Monthly Archives: January 2010

Israel and Guns

Posted on by

I know there’s a perception that in Israel, by golly, practically everyone has guns and that makes for great security.  They may have an effective military.  I don’t know.  When was the last time it was really tested?

From our friend in Israel, we get a more accurate picture of how the government treats private gun ownership there;

Friends:

Something new has been inserted into the firearms regulations here.

When your rifle (includes all .22 caliber rifles, even Olympic small bore .22s and air-guns) license comes up for renewal, if you are not an active member of the new Israeli Rifleman Association– a new branch of the Israeli Shooting Federation arisen out of the ashes of the Civil Guard Sharpshooters Association in 2009 – you must turn your rifle into the police or get a licensed firearms dealer to carry it on his “books” for you or sell it. 

1. Since no one can obtain a rifle license, you can’t find anyone entitled to buy your rifle. 

2. I know of almost no gun dealer who wants the headache, even for a fee, of having to deal with the Ministry of Interior inspectors about having “your” gun on his book.  Even though it is “kosher.”

3. Turning your rifle(s) into the police, because your license to possess (even exclusively in your home) your private and valuable property is not renewed because of an administrative decision not to renew it, is confiscation.

And they will send the anti-terror unit of the Border Police to knockdown your door and destroy your home in the process of taking your rifle and you will be arrested and carted away – the TV cameras will be rolling and the newspaper photographers will be snapping photos of the event – you can be sure that the police will invite the media.

If you are a member of the new Rifleman Association you must be “active.”  The Ministry of Interior regulations define active as you participating in a minimum of 5 national competitions per year.

GOD BLESS THE SECOND AMMENDMENT and the entire Bill Of Rights!  Things Israel lacks.

Enjoy the Shot Show.

Howard

This resembles the UK more than it does our popular ideas of what Israel is supposed to be.

U.N. and guns

Posted on by

NRA News video on the U.N. plans for gun control.

The destruction of those firearms I find as, or more, disturbing as I would the burning of books.

As I have said before I regard this as one of the largest threats to our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. And contrary to what some people say I don’t think the response by people will involve actively resisting. The first steps, should such a treaty get passed would be registration of firearms. I don’t think people would take up arms on a large scale to oppose this. It would be more like Canada where they, in a large part, ignored the law.

This would mean that ammo sales would go down, practice would go down, recruiting of new shooters would go down, and within a generation or two the game would be over. Registration must be vigorously opposed and defeated in the legislatures and in the courts. Should such a treaty passed the enforcement of the treaty must be resisted with all the enthusiasm you would any other law that violates my Jews In The Attic Test.

Quote of the day–Sean Flynn

Posted on by

What we’re looking for is good enough and on time. By short-circuiting the big questions and providing ready answers, religion makes decision-making fast. In this sense, a good, rigid ideology works the same way. Judgements can be made fast. Your OODA loop is tighter. Your observations are colored, but you can decide and act faster than someone who is weighing all the facts carefully and checking himself for bias. It’s sort of like why CoreWars was short-lived. It turned out that the winning strategy was to have a tight loop that shat all over memory at random.

Obviously there are limits to my argument. Components of Islam and Taoism stunted the development of science and later on put those cultures at an evolutionary disadvantage vs the West. It remains to be seen if the West has become too rational for its own good in the long term.

Sean Flynn
January 15, 2010
Comment to Environmentalism as a religion.
[With that bit of insight the comment thread completely stopped. I think everyone else realized they were out of their league.

Nice job Sean.–Joe]

Irrational fears

Posted on by

The anti-gun bigots sometimes accuse us of irrational fears. I can’t immediately think of any cases where there isn’t at least some truth to the fears expressed but I suppose the accusation could be valid in some cases.

However the anti-gun mind is overflowing with fears that are so numerous and totally lacking in a rational basis they are not only laughable but they are being slapped down in court about it:

When Tarrant County College denied a student the right to stage an empty holster protest in April 2008 at the South Campus, officials feared someone would use the event to bring a weapon on campus.

“There was certainly the expectation that someone was going to show up with a gun in a holster,” TCC interim Chancellor Erma Johnson Hadley said under cross examination during a trial in federal court Thursday.

School officials had the concern even though they had no evidence that anyone would, and U.S. District Court Judge Terry Means told her — when she couldn’t provide any proof of why she thought someone planned to do so — that free speech cannot be limited on the basis of an “undifferentiated fear.”

“I can’t see any tangible basis for this fear,” Means said.

I am sometimes not nearly so gentle with bigots like this. I insist they inhabit the real world and the leave their lunatic ravings at the funny farm. I say something like, “Facts. It’s what reality is made of. I suggest you check it out.”

Quote of the day–Oscar Wilde

Posted on by

People fashion their God after their own understanding. They make their God first and worship him afterwards.

Oscar Wide
From Hesketh Pearson, Oscar Wilde, His Life and Wit (1946) via The Great Thoughts (link is to the 2nd Edition, mine is the 1st Edition–1985) compiled by George Seldes.
[Although the list is essentially without limit my favorite examples are socialism, environmentalism, and gun control.–Joe]

Environmentalism as a religion

Posted on by

Via IM from son James we have a philosophy professor explaining how environmentalism is a substitute for more traditional religions:

Feeling unworthy is still a large part of Western religious culture, but many people, especially in multicultural urban centers, are less religious. There are still those who believe that God is watching them and judging them, so their feelings of guilt and moral indignation are couched in the traditional theological furniture. But increasing numbers, in the middle and upper classes, identify themselves as being secular or perhaps “spiritual” rather than religious.

Now the secular world still has to make sense out of its own invisible, psychological drama—in particular, its feelings of guilt and indignation. Environmentalism, as a substitute for religion, has come to the rescue. Nietzsche’s argument about an ideal God and guilt can be replicated in a new form: We need a belief in a pristine environment because we need to be cruel to ourselves as inferior beings, and we need that because we have these aggressive instincts that cannot be let out.

Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience, we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper. In addition, the righteous pleasures of being more orthodox than your neighbor (in this case being more green) can still be had—the new heresies include failure to compost, or refusal to go organic. Vitriol that used to be reserved for Satan can now be discharged against evil corporate chief executives and drivers of gas-guzzling vehicles. Apocalyptic fear-mongering previously took the shape of repent or burn in hell, but now it is recycle or burn in the ozone hole. In fact, it is interesting the way environmentalism takes on the apocalyptic aspects of the traditional religious narrative. The idea that the end is nigh is quite central to traditional Christianity—it is a jolting wake-up call to get on the righteous path. And we find many environmentalists in a similarly earnest panic about climate change and global warming. There are also high priests of the new religion, with Al Gore (“the Goracle”) playing an especially prophetic role.

We even find parallels in environmentalism of the most extreme, self-flagellating forms of religious guilt. Nietzsche claims that religion has fostered guilt to such neurotic levels that some people feel culpable and apologetic about their very existence. Compare this with extreme conservationists who want to sacrifice themselves for trees and whales. And teachers, like myself, will attest to significant numbers of their students who feel that their cats or whatever are equal to human beings. And not only are members of the next generation egalitarian about all life, but they often feel positively awful about the way that their species has corrupted and defiled the whole beautiful symphony of nature. The planet, they feel, would be better off without us. We are not worthy. In this extreme form, one does not seek to reduce one’s carbon footprint so much as eliminate one’s very being.

It appears many people have a religious gene. They are, in essence, programmed to feel as they do toward “something greater than themselves”. As science made the unknown more knowable and more under the control of man it reduced the domain of possibility and probability of god(s) controlling people’s lives. And people had to have a substitute. This professor proposes environmentalism fulfills this need for many people.

I would like to suggest that an all powerful state fulfills that need for far too many other people–socialism can be thought of as a religion. It is a belief in the goodness of something without, or in spite of, evidence. Compare that to traditional religious faith.

This has serious implications for society and even the entire human race. If we are condemned to believe in things contrary to the facts how can we make the best decisions for ourselves let alone justify the forcing of others to adhere to the will of the majority?

Quote of the day–John Bolton

Posted on by

The administration is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt – as was the case back over a decade ago – that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.

There’s never been any doubt when these groups talk about saying they only want to prohibit illicit international trafficking in small arms and light weapons, it begs the whole question of what’s legal and what’s not legal. And many of the implications of these treaty negotiations are very much in their domestic application. So, whatever the appearance on the surface, there’s no doubt that domestic firearm control is right at the top of their agenda.

After the treaty is approved and it comes into force, you will find out that it has this implication or that implication and it requires the Congress to adopt some measure that restricts ownership of firearms. The administration knows it cannot obtain this kind of legislation purely in a domestic context … They will use an international agreement as an excuse to get domestically what they couldn’t otherwise.

John Bolton
Former Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations
Quoted by J.D. Longstreet January 15, 2009 in The UN To Take US Guns?
[I don’t know if this is a real threat or not. My initial inclination is that the current Senate would refuse to ratify it. But I just don’t know for certain.

Long term I do fear this sort of approach to gun control because it requires fewer people to agree to it. Just the President and 2/3s of the Senate. But how would that work if the treaty said “You must register and track all guns” but the House of Representatives refused to pass a law requiring that? How could a treaty be enforced against individual citizens without U.S. legal code defining the offenses and the punishments?

Would the U.N. send in troops to enforce it? If so I know some people who refer to this sort of situation as having unlimited license to hunt “blue helmeted elk”.–Joe]

Proposed mini-match at Boomershoot 2010

Posted on by

A recent email from RivrDog contained the following:

The Rivrdog/Rockett Boomershoot camp (camped at #75/76) issues the following Challenge to those coming to this year’s Boomershoot, INSTRUCTORS INCLUDED!

  1. Pick any off-the-shelf HUNTING rifle out of your safe (or buy one, except no Fifties at this end of the range). Custom rifles OK, if they are custom HUNTING rifles. I’ll have a scale, your rifle needs to weigh less than 10# to qualify, or you need to prove you actually tote that 17# monstrosity in the field and not just shoot it off a bench (photo of you with the elk and heavy rifle will do). I’ll be firing a WIN70, myself.
  2. Put any glass on it you desire.
  3. Load/buy any ammo for it you desire (that doesn’t conflict with Joe’s rulz).
  4. On Field Fire days/hours (Friday and Saturday), come on down to the Rivrdog/Rockett camp and use MY shooting table & rifle rests. The rests are elevation adjustable front and sandbag rear. Coordinate your rifle -moving to be legal during cease-fires.
  5. Bring your spotter or go solo.
  6. Fire 10 rounds, slow fire, at the right-end steel ON THE 380-YARD BERM. Number of hits on it is your score.

Winner receives a (new, sealed!) bottle of 12-year old Scotch, my choice (which guarantees it’s quality!). As in war, no second place prizes. My guess is that it will take no less than a 9 to win, so put in some practice time. You likely will be shooting against some professionals. The steel will be about 2 MOA, if it’s like last year. I may bring a 1 MOA steel for tiebreakers. Award ceremony after Field Fire/Cleanup on Saturday. I will take photos during the contest.

If I had the time that day I would show up with my 17.5 pound Spud Gun that I used the one and only season I went hunting (and got a deer). It can do this at 200 yards and hitting 2 MOA (about 8″) at 375 yards is pretty easy if the wind isn’t bad. I’d do it just to be pushing the envelope on the rules and winning, not because I’m interested in a bottle of Scotch. I’ve never tasted the stuff and am not particularly interested in trying. Besides I have two bottles of the stuff on the shelves (Xenia, you still have that one bottle, right?) given to me by friends that I haven’t touched.

If you happen to think of some nifty addition to the proposal suggest it to RivrDog. This is his baby.

I’ll probably get around to emailing this to all the participants sometime this weekend.

Proposed ‘assault weapon’ ban in Washington state

Posted on by

I posted a little something on it yesterday and last month I told you why it is DOA. But I’ve been getting email (thanks Carl and Barron) and I decided to dig into it a little bit more.

From the bill itself (emphasis mine):

(20) “Assault weapon” means:

8 (a) Any semiautomatic pistol or semiautomatic or pump-action rifle

9 or shotgun that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine, with a

10 capacity to accept more then ten rounds of ammunition and that also

11 possesses any of the following:

12 (i) If the firearm is a rifle or shotgun, a pistol grip located

13 rear of the trigger;

14 (ii) If the firearm is a rifle or shotgun, a stock in any

15 configuration, including but not limited to a thumbhole stock, a

16 folding stock or a telescoping stock, that allows the bearer of the

17 firearm to grasp the firearm with the trigger hand such that the web of

18 the trigger hand, between the thumb and forefinger, can be placed below

19 the top of the external portion of the trigger during firing;

20 (iii) If the firearm is a pistol, a shoulder stock of any type or

21 configuration, including but not limited to a folding stock or a

22 telescoping stock;

23 (iv) A barrel shroud;

24 (v) A muzzle brake or muzzle compensator;

25 (vi) Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that

26 can be held by the hand that is not the trigger hand;

27 (b) Any pistol that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine

28 at any location outside of the pistol grip;

29 (c) Any semiautomatic pistol, any semiautomatic, center-fire rifle,

30 or any shotgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept

31 more than ten rounds of ammunition;

32 (d) Any shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine;

33 (e) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder;

34 (f) Any conversion kit or other combination of parts from which an

35 assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or

36 under the control of any person.

37 (21) “Detachable magazine” means a magazine, the function of which

is to deliver one or more ammunition cartridges into the firing

2 chamber, which can be removed from the firearm without the use of any

3 tool, including a bullet or ammunition cartridge.

4 (22) “Barrel shroud” means a covering, other than a slide, that is

5 attached to, or that substantially or completely encircles, the barrel

6 of a firearm and that allows the bearer of the firearm to hold the

7 barrel with the nonshooting hand while firing the firearm, without

8 burning that hand, except that the term does not include an extension

9 of the stock along the bottom of the barrel that does not substantially

10 or completely encircle the barrel.

11 (23) “Muzzle brake” means a device attached to the muzzle of a

12 weapon that utilizes escaping gas to reduce recoil.

13 (24) “Muzzle compensator” means a device attached to the muzzle of

14 a weapon that utilizes escaping gas to control muzzle movement.

15 (25) “Conversion kit” means any part or combination of parts

16 designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into an assault

17 weapon.

Notice that some pump action guns are considered “assault weapons” by these bigots.

Notice that the firearm has to have a detachable magazine and any of the evil characteristics. In the 1994 Federal AWB it had to have two of the additional characterisitics.

Notice that muzzle breaks and compensators are considered evil enough to make a firearm an AW. That would appear to make all Glock “C” models outlawed under this proposal.

And people like Dennis Henigan (Lethal Logic chapter 3) claim there is no slippery slope.

The line about “any tool, including a bullet or cartridge” appears to be in severe need of rewriting. I can’t make sense of it as it stands. I’m sure the Seattle bigots heard the California bigots whining about the manufactures making “California legal” firearms with a receiver that allows the magazine can be removed with a cartrige used as tool and hence complies with the law. I guess they didn’t hear about the ring worn on your finger than does the same thing.

Also of note is that the grandfathering of existing ownership is more than little harsh:

16 (5) In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was

17 legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person

18 possessing the assault weapon shall do all of the following:

19 (a) Safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of

20 the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to

21 ensure compliance with this subsection;

22 (b) Possess the assault weapon only on property owned or

23 immediately controlled by the person, or while engaged in the legal use

24 of the assault weapon at a duly licensed firing range, or while

25 traveling to or from either of these locations for the purpose of

26 engaging in the legal use of the assault weapon, provided that the

27 assault weapon is stored unloaded and in a separate locked container

28 during transport.

So in order to exercise your specific enumerate right to keep bear firearms in common use (most of my firearms would be illegal by this definition) you have to allow the sheriff to annually inspect your firearm storage–with no guidance on what is considered “safely and securely”.

A person would not be allowed to transport the firearm under any number of important situations such as to the gunsmith, a hunting trip, out of state for sale or as a gift. Let alone carry one on a daily basis as I do.

And what is it with “duly licensed firing range”? A search of the Washington State Department of Licensing website turned up nothing.

Also note that a couple of the bigots who proposed the law wrote an error filled opinion piece in the Everett Herald.

As other have said–we win because the other side is stupid. They are apparently nearly completely blinded by their own bigotry. But isn’t that nearly always the case with bigots?

No pressure

Posted on by

As you might have noticed I haven’t done much blogging recently. I am spending a lot of time at work and working while at home.

Earlier this week we learned something we had designed and implemented months ago works for simple cases but in real use it is easily broken. It had to do with some user interface stuff that we didn’t really want to do (our team is working fairly deep down in the O/S). We just didn’t have any UI experience and the UI coding model is something very new and had virtually no documentation and was in a great state of flux at the time we designed our little widget. Now it needs to be redone–essentially from the ground up.

It only showed up when some of the other teams started calling into our UI and problems showed up if you didn’t do things precisely the way it was intended to work. These other teams are partially blocked by this bug on my plate and it is my number 1 priority to get this fixed ASAP. No pressure there…

My boss says he starts getting into heart attack territory when we have an average of 10 bugs per developer. We currently have an average of something like eight and I have 16 on my plate. No pressure there…

So I was digging into the samples (which don’t work) on how do this thing when the PM stopped by to give my officemate and I some “encouragement”. In his heavy East German accent he said, “Yah! You should know that in just weeks Steve Ballmer is going to demo this to the world…” Now that is some pressure.

I think I need a caffeine IV drip.

Blog changes

Posted on by

If you read my blog directly you probably noticed a few cosmetic changes today. Mostly it was a side effect of me fixing the comment text entry box which was all messed up. I had to learn a bunch about Cascading Style Sheets to fix the problem and tweaked a few things along the way.

I moved the “Bloggers I Have Met” list to a different page because it took up so much real estate on the sidebar. I also updated the list. If I have overlooked someone please let me know. It wasn’t intentional to ignore anyone–except for wife Barbara.

Yes, she has a blog–with three posts since it was created on September 13, 2009. I refuse to link to it until she posts a little more frequently. Currently she has had a total of 13 visits. I think all of those visits were by me.

NRA; What’s up?

Posted on by

I’ve been seeing ads for the new NRA on-line national firearms museum, and I’ve also been working on building a period rifle.  I therefore thought it would be great to go and see if I could find some original examples of said period rifle at this new-fangled on-line museum, rather than having to, say, drive to Wyoming and visit the Cody Museum or pay 5 to 10 thousand dollars for an original rifle.  I tried it from home using my Mac G4 to no avail.  OK, I can forgive that.  The old G4 still has an old version of OS-X and Safari, and I sometimes have problems using other web sites.  Here at work I use XP Pro, IE 8, and a 700+ KBps ADSL connection.  I patiently try nationalfirearmsmuseum.org a few times from work and I’m redirected to nramuseum.org which displays a black screen, this tiny little sentence in the middle, and a heap big helping of nothing else;

The full NRA experience requires a broadband connection.  Click here to go directly to the standard NRA.org website.

From the standard NRA.org website you can eventually find a link to the museum, which then gives you said black screen.  Repeat as needed to become convinced beyond reasonable doubt that you’re not going to see any museum, no matter what, in spite of the fact that said non-viewable museum is currently being advertized all over the NRA publications.  Denied.  I then tried “compatibility view” in IE 8, which made quite a difference– it put that sentence at the bottom of the black screen instead of the middle.  Double denied.

If my setup can’t work, who’s does?  I thought DSL was about as broad as broadband gets, while the only clue to the denial is a note telling me my connection speed is too low, with no indication of what they consider to be “broadband”.  Have I missed some new and wonderful breakthrough in IT that everyone else knows about and uses already?  Do I need a cable ISP?  Do I need to get Win 7 or what?  In any case I think that if your web site doesn’t work with the vast majority of existing computer setups, you’re doing something wrong.  That is, if you want the majority of people to see it, and you’re not just interested in being cutting-edge for the sake of it, being satisfied with catering to an exclusive audience.

Then again, maybe I’m doing something wrong that makes it impossible to see this web site, though all the others I visit seem to work OK.

Dear NRA; I’d write you directly about this, but a black screen with nothing on it includes, as an accompanying feature, the non existence of a “if you can’t view this page, please notify our web designer by clicking here” or anything like that.

Update Jan. 10; Without my having contected them directly, NRA Tech Support wrote me this morning and fixed my problem.  Wow.  That’s service.  More in comments.

Quote of the day–Dave Workman

Posted on by

Voter frustration has a way of becoming voter fury when lawmakers stick one hand in their wallet and the other hand in their gun cabinet.

Dave Workman
January 13, 2009
Bill introduced to ban so-called ‘assault weapons’ in Washington State
[This bill defines certain pump action rifles and shotguns as “assault weapons” as well as ordinary semi-autos.

Vote the bums out!–Joe]

Quote of the day–mikecope

Posted on by

The only thing a gun is good for is killing and maiming people and animals. It is especially bizarre that several people professing to be Christians are keen to get their hands on the means to kill and maim. Would Jesus have packed an assault rifle?

…

You should also consider that a lot of this weaponry stuff is not about rights or owning arms, but SELLING arms, and making money out of it. Always follow the money.

mikecope
March 3, 2009
[First off, apparently he forgot that Jesus said:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Luke 19:27

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Luke 22:36

Second, it is spoken like a true communist. It’s the greedy capitalist that is responsible for everything they think of as evil in the world. It’s that unchallenged assumption–“Money is the root of all evil.”

I prefer Ayn Rand’s claim “Money is the root of all good.”–Joe]

Quote of the day–Marie

Posted on by

I find that people who are so enamored with guns are people who feel powerless in some way and have to prove something to world about how big, important and special they are.

…

Guns are a hideous necessity for law enforcement, but should never be in the hands of anyone else.

Marie
Oct 29, 2009
[Just so you know what some people thing of you and your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.–Joe]

Blog maintenance

Posted on by

I’m upgrading this blog to a newer version. There will be some disruption. In general there should not be any loss of content but if you are in the middle of leaving a comment that could be lost.

I expect the upgrade to start at about 16:30 PST (about 15 minutes from now).

Update: All done.

Quote of the day–Dmitry Orlov

Posted on by

So, what is there for them to do? Forget “growth,” forget “jobs,” forget “financial stability.” What should their realistic new objectives be? Well, here they are: food, shelter, transportation, and security. Their task is to find a way to provide all of these necessities on an emergency basis, in absence of a functioning economy, with commerce at a standstill, with little or no access to imports, and to make them available to a population that is largely penniless. If successful, society will remain largely intact, and will be able to begin a slow and painful process of cultural transition, and eventually develop a new economy, a gradually de-industrializing economy, at a much lower level of resource expenditure, characterized by a quite a lot of austerity and even poverty, but in conditions that are safe, decent, and dignified. If unsuccessful, society will be gradually destroyed in a series of convulsions that will leave a defunct nation composed of many wretched little fiefdoms. Given its largely depleted resource base, a dysfunctional, collapsing infrastructure, and its history of unresolved social conflicts, the territory of the Former United States will undergo a process of steady degeneration punctuated by natural and man-made cataclysms.

Dmitry Orlov
February 13, 2009
Social Collapse Best Practices
[I was reminded of this after reading Roberta post The Greater Depression. I snorted in laughter when I read the last line of her post but then it took me several minutes for me to give Barb the context so she could get the joke. She claims it was worth it.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Thomas Jefferson

Posted on by

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson
[This was going to be a response to some gun fearing wussy who had objections to my statement here. But no one took the bait and someone else brought up what Jefferson said in the comments before I did.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Haitao Jiang

Posted on by

Just one more time. Then I’ll go home.

Haitao Jiang
January 8, 2010
This was said many, many times in the last three or four hours as he tried to get his code working. Hiep, Pawan, and I hovered over his shoulder and others lurked on-line to await the results. He finally agreed to go home at 23:33 PM.
[I’ve been working since 5:00 AM after going to bed last night at 23:30 and I really don’t feel like finding a better QOTD for you. I went to bed after Barb had gone to sleep and I was up and working before she woke up.

My stuff is done for now and the testers writing the automated test code have to be convinced the test code is broken and not my stuff. We start at it again tomorrow morning.–Joe]