Obama wants you to believe that the government must grow an inch bigger.

Obama smokes so you don't have to.

Obama always overpays his taxes because he believes that the government will find a better use for his money than he ever could.

Jeffrey Goldberg tests TSA and finds it full of fail.

He does, and writes about it, all kinds of things that I knew were possible but didn't have the courage to do. Read it and laugh--or maybe cry.

TSA--A Security Theater.

This seems so odd to me. How can they possibly make such a claim?

Judge Richard A. Posner, in an article in The New Republic in August, wrote that Heller’s failure to allow the political process to work out varying approaches to gun control that were suited to local conditions “was the mistake that the Supreme Court made when it nationalized abortion rights in Roe v. Wade.”

Would he say the same about the right to a trial by jury, freedom of religion, or freedom of speech? The RKBA, is a specific, enumerated right. Yet Posner thinks it should be subject to "the political process"? If that were the case then what does he think a right really is?

And if you read his article in The New Republic you will find he misstates facts and overlooks things like the state constitutions at nearly the same time as the U.S. Constitution that specifically spelled out the RKBA as an individual right.

How can someone like this be considered fit to be a judge?

Or what about this?

“In both Roe and Heller,” Judge Wilkinson wrote, “the court claimed to find in the Constitution the authority to overrule the wishes of the people’s representatives. In both cases, the constitutional text did not clearly mandate the result, and the court had discretion to decide the case either way.”

What about the wishes of the people's representatives in Alabama, Mississippi, and the other deep south states of 50 years ago. Should have they been respected?

It seems to me that these judges are unable or unwilling to embrace the concept of inalienable rights.

If I were able to change the structure of our government one of the changes I would make is there would be specific provisions for a small minority to overthrow any law which plausibly granted to the government powers beyond those enumerated in the constitution. It seems too many people are unable to think of there being a problem that would not benefit from a government solution. And what I think of when government tries to solve problems is best described by the picture here.

It ain’t about Osama Bin Laden.

It's about Obama Been Lyin’.

Massad Ayoob
October 19, 2008
BRADY ORGANIZATION "OUTS" OBAMA
[In regards to what Barrack Obama says about guns.--Joe]

I'm all for freedom of choice and it's interesting to me the debate over open carry is sometimes actually framed in those words in the media. But then this is an Oklahoma newspaper.

Sometime I'll have to spend an hour or three and collect my thought on open carry for a post. I'm all for it but I do worry about scaring the sheeple and it backfiring on us.

<heavy sigh>

What follows is what the believers of unity think of gun owners. Sometimes I just have to shake my head at the extraordinary displays of bigotry and ignorance of those that think they are enlightened. From the comments:

bengaliman Oct 20 08, 11:03am

Ignorant fools who deserve every bit of bad news they get. Lets hope they use it on themseleves at soem point. Lets face it they are racists who wont come out with what they really think.

Ahh... yes. Someone who thinks they can read the minds of other people and is ignorant of the racist origins of gun control. I'll ignore his spelling errors...

Struggling Oct 20 08, 11:32am

Hear the store guys' closing words: He's a hard nut to crack.

Their effort to convince Marc must have been all the bullshit they were spouting about Obama.

Just shows the extremity of some people's distance from reality. Their viewing must be entirely Fox or some cable effort of even more extreme outlook. I don't know what their reading might be (Mein Kampf would be a funny suggestion but an unfair one may be??).

These are people perhaps Obama is not going to be able to convince? Perhaps his drive for votes might not need to expend so much on them?

Crazy guys.

Obama has me convinced. His record is clear.

MrPoisson Oct 20 08, 12:18pm

These are people perhaps Obama is not going to be able to convince?

Well that's a given - there's a vast population of gun totin', chequered shirted, and outspokenly racist redneck types across the states. I went (out of bemused curiosity) to a pawn shop/gun range in south Florida which was entirely staffed and frequented by a section of society you wouldn't want to have access to a pen knife let alone an enormous 7.62mm assault rifle. They all seem to possess that stubborn, unwavering, and willfully ignorant patriotism which really has no place in todays world.

I just hope the latest polls accurately reflect these idiots.

7.62mm is "enormus" and he thinks we are idiots? And how was it he determined the people at the gun range should have access to a pen knife? Was it because of their checkered shirts or was it because they were patriotic? The important part is he doesn't think people with the viewpoints opposed to his have a place in "todays world". I'm reminded of someone else who had similar thoughts.

Roosterbooster198 Oct 20 08, 12:47pm

Secession for the East and West coasts looks more attractive by the day. Secede, and leave these imbeciles to rot in Third World squalor.

This guy displays mind-boggling ignorance of reality. And he really, really, doesn't want to go there. If the heartland put an blockade on the food and water flowing into the East and West coasts within two weeks there will only be rats and cannibals crawling through the rubble of the burned out cities. The farmers, ranchers, miners, factory, and construction workers may not be able to get much content on their TV sets and their medical resources would be diminshed but they would have plenty of food, water, and ammunition as they manned the big dirt berms pushed up around the cities and put out the run away fires, and shot the arrogant elistists who believe themselves smarter and superior as they attempted to crawl out of the hell they created for themselves.

jigen Oct 20 08, 4:31pm

The National Rifle Association — which is the lobby for gun manufacturers and sellers, but poses as an organization fighting for the rights of the little guy — has been putting out literature saying 'Obama will take your guns'. The literature even looks like an Obama flier, which must be confusing for these hillbillies when they see a stack of them at the local gun-show.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html

In a way, I feel sorry for these people. They are under-educated — products of a school system the Republican Party wants to keep in place because it favors them — and fearful, because they are told to be afraid. If it comes to the crunch, these people aren't going to be the ones who survive. What will they do, make their own bullets? The stockpile won't last for long, and survival will need intelligence, strength and good health much more than cowardice, brute force and a lack of fashion sense.

The NRA is a lobby for gun manufactures and sellers? This is an extraordinarily common belief among anti-gun socialists. My hypothesis is their hatred of capitalism blinds them to reality--they are incapable of seeing the world other than in terms of the "evils of capitalism" and those that oppose socialism are either dupes of, or in collusion with, the capitalists. In the case of the NRA it is very, very clear they are completely, totally, wrong.

Under-educated? I have a BSEE and MSEE, my wife has two college degrees, our only son has a BS in computer science, and both daughters are in college. I have to wonder what sort of education jigen has such that he thinks I and/or my family are under-educated. Yes, people can and do make their own bullets. And I love it when he mentions fashion sense as related to "survival".

Ladd Everitt, a anti-gun activist, goes shooting with Brian Borgelt, the former owner of Bull's Eye Shooter Supply.

His experience is similar to mine in the opposite direction. They may be bigots and are enabling terrible things but it's quite possible they are nice people. It's something to keep in mind in our battle against the evil they, in most cases unwittingly, do.

Anti-gun activist Mike Beard has similar comments about his meetings with Neal Knox and others.

As suggested by James (not our son) and enabled by Tony I finished Freehold last week. It was slow reading only because I would only read a few pages every few nights before I would go to bed. It was a great book. I cried when Kendra was awarded her medal. I love strong female characters.

I started The Weapon last night. It's looking good so far.

An email I received from L. Neil Smith:

A WEAPON OF THOUGHT

 

By L. Neil Smith <lneil@netzero.com>

 

 

   Aaron Zelman, founder and executive director of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, has announced creation of a vital and unique new resource for advocates of the individual right to own and carry weapons.

 

   _2A Today for the USA_ is a free 23-minute video presentation, a weapon of thought, specifically produced to disrupt and destroy the evil, inhumane agenda of victim disarmers and gun prohibitionists with generous applications of legal and historical truth. Because JPFO encourages the widest possible distribution of this film, it is being offered on the Internet for free, with numerous options for viewing or downloading.

 

   Quite simply put, in these frightening times we're living through today, you must use this video -- or lose your guns.

 

   Although many gun rights advocates mistakenly believe that the recent Heller Supreme Court decision was a victory for our side, in fact it authorizes all manner of infringements -- in the form of "reasonable" regulation -- on the individual right to own and carry weapons. _2A Today for the USA_ sets the legal and historical record straight.

 

   In the current national election -- no matter what political propagandists are saying now -- both sides are sworn and established enemies of private, individual gun ownership, who either don't understand the Second Amendment, or willfully misinterpret it. _2A Today for the USA_ exposes them for what they are: ruthless would-be dictators who find a well-armed populace an inconvenience to their plans.

 

   One thing is certain: whoever wins this election, we will have no friends in the White House for the next four to eight years. Even if John McCain wins, and Sarah Palin means what she appers to say on Second Amendment issues, she won't be the boss, and she won't be able to dissuade her boss from ravaging our rights as he has always tried to do.

 

   We all know the setup: cowardly Republican president wants some pet bill passed; predatory Democratic congress tacks on an anti-gun hitchhiker; cowardly Republican folds like a dollar bill and more of our rights disappear.

 

   Clearly, you must use this video -- or lose your guns.

 

   Go to: <http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/2a-today-download.htm> to view or download the movie, which was made possible by JPFO's members and supporters.

 

   Please send this announcement to your friends and everyone on your address lists. That should include every gun owner, every gun dealer, every hunting buddy, and everyone else you know.

 

   Make sure JPFO's video is seen -- as a warning, if nothing else -- by anyone in a position to help take your guns away. Start modestly, with just half a dozen city council members, then work your way up to the mayor, city manager, municipal and county judges, county commissioners, the governor, state and federal representatives, senators, and judges.

 

   What does it cost, how much time does it take, to send an e-mail?

You must use this video -- or lose your guns.

 

   Be relentless with the media -- with radio stations, newspapers, and television. Be sure to include any clubs you may belong to: they all start their meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance, make sure they know what it really means.

 

   Don't overlook "friends of the NRA" -- they need to be shown the truth more than most. Here's something you can do: tell your friends that when they are approached by various gun groups for money, they should demand that the group encourage their members to watch _2A Today for the USA_ on the Internet or there will be no more donations or memberships for phony "freedom fighters".

 

   Tell them they must use this video -- or lose their guns.

 

   Follow whatever viewing or downloading procedure best suits your preferences, and download/bandwidth options. PC users can right click and choose "save target as" on links to download the files to your computer. There are also links to YouTube and Blip.TV. Please email us if you have any problems.

 

   Again, <http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/2a-today-download.htm>

 

   Remember, you must use this video -- or lose your guns.

 

================================================================

 Four-time Prometheus Award-winner L. Neil Smith has written on guns and gun ownership for more than 30 years. He is the author of 27 books, the most widely-published and prolific libertarian novelist in the world, and is considered an expert on the ethics of self-defense.

His writings (including _The Probability Broach_, _Roswell, Texas_ and the newly re-released _Tom Paine Maru_) may be seen on the following

sites:

 

LNS at JPFO: http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/lneilsmith.htm

 

BigHeadPress.com: http://www.bigheadpress.com/

 

Arc Manor/Phoenix Pick: http://www.phoenixpick.com/

 

_The Libertarian Enterprise_:  http://www.ncc-1776.org/

 

The Webley Page:  http://www.lneilsmith.org/

George Orwell couldn’t have made this stuff up.

Jeff Soyer
October 20, 2008
Britain: More Police State on the Way
[On the state of affairs in Britain revealed by the article Passports will be needed to buy mobile phones.--Joe]

Heh. Mine will say "GET A WARRANT".

When examining the security of a system we have something called the "attack surface". This is the area exposed to threats. If the system being studied is a web site then among other things the attack surface is composed of the physical server, open ports, and the URL for the site. These "surfaces" can be attacked. For example the the URL could be attacked with alternate pages and query strings. If you get lucky and/or know what you are doing you can obtain access to configuration files (such as this one I just found) which frequently contain information that can be used to get unauthorized access. The larger the attack surface the harder it is to make the system secure.

In a free society the attack surface is enormous and we, consciously or unconsciously, have decided the benefits of an open free society out weigh the susceptibility to attack and/or the cost to defend the attack surfaces. For example the grocery store keeps all the fresh fruits and vegetables accessible for the customers to directly examine. This allows anyone to tamper with them for their own evil purposes. We don't have armed guards and security systems for the entire length of our water supply. We don't have the means to realistically protect our air supply from nuclear, biological, or chemical (NBC) attacks.

When an attack surface is so large that it is essentially indefensible the smart security experts will put their limited security resources into mitigate the risk. In the case of our water supply we have multiple systems and medical facilities which reduce the number of people affected from a single point attack and provide care for those that are affected.

These principles are well known and adhered to by security professionals. I must therefore conclude that TSA (A Security Theater) isn't concerned with real security. More evidence of this just came in:

The government has not been able to keep track of all the airport security uniforms and badges it issues, which makes secure areas in airports vulnerable to terrorists posing as authorized officials, according to an internal review released Friday.

The Homeland Security Department's inspector general looked at five airports across the country from October 2006 through June 2007. The IG found major deficiencies in the Transportation Security Administration's ability to keep track of uniforms, particularly after an employee leaves the job.

As some of us discussed at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous having a uniform and/or just being able to speak the language will get you access to places and things that should have been way out of bounds.

Another attack surface in airplane security is the process for screening materials that are allowed past the security check point:

If some copycat terrorists try to bring their liquid bomb through airport security and the screeners catch them -- like they caught me with my bottle of pasta sauce -- the terrorists can simply try again. They can try again and again. They can keep trying until they succeed. Because there are no consequences to trying and failing, the screeners have to be 100 percent effective. Even if they slip up one in a hundred times, the plot can succeed.

The same is true for knitting needles, pocketknives, scissors, corkscrews, cigarette lighters and whatever else the airport screeners are confiscating this week. If there's no consequence to getting caught with it, then confiscating it only hurts innocent people. At best, it mildly annoys the terrorists.

To fix this, airport security has to make a choice. If something is dangerous, treat it as dangerous and treat anyone who tries to bring it on as potentially dangerous. If it's not dangerous, then stop trying to keep it off airplanes. Trying to have it both ways just distracts the screeners from actually making us safer.

The attack surface the TSA is trying to protect is just too large. We should spend that money on alternatives. What we are doing now is just entertainment for those that enjoy security theater.

Barack Obama says that health care is a right. Which apparently, in his world view, means government should make it possible for everyone to obtain health insurance via tax credits and forcing employers to provide it. He also says he believes gun ownership is a right. Therefore one should reasonably be able to conclude he also believes similar measures would be appropriate to pay for guns and ammo for everyone, right?

Odd, he doesn't say anything about that in his policy statement.

Here's something you won't find from the anti-gun bigots. Recent Gun Rights Policy Conferences were recorded and the recordings are available to anyone. Get the recordings of previous conferences all the way back to 2003.

When the bigots hold conferences do they make their proceedings public?

Well, Professor, with your academic background and obvious intellectual gifts, perhaps you'd care to explain the tactical advantages of a "shoot-second" approach to self-defense, because I'm clearly not bright enough to see them.

45Superman
October 17, 2008
The case for 'erosion'

Barack Obama is now running ads telling us that he supports gun rights:

He bases this claim in the fact that he voted for SA4615 the bill which has the purpose:

To prohibit the confiscation of a firearm during an emergency or major disaster if the possession of such firearm is not prohibited under Federal or State law.

Good. But not good enough. This ignores all his other votes and support for the complete handgun ban in Washington D.C., and support for a ban on "assault weapons". Hunting, which is what Obama and Biden focus on, has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. Unless you include hunting government employees in the definition of hunting. Hunting is not a protected right except under some state constitutions. Yet that is what Obama and company seem to think is the entire basis of the Second Amendment.

Check out the rest of the story before you believe this weasel.

I do the same as Ry.

Some explanation is probably required...

Employee donations to 501(c)(3) corporations are matched by Microsoft. Microsoft made up a special pop can to put in our refrigerators that said, "double your impact". Referring, of course, to the matching gifts.

But then Ry and I donate money to American Snipers. That should result in an additional impact multiplier, right?

I hope they are right but I just don't know. I don't have a very high opinion of the ability of people to think for themselves. But could it be The Left's Big Blunder?

Via Ry.

I saw this while looking over daughter Kim's shoulder when she was studying for her class Riddles and Paradoxes: How the Culture of Markets Shapes our World: Past, Present, and Future.

The Functions of Government

1. To promote competition and provide a system of laws, courts, and method of enforcing contracts (infrastructure for free markets).
2. To play an allocative function of producing goods and services.
3. To redistribute income and assist the poor.
4. To provide stabilization of the economy to keep inflation and unemployment low

Which of these four items are found in the U.S. Constitution? I agree with number 1 but the others are out of bounds. Some other governments do claim these to be within their legitimate areas of power. We call them socialists, communists, tyrannical, genocidal, and losers. Perhaps the Power Point slide deck I found this in or the instructor in class makes the point that this isn't within the legitimate domain of our government but a quick scan through the slides certainly doesn't make it obvious.

It appears one can assume we have a discrepancy in philosophical viewpoints. Kevin illustrates it with cartoons better than I can with words.

Ths happened in the state of South Idaho, not North Idaho where I am:

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho — An eastern Idaho woman whose boyfriend impregnated her 9-year-old daughter has been sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Isabel Chasarez, 27, must serve at least one year in prison before she is eligible for parole, 7th District Judge Brent Moss ordered Tuesday at the sentencing hearing.

Chasarez pleaded guilty in August to failing to provide proper prenatal care for her daughter.

Her 38-year-old boyfriend, Guadalupe Gutierrez-Juarez, pleaded guilty to rape in September. He is scheduled to be sentenced Oct. 28 and faces life in prison.

The girl became pregnant at age 9, sometime between Aug. 1 and Sept. 30 2007, authorities say, and gave birth in April.

It looks as if the authorities are handling the case appropriately but I'm still shocked that the egg donor was unable or unwilling to protect her offspring.

I've reported on this before here and here. The couple has been sentenced now. It could have been up to six years in jail but they were given just three months, a $350 fine, and are to be deported from the country. I agree with:

Analysts here say their punishment is meant to strike a balance — by showing that expats must respect local laws, while maintaining the Emirate's image of being welcoming to Westerners.

I don't agree with the law but I think the judge did the right thing.

Last Saturday most of the gun bloggers at the Rendezvous went to the range. Other reports and pictures from range day are here:

• gbr-iii-saturday-101108-range-day
• Gunbloggers Rendezvous III
• GBR-III Fabrique Nationale
• GBR-III Range Day or Bust
• Gun Pr0n: Boom!
• GBR-III Update: The Packing Rat goes Full Auto
• GBR-III Update: Range Day, with Gun Pr0n
• We're Either Dedicated or Crazy
• David’s Trigger Time
• GBR Day 3
• it goes boom
• Finally

Yes. As nearly everyone else noted, it was on the cold side of comfortable. The temperature was about 35 F and when we arrived the winds varied from 10 to 20 MPH.

Derek deals with the cold and wind.

These were not the best of conditions for long range shooting but this range is for long range shooting and I wanted to do some long range shooting. I had not shot my .300 Win Mag since the year before at this same range. This range has targets out to nearly 1000 yards and this, more than anything else, is why I wanted to go to the Rendezvous.

Traction Control brought his Barrett .50 BMG and was setting up at the very end bench. This minimized the impact of the vicious muzzle blast on other shooters. I set up on the empty bench next to him but stood behind the line when someone was shooting the .50 to avoid the vicious muzzle blast. This extended the time for my set up as I measured the wind speed, wind direction, air pressure, the inclination to the various targets, and used my laser range finder to get the exact range to each of the targets. I was still making measurements and taking notes as everyone else went through two cycles of shooting and shutting down the range to change targets. I then used my HP-41CV calculator running a special version of Modern Ballistics to compute the necessary sight angle between the scope and the gun for the elevation. I didn't bother with measuring the incline for the targets at 523 yards and under because they were all less than 8 degrees and the resultant shift in scope settings would be less than 0.1 MOA from assuming no inclination. By the time I was finally ready to shoot there was very little wind from side to side so I didn't bother to run the numbers through the calculator.

Here are my notes:

October 11, 2008

Apparent Elevation (based on air pressure): 3500'
Wind: 10 to 20 MPH 45 degrees

Target	Range (yards)	Incline (degrees)	Sight Angle (MOA)
Paper	197	0	4.87
Plate 1	342	-	7.83
Plate 2	412	-	9.51
Plate 3	523	-	12.38
Plate 4	637	8	16.63
Plate 5	957	11	27.19

Having done all this I finally took my first shots at the paper target:

Five shot group at 197 yards at the upper A-zone of a USPA target.

I should have put a orange target dot on the center of the 'A' to have a better aiming point. It was difficult to get the cross hairs centered on the outline as I couldn't see the 'A' itself. As it was I just concentrated on the horizontal because I was uncertain as to my windage zero but not my elevation zero. I expect most of the vertical was my fault and not the gun and/or ammo. Still, it was a less than 3/4 MOA group and I was satisfied with it.

I adjusted my windage zero and took some shots at the closer plates. I connected every time and was rewarded by seeing the plate swing and hearing a loud "thwack-clang" sound. I then asked Phil to spot for me as I adjusted for the 957 yard plate. The plate was difficult for a lot of people to find. Here is the context as seen through a 300 mm (think of it as 6X telescope) camera lens:

Plate and drum are in the upper left quadrant.

Close up of the 957 yard plate and 55 gallon drum.

A 55 gallon steel drum is about 22" x 34" and based on that the plate appears to be about 30" x 16". My mil-dot reticle estimates agree with this. The wind was very low but even a 3 MPH wind would result in a miss if I aimed dead on at this range. I waited until the wind appeared to be zero and pulled the trigger. Phil reported it hit just a bit to the right of center and dead on for elevation.

A first round hit at nearly 1000 yards. The geek wins!

The rest of the day was anti-climatic for me. I shot at the 957 yard plate a few more times but I ignored the wind and got hits only about half the time. I shot 10 rounds out of Traction Control's .50 (I brought my own ammo) and got 7 out of 10 hits on the drum. The .50 has a much better BC (1.05 on the 750 grain A-MAX versus 0.533 on the 190 grain Sierra Match Kings I was shooting) which helped on windage but I suspect that gun didn't have the inherent accuracy because the target was bigger and I got essentially the same hit ratio.

I emptied a magazine (four rounds) into each of the closer plates and knocked down the 523 yard target with my last shot. As it appeared everyone remaining from the Rendezvous was waiting on me I packed up and left. I was done as soon as I got the first round hit on the 957 yard plate. That was all I was really interested in anyway.

By the end of the day the apparent elevation had changed to 3700 feet but I ignored this as it made only about 0.1 MOA difference at 957 yards. Had it warmed up 10 degrees to 45 F that would have made a difference of 0.28 MOA in the same direction and I would have taken two clicks off of the scope setting for the most distant target to account for both.

Update: The picture below is from last year and the target is out of focus but it does give a sense of the size of the target as seen in a 14X scope. The drum is 2.5 Mils to the right of the plate which is almost centered in the crosshairs.

2007 view of the 957 yard target at the Reno Range.

Jeff Knox and friends have created a website/forum for helping gun rights activists. Here is what he has to say about it:

GunVoter.org is a grand experiment and, we hope, will become a valuable tool in the activists toolbox.

This is your site and it will only work if you participate. Just snooping around now and then doesn't help other activists any at all. We need you to share your thoughts and knowledge as well as learning from the posts of others.

In this area we ask that you introduce yourself, let users know where you live, what you do, what your interests are, and what's important to you. Tell us what clubs you are a member of and what organizations you support.

I also want to encourage every user to go to the forum zone for your state, tell us what you think of your Senators and your Representative or, if you don't know where your politicians stand on gun rights, ask a question so you and others can find out.

Something else that would be very helpful for all of us is if you would add to and correct the thread under your state listing pro-gun organizations and their contact information. We got that information courtesy of our friends at GunLawNews.com and know that it is incomplete and that some of it might be out of date. We need you to help us get it accurate. Then we need your help contacting those groups to invite them to participate here on GunVoter.org!

You don't need to be an expert or a professional to post on this site, just interested and concerned.

Please don't leave the site without contributing to the community in some way, whether just an introduction post, a question about legislation or a politician, or information about some candidate you support. Every post has value. Please participate in the project.

Thanks for being here and thanks for being a GunVoter.

Jeff Knox

From Nevada Appeal (ignore the error about Biden being the presidential nominee instead of the vice presidential nominee):

Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware said Friday that Nevadans shouldn’t listen to claims he and Barack Obama would take away the right to bear arms.

“I get a kick out of, sometimes, the NRA saying we’re going to take your shotguns away,” he said in a telephone interview with the Nevada Appeal.

...

“Both of us believe strongly in the Second Amendment,” Biden said. “We do not believe in registration. We do believe in limits on some of the weapons. You can’t have your own flame-thrower or bazooka. And legislation in relation to assault weapons doesn’t affect hunters or sportsmen.

“We are two Democrats who voted against gun control,” he said.

But, Biden said, there is room for common-sense laws relating to such things as carrying concealed weapons.

That's right. You shouldn't listen to what people are saying about his record. Listen only to what he wants you to hear. "Assault weapons"? Concealed carry? You're just a hunter. You don't need to concern yourself with those things. We'll send those people off to the prison camps first and you don't need to worry about them because your gun is a good gun. Those other guys have bad guns.

It's not a stretch to think that terrorist groups have been coming to the United States, buying them, shipping them back to Afghanistan or Iraq and killing US soldiers.

John Rosenthal
October 18, 2008
Founder of Stop Handgun Violence
Logan twice missed passenger's weapons--R.I. man got pistols, shotguns past security
[As if terrorist groups can't get guns in Iran, Syria, or any other Mideastern country much easier. Rosenthal will say whatever he thinks he can get away with which will have the effect of reducing the ability of people in this country to exercise their specific, enumerated, right to keep and bear arms. Quoting Rosenthal after someone breaks a gun law is like quoting the KKK after a non-white breaks the law.--Joe]

The NRA website has the details. The basics are:

This week, in a testament to his anti-gun record, Barack Obama also received a presidential endorsement from the Brady Campaign.

So, once again, the Brady Campaign and NRA are in total agreement—Barack Obama is, by far, the most anti-gun presidential nominee in history and he certainly deserves the endorsement of one of the most outspoken anti-gun organizations in the country.

NRA-ILA has repeatedly documented Obama’s anti-gun stance; but if any doubt remains about Obama’s true position on the Second Amendment, his endorsement from the Brady Campaign should dispel it.

Voting for Obama will be asking for a return the era of Bill Clinton only worse. Bill Clinton and his policies were significant motivators for me to buy my first gun. It was Diane Feinstein that motivated me to manufacture my own explosives. You don't want to know what Obama will motivate me to do.

Chris says it's for Boomershoot. But the maximum range of targets at Boomershoot is only 700 yards. Therefore I think it might be for more than just Boomershoot. I'm thinking my evil plan might be working. Hmmm... so that would mean it is about Boomershoot, even if it isn't for Boomershoot.

Daughter Xenia called me a few minutes ago. She was crying and could barely talk. She was crossing the street as she walked to class and a car turned a corner, didn't see her, and missed her by a couple feet.

Other than the psychological aspects she is fine but it sure makes you think. What a difference a few seconds can make...

Update: Xenia has more details.

Sometimes it is amazing what one, essentially, insignificant, unknown person can do. "Joe the Plumber" is in the news right now and may be "a bone in the throat" of Obama. I even got a text message from my old boss asking, "Are you watching the debate?" I replied, "No. Should I be?". He responded that "Joe" was what the debate was about. Since I don't have a TV it wasn't until the next morning that I figured what was going on.

On a much smaller scale my barely read blog occasionally gets attention from people of power. That's pretty cool. But what really amused me was what happened yesterday.

I noticed I had a hit from Handgun Control Inc. who was doing a search for "Joe Huffman". Apparently I am known, by name, to the biggest, baddest, anti-gun bigots in the country:

Domain Name		sct.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address		65.242.56.# (HANDGUN CONTROL)
ISP		Verizon Business
Location		Continent  :  North America Country  :  United States  (Facts) State  :  District of Columbia City  :  Washington Lat/Long  :  38.9042, -77.032 (Map) Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft Win2000
Browser		Firefox Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 Firefox/2.0.0.17
Javascript		version 1.5
Monitor		Resolution  :  1024 x 768 Color Depth  :  16 bits
Time of Visit		Oct 16 2008 12:45:39 pm
Last Page View		Oct 16 2008 12:55:48 pm
Visit Length		10 minutes 9 seconds
Page Views		6
Referring URL		http://www.google.co...2US261&q=Joe Huffman
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		joe huffman
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffman.org/
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffman.org/
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Oct 16 2008 3:45:39 pm
Visit Number		370,096

Further investigation revealed that on March 21st of this year they did a search for ""@stopthenra.com" -www" and found me. On May 14th they did a search for '"north central idaho" gun' and found me again. They have done several searches for "Dennis Hennigan" (Brady Campaign attorney) and found my blog.

And yesterday after specifically doing a search for my name they added my blog to their RSS reader. I feel so honored. Hello Sarah, Jim, Dennis, and Paul! I have Just One Question for you. Think about that for a while...

Yesterday was apparently good day to be noticed because New York City got my opinion on the issue of microstamping (Google ranks my blog post #1 with a search phrase of "microstamping research"):

Domain Name		nyc.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address		161.185.151.# (City of New York)
ISP		City of New York
Location		Continent  :  North America Country  :  United States  (Facts) State  :  New York City  :  Brooklyn Lat/Long  :  40.6525, -73.9554 (Map) Distance  :  2,162 miles
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution  :  1024 x 768 Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit		Oct 16 2008 1:55:43 pm
Last Page View		Oct 16 2008 1:55:43 pm
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL		http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.joehuffman.org/content/binary/MicrostampingSEM.jpg&imgrefurl=http://blog.joehuffman.org/2008/02/18/MicrostampingResearch.aspx&h=515&w=516&sz=38&tbnid=9x03aBEr7zUJ::&tbnh=131&tbnw=131&hl=en&prev=/images%3Fq%3
Visit Entry Page		http://blog.joehuffman.org/2008/02/18/MicrostampingResearch.aspx
Visit Exit Page		http://blog.joehuffm...tampingResearch.aspx
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Oct 16 2008 4:55:43 pm
Visit Number		370,120

Sometimes I feel rather impotent (in a way Viagra can't help) in regards to what is happening to freedom and gun rights in this country and the world. Even Boomershoot, which I consider my greatest accomplishment, seems like too little but when I think of my impact in terms of what it was 10 years ago or compared to the impact of the non-professional gun bigots like Robyn Ringler I'm doing fairly well. I'm not a Wayne LaPierre, Alan Gottlieb, Alan Gura, Joe Waldron, Dave Kopel, David Hardy, or an Ashley N. Varner. But other gun bloggers and I are doing okay for not being on the payroll (the wheelbarrows full of cash aren't part of the official payroll) at the Apex of the Triangle of Death. I don't know if it is enough but we are having an noticeable impact.

Update: I was also quoted in a newspaper last week which may have been the reason the Brady Bunch became interested in me.

Yeah, my blog was down for most of yesterday. All my websites that use ASP.NET were down. It was a problem with my web provider. I need to finish migrating to another provider but I haven't. Maybe over Thanksgiving or something...

A billion here, and a billion there, and pretty soon it adds up to real money.

Senator Everett Dirksen
[I should have posted this two weeks ago.--Joe]

There is no doubt that an abused woman is at much greater risk if her abuser has a gun. However, research shows no heightened risk to an abuse victim who lives apart from the abuser and who has her own gun. An abuser’s being armed creates a 7.59 odds ratio for increased risk of femicide. Living alone and having a gun yields an odds ratio of 0.22, far below the 2.0 level necessary for statistical significance. Jacquelyn Campbell et al., Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships, 93 AM.J.PUB. HEALTH 1089, 1090-92 (2003). Petitioners and their amici relentlessly cite variants of the first figure, but ignore the second figure.

David B. Kopel
Brief of The International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA), The International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors (IALEFI), Maryland State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, Southern States Police Benevolent Association, 29 Elected California District Attorneys, San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association, Long Beach Police Officers Association, Texas Police Chiefs Association, Texas Municipal Police Association, New York State Association of Auxiliary Police,Mendocino County, Calif., Sheriff Thomas D. Allman, Oregon State Rep. Andy Olson, National Police Defense Foundation, Law Enforcement Alliance of America, and The Independence Institute as amici curiae in support of respondent.
D.C. v. Heller
[Typical. Crow about the dangers but none of the benefits of firearms.--Joe]

So what did you expect when the security theater people didn't improve security? Did you believe they would give up and spend the money on something effective? Of course not. Instead they make you the entertainment--Genitals, breasts not obscured in airport security trial.

The back story is here, here, here, here, here, and here.

An email from Joe Waldron to the WA-Guns email list:

The Attorney General has issued Opinion Number 2008 -- 8 that defines
state preemption as it applies to Mayor Nickels attempt to ban guns on
Seattle city property.

In a nutshell, the AG says "preemption means preemption."

The AGO reads in part:

The question: "Does a city in Washington have the authority to enact a
local law that prohibits the possession of firearms on city property or
in city-owned buildings?"

The answer: "The answer to your question is no. RCW 9.41.290 "fully
occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation" and
preempts a city's authority to adopt firearms laws or regulations of
application to the general public, unless specifically authorized by
state law. Accordingly, RCW 9.41.290 preempts a city's authority to
enact local laws that prohibit possession of firearms on city property
or in city-owned facilities."

He then uses a dozen pages of legalese to explain why the Cherry and
PNWSPA cases (state Supreme Court decisions that went against us) do not
apply here.

AG Opinions are published on the AG's web site at
http://www.atg.wa.gov/uploadedFiles/Another/About_the_Office/AGO_Opinions/AGO_Opinion_Archives/Indices%20Yearly%20Report%202007.pdf

AGO 2008-8 is not posted yet, but should be shortly.

In all, to these non-lawyerly eyes, a well written stick to poke in
Mayor Nickels' eye.

Another win for the good guys.

We need to thank Senator Morton (R-7), Representative Van De Wege (D-24)
and those other legislators who made the formal request to the AG for
this opinion.

And now for the down side: We can expect a frontal assault on
preemption in Olympia when the legislature goes back into session in
January. They've tried it before, and didn't have quite the number of
votes they needed to pass. With ACORN & Co working overtime to register
fraudulent voters for the presidential election, we can anticipate
Democrat gains in the 2009-2010 legislature. That MAY be enough to push
them over the top.

Joe W

I'd like to remind you that I'm a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation's outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him.

Richard Pearson
October 15, 2008
Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson Issues Open Letter to Nation's Sportsmen Regarding Obama's History in the Illinois Senate
[H/T to Sebastian. See also GunBaNObama.com. And that totally ignores his anti-First Amendment activities and his apparently complete disregard for the U.S. Constitution as a whole. See also The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate. That book will really open your eyes. He won at least two of his state legislative offices by kicking his opponents out of the race--Chicago politics at their finest. You can be sure he will bring change you can believe in to Washington D.C.. There is also his close relationship with Reverend "Snuffy" Pfleger (not to be confused with Reverend Wright) and so many other unsavory things that people that should know greatly fear his rise to power.--Joe]

... on the Glen Beck radio show.  If you know Glen Beck at all, you know he's a capitalist.  He gets it.  In discussing the "Bail out" scam, he asked McCain why he voted for it the second time, after having opposed it earlier and after decrying earmarks and pork.  Now, I'd say it was a dumb question, because there is no possible decent answer other than, "I'm a sucker and I have no principles.  What can I say?"  Taking probably his best way out, McCain answered, and I paraphrase;

"Everyone was telling me it was the right thing to do."

Now that's leadership, baby!  Wow, what balls!  Everyone told him to do it.  And just who is this Everyone person?  I'd like to meet him.  We've known McCain for a long time, so this is nothing unexpected.  Apparently this Everyone person is a lot smarter and a more forceful decision-maker, 'cause he turned McCain around on a dime.

We are so screwed.

And for those who think it untimely of me to bring this up right before the election; I see it as a matter of how quickly we're gonna get screwed, so it's hard to keep a dog in this fight.  Frog-in-the-pot model and all.  It's McCain's to lose.  Hopefully this Everyone person, whom he trusts more than himself, will give him some better advice in the coming weeks. 

Say Uncle says Frightening, Third Power says Baghdad Chicago, Mike Vanderboegh says be careful what you wish for, Dave Codrea says:

Mary Mitchell's America is a police state.

I notice she acknowledged force was used. I note she says "Forget it" for any rights-based disagreement, removing any will but hers from the decision.

How many men who disagree is Mary willing to see destroyed to enact her totalitarian agenda? Anybody not think creatures just like her enabled killing fields?

This wretched harridan is nothing less than a domestic enemy. The Chicago Sun-Times, which gives her a platform, is an instrument of subversion.

Anyone who thinks such as these will ever allow us to peacefully coexist is a fool.

All over what Mary Mitchell says:

Secret Service, sheriff's deputies, Chicago Police officers and plainclothes officers are scattered throughout the area.

Frankly, I felt like I had just entered the safest zone in America.

For the first time -- in a long time --while on the South Side, I didn't worry about leaving my car parked on the street or about walking back to it several hours later in the dark.

Obviously, law enforcement is doing what needs to be done to ensure a presidential candidate's safety.

But it does make me think.

Obama's neighbors have been forced to give up certain of their personal freedoms in order to ensure his safety.

Unsuspecting pedestrians are questioned when they go around the barricades. Similar to a gated community, guests who visit Obama's neighbors have to identify themselves.

Although I'm a journalist, the presumption on the part of the Secret Service is the same as it is for the Fruit of Islam who guard the Nation of Islam headquarters a few blocks away.

An agent rifled through my purse and searched my backpack.

More than a few dog-walkers strolled past without so much as a backward glance at my outspread arms as the agent checked me with a hand-held metal detector.

Aldermen and activists who are struggling to stop the bloodbath on the South Side may have to resort to the same aggressive policing that is being used to protect Obama.

Hundreds of people have been killed in the city this year because of street violence.

It is a crisis.

And a crisis requires drastic intervention, not rhetoric.

There's no telling how many guns would be taken off the street in gang- and drug-plagued neighborhoods if police were to set up roadblocks and search everyone going into those areas.

For those of you who argue that what I am proposing violates basic civil rights, forget it.

When you go to an airport or into most schools, you have to walk through a metal detector.

This is Chicago, not Alaska.

Wow! Just wow!

Any other words I am inclined to say could be used against me...

If a domestic violence report is filed, the police should forcefully search for any and all weapons owned by the alleged abuser. The police should have broad discretion and lean on the side of protecting women and not worrying about a batterer's "gun rights". If a woman's charges of domestic violence are unwarranted, then a gun owner can get their rights restored later -- that's why we have a court system and procedures.

Mike of Gun Guys
April 4, 2008
With So Many Men Owning Guns, Domestic Violence Is Difficult to Prevent for Justice System
[And the reason we don't violate a person's rights on the basis of a single accusation is because we have a court system and procedures. If someone is not fit to own a gun then prove it in court where the gun owner has a chance to defend themselves. If these guys applied the same logic to the First Amendment they would change their tune. On the first accusation of them using their website to lie about the NRA or gun owners their website would be taken down, all their computers confiscated, and they would be forbidden to talk to the media. They could try to prove the charge of libel was unwarranted later in court. If they were lucky their First Amendment rights would be restored sometime within the next year after spended tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

See also my other comments about this same post here.--Joe]

This particular rights violation session wasn't as bad as some. As Barb said, "They were pretty good about guns here. Much better than Denver." I can't find where I wrote up my Denver experience but here is someone else's experience. I have to agree but it's still aggravating to be searched by government agents without a warrant or probable cause.

As I was researching this post I reviewed the TSA website again. I may have gotten lucky when TSA let me get through with three of my STI magazines in carry-on baggage. They saw them in the x-ray and pulled the bag off for further inspection while a police officer watched. They examined each of the magazines for ammunition, asked if I was law enforcement, and told me to have a nice trip.

The TSA says this about firearms parts:

You may only transport firearms, ammunition and firearm parts in your checked baggage. Firearms, ammunition and firearm parts are prohibited from carry-on baggage.

I guess it depends on what you define a firearm part to be.

Obama is trying to trample on the first amendment. And then Obama saying, "Don't tell me words don't matter" in combination with saying people with "traditional values" cling to their guns and religion.

Barb and I are sitting in the Reno airport waiting for our plane. I'm pretty sure I'm the last of the gun bloggers to leave town. Barb and I had dinner last night at the Black Bear Diner with The Conservative UAW Guy, his wife, Mr. Completely, and Keewee. Back at Circus Circus I chatted with them and Ride Fast, the last hanger ons, about airport security theater until about 21:00 when most of us said our good-byes. Mr. Completely, Keewee, Barb and I had breakfast together this morning and the Gun Blogger Rendezvous was over.

I have a few pictures and will post more later, particularly about our day at the range, but for now here is an odd gun I saw at the museum today with Barb. This gun was part of an exhibit on bootleggers:

Sawed off pistol. (Click for bigger.)

[Please excuse the poor photo quality. I used my cell-phone camera.]

I noticed one of their exhibits was mislabeled and they seemed very grateful when I corrected them. A device used to clean wheat had original markings saying it separated wheat from wild oats. But was labeled as tool for separating wild oats from chaff. <shrug> Just me being nit-picky as usual.

The real cure for our environmental problems is to understand that our job is to salvage Mother Nature. We are facing a formidable enemy in this field. It is the hunters... and to convince them to leave their guns on the wall is going to be very difficult.

Jacques Yves Cousteau
[This is widely attributed to Cousteau but I have not been able to find the context. Regardless this is a very mild version of what a great number of people believe. What they don't understand is that hunters and other shooters raise more money and do more for wildlife preservation than, probably, any other group. Bigotry is an ugly thing.--Joe]

Say Uncle says he knows the guy quoted in the newspaper article. The article is about the NRA ad being correct when it says Obama voted for a bill that would have outlawed most common hunting ammo. Obama and others on the left say the NRA ad is a lie. The reporter quotes a gun blogger as a reference to support the NRA's claim. I know that guy too.

That blogger would be me and this blog post.

Sebastian also noticed.

What I noticed was that the headline to the article wasn't something to the effect that "NRA is right--Obama tried to ban hunting ammo" but instead, "NRA ad draws fire for dubious claims".

What media bias?

Lack of sleep (up very late talking to other bloggers) combined with Barb wanting to use my computer meant I haven't really posted anything about the rendezvous. Sorry, it's not going to get much better for a few days.

Check out what others have been saying:

• GBR-III Update: Nice Hat! (this is the picture I should have taken of Ashley. I only got a couple before she left and both were crap compared to this one)
• GBR-III Update: Range Day, with Gun Pr0n (picture of me preparing to shoot--a story I promise I will tell before long)
• We're Either Dedicated or Crazy
• GBR-III Saturday 101108 - Range Day
• GBR Day 3 (lots of pictures--See previous posts as well)

There is no kind of dishonesty into which otherwise good people more easily and more frequently fall into than that of defrauding the government.

Ben Franklin
[Socialized medicine anyone?--Joe]

What the District’s current firearms laws do is manifest "gross indifference" to the self-defense needs of women. Effectively banning the possession of handguns ignores biological differences between men and women, and in fact allows gender-inspired violence free rein. Those biological differences should, under these limited circumstances, be influential to the Court’s decision.

M. Carol Bambery
Brief of amicae curiae 126 women state legislators and academics in support of respondent in D.C. v. Heller.
[A lot of people in the gun rights community worry about the aging of the gun owning population and the need to get young people into the culture. Just as important and, in a logical sense, an easier sell is to get women into the culture. Defense of self and defense of your family is a very powerful argument.--Joe]

Barb and I arrived in Reno a little to late to get on the visit to Cabelas and the NRA presentation from Ashley Varner. I did participated in the show and tell and Barb came in for the tail end of that just before went to dinner.

I'm am now sitting in the corner listening to discussions of how bad Obama is and how the race is closer than the national polls indicate. I certainly hope so.

Oh, and David gave me a Serenity poster. Cool!

I am a new NRA member. I have been a citizen for only fourteen years. I believe in the Constitution and the Second Amendment, and when I see Obama, I see Communism, and I am afraid. I believe he is going to win the election. Do you have any plans in place if this happens?

Ly Chho
October 9, 2008
A question for NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.
Via Kevin Baker.
[Kevin reports Mrs. Ly Chho, was born of Chinese parents in Cambodia, raised and schooled in Taiwan, and hence "she should know".--Joe]

One might reasonably speculate that the NRA is going to engage in a full court press against Barack Abomination Obama starting today and continuing until election day.

Here are some hints of what we will see today:

• NRA ad uses Clinton's words against Obama on guns
• Hillary Was Right: You Can't Trust Obama With Your Guns
• NRA to Make Major Election Announcement Thursday, October 9, 2008

The news should be out of the bag by now. It's 8:00 in PA but I haven't seen what is being said yet and I really need to get back to bed and get some sleep.

Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.

Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach
[Ebner-Eschenbach is apparently the originator of the "stopped clock is right twice a day" quote:

Even a stopped clock is right twice every day. After some years, it can boast of a long series of successes.

Which wouldn't be a bad QOTD during this political season as well. But back to fear and dodging...

Obama dodges. What does he mean when he says the following?

"I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country." (gun ownership and restrictions on guns)
Politico, 2/11/08

"I think that local jurisdictions have the capability to institute their own gun laws."
BaltimoreSun.com, 2/15/08

He could settle all this by promising, as President of the United States, to veto any gun control restriction bill that reaches his desk. But he doesn't.

Gun owners have something to fear in Obama as a person in power.--Joe]

Barb and I are currently in the SeaTac airport eating a late lunch. Soon we will be on the plane to Reno, then from there we will rent a car and drive to Tonopah. We will spend a few days looking around at historical and genealogical things. Her father lived and worked there in the '30s.

Friday we will return to Reno for the Gun Blogger Rendevzous.

If you are interested follow the boring details on my Twitter account. Please ignore the typos. My Pocket PC has problems with rapidly typed letters hence "looking" comes out as "loking" and I often make an update while walking or doing something else and don't check for errors as well as I should.

Health care is a right the same as guns are a right. You have the right to provide it, or to purchase it as you are able, and government should have no role in the matter except as protector of your rights.

I know that wasn't the framework of the question however. Honestly put, the question would have been, "Do you believe free healthcare, paid by someone else under threats from the government, is your right?"

But liberty isn't even on the table for discussion in this election. How can we be bothered with such abstractions as liberty when we're worried about the crisis-of-the-day, and who is going to take care of us and keep us all safe, happy and warm?

Lyle @ UltiMAK
October 8, 2008
In the comments.
[We have a long way to go. Sometimes it takes Lyle and others to put it in proper perspective.--Joe]

Kevin is leaving tomorrow evening. Barb and I are packing tonight. Our plane leaves at noon tomorrow but we will be in Tonopah until Friday which means we will miss out on the super secret event on Thursday evening.

The gun stuff I'm packing includes:

• Gun Blog 45 and 200 rounds of ammo
• STI Eagle 5.1 and 200 rounds of ammo
• Shot timer
• Spotting scope (I hope I can find it!) and tripod
• .300 Winchester Magnum and 100 rounds of ammo
• Laptop computer with Modern Ballistics (yeah, I'm a geek)
• Some cleaning supplies

Anything I'm missing that I can legally take on the plane (no, I won't be bringing my chemistry set) and would be nice to have on the range Saturday?

Update: I can't find my spotting scope so I'm not bringing the tripod. I am bringing my laser range finder and a pair of good binoculars.

From a random link I clicked on:

One moment struck me as particularly unfortunate for McCain: When Tom Brokaw asked whether health care was a privilege, a responsibility or a right. McCain said it was a responsibility, but left unclear whose responsibility it might be. Obama said he believed it should be a right...

Did Obama really say health care should be a right?

Wow! And I thought he was supposed to be a constitutional scholar. Anyone that passed their high school government class should give Obama a failing grade for even being on the city council or the local school board for getting that one item so wrong. As a U.S. Senator he should be tried for attempted treason.

This is a little bit into my gray area. I disagree with the judge but I can see his point even if he overstates it with the shirt in question:

"The impact of violence is so great that it now has equal importance as the issue of illegal drug use in schools," U.S. District Judge James Knoll Gardner wrote in an opinion handed down this week.

"There is nowhere that is truly safe or immune from the problem of school violence, from the one-room schoolhouse to America's largest universities," Gardner said.

"Students," he said, "have no constitutional right to promote violence in our public schools."

What this judge apparently doesn't understand that his own orders are carried out with the threat of violence. There is illegal violence and there is legal, even praiseworthy violence. I don't see that the shirt advocated anything illegal or immoral:
 

According the court order and the article the complete text on the back of the shirt says, "Special Issue-Resident-Lifetime License--United States Terrorist Hunting Permit--Permit No. 91101 Gun Owner-No Bag Limit". The front of the shirt has a gun on the pocket which has a gun and says, "Volunteer, Homeland Security".

And how does this "promote violence in the school system"? It is promoting the rapid stopping of illegal violence using legal violence. If the shirt advocated hunting Muslims, blacks, Jews, or some other ethic, racial, or religiously identified group I would agree with him. But not this. Terrorists are not, or at least shouldn't be, a protected group.

I must conclude this is another case of simplistic minds either refusing to or being unable to see the total picture.

Earlier today Say Uncle sent me an email asking if I could help out a reporter looking for "someone of authority" to address the body armor versus deer hunting ammo issue. I know a lot more about exterior ballistics (I wrote Modern Ballistics) than terminal ballistics but I'm not totally ignorant of it either. So I agreed to "look up a few references" for the guy.

My email, with very minor edits, to the reporter follows. His email response indicated he was happy with my answers.

Say Uncle asked that I address your “deer ammo going through body armor” story. I’ll address it as best I can but strictly speaking I’m not an expert. I’m a very well informed hobbyist.

Although there is occasional some controversy over the National Institute of Justice testing procedures and standards they are still “the standard”. You can read their standard here.

Their main page on Body Armor is here.

Probably the part that is most relevant to your issue is the body armor classification. This can be found in section 2 starting on page 17. The basics are that body armor is classified according to the level of protection it provides. Those classes are, in order of increasing protection level:

• Type IIA (9 mm; .40 S&W)
• Type II (9 mm; .357 Magnum)
• Type IIIA (.357 SIG; .44 Magnum)
• Type III (Rifles)
• Type IV (Armor Piercing Rifle)

Most law enforcement officers wear type II or IIIA. Higher levels of protection require metal or ceramic inserts which increase the weight, bulk, and the body heat retention. See also Section 6, Selecting the Appropriate Level of Protection in this document. At some point in the tradeoff between comfort and protection the police officer will stop wearing the armor on an everyday patrol. In a high risk entry/arrest situation they are more likely to upgrade to type III armor if it is available.

The problem certain well intentioned politicians get into is that they don’t realize the body armor problem is as much a velocity problem as it is a bullet construction problem. Certainly sharp pointed Teflon coated tungsten carbide (a very hard metal used for metal working tools) bullets will penetrate a higher level of armor than a blunt nosed soft lead bullet. But that only goes so far. Increasing the velocity of the bullet by a few hundred feet per second will overcome the inferior construction in most applications. Rifle bullets are much faster than common pistol bullets. The typical handgun bullet is on the order of 1000 fps. A typical modern center fire rifle bullet leaves the muzzle at a velocity on the order of 2500 fps or greater.

I’ve done some informal testing with the 30-06 rifle on an engine block. The Speer Reloading Manual says of this rifle cartridge, “It is safe to say that the 30-06 Springfield is the best-known and most successful centerfire cartridge ever developed.” In a typical hunting load (see http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=260) at 100 yards from the muzzle the bullet is still traveling at over 2600 fps. The tests I did were with a target cartridge and bullet (http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=148). At the muzzle this bullet is traveling at about 2700 fps and is still going at over 2500 fps at 100 yards. I was shooting into the side of a six cylinder car engine from the early fifties from about 50 yards away. This was a very heavy engine block compared to today’s cars yet the target bullet would penetrate half way through the block penetrating the water jacket, one side of a cylinder and frequently one side of a piston. A very high velocity (1350 fps at the muzzle) 9mm bullet shot at the same engine block only knocked the rust off of the metal. It did not dent or crack the side of the engine.

It is a very different problem to stop a rifle bullet than to stop a handgun bullet. Although it isn’t quite this simple you can think of it as an energy problem. The energy of the projectile is proportional to the mass of the bullet times the velocity of the bullet squared. That is E = m V². The mass of a common hunting bullet is on the order of 150 to 180 grains. The mass of a pistol bullet is on the order of 125 to 200 grains with the heaver bullets moving much slower than the lighter ones. The rifle bullets typically are moving about 2.5 times as fast as the pistol bullets. Hence they will typically have about 2.5² or about 6 times as much energy as the pistol bullet.

Even the ancient 30-30 Winchester cartridge has a muzzle velocity of nearly 2400 fps with a 150 grain bullet (http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=28) which will cut through the typical concealable body armor worn by law enforcement on a daily basis. Higher end rifles for larger game such as, the still very common, .300 Winchester Magnum with a 165 grain bullet (http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=592) have muzzle velocities of over 3000 fps. Run the numbers on that and see the sort of problem the body armor is facing.

Hence, the NRA claim that outlawing ammunition on the basis of its ability to penetrate typical body armor would result in the banning nearly all common rifle hunting is true. It is possible the politician did not have that intention but that would be the result.

That is probably more information than you really wanted but I hope it answers your questions. If not or if you have any further questions please let me know.

The NRA has a special deal going on with Midway and Aimpoint.

Pat Kelley (who won the USPSA match I was at on Sunday--I came in third and seventh out of 18) has a bunch of really neat gun and gun related pictures on his media website. Here are some samples:

Organized capitalism has sublimated and turned to socially productive use frustration and primary aggressiveness on an unprecedented scale -- unprecedented not in terms of the quantity of violence but rather in terms of its capacity to produce long-range contentment and satisfaction, to reproduce the "voluntary servitude." To be sure, frustration, unhappiness, and sickness remain the basis of this sublimation, but the productivity and the brute power of the system still keep the basis well under control. The achievements justify the system of domination. The established values become the people's own values: adaptation turns into spontaneity, autonomy; and the choice between social necessities appears as freedom. In this sense, the continuing exploitation is not only hidden behind the technological veil, but actually "transfigured." The capitalist production relations are responsible not only for the servitude and toil but also for the greater happiness and fun available to the majority of the population -- and they deliver more goods than before.

Herbert Marcuse
1971
An Essay on Liberation from the chapter "A Biological Foundation for Socialism?", page 13.
[It seems to me that those that advocate socialism have a very simplistic, idealized view of the world. And they have this view of "social justice" such that, Susan K. once told me, "They would rather everyone make $1.00/hour than most people make $100/hour if there are some people that make $1000/hour." Capitalism creates envy because of the disparity of wealth but it also produces the greatest good for the greatest number.--Joe]

Via the Apex of the Triangle of Death:

Fairfax, VA-Today the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) expanded its advertising campaign with the release of additional commercials further detailing Sen. Barack Obama’s long anti-gun record in battleground states across the country. The NRA-PVF commercials began airing Monday in Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Minnesota and Michigan.

These ads, which expose the truth about Obama's record opposing the rights of law-abiding gun owners, are currently running in Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Colorado. The media spots feature a variety of people from all walks of life, including war veterans, hunters, families and former law enforcement officers criticizing the many anti-gun and anti-hunter votes cast by Obama as a state and as a U.S. Senator. NRA-PVF is also running Spanish-language commercials in several states.

In an attempt to suppress free speech rights protected under the First Amendment, Obama's campaign has threatened television stations to stop airing the NRA-PVF ads under threat of revocation their FCC licenses. NRA-PVF has provided documented evidence to support the statements about Obama's record in the ads.

Commercials may be viewed at www.gunbanobama.com.

We felt that, for a variety of reasons, the collective rights model was under represented in the debate, and wanted to give scholars an opportunity to enhance or further illuminate the collective rights position. Sometimes a more balanced debate is best served by an unbalanced symposium. I did not, therefore, invite anyone who I knew subscribed to the individual rights model.

Carl Bogus
June 12, 2001
Email regarding a Chicago-Kent symposium on the Second Amendment which only invited, and allowed, anti-gun owner viewpoints to be presented. This was done under the "community leadership" of Barack No Guns Allowed Obama--see also Obama and the Attempt to Destroy the Second Amendment.
[And would Mr. Bogus would say a more balanced trial of a black man is best served by the judge, both lawyers, and all the people on the jury being members of the KKK?--Joe]

Ask me how I know.

I just had a cancelation of one of the positions for Boomershoot 2009.

Position 62, on the berm, is now open.

Sign up here soon if you want it.

Update: The position has been filled. It was open for two hours and 18 minutes.

You put on the most politically incorrect event on the planet.

Pat Kelley
October 5, 2008
Referring to Boomershoot.
[Pat was at the USPSA match I went to today. I think it has been 10 years since I have seen Pat. He remembered me and said a lot of flattering things. I was a little embarrassed because he is such a great shooter he is totally out of my league. But he wasn't talking about my shooting ability. See also these quotes from him in other posts:

• Quote of the day--Pat Kelley
• Shotgunning: 12 shots in 1.73 seconds

He also tried shooting my Saiga 12 gauge. He had never shot one before. He was not able to out-shoot it even though he believes it probably is possible. I wish I had thought to put a timer on him and see what sort of splits he got. I just saw a blur of fire expel from the ejection port and the 10 round magazines were empty.--Joe]

In the right column I have a list of the bloggers I have met. I just found out a friend from way back (nearly 25 years) just started a blog. I'm not sure the general population of readers here will find all that much to agree with her on politics but she does take pretty pictures and says she will be posting her pictures there.

I have referred to her in my posts here a few times as one of my lesbian friends and she is the one that wrote the email referenced here. I tend to avoid discussing politics with her. Chess, places we have worked together, and other geeky stuff can keep us happily chatting for a long time however. And then there was the time I took her and her friend to the nudist club...

Howard Nemerov gives us some info on possible motiviation for Obama's support for gun control:

In politics, it is often difficult to determine why a person supports a policy. Fortunately, numbers speak louder than words: In this case, follow the money to understand Obama’s support of registration.

One of Obama’s biggest donors is the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Meagher and Flom, LLP, which contributed $340,264 to his presidential campaign as of September 2, 2008.[12] Skadden, Arps represents the inventors of a “firearm safety system,” patent number 6499243, which adds a biometric activator that links a gun to one owner. The “Summary of the Invention” section of the patent application notes:

The safety system further makes use of a person’s fingerprint data, which is a unique personal property that is highly suitable for tracking and control.[13] [Emphasis added]

Sidley Austin LLP has contributed $350,302 to Obama.[14] Sidley Austin represents the inventors of the “Gun identification kit,” patent number 7380706. This invention provides a way for every gun to have a spent cartidge case made available for entry into a ballistic “fingerprint” database. Of course, such a database is useful only if all firearms are entered into it:

Because the vast majority of publicly owned firearms have not been used in the commission of a crime, they will not show up in [such a] database. It would therefore be desirable to provide a means for increasing the number of firearms for which…information and data is available.

The inventors’ solution to this? Pass a law mandating that every gun is registered (serial number matched with shell casing and owner data, all permanently recorded):

One means of populating [such a] database would be to mandate that ballistic information be obtained and entered into the database for all firearms.[15]

$350,000 for supporting gun licensing? Sounds like motive to me. Why else would Obama be so cagey on guns? We know it's not about making people safer because no one has been able to answer Just One Question.

So, when Obama says he "won't take your guns" keep in mind he didn't say he wouldn't register them. See Nemorov's post for more about the wisdom of that. Obama says Chicago is different from Chyenne. See my post on community policy for a response to that.

If all mankind were of one opinion, and one man held the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one man than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.

John Stuart Mill
On Liberty
[This is sometimes attributed to Thomas Jefferson. I believe this to be an error. Regardless it is apparent that Obama does not subscribe to this philosophy and McCain is not much better. They are both scumbags so this year I will probably be voting for Sarah.--Joe]

As promised:

Newsgroups: alt.sex
Subject: Porn Star Interview.
Organization: Prototronics @ Sandpoint, Idaho
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1991 23:39:02 GMT
Keywords: Cherri Hill Porn Movies Star

About 3 weeks ago I posted saying a former porn star was going to be visiting
with a friend at my place.  Well... due to various problems they didn't
show up.   I still wanted to ask her some questions and finally last night
I was able to make contact with her via phone.  She lives several hundred
miles from here but we spent about 45 minutes on the phone.  She seemed
intelligent and articulate.  I was sort of expecting someone a bit 'simple'.
Perhaps a the sterotype of a 'dumb blonde'.  This was not the case as near
as I could tell.

Without further elaboration -- my interview with "Cherri Hill":

Questions I had:

Me: How did you get into the business? 

Cherri:  I grew up in Coeur d'Alene Idaho and got married at 18 (I'm 21
now).  We moved in with another couple that was older and had this big
house.  The other women and I worked at a massage parlor at Stateline
(nearby town).  The older guy asked if I was interested in X-rated movies
and I said sure.  He sent pictures to Jim South's World of Modeling then
we went down there and I started working.  My husband stayed behind and I
told him that I was just modeling and not doing any sex stuff.  He later
came down and I told him about it and he decided he didn't like it and he
moved in with his father that he hadn't seen since he was about 5.  We're
still married 'cause I haven't got around to getting a divorce.

Me: Was it hard work?  How long did you have to work each day?

Cherri:  It was work.  We would usually meet at a parking lot about 7:00 in
the morning and caravan to somebody's house.  It was illegal in Orange county
because we were getting paid for sex.  So people who were having trouble meet
a mortage payment or something would rent out their house for three or four
hundred dollars for the day.  We would start filming the scenes and work all
day until 11:00 or 12:00 that night.  We would get our money and go home.

The movie 'formula' is 6 scenes with 3 men and 3 wowen.  The scenes are made
with switching people around so you get some girl-girl scenes, threesomes
and straight boy-girl scenes.

Me: Did it pay well?  Are the men paid comparable to the women?

Cherri:  For a beginer $400->$500 scene, $250->$300 for man.  Each day would
involve about 3 scenes.  Towards the last I was getting 2 or 3 jobs a month.
The agents fee is a straight $50.00.

Me: You only worked 2 or 3 days each month?  That gave you lots free time!

Cherri:  Yeah!  A lot of people are going to school or something like that.

Me: Did you get to know your co-stars ahead of time? 

Cherri: No -- not really.  You might know who was going to be there and you
got to know a lot of the people involved.  But nothing like you were
introduced a week ahead of the filming or anything like that.

Me: What about disease prevention?

Cherri:  You had to have AIDS test results that had come back in the last
24 to 48 hours.  If you didn't have the papers you didn't do any filming.

Me: How would someone go about getting started in the business?

Cherri: Call down to Van Nuys California (area code is  818) ask information
for Jim South's World of Modeling.  They are very cautious about police and
stuff.  You have to send in pictures. 

[Note:  I called information this morning.  There was no Jim South's World of
Modeling.  There was a "World Modeling Agency" with the phone number 
818-986-4316.  I have not called it and probably won't.]

Me: Is there a demand for men or just women?

Cherri: They need men as well as women.  A lot of men get in front of the
camera and just can't do it.  That's the end of their career in that field.

----
Several other people sent in questions.  Some were sort of duplicated.  One
person didn't want their name mentioned so I stripped out all identifying
information from all the questions.  I read the following questions to her
and give credit to "Net".
----

Net: Yes.  I would like to ask if they ever fake stuff in order to meet some
kind of a deadline.  If she's tired and just doesn't feel like having sex,
can they just rest for a while, or are they supposed to be ready to have sex
no matter what?

Cherri: You are told when your scenes will be a day or so ahead of time. 
Then it's pretty just go in and shoot them.  A scene takes about an hour to
an hour and 15 minutes.  Later when I got better at it it sometimes got down
to as little ast 22 minutes.  Only one time was there any fake stuff that
I saw.  It was doing some still shots for some magazine and this guy couldn't
get it off and I had this bottle of lotion that I held it behind his cock and
squeezed it so that it looked like he was cumming.

Net: Also, I'd like to know if they get to specify what kind of sex they will and
won't do.

Cherri:  Yes when you go into the agents office.  They have you fill out
this form -- will you have sex with blacks, hispanics, etc.  What kind of
sex will you do -- DP (double penetration), anal, girl-girl, etc.

Net: Also, do they get to pick with whom they will have sex?  If so, is
this on a movie-by-movie basis or do they just say that they will not have
sex with someone of the same sex at all.

Cherri: You can always say no for whatever reason (privately you know he's
been shooting up or they aren't clean or whatever).  As far as sex with
another women -- the first time I was put on set and asked to do a girl-girl
scene I was so scared!  I figured someone I knew would see it and that
bothered me.  But I did it and it got easier.  One women brought these
'tools' for me to use on her and I did -- it was kinda fun and it made it
a little easier.  And then afterwards she told me that she REALLY liked what
I did to her.  That helped a lot too.

Net: And lastly, can she share some of her personal opinions about the porn
world in general? 

Cherri: I liked the people involved they were REAL people -- down to earth.
I promised myself I wouldn't change from the person I was back in
Couer d'Alene.  But then I got involved with drugs and this guy from
Argentina.  I was more carefree then at 18 than at 21 now.  I only worked
in the business for 8 months.

Net: Where might we see her or what movies or whatever has she been in?

Cherri: 25 movies were made.  Which eventually were then cut up into 34 ->
40.  Some of the better ones were: "Thrill on Cherri Hill" (which I helped
write), "Eye of the Tigris",  "Port Holes".  They will say on the box
"Features Cherri Hill". 

Net: My exposure to this material (magazines and movies) is limited, but I
have always felt somewhat of a dillema. Given the media's representation of
the porn industry, I get the impression that most of the women involved are
doing it because of desperate financial situations (including expensive drug
habits), or they are run-aways with no place else to go and are more or less
forced into it.  Is this a correct representation of the industry, or is the
media/politicians trying to control the industry.  By renting/purchasing this
type of material am I contributing to or promoting abuse? This bothers me.

Cherri: Absolutely not!  You are asked for ID and birth certificate.  The
last thing they want is another Traci Lords thing.  Many got rid of drug
habits before getting involved.  And if you wanted drugs there was no expense
involved.  When people found out that I made movies like that they would give
me all the drugs I could have ever used.  Everyone is absolutely straight
on the set.  This is no place to be messed up.  Many of the men and women
are 25 -> 35 (some men even in their late 40's) and have to work a bit
more to keep in shape -- they have to stay away from drugs.

Net: Bearing in mind that what's on the screen is a performance, when she
was doing these movies, did she find that she had to put herself into a
frame of mind that it was work, and not sex?

Cherri: It's work of course.  There were some people that I really liked.
There was one guy (Mark Wallace) that I had outside relationship with and
that made the work more enjoyable.

Net: Did her performances impede her ability to function normally in an
intimate relationship outside of work?

Cherri: Hmmm... No it made me more aware of what turns a guy on.

Net: Was the sex on the job too much (I mean did it turn her off from
seeking an emotional commitment in her life?

Cherri: No.

Net: Did men in relationships outside of work assume she was a slut?

Cherri: Some.  But they are rare.

Net: Were they abusive to her because of her job (i.e. did she have to lower
her standards for a man/mate because she had to find someone who would not
be jealous.

Cherri: One guy was sort of mentally abusive.  He's in prison now for doing
some other stuff.  He wasn't a very nice guy anyway.  Didn't have much
to do with what I had done.  He would have been bad for anybody.

Net: Was she able to reject sexual partners (hygene, questionable health,
etc..) or did the "producers" _require_ that she perform with any and
everyone that they told her to. Could she reject a scene because she didn't
like it?  The reason I ask these questions is because, while I find the
material arousing and it can really improve bedroom play, I don't like the
idea of making someone else miserable so I can enjoy erotica.

Cherri:  You could reject anything.  You are your own boss.  You can decide.

Net: The men in the movies are brought to orgasm (I assume they are when I
see them ejaculate).  Did she find that to be arousing? Did she enjoy the
sex?  I always wonder how much is over-acting (on the part of the women) and
how much is actually orgasm (perhaps that's what makes the movies
intriguing?).

Cherri: Different people are different.  I did a lot of acting.  I felt
there was too much "let's fuck" not enough "let's make love" in the movies.
A friend and I used to go in and do voice overs for movies because the women
on the set didn't make enough or the right kind of sounds.

Net: If she isn't either bi-sexual or gay, was she aroused in scenes where
she had to play with other women? Was she worried, turned off, or otherwise
disgusted if she knew that what she was doing was actually arousing/getting
a female co-star off (I guess that doesn't apply if she's bi or gay).

Cherri: Early in the business I was scared that someone would see me and I
was nervous but later I got over that when some of the women really liked it.

Net: I have seen one movie where the woman was literally dripping _very_
copiously, (despite all the posts in this newsgroup, I have never seen a
women _literally_ drip). I assumed they had put something inside her before
the scene.

Cherri:  Who was it?  I could probably tell you if was real or not.  There
was one woman who did do this naturally.

Net: Does effect outway precaution? Do the producers care if she is injured
in or gets an infection (I don't mean an STD, but more like a yeast
infection) from using some bizzare sexual prop (like a bannana or such)?

Cherri: There are laws against that.  Also these people are knowledgeable
they won't do that.  They don't even do things that straight couples do --
like use Vaseline.  Thats really bad for you these people know their stuff
and won't do risky stuff.  They watch out for others too.  These people just
don't do dangerous things.

Net: Are the sex scenes in the movies scripted out fully partially
or not at all. Do they have the freedom to improvise as the scene progresses.

Cherri: The scenes are nearly all the same and everyone pretty much knows
what to do.  Not much scripting because it's the same as last time.  So much
of this then change positions and do some of that, get the camera angles,
etc.

Net: In addition, I would like to know about the "type" of person who makes
films.  Are there wide variations in personalities?  What are some of her
comments on the "big-name" stars?

Cherri: Some are pretty stuck up.  Samatha Strong is one.  Tasha Ray would
come do her scene and leave with her $1500 and didn't associated with the
'low life'.  Others like Nina Hartley are neat people -- I liked watching
her.

Net:  If you do get to ask her this stuff ask her if the stars really read
their fan mail, or just throw it away. I've written a couple (being
tasteful, asking questions and not saying what I'd do to her or what not)
but have never got a reply.  Anyways I am VERY curious about the answers
to the questions you'll be asking, if you don't post to the net please
write me telling what her answers are.  Thanks much and good luck!

Cherri: I never got any.  Some people set up P.O. boxes and advertise in
the back of Hustler and other magazines.  "Send $5.00 or whatever".  Men get
letters and pictures back saying how horny they are and stuff.  These are
all fakes just photo copied stuff that was made up by some other guy. 
Trying to make some money.  The women got a modeling fee and are never
involved again.  If this is what he is talking about then he was kinda
ripped off.

I would like to think this is the beginning of the realization that the ATF is not known for it's recognition of civil rights and there are lots of other opportunities for the ACLU to put some out of control government types in their place, but I'm not that hopeful:

The ACLU filed the case on April 18, 2006, on behalf of Karen J. Kilpatrick, who claimed that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) violated her Free Speech rights.

Kilpatrick was driving her blue van in Pensacola on April 19, 2004, with the slogans “Remember the Children of Waco” and “Boo ATF” written on some of the windows when she was pulled over by police for questioning by the ATF.

The ACLU argues in the lawsuit that her First Amendment Rights to Free Speech and her Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure were violated when officers detained her for an hour, searched her car without consent, and ordered her to remove the writing on the side of her van.

“The ATF’s actions were unconstitutional and there was no legal justification to stop and question Ms. Kilpatrick.  We believe that the ATF was trying to silence Ms. Kilpatrick and the 911 call substantiates this position,” said Bert Oram, ACLU cooperating counsel.

I don't know if this will help or her chances of getting elected (vice) President but my guess is it will help:

US Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has caught the eye of Hollywood - as the subject of a movie definitely not for kids.

A major Los Angeles porn studio is on the hunt for a Palin look-alike to play the mother-of-five politician in an adult film.

The successful actress would earn $2535 to $3800 for the role, according to online advertisements posted on the Los Angeles webpage of sales and social networking site Craig's List.

"Looking for a Sarah Palin look-alike for an adult film to be shot in next 10 days," the advertisement said.

It's time for me to dig up the interview I did of a porn actress I posted on Usenet several years ago. I'll try to post that this weekend sometime.

H/T to my Aussie friend.

Update: Via Sebastian here is the Craig's Listing.

Excuse me, I've got some video to watch. . .

Kevin Baker
October 3, 2008
Hey! We're on Video!
[On the Gun Blogger Weekend videos that are now up on Down Range TV. See also the blog post from producer Marshal Halloway and the news release (pointed out to me by Sebastain). But it was an email from Say Uncle that first informed me.--Joe]

These pictures are via an email from Johnathan on an email list I'm on:

Some people on the left are complaining that Sarah Palin supporters are shallow and all enthused with her because she is good looking. I'm sure that has something to do with it. But her views on most topics are a big boost as well. Still it is hard to defend against the assertion if she were not so hot that she wouldn't have gotten picked.

But one has to wonder why the Democrats are so upset by it. Weren't they smart enough to know that sex sells? I can hardly believe that. After all wasn't that one of Bill Clinton's appeal to a lot of women voters? And if the democrats thought the male voter who thinks with the head between his legs was an important demographic they should have chosen a woman--after all they have lots of politically experienced women on their side to choose from. Here are some examples:

So what's is there for them to complain about?

Oh, now I see. They would still be stuck with the same problem--trying to sell an inferior product at a higher price.

Further evidence of the inferiority of the left will be supplied next weekend at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in the form of pictures of Ashley Varner from the NRA who will be attending--another reason for gun bloggers and readers to attend. She knows her stuff and it's not just because the male brain turns to mush when in her presence.

I got a call tonight from Barb's sister who lives in California. I had talked to her and her husband about guns in years past and while not really opposed to them they wouldn't want one in their house.

Barb had talked to her last weekend and I knew she were planning to join the NRA just to annoy her liberal friends and neighbors. I also knew their daughter who is in college in Missouri wants to get a gun so she can defend herself. I didn't know that Barb's sister and her husband are planning to take up shooting as a hobby. She asked me about ranges and do they rent? And she wanted a recommendation for a gun to start out with. I told her a .22 to lessen the chances of picking up bad habits and reduce the cost.

I also sent her a link to the NRA yard signs so they can tweak the neighbors without even flashing their membership cards.

I need to get them up here for Boomershoot next spring. That will give them some goals.

But Sebastian points out it's too inflationary and we should return to the Goldfish standard.

I think this has been around sometime earlier but I still laughed when a co-worker send me a link today. It could just be the Alzheimer's has shortened my memory enough to make it funny again:

As I reported in my previous post Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence, is now working from home to save money but that didn't stop him from talking about stuff he didn't know anything about to the D.C. City Council yesterday:

A gun-control advocate told the D.C. Council's public safety committee Wednesday that officials should consider adopting a complex method of ballistics tracking to help identify guns used in the city.

"In crime scenes, what we find are cartridges and no guns," said Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence. "Microstamping can provide the link between the gun and cartridge."

Mr. Horwitz's comments came during a hearing before the council's Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary regarding gun laws in the District.

Apparently he didn't realize one or more of the following facts:

• There are no microstamped guns in production.
• Requiring guns to be microstamped would indirectly be a ban on guns in D.C.
• The Supreme Court said complete gun bans are unconstitutional.
• There are over 200 million guns in the U.S. that are not microstamped and no criminal with room temperature I.Q. would use a microstamped gun. Those with sub room temperature I.Q. will get caught without having a microstamped gun.
• Microstamping is easily defeated:
  • Good choice of background music
  • Microstamping research
  • My opinion on microstamping

But we already knew these guys are clueless about guns and microstamping.

Joshua Horwitz spins it as a positive thing but they are cutting way back on their office space and people are working from home to save money.

Also notice their web site says there are no job opportunities but they are accepting interns at no pay.

It's a good first step. When they turn off the phones and the only public presence they have is an aging web site that whines about the "Gun Show Loophole" we can consider them politically dead.

As Lyle pointed out the other day some interesting comparisons can be made between the way the left deals with abortion versus guns. Here is another example:

McCain and Obama on the issues

ABORTION

McCain: Opposes abortion rights...
Obama: Favors abortion rights.

GUN CONTROL

McCain: Voted against ban on assault-type weapons but in favor of requiring background checks at gun shows. Voted to shield gun-makers and dealers from civil suits. "I believe the Second Amendment ought to be preserved -- which means no gun control."

Obama: Voted to leave gun-makers and dealers open to suit. Also, as Illinois state lawmaker, supported ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter state restrictions generally on firearms.

Notice that even the title puts a positive spin on the repression of gun owners. It's about "gun control", not "guns", not "gun rights", not "the Second Amendment", not "gun ownership". Who wouldn't be opposed to "uncontrolled guns"? Therefore the opposite of uncontrolled guns, or gun control, must be a good thing.

Compare the handling of guns versus abortion. Obama favors a right. McCain opposes a right.

What media bias?

The revolution will not be televised. It will not be brought to you in three parts by any sponsor, and it will not feature guns taken from cold dead fingers.

Counterintuitive Man
August 4, 2008
Counterintuitive Man says: "You can have my gun when you take it from my cold dead finger," is a total myth!
[I agree. I think the entire mindset has to be changed before the RKBA has any teeth against a tyrannical government. In essence the attitude must be, "You can have my gun when you reanimate your cold dead fingers." This changes the equation in two crucial ways: 1) It's the government thug that is presumed to be dying and 2) It's the individual that is presumed to be walking away from the engagement.--Joe]

Walter E. Williams has an excellent piece entitled Destroying Liberty in which he accurately describes the process that leads ordinary Americans to support destructive legislation.

But if you were to ask, say, the average senior citizen whether Social Security, Medicare and prescription drug subsidies should be continued, he would probably answer yes. The same would be true if you asked a college professor whether higher education should continue to be subsidized, or a farmer or a dairyman whether their products should be subsidized, or a manufacturer whether there should be tariffs and quotas on foreign products that compete with his product. The problem with congressmen producing favors and privileges to all interest groups is that it creates what none of us wants: massive control, numerous dictates and micromanagement of our lives.

Read the whole thing.  Superb as it is, he missed the hate factor.  There are a significant number of Americans who have been taught to hate the very things that make this country a success.  They hate the very idea of corporations for example.  The term "free enterprise" makes their blood boil.  The sight of a nice home, on a nice lot, with the American flag flying makes them want to spit.  They have a hateful name for it; "McMansion".  They would tend to agree with Obama when he says with contempt that some Americans are clinging to guns and religion (the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights).  I suppose deriding Americans who "cling" to property rights, free speech, the right to a fair trial by jury, etc., will come next.  When FDR was pushing his Raw Deal back in the '30s and '40s, there was a famous (to me) quote, and I paraphrase; "For the first time, the rich are going to feel the same pain that the poor have felt."  Spread the misery.  If I'm suffering, angry, and unhappy, then by damn, if I can't do anything else, I will make you suffer, make you angry, and make you just as miserable as I.  That seems to be the mentality.  It's far easier to tear down someone else's house than to build one of your own.

Now we're faced with the possibility that one of these America haters is going to be elected president.

A retired law enforcement officer explains why voting for Obama is a bad idea.

Any time I hear a politician cite common sense as a modifier in any sentence, I know he’s: 1) implied that I don’t have any; and 2) planning on stealing something from me. Since Pope Innocent II declared that the crossbow was an assault weapon in 1139 A.D., I’m not sure what definition these people are capable of. Vote wisely this November, and remember whose interest the name you select has in mind.

George S. Roof
September 30, 2008
Presidential election could shape future gun laws
[For sometime now "common sense" has been a phrase that immediately gets my fight (mostly) or flight response going but I never took the time to analyze it before. Thank you Mr. Roof.--Joe]