The View From North Central Idaho

Guns: a pill for what ails you, if what ails you is insecurity about the size of your pecker.

someguy
March 4, 2010
Comment to Open Thread: Penis Substitutes At the Ready!
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

...but the manufacturer defaced it horribly by putting lettering and numbering all over it.  I wouldn't mind owning one, but then I'd be forced to advertize for Colt's without compensation, flashing that company name and address around everywhere I went.  They should pay me to own it.  And those serial numbers?  Those weren't required by law in the 1840s and '50s, and the gun would look SO much tidier without them.

(This in response to people who complain that my products have to be defaced with my company's name and the model number, or the patent number in some cases.  It turns out that there's also a significant culture in the muzzleloader world that hates the idea of signed or numbered guns.  That fact that maker's marks, serial numbers, inspectors marks and proof marks have been a necessary and worthwhile part of manufacturing since Grok made his first stone club seems to get lost on some people.  Maybe the famous works of art would be worth more if they'd never been signed, too [they were such shameless self promoters they turned every work of art into an advertizing billboard for themselves].  We do refrain from using flashing lights in our logo if that's any consolation.  Our engraved logos are matte black on matte black, but they're still too obnoxious for some people)

I had no idea.

Next year we are coming back with all our friends.

Charles
Spouse of 30 Cal Gal
April 29, 2012
[This was in regards to the awesomeness of Boomershoot where his wife and Shelley were shooting.—Joe]

Boomershoot makes them put up or shut up.

Tony Finley
April 28, 2012
[After the Boomershoot dinner and raffle were over Tony came over to me and said so many nice things about me and Boomershoot that I wondered if perhaps we should have closed the bar earlier. But he did say the above that I certainly agree with.--Joe]

This is boring. I just keep hitting the same spot.

Matthew Jensen
April 27, 2012
[He was shooting my “Spud Gun” at a 700 yard steel target. He was hitting the same spot on the target…

I love my Spud Gun. He did have an excellent coach in one of Gene Econ’s staff, but still the gun, ammo and shooter had to be doing their job too.—Joe]

Today Scott, Tim, and I got soaking wet as we put the 500+ stakes in the hillside for Boomershoot. And it was cold.

Tomorrow is forecast as 100% chance of precipitation until 8:00 PM when it drops to 90%

The generator didn’t work for a while this morning. I think the electrical system was wet. I covered it with a tarp and let the engine run and it started working again. Tim is bringing his generator as a backup for tomorrow.

antitango got stuck trying to turn around near Mecca.

I realized I didn’t have the scope rings required to put a scope on the rifle Sarah was going to use. I did get the rifle Ry is going to use scoped but it was so cold and wet I didn’t go out to zero it in.

Scott then got a flat tire trying to make it to Mecca. That makes the third tire to die while making the trip to Mecca since last September. Once is happenstance, twice is a coincidence, three times…

Am I having fun yet? Actually I really enjoyed having dinner with Boomershoot friends and bloggers at the Ponderosa tonight.

A fool and his money are soon elected.

Will Rogers
[Some things never change.—Joe]

There.  Fixed it.

(and no - it doesn't become legal if you give it a new name)

About that Marine who was "less than honerably" discharged.

First, I had to check four major news sources before I could find what the Marine actually said.  The UK news, MSNBC and the WSJ all just quoted his "Screw Obama" bit (Yahoo News came through).  But what counts is the bit about the Oath;

But U.S. District Judge Marilyn Huff refused to intervene, saying the military had the discretion to discipline Stein after he stated he would not follow all the orders of the president.
...
She said that message read: "As an active-duty Marine, I have sworn to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Obama is the economic enemy, the religious enemy, the domestic enemy."

Stein has served nearly nine years...

I can see the judge's position.  He said he would not follow "some" orders, so she kicked it back to the military.

Anyway, it puts you in a sort of pickle when you take that Oath, doesn't it?  So all you who've taken it have a question to ask yourselves every single day.  Do you follow all orders, no matter what, OR do you defend and protect the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic?

With a communist in the Whitehouse, what are your options?  The Devil (so to speak) has you by the neck.  You're damned if you do, damned of you don't.  I don't think we want a coup on our hands, but we don't want a communist giving orders either.  Stein's problem was that he posted about his obvious conundrum on Facebook.  Best to get out, maybe?  But then you'll only be replaced with someone who doesn't have a problem following order from a communist, and that's not good at all (how long before the Oath is changed to one that gives alliagence only to the commander in chief?).  As I say; Pickle.

In an e-mail from Oleg Volk;

"Fetishizing the gun...

"American antis will flip at this animation series..."

Yup.

Last February I was contacted by Eye Safety Systems (ESS) out of Sun Valley Idaho. They make high end eye protection glasses. They wanted to participate in Boomershoot and to make a long story short that is how Boomershoot ended up with 30 Cal Gal and Shelley Rae signed up for Boomershoot this year.

ESS also sent me three pair of their glasses. They are very nice glasses. One thing that I despise about nearly all safety glasses is something that isn’t that hard to do right and ESS did it right. When most glasses are folded up the tip of the ear piece touches the inside of the lens. This scuffs the plastic and you end up with a partially blind spot in one or both eyes. The ESS glasses I have been using don’t do that. The ear piece will not touch the inside of the lens. I have been carrying a pair around in my coat pocket (inside the cloth pouch provided) for almost two months now and the glasses are still scuff free. They are comfortable to wear and give me a great field of view and wrap around protection.

Here is more of what ESS has to say about their glasses and their attendance at Boomershoot:

Idaho-based company ESS (Eye Safety Systems) will be present at this weekend’s Boomershoot events.  ESS manufactures the sole issued eyewear of the United States Marine Corps and is a leading supplier to the U.S. Army & all branches of the U.S. Department of Defense.  Their military-grade eye protection is gaining in popularity and is highly-regarded amongst those in the know in the commercial shooting market. 

ESS will be offering free demos of select shooting-specific models of its MIL-SPEC, ANSI Z87.1+ protective eyewear, including the Crossbow Suppressor which is the only eyewear completely engineered for optimal function under ear cup style hearing protection.  Inquire at the ESS tent on site and/or with ESS employees regarding their demos and event specials.  Visit www.esseyepro.com to learn more.

Amazon also has them.

A radio news report this morning said there have been three accidental shootings in Latah County recently.  One of them happened when a guy was "cleaning a loaded pistol".  Yeah, right.

We know about these accidents, why?  Because when the injured went to the hospital for their minor wounds, the people at the hospital call the cops.

I once shot myself right through the weak hand thumb.  I went to the hospital to get the projectile extracted from my thumb.  It was sticking out both ends of the wound.  The thought of calling the cops, I am certain, never entered anyone's mind at the hospital that day.

OK, class.  This is a test.  WHY did no one at the hospital think of calling the cops in my case, but they automatically called the cops in those other cases?  Hint; why aren't the cops typically called in on a lawnmower accident, a ladder accident, any time you cut your finger while chopping vegetables, cut your head running into a door, etc?

Answer;  Because those accidents do not involve guns.  We've all been conditioned.  If it involves a firearm, call the cops.  No thinking required.  If it doesn't involve a firearm, well take care of the patient, stupid.  This is a hospital.  If that's not bigotry, it sure does look like it.

(I shot myself with an arrow, you see.  Flawed wooden arrows can fracture upon launch, and since your hand is right there on the bow, the fractured arrow can be thrust right through your hand)

"Oh, but those gunshots could have been part of a crime" you say.  And that's my point-- even you are programmed.  If a gun is involved, well, crime.  Sure, and someone could have shot me with an arrow while I was threatening them, or that cut you got chopping food could have been done on purpose by your raging spouse, and that contusion on your kid's head from the bicycle crash might have been caused by you hitting him with a blunt object on purpose, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.   Get the irrational programming (the mindset; gun = crime) ironed out.

Understanding such forces is crucial in attacking issues such as gun control, which are completely out of control. Even though the vast majority of both NRA and non-NRA gun owners are for tighter gun control laws, fear and shame are still the primary factors driving gun ownership to record highs. But fear and shame cannot be approached directly, for one is generally too ashamed to admit one is ashamed!

If shame is indeed one of the most powerful unconscious forces behind so many of our failed attempts to curb our most pressing social problems, and if it is difficult to approach directly, then how can we confront and combat shame itself?

There are at least four different ways, none of which are sufficient by themself. The first is obviously books such as Gilligan's, which point out the complex factors and overall patterns responsible for shame. Sadly, because they confront shame too directly and are largely cognitive in nature, they reach only a very small percentage of the population, mainly highly educated liberals, who are already less prone to shame. Nonetheless, they are necessary even if they are not sufficient. Without understanding the factors responsible for shame, it is extremely difficult, if not virtually impossible, to fashion truly effective ways of combating it.

The second way is of course individual therapy. Again, this only reaches a very small percentage of the population, mainly highly educated liberals. And, it does not treat a whole society therapeutically that is suffering from shame.

The third of course is ongoing, sustained programs and efforts in education. The earlier and the younger we intervene with children the better. But imagine the howls of protests from conservatives who are already paranoid about "government stealing the minds of children."

The fourth is the most effective. It consists of carefully orchestrated public service campaigns that feature prominent, charismatic figures from all walks of life (business, entertainment, sports, politics, etc.) that have successfully faced and overcome shame. Powerful personal stories are the main ingredient. And, of course, celebrities are the story.

Ian I. Mitroff
Adjunct Professor, UC Berkeley
April 25, 2012
Confronting Shame-Based Politics: The Biggest Challenge of All
[I would take issue with his unsubstantiated assertion that gun owners are for tighter gun control laws and that shame is an issue in gun ownership. But I won’t out of fear he would put me on a list such that I would end up in a death camp instead of a reeducation camp or psych hospital should he and his kind ever achieve the power they desire.—Joe]

The local newspaper story is here.  You only see part of it unless you subscribe.  Basically, the robber was distracted with pulling money out of the cash drawer, which was placed on the counter and the clerk took the initiative, snatching the robber's gun.  The gun was dropped.  The robber then fled, leaving the cash and the gun behind.  Oops.  He later came back and turned himself in-- probably not a bad idea, given the circumstances.

One of the radio reports has the cops telling us, after this incident, not to fight back-- to do whatever the criminals tell us to do.  Uh, hey Skippy: isn't that exactly the sort of advice that enabled the 9/11 attacks?

You can't really plan ahead for what you'll do, and you certainly cannot second guess the actions of the clerk.  What happened this time, and what happens time and time again, is that someone recognizes an opportunity to stop a crime, and then takes that opportunity while the taking is good.  That's all.

I wouldn't call it an act of will so much as a reflexive reaction based on a split second certainty, founded in basic principles.  My son once recounted an incident at school wherein he had a habitual bully pinned to the floor, crying, before Son even really knew what had happened.  No; you don't plan this stuff, but you don't want to be hamstrung by stupid advice from cops and other wannabe authorities either.

Good for that clerk for having the presence of mind plus the wherewithal to act.  He used his bare hands against an armed robber, no one was hurt, and the robber is in custody.

We don’t know the facts yet, but let’s assume the conclusion MSNBC is leaping to is accurate: George Zimmerman stalked a small black child and murdered him in cold blood, just because he was black.

If that were true, every black person in America should get a gun and join the National Rifle Association, America’s oldest and most august civil rights organization.

Ann Coulter
April 23, 2012
Coulter: Gun control and self-defense
[Great article. As is usual for Coulter there is lots of snark.-Joe]

Hat tip; Billy Beck  This can't get enough exposure;

Some of the people close to me are in effect communists.  No; they don't attend Party rallies and most of them don't send money to The Party (though some do through their union dues and they may not even know it) but their underlying assumptions are the same.  That's all it takes.  You don't need to be a Firm Believer in the teachings of Brother Marx, carrying around the little red book, or even understand where your beliefs came from.  You only need those underlying assumptions you acquired by default sometime in childhood, and just a little bit of envy, or resentment, or frustration, or anger, and plenty of reinforcement from those with whom you've chosen to surround yourself.  The Party and it's allies will then be free to do the rest, because you won't notice until it's too late.  It all sounds fairly reasonable, even good, along the way, because "we all know that something has to be done".  Right?  And that something is, as always, more government (less freedom).

Suckers.  I can forgive the kids (most haven't received a proper education) but what about you adults?  Seriously.

It's interesting.  I was listening this weekend to a man who barely escaped with his life from Cuba.  He said his parents supported Castro.  All Castro wanted was justice after all (there was clearly a lack of justice in Cuba, pre revolution) and to serve the collective good of The People.  His parents supported Castro wholeheartedly.  That is, until the newly empowered communists came and took everything they had-- everything his parents had worked for all their lives.  I heard the same basic story directly from a famous musician who had escaped from Cuba by skipping out on his handlers while on tour in the U.S.  You risk your life doing that.  If the catch you, they kill you, or take you back to make an example out of you.  The man I was listening to this weekend was in tears, trying to warn us that the same thing is happening here in the U.S., in this land of his Last Great Hope.  They're using same promises and the same rationale, using the same underlying assumptions, with the same goals right here and right now.  If it succeeds it will have the same outcome.  It always does.  Only this time it's global.

It has been said that being right is ok (sometimes) but being right too soon makes you a radical extremist.

What about being right too late?  What does that make you?  I ask you Progressives.  You've grown up with the warning signs all around you, and now the warning signs have reached ear-splitting decibel levels.  What does it make you if you're right too late?  Or does your anger or fear, or hatred, or disgust with the human race, prevent you from caring about the consequences?  I know there are those who believe there are too many people on the planet already.  Some people know what we're headed for and they secretly long for it.  For other Progressives-- those who just want to live a good life and want what's "best" for everyone; What does it make you when you're right too late?

Guns? Have at it. If only the stupid dickless wonders (and I don’t mean the women) who feel the need to whip it out in public would keep it amongst themselves, then I would say let Darwinism take over (such as the Southern states who’ve decided it’s a nifty idea to allow guns into bars).

Almost everything went well today. I got the Wi-Fi and micro-cell working. AT&T says the micro-cell is good for about 40’. That wasn’t really going to meet my needs and I talked to the people at the AT&T store and they said it would be much further if there were no obstructions so I took a chance on it. I still had 3 bars 250 feet away which is good enough for what I need it for.

I got my tent set up and all the bedding in place.

I cleaned up the interior of Mecca a bunch. I made room for and moved a bunch of the empty crates we store the targets in to the Mecca to be filled. After being filled they will be transported to the Taj Mahal for storage.

I had hoped to get all that stuff done yesterday so basically I am taking about twice as long as I had planned to get stuff done.

The really important stuff that I need to get done before tomorrow night (other than do my regular job, “work from home” is actually going to be “work from the middle of a field”) is to get the rest of the chemicals from the Taj Mahal moved to Mecca. The weather has been great with clear skies and the today the temperature was in the low 80’s. This was probably close to a record for this day of the year. But there is a 50% chance of rain tomorrow night and I need to get those chemicals moved before the field gets muddy again.

The solar panel has been doing great. It puts out over 100 Watts (rated at 130 W) during the middle of the day and it has more than kept up with the Internet, cell, and computer power needs.

Boomershoot is looking to be good this year. There is some chance of rain but it doesn’t look nearly as bad has it has some years.

As Sarah notes Paul Barrett will be speaking at the Boomershoot dinner next Saturday.

I am very pleased to have Barrett attend. He and his wife are coming all the way from New York City to attend.

You may purchase a copy of his book at the dinner and there will be a book signing after his speech.

You don’t have to be a Boomershoot participant to listen to the speaker. Speaker only tickets are $10 at the door.

We must fear a government monopoly on firearms. It is a path awash in the blood of millions and anyone who calls for bans on civilian firearms is on the side of evil.

Braden Lynch
April 21, 2012
Comment to Quote of the day—Ronald Reagan
[It may be the advocates have the best of intentions but as is well know, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.—Joe]

Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.

Murphy
Murphy’s Law
[I’m at Boomershoot  Mecca and things have not gone well for me today. I spent about two hours trying to get a Nanostation 2 to act as a router and get it’s IP address from the ISP. I “bricked” the device mounted on a pole 20 feet in the air. I can probably still recover it by pushing the hardware reset button but that means bring the pole down. The pole has a solar panel and the ISP’s wireless flat panel as well as the Nanostation on it. That isn’t going to be fun. Then I tried using another Nanostation I have at ground level. I was unsuccessful so I finally drove to Moscow (1 hour each way) to get a conventional household router. That worked and I got the AT&T microcell working with one of my phones but not the other. Then just as it was getting dark I started to put up my tent. I didn’t have the poles or the stakes. I have to go back to Moscow again. I’ll return in the morning.

As Barb asks multiple times during Boomershoot, “Are you having fun yet?”—Joe]

...the truth is shockingly radical to some people.  How DARE he say that!  Well it isn't truth's fault that truth is sometimes shocking, is it?  Well is it?

Allen West does a pretty good job of standing his ground and staying focused;

Did you catch the fact that the Vice Chairman of the National Communist Party thinks that being called a communist is insulting?  I found myself hoping that West would bring it up.  Could you imagine a high ranking NRA executive thinking it an insult to be called an NRA member?

Communists (Progressives) have to slink around in the dark as a way of life and they know it.  Turn on the lights!

"Well I don't care what he says."  I love it.  CNN goes to the actual, openly named Communist Party (they're probably on a first name basis) for their reaction to someone calling someone else a communist.  Oh, the layers of irony and stupidity.  See; this how these things make the major headlines.

It's all because Allen West had the gall, the nerve, the cheek, the chutzpah, to describe what was right in front of his face and for all to see.  The loonies go apoplectic, try to beat West over the head with his own comments, and now a lot more people have heard that the communists had to re-brand themselves, that they have a caucus in Washington, the self described Communist Party comes out saying it's insulting to call people communists, and West gets a boost. This is how it works, people. We win every time we stick to basic truth.

Now if West had gone all Republican (getting scared, going marshmallow, saying he didn't really mean it, and sorry to be so reckless with my words, please forgive me, mea maxima culpa) he'd have lost.  And we'd lose with him. As it is, the loonies actually look like loonies, making loonies of themselves, calling out more loonies to join the loony-fest, and the truth gets a boost.

Hat tip; Glen Beck, and I credit him also for bringing some of our history (the parts that don't get taught in the coercive, i.e. government, schools) into the public spotlight over the years.

Some say the The Nuge is too over the top.  They need to listen more closely.  He says what needs to be said.  If it drives the loonies out of the woodwork, perfect.  That's exactly what we want-- bring the conversation, the principles and the clarity, out, naked, front and center.  That way we win.  There is no other.  Obfuscation and beating around the bush, "moderating" the message, only serves as chum in the water for the sharks.  Don't bandy words with fools.  Listen and learn;

ETA; You know they were trying to intimidate him.  Don't be intimidated.  This sort of thing will continue until the left finds out that it backfires on them every time it's tried.  Alan West, for one, is beginning to figure it out.

There are those in America today who have come to depend absolutely on government for their security. And when government fails they seek to rectify that failure in the form of granting government more power. So, as government has failed to control crime and violence with the means given it by the Constitution, they seek to give it more power at the expense of the Constitution. But in doing so, in their willingness to give up their arms in the name of safety, they are really giving up their protection from what has always been the chief source of despotism — government. Lord Acton said power corrupts. Surely then, if this is true, the more power we give the government the more corrupt it will become. And if we give it the power to confiscate our arms we also give up the ultimate means to combat that corrupt power. In doing so we can only assure that we will eventually be totally subject to it. When dictators come to power, the first thing they do is take away the people's weapons. It makes it so much easier for the secret police to operate, it makes it so much easier to force the will of the ruler upon the ruled.

Ronald Reagan
Column published in Guns and Ammo (1 September 1975)
[First half via Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor, the rest via Wikiquote.

As I have said before, in the 20th Century more people were murdered by their own government than by individual or even gangs of criminals. People willing to give up their arms in the false hope of the government making them more secure from common criminals are missing the big picture. We have far, far, more to fear from an overly powerful government than from common criminals. In other words the hazards of too much freedom are of much less consequence than the hazards of not enough.—Joe]

A few years ago I went looking for material related to guns in the workplace and couldn't find anything except "keep guns out of the workplace".

Times have changed. Now we have classes for HR weighing both sides of the issue:

Deciding whether to ban guns in the work place is an incredibly controversial and potentially polarizing issue between employers and employees, and between 'pro- gun rights' versus 'pro-gun restrictions' advocates. But it is a decision which cannot be avoided: an employer may face potential risks if it decides to ban guns, and it may face potential risks if it decides to not ban guns. The issue is complicated by constant changes in gun laws and restrictions throughout the United States. You will learn about the latest legal developments which impact this controversy. This live audio conference shall also provide you with a strategy for making the most informed decision, in light of the law and their circumstances.

Some good things came out of that fiery inferno: By the end of the day, April 19, 1993, I was a recovering liberal, ready to bear arms.

Sarah Connor
April 19, 2012
Comment to April 19, 1993: Where were you when Waco burned?
[I have a similar story but it started a little bit earlier.

I had bought my first gun in December of 1992. This was in large part because of the helplessness I felt at Ruby Ridge a few months earlier. It went down just a few miles from my home at the time and there was nothing I could do. I didn't have a firearm of any type and I had zero training. It was just an SKS but it was a beginning.

Just the siege at Waco confirmed I was going down the necessary path. I didn't have to wait for the the outrage of the burning. The only doubts I had were whether I had started my journey soon enough and if I had enough money and time to complete it in time. In May of 1995 I got a contracting job at Microsoft that paid a lot of money and gave me easy access to high quality training and nearby indoor range.

I was shooting USPSA matches by the end of 1995. I shot in a lot of steel plate and pistol league matches from 1995 through 1999. I went to my first dynamite shoot in May of 1996. I bought my STI Eagle in late 1997. I went to the USPSA Area 1 Championship in June of 1998. I won the Intermountain Tactical Rifle Championship in July of 1998. The first Boomershoot was in October of 1998. I took a class in long range precision rifle shooting in early 1999. Hundreds of people have participated in Boomershoot. They acquired the equipment and skills to hit one minute of angle targets out to 700 yards.

I and hundreds, if not thousands, are ready. It was Ruby Ridge, Waco, and the 1994 Clinton Gun Ban that motivated us. But what the really means is that almost for certain our equipment and skills will not be required for that method of last resort.—Joe]

I'm glad the statute of limitations has expired on this Defensive Gun Use in Chicago.

No shots fired nor was a gun even brandished. But it qualifies as a DGU in my book. It enabled a bystander to have the confidence to get involved.

There is no anti-gun group with enough money to defeat the pro-gun money. There is a lack of will and desire to confront this issue in the state and federal government and no strong anti-gun leadership from either party. The only way left to fight the gun industry is through the voices (and votes) of the American people.

Cynthia Kounaris
April 17, 2012
Guns Help People Kill People
[And the American people have spoken. NRA membership is at or near an all-time high. The NRA annual meeting this year set a new attendance record. And 68% of the American people have a favorable view of the NRA.

Ms. Kounaris, the problem for you is that there aren't enough people on your side of the issue. And the reason you don't have many people is in a large part because gun control advocates can't answer Just One Question. The anti-gun groups don't even have a way to join on their websites. They have no real membership in the sense of the pro-gun groups. It's time to educate yourself and join one or more of the winning teams.—Joe]

This might mess up Joe's auto QOTD super system and crash his server, but here goes;

"I prefer clarity to agreement" - Dennis Prager

I love that quote, and he uses some version of it often on his radio show.  It is in contrast with the usual method of obfuscation for the purpose of recruiting to one's cause.  Understanding, the prerequisite to true agreement or true disagreement, can only come out of clarity.  It is required for any positive, productive communication in any subject.  I don't know if Prager has said it as such, but clarity is pure poison to the left.

Pure.

Poison.

As such, our mission is easy, no?  If I had to name one thing, the lack of which is resulting in the most problems in our society, it would be clarity.  Not energy, not oil, not honesty, not contraception, not redistributed money, not even liberty, but clarity, because without it we don't have any of those other things.  We're paralyzed.

Think how refreshing it would be to hear true clarity on a regular basis.  "Honesty" could be substituted in many cases, but it's different from clarity in that some people don't actually know what they think-- Their thinking process has been retarded through obfuscation.  Clarity must some first, then, before honesty (or the lack thereof) can become an issue.  Glen Beck oft repeats a variation on it; "Say what you mean and mean what you say".

No doublt, if some politician ever reads this, he'll be asking his campaign advisors how he can best appear to be saying what he means and meaning what he says, 'cause he heard it was popular with those idiots in flyover country.

Anybody openly carrying a gun into Starbucks (or anywhere else) to “make a point” or “exercise a right” is inherently unqualified to carry a weapon. This is a fundamentally improper use of a firearm.
 
Like your dick, you only take out your gun if you are prepared to use it. You don’t openly carry it into a coffee bar to scare the liberals. This identifies you as a cheap tin can that shouldn’t be allowed near anything as powerful as a Model 29 or to use the other common penis substitute, a Porsche Turbo Carrera.

Honus
March 4, 2010
Comment to Open Thread: Penis Substitutes At the Ready!
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

As much as I detest people that think it is legitimate to make laws based on majority rule when it should be a matter of principle it is reassuring when the majority aligns itself with principles:

Most Americans support the right to use deadly force to protect themselves - even in public places - and have a favorable view of the National Rifle Association, the main gun-lobby group, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.
The online survey showed that 68 percent, or two out of three respondents, had a favorable opinion of the NRA, which starts its annual convention in St. Louis, Missouri, on Friday.

The approval rating for Congress is currently running about 12%. I claim this is in a large part because they have no principles, only policy positions which change about as often as their dirty laundry that keeps showing up in public.

This leads me to believe the appropriate thing to do is replace congress with the Board of Directors and senior members of the NRA.

With the strict gun control implemented in Mexico I did not realize the Mexican Constitution has a right to bear arms clause:

The inhabitants of the United Mexican States have a right to arms in their homes, for security and legitimate defense, with the exception of arms prohibited by federal law and those reserved for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, Air Force and National Guard. Federal law will determine the cases, conditions, requirements and places in which the carrying of arms will be authorized to the inhabitants.

I would be willing to bet the Brady Campaign would almost be willing to accept a "guaranteed" right "protected" thusly. The VPC wouldn't of course. But giving the Brady Campaign a reason to disband would be appealing.

But I'm inclined to go with the "shall not be infringed" version and have the Brady Campaign disband because we have accomplished all our goals in the U.S. and have moved on to protecting the right of people to keep and bear arms in other countries.

Martyrdom' is the only way a person can become famous without ability.

George Bernard Shaw
[I wonder who he was talking about. Colin Goddard of the Brady Campaign comes to mind but the timeline doesn't quite work.—Joe]

We need a president who will stand up for the rights of hunters and sportsmen, and those seeking to protect their homes and their families. President Obama has not. I will. And if we are going to safeguard our Second Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes.

…

And if we are going to safeguard our Second Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes.

…

This president is moving us away from our Founders' vision. Instead of limited government, he's leading us toward limited freedom and limited opportunity.

Mitt Romney
April 13, 2012
Romney touts support for gun rights at NRA

Photo credit: AP Photo/Michael Conroy
[Since Romney is a politician and his lips were moving I question how firmly, if at all, he believes what he says and whether he will remain true to these campaign promises. But he is saying some of the words gun owners and freedom lovers want to hear.

I want to hear that he is going to do more than play defense ("defend the rights"). I would prefer that he say something along the lines of what Newt said a short while later to the NRA (H/T to Bitter). We should be expanding the scope of the right to keep and bear arms to the rest of the world via the UN. That means a strong offense, not just defense.

For those of you who question the validity of that last sentence by Romney please see my QOTD-Barack Obama from October 28, 2008 with further info from Kevin.—Joe]

Ry reports his room reservation he made last May at the Best Western in Orofino for Boomershoot 2012 was cancelled exactly 90 days later.

If you think you have a reservation there please check to make sure everything is still in order.

If you have lost your reservation there may be other places in town that still have rooms available. Here is a list of places with phone numbers where you can look.

There’s no politician in the world that wants to write off the votes of 5 to 6 million Americans out of the gate.

Sebastian
April 10, 2012
The Dreams of Bloomberg
[I'm reminded of something Chris Cox (NRA top lobbyist) said, "They don't fear me. They fear you."—Joe]

If the TSA were to scan for Ammonium Nitrate fertilizer (AN) they would get a very high percentage of travelers testing positive as this guy did:

An 82-year-old farmer from Brush got quite the surprise Thursday when he was briefly detained by Fort Collins-Loveland airport security after his suitcase tested positive for the chemicals used to make bombs.

Large numbers of false positives mean they have to hand examine large numbers of people. This will require far more manpower and increase the frustration with the TSA. If they don't scan for AN then they leave a huge gaping hole in their security. Yes, AN needs something else with it to detonate. Boomerite, for example, uses Potassium Chlorate (PC) and Ethylene Glycol (EG). Scanning for either of these isn't going to accomplish anything. PC is one of the main ingredients in matches. EG is the common automobile anti-freeze. False positives are us.

Scanning for all three, AN, PC, and EG would detect Boomerite but there isn't anything particularly magic about those three. AN with any number of things will explode. Here is just a partial list of things I have used:

• Aluminum powder
• Diesel
• Model racing fuel
• Powdered milk
• Powdered sugar
• Wheat flour
• Propylene Glycol
• Nitromethane
• Acetone (nail polish remover)
• Methanol (wood alcohol)
• Naphthalene (moth balls)

Basically anything that will burn will enable detonation of AN. So unless TSA is willing to detain and hand search every passenger that walked through their recently fertilized lawn and then ate a powdered sugar donut on the way to security there is no point in scanning for AN. Plus this assumes that a real threat would not be able to seal and clean up their explosives device and themselves sufficiently that they couldn't get their chemical profile below the detection threshold.

Since explosives detection is pointless and they do not hand examine every passenger TSA is really nothing but A Security Theater.

The NRA is selling a wallet which shields your RFID cards from being scanned.

I'm a little torn as to whether I want to get one or not. It's very convenient to just swipe my wallet over the the scanner when I get on the bus to go to work. If I had the shielded wallet I would have to take the card out to scan it.

On the other hand Ry recently demonstrated an app for an Android phone that could scan that same card and get my public transportation history for the last 10 days.

Here's a quote I got today from a customer.  We were going back and fourth regarding the configuration of his rifle and which of the vastly superior UltiMAK optic mounts would fit it.  I paraphrase for clarity;

"...mine is a sporterized one... No scary features-- to keep our state politicians' diapers dry." (he's in the PRC)

I've eschewed potty jokes of late, as they're usually not productive.  This one brings up a key point though.  My first thought after reading it was; Who cares, or should ever care, about politicians who would soil themselves at the thought of a well and properly armed citizenry, i.e. who cares what a coward thinks?

This is an open message to all politicians and law enforcement.  If you're afraid of a citizenry that has its rights fully respected, exercised and protected, you're either a coward, a criminal or a fool, and in any of those cases you don't belong in your position.  Your position is for those who respect and love liberty, and have both the courage and the personal wherewithal to protect it.

(Disclaimer; my wife is a public school teacher, so although I preach liberty, and the responsibility of self reliance that comes with it, some of my household income derives from a coercive redistribution racket)

The argument that an armed citizenry cannot hope to overthrow a modern military machine flies directly in the face of the history of partisan guerilla and civil wars in the twentieth century. To make this argument (which is invariably supported, if at all, by reference only to the American military experience in non-revolutionary struggles like the two World Wars), one must indulge in the assumption that a handgun-armed citizenry will eschew guerrilla tactics in favor of throwing themselves headlong under the tracks of advancing tanks. Far from proving invincible, in the vast majority of cases in this century in which they have confronted popular insurgencies, modern armies have been unable to suppress the insurgents. This is why the British no longer rule in Israel and Ireland, the French in Indo-China, Algeria and Madagascar, the Portugese in Angola, the whites in Rhodesia, or General Somoza, General Battista, or the Shah in Nicaragua, Cuba and Iran respectively--not to mention the examples of the United States in Vietnam and the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. It is, of course, quite irrelevant for present purposes whether each of the struggles just mentioned is or was justified or whether the people benefitted therefrom. However one may appraise those victories, the fact remains that they were achieved against regimes equipped with all the military technology which, it is asserted, inevitably dooms popular revolt.

Perhaps more important, in a free country like our own, the issue is not really overthrowing a tyranny but deterring its institution in the first place. To persuade his officers and men to support a coup, a potential military despot must convince them that his rule will succeed where our current civilian leadership and policies are failing. In a country whose widely divergent citizenry possesses upwards of 160 million firearms, however, the most likely outcome of usurpation (no matter how initially successful) is not benevolent dictatorship, but prolonged, internecine civil war.

Don B. Kates Jr.
Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment
Michigan Law Review 82 (1983): 204-273.
[Via Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms by Philip Mulivor.

This is along the same lines as what Lyle described as the Plausible Threat.

It's worth noting that the estimate of 160 million firearms in the U.S. was in 1983. The estimate is nearly double that now.—Joe]

That of course was its only purpose from the outset, so we’ll have to call the program a complete success.

What?– You believed the stuff about “protecting public safety”? No, see, that’s the just the selling point. That’s that charming, handsome man with his arm in a cast, Ted Bundy, asking you get in his van. Forget the assertions. The actual goal is something else entirely. That’s how communists (and serial killers) roll. It’s always a ruse.

Lyle
April 6, 2012
Comment to Gun card chaos: FOID foibles in IL
In response to "The only success of FOID cards is the successful persecution of gun owners.”
[Many, perhaps even most, of the people advocating for restrictions on firearms believe it will improve public safety. But at the top they know better. I've been listening to them and even meeting them face to face for many, many, years. Listen to and read carefully the words of gun control politicians Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, and Bill Clinton. Listen and read carefully the words of the top leaders of the anti-gun activists. The smart articulate ones. Not the rambling incoherent ones. They know the truth. They know it's not about public safety. It's about buying votes, gaining power, and control of the general population.

For a long time I have wanted to get a meme started, "What is the real reason?" But apparently we are not quite ready to ask that question. And for the population at large, and gun control advocates in particular, gun ownership laws are not something that is subject to reason.—Joe]

Although the exact number of Americans killed by gun violence in the 20th century will never be known, it is now all but certain that it will, by any measure, vastly exceed the number of Americans shot and killed on battlefields since 1900.

Brady Campaign
December 30, 1999
MORE AMERICANS KILLED BY GUNS THAN BY WAR IN THE 20TH CENTURY--1.4 Million Known American Firearms Casualties Since 1933
[What the Brady Campaign either is ignorant of or willfully ignoring is that during that same time frame countries without the right to keep and bear arms murdered about 170 million innocent non-military lives in the 20th Century.

There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs.

The trade-off is not between guns being readily available to individual criminals and guns being banned and hence as difficult to obtain as other banned items like recreational drugs. The trade-off is between freedom and tyranny. It's between losing a million innocent people in century due to criminal acts of individuals and losing 100 million people due to criminal acts of governments.

The founders of the this country understood and placed the security of a free state above the risk from individual misuse of arms:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Firearms in the hands of the people are a plausible threat to would-be tyrants and hence a "safety net" for freedom.

Gun control in this country was implemented to make it easier to suppress slaves, former slaves, and the descendants of slaves. That is a shameful heritage for the advocates of gun control.

The Brady Campaign is a small and small-minded organization that does not represent the people of this nation or it's values. It's time they faded away into the dustbin of history like their small-minded ancestral cousins, the KKK.—Joe]

This is in response to Joe's QOTD here by JFK

JFK's concept is what I've dubbed the "Plausible Threat" influence in human interaction.  Reagan referred to it as "Peace Through Strength".  My Plausible Threat concept is of the same nature, but is much more broad.

Why does someone do some something he doesn't want to do, when he is told to do it?  Why does someone avoid doing something he wants do to, when told not to do it?  Often it's because he sees a plausible threat of some kind looming over him, which will harm him in some way if he doesn't tow the line.  It applies in all sorts of interactions and life decisions.  In some cases there is a moral factor, wherein a person's conscience is more prominent in the decision making process.  In other cases it is the plausible threat that tips the scale.  In yet other cases the plausible threat is not enough, and a person or group will act in spite of it, i.e. it's a gamble wherein the perceived benefits are deemed greater than the perceived threat.  The threat could be anything from minor social tension to global nuclear annihilation.

Our second amendment is, in part, to guarantee a natural right, but also it is to ensure a plausible threat as insurance against growing tyranny. 

We’ve seen on TV shows like Survivor what most people will do for a million dollars.  What would some people or groups of people be willing to do for several trillion dollars, their own army, and the power to substantially control millions of people?  It would take a very plausible threat indeed to dissuade the sort of motivations we’re seeing in that arena, and we have a long way to go before the whole of the people are armed well enough, organized well enough, and act in such a way as to dissuade the sorts of tyranny already in place, and the sorts that we have yet to see.

A couple weeks ago I took the USPSA range officer class with Ry and Barron. I got my grade back today. I passed with a 92 on my first try. Ry got a 88 and Barron got a 94. 85 is passing.

This means we will have officially certified (assuming the certification comes through in time) range officers at Boomershoot 2012.

I’ll give you my cold, dead dick when you take it from my gun-wielding hands!

Quiddity
March 4, 2010
Comment to Open Thread: Penis Substitutes At the Ready!
[It's another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

As you probably have heard the call of Zimmerman with the police that NBC aired on the Today Show was edited such that Zimmerman appears to say, "This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black." This was not how it happened and a producer was fired over this. Good. The damage this deliberate slanting of the news could have been been millions of dollars in property damage and even people ending up dead from riots. As it is the tremendous amount of time and energy expended by people basing their actions on falsified information is incalculable.

The story is an AP story and is spreading rapidly. It certain deserves exceedingly wide coverage. Perhaps tensions can be reduced and people will look more closely at all the facts related to this event. And long term I hope more people verify stories reported by the media before taking extreme action.

Some of the news outlets reporting this story:

• NBC News producer fired for misleading editing of George Zimmerman recording (nj.com)
• NBC producer fired over Zimmerman call? (azcentral.com)
• NBC producer fired over Zimmerman 911 call (stltoday.com)
• NBC producer fired over Zimmerman 911 call (theaustralian.com.au)

We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.

President John F. Kennedy
January 20, 1961
Inaugural Address
[The "we" and "them" Kennedy was referring to were the United States and the communists of the world. But the sentiment has broader application.

It also applies to the people of a nation and a government delegated certain powers by those people. And if you think of "arms" as lawyers and financial resources it also has application to those with whom you enter into contracts with.

And if "arms" were a metaphor for "votes" the first sentence, but not the second, could have immediate application to the NRA, SAF, and other gun rights organizations and politicians versus the anti-gun organizations and politicians.

I had hinted at something similar with a very narrow application over 16 years ago but Kennedy says it more clearly and with broader application.—Joe]

It wasn't a failure of laws. I just don't see how our gun laws could have stopped something like that.

Amanda Wilcox,
Lobbyist for the California chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
April 6, 2012
California's tough gun laws could not prevent Oakland tragedy
[It's nice to see the Brady Campaign admitting gun laws cannot stop mass shootings but she still has some pretty significant symptoms of Peterson Syndrome.

Did you noticed she said "It wasn't a failure of laws" but then in the next sentence she says she doesn't see how gun laws could have stopped the shooting. One or the other of those statements has to be false.

The corrected statement should be:

Our gun laws have failed. Our gun laws cannot stop something like that. The best known way to stop an active criminal shooter is for another person to shoot back. As long as our gun laws make it difficult or impossible for potential victims to defend themselves these tragedies will continue to happen.

But the Brady Campaign has a vested interest in the blood of innocent people running in the streets. If they were more rare their funding would dry up and they would cease to exist. Hence they give out sound bites that at first glance support their warped view but upon closer examination cannot even maintain coherence from sentence to sentence.

See also Say Uncle and the comments to his post.—Joe]