Author Archives: Joe

He must think he is psychic

Posted on by

From “The Gun Guys”:

Gun Pusher: noun. 1. Someone who pushes guns on others whether they need, want or should have them. 2. A person who cares more about profit generated from the sale of firearms and their own power than they do about their fellow-citizens. 3. A person who can pretend that 30,000 deaths from guns in the United States is simply the price we pay for “freedom”.
Like a drug dealer, a gun pusher will seduce you into believing that you want and need a gun. After all they say, “guns will keep you safe.” What they fail to tell you are about the terrible side effects of guns in America.
…
The NRA is little more than a two-bit gun pusher. Like a drug-dealer they peddle their wares regardless of consequence or conscience.
Beware of the gun pusher, they will leave no stone unturned in their relentless pursuit of profit and power. Schools, churches, malls, playgrounds, national parks and airports are all fair game to them. And, believe us when we say, the last thing they are concerned about is the safety of you, your family or your loved ones.

Apparently he is unaware that of those 30,000 deaths by gunfire half were suicides that nearly all would have occurred even if there were no guns on the planet.

Apparently he is unaware that of the remaining 15,000 deaths thousands of them were from legitimate self-defense by both the police and private citizens.

Apparently he is unaware that at least 74 Million people lost their lives in the last century because of gun control. Do the math on that when you estimate your price for freedom.

He apparently is unaware the NRA teaches thousand of people in personal protection and safety with and without guns each year.

Apparently he believes firearms in the hands of the police are not about the security and safety of innocent lives.

And finally, does this guy really think he is psychic and knows what we are and are not concerned with? He is actually closer to a psychotic disconnect from reality. But then we already knew he has mental problems. This isn’t really news.

Quote of the day–Alan Gottlieb

Posted on by

However, gun owners are not so foolish to believe that House Democrats embraced this legislation just because it was the right thing to do. Many voted for H.R. 6691 to give themselves some pro-gun-rights cover for the upcoming election, and they know it.


Those Democrats are fully aware that chances of this bill getting through the Senate during this session of Congress are virtually nil, but this issue gave them a chance to cast a pro-gun vote they can brag about on the campaign trail over the next seven weeks.You can bet your gun collection that Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will block a vote on this measure.


Alan Gottlieb
Founder of Second Amendment Foundation
September 17, 2008
HOUSE RIGHT TO VOTE ON D.C. GUN REGS, MAKE COUNCIL BEHAVE, SAYS SAF
[It about symbolism over progress on the civil rights front. But at least they using symbols that appeal to us rather than to the Brady Campaign. I’m annoyed D.C. is defying the Supreme Court chastisement for their 30 year repression of civil rights with the attendant hundreds, if not thousands, of lives lost. But at least they are headed in the right direction even if they have their feet dug in and are being dragged into compliance. I’m annoyed at the situation, can you imagine what the anti-gun bigots are feeling? I think I can–at least partly. I remember the passage of the Brady Act and then a few months later the “assault weapon” ban. I felt anger that lasted for months. But I had an outlet. I purchased guns, ammo, reloading equipment, training, and then in 1996 started working on explosives. The Brady supporters don’t have nearly as good an outlet. They can only whine, complain, and scream. That isn’t nearly as satisfying as putting a bullet through a pop can filled with explosives from 500 yards away. But then they have been whining, complaining, and screaming for years now and are good at it–it what they do. We have better things to do and it is part of the reason why we are winning. We have positive activities with tangible social and self improvement results. They are a hate group and have zero positive results to show for all their decades and even lifetimes of hate. To have even their minimal accomplishments in a few square miles of swamp wasteland near Virginia and Maryland be taken away from them as got to be extremely discouraging. Pity them as individuals but drive them as a group into political extinction.–Joe]

Pure Microsoft

Posted on by

Last evening as I was leaving work I saw this. Sorry for the low picture quality. It was taken with my cell phone.



Today, all day, was the company meeting. In a lot of ways, especially when Steve Ballmer is on stage (or running through the crowd), it’s like a prep rally from high school. The following are my Twitter comments while watching the meeting. If you view them on the web they don’t have the proper time stamp because the cell phone connectivity (and my Internet connection on my Pocket PC) at Safeco Field was very intermittent (overloaded with all the geeks with mobile devices). Most of the Twitter updates had to be sent several times before they finally made it out.



At the company meeting. Live Mesh is awesome. Office 14 is gettting lots of applause too.


Watching cool demos of Live Search.


XBox has good stuff coming.


Just saw world premier of more MS ads. Will show up on TV tonight. Much better than the first one.


Windows 7 demo is cool!


Raiin Wison led us in making a new world record of simultaneous paper airplanes in the air–22K.


One of the best ways to predict the future is to invent the future.–Craig Mundie


The robotics demo was impresssive. Receptionist assistant will go to beta in a few months.


Fireworks for Steve Baller’s entrance.


60B in sales. 22B in gross income. No other company (if they aren’t an oil company) can say that.


Apple: GAME ON!


Google has never been challenged. I want see what happens when they are.–Steve B.

Interesting correlation

Posted on by

There are times when I’m certain I can tell who is going to be in favor of gun control just by looking at them. They look scared all the time. Sort of like they are about to run home and tell mommy because you looked at them wrong. I have commented on this before (see also the picture in that post). Now we have some research to indicate there is a correlation but it is different from what I expected:



Alford and his colleagues studied a group of 46 adult participants with strong political beliefs. Those individuals with “measurably lower physical sensitivities to sudden noises and threatening visual images were more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism and gun control, whereas individuals displaying measurably higher physiological reactions to those same stimuli were more likely to favor defense spending, capital punishment, patriotism and the Iraq War,” the authors wrote.


…


The researchers noted a correlation between those who reacted strongly to the stimuli and those who expressed support for “socially protective policies,” which tend to be held by people “particularly concerned with protecting the interests of the participants’ group, defined as the United States in mid-2007, from threats.” These positions include support for military spending, warrantless searches, the death penalty, the Patriot Act, obedience, patriotism, the Iraq War, school prayer and Biblical truth, and opposition to pacifism, immigration, gun control, foreign aid, compromise, premarital sex, gay marriage, abortion rights and pornography.


There are some profound implications if these results are true:



The paper concluded, “Political attitudes vary with physiological traits linked to divergent manners of experiencing and processing environmental threats.” This may help to explain “both the lack of malleability in the beliefs of individuals with strong political convictions and the associated ubiquity of political conflict,” the authors said.

Crimson Trace laser grips

Posted on by

While at the Gun Blogger Summer Camp last month I won a set of Crimson Trace laser grips–whatever set I wanted. I finally got around to asking for a set to fit a Ruger Mark II. I received them but haven’t installed them. I went to range tonight thinking I would put them on and try them out but wasn’t thinking ahead. I forgot to bring tools.


They look very cool but a full report will have to wait for a few days.

Quote of the day–Alan Korwin

Posted on by

The good news is that 90 to 95% of the people from New Orleans have reached the evacuation areas, and have voluntarily taken wrist bracelets with bar codes on them so they could be safely evacuated, according to FOX news, 8/30/08.


Just think about that.
Bar codes for people.


Alan Korwin
September 15, 2008
Bar Coding People
[Those that understand the point won’t need any further comment from me. Those that don’t understand probably won’t ever get it–until it is too late.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Kristen Rand

Posted on by

This NRA-backed bill repealing DC’s gun laws serves only the political interests of the gun lobby and the profit motives of the gun industry. Make no mistake, such a radical reversal of DC’s gun policy will cost lives.

Kristen Rand
VPC Legislative Director
September 17, 2008
House of Representatives Votes to Repeal District of Columbia’s Gun Laws
[I think there are a few things Ms. Rand erred in when she make this statement:

  1. Repealing DC’s gun laws was done by the U.S. Supreme Court last June, not the House of Representatives or “the gun lobby”.
  2. She says “profit” like it were a bad thing. It is not. Profits indicate willing customers finding willing suppliers of goods and services. But her apparent dislike of this is to be expected–there is a very high correlation between socialists/communists and those that wish to remove guns from individuals. For her to do that puts her at odds with the entire basis of our country and in alignment with the most brutal, murderous tyrants in history. This alone should be reason enough to be suspicious of anything she advocates.
  3. The “profit” from sales into DC will be such a tiny blip on the balance sheet of “gun industry” they won’t even notice and cannot be considered a motive.
  4. The lives it will cost will be almost exclusively those of violent criminals. And even then one should expect the overall death rate to decrease to levels approaching that of nearby Virginia with firearm laws much closer to being in alignment with the specific enumerated right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Hence, either she regards all lives as equally important or she is unaware the repressive gun laws in DC did not enhance safety.

In those two simple two sentences there were four errors. Let’s enumerate the things she got correct:

  1. The bill is backed by the NRA.
  2. It is a radical reversal of the DC’s gun policy.

Final score 2-4. With the two valid points being irrelevant to what is really should be an answer to Just One Question. If I were grading her essay as if it were a test I would give it 0.5 out of 10. The spelling and grammar were adequate.–Joe]

This is for Kevin

Posted on by

I think Kevin Baker has his problems with the TSA mostly fixed now. I’m pretty sure he is now able to avoid getting special treatment when he flies. But had the normal channels not worked he could have just changed his name. Apparently it works quite well.


My contempt for the TSA Security Theater is at an all time high. But there is a certain amount of truth to the claim that a great deal of security is about feeling secure rather than actually being secure. However this doesn’t lower my contempt of the TSA, it just raises my contempt for sheeple and all government (redendency alert) idiots.

Guns and freedom

Posted on by

Does the presence of guns in a society increase or decrease freedom?


The NRA says, “Vote Freedom First“. But is it really true?


The answer is obvious to you and I. But it’s also “obvious” to the people of the Brady Campaign. David Kopel, Carlisle Moody, & Howard Nemerov did the research, crunched the numbers and concluded:



There are many causal mechanisms by which guns and freedom can advance or inhibit
each other. The mechanisms which are most influential at a given point in time can vary widely
from nation to nation. Historically and today, we can find ways in which freedom has increased
guns, guns have increased freedom, freedom has reduced guns, and guns have reduced freedom.
International firearms scholars, except those based in North America, have tended to focus their
research only on the latter two relationships, while ignoring the first two. Some of the more
enthusiastic proponents of gun prohibition have asserted that the relationship between freedom
and guns is always negative.


The data in this Article reveal a more complex picture. As general (but not invariable
rule), countries with more guns have more economic freedom, less corruption, and more
economic success. The broad international data do not support theory that more guns means less
freedom, for any of the measures of freedom.


The data provide reason for caution about embracing global agenda of reducing civilian
gun ownership. There may be particular countries where reductions might enhance freedom, but
the data raise serious doubts about whether the gun-reducing agenda makes sense as a categorical
imperative, at least if freedom ranks highly in one‘s hierarchy of values.


When we acknowledge that guns can have a positive and a negative relationship with
freedom, then we can begin to look for more sophisticated, carefully tailored approaches to gun
policy, which attempt to address the negative effects, and which are careful not to reduce the
apparently significant positive effects. Such an approach offers a better possibility of enhancing
freedom than does a simplistic program that only considers negative effects.


I’ll be reading the whole thing tonight after work.

Quote of the day–Gary Marbut

Posted on by

Heller was a five-to-four split decision with the majority (prevailing) opinion written by Justice Anthony Scalia. Some call this a “razor thin” majority for the decision. Not exactly. The opinion was written as strongly as could be done and still keep the SC swing vote, Justice Kennedy, on-board. A more dilute opinion might have garnered a 6-3 decision, and a weaker opinion yet might have gotten a 7-2 vote.


Gary Marbut
D.C. v. Heller What does it mean?
Page 16, Front Sight, September/October 2008
[This is the way I read the decision as well. It may not be the best way to present the decision for propaganda purposes but I’m fairly certain this describes what happened.–Joe]

Quote of the day–American Mercenary

Posted on by

A bolt action rifle can be the basis for a formidable fighting force, as could the venerable 30-30 lever rifle. Give me men willing to discipline themselves to train as a concerted team with nothing more than common hunting arms and I (and most any other military leader from the US Army or Marine Corps) can give you a formidable guerrilla force.


Which is why the estimated 80 to 100 million gun owners in the US give me a warm fuzzy feeling. That is the largest untapped militia force in the world. US shooters consume over 9 billion rounds of ammunition annually.


Why would any politician want to disarm the US people? Oh yeah, an armed population can only be subjugated by consent.


American Mercenary
September 7, 2008
Reloading thoughts
[I sometimes get comments from people who say they are glad I am on their side. Well… I’m glad American Mercenary is on our side.–Joe]

John gets it right

Posted on by

Maybe it’s his military training. I’m not sure. But Xenia’s fiancée John deals with one annoying situation appropriately.

Easy fireballs

Posted on by

Inspired by Roberta’s post I looked up something I had seen a while back–How To Make a Cremora Fireball. Here are some pictures of the results:



40-50 Foot Tall Cremora Fireball
(Photo and fireball by Noel Emge)



70 Foot Mushroom Cloud by Bluegrass Pyrotechnic Guild


And in case you hadn’t connected all the dots the TSA does not (and cannot) sniff your luggage for coffee creamer or powered milk. Hence a component of my contempt for the entire concept of TSA.

Blogger meet report

Posted on by

Six of us made it to the event (click on the pictures to see higher resolution versions):



Left to right, Phil, American Mercenary, Misty (wife of American Mercenary), Barb (my wife), and Gay_Cynic.


Barb insisted I should post a picture of myself as well, so here it is:



Joe Huffman and Gay_Cynic.


We had a nice time. No concrete plans to take over the world or anything. A report on Gun Blogger Summer Camp was requested. Gay_Cynic wanted to know if Tamara was as delightful in person as she is to read. I said she was but she seemed a little bit shy which I didn’t expect.


Phil and I talked about our plans for guns to take to Reno next month.


We talked about Seattle Mayor Nickels attempts to break the law and ban gun owners from carrying on City property. Phil reports Nickels will release his plans after getting an opinion from the state Attorney General. If I recall correctly Phil said that was due out on October 20th which will be in time for the election.


In response to something American Mercenary said about Democrats and socialism I said those people have a different set of basic assumptions about reality than I do and Phil says he will have blog post about that on Monday. I’m looking forward to it.


American Mercenary informed us about the use and misuse of full auto in the army. He explained a use I hadn’t really thought of before. He said a machine gun set up in a street can prevent anyone from crossing for many hundreds of yards but that same gun on a roof is of limited use.


Barb and Misty talked extensively about being the wife of a military man. Xenia will soon be in that position and Misty has been living that life for quite a while now. Barb arranged for Xenia to take some pictures, “When Misty has her baby.” Of course this was ambiguous to me. My first inclination was this probably meant during delivery–which seemed a little odd. But the shock on Barb’s and Misty’s faces when I wanted clarification on this point got me on the right track.

Quote of the day–Nathaniel of Tech Paladin

Posted on by

Never having experienced anything even remotely approximating the death of a loved one, I almost don’t feel I deserve to be able to critique the way Shields deals with his loss. I know what such traumatic grief does to people; who are we to judge how they cope? The trauma simply breaks some, transforming them into shadows of their former selves; others it unhinges, never to be the same again. Still more are infused with a zeal to ensure that no others are made to endure what they did. This is simultaneously the most noble and selfless way of coping, but also the most dangerous; after all, what has more potential for harm than a fanatic who’s wrong but can’t possibly see it?


And that is the man who Pete Shields is; honorable, kind, warm, eloquent, passionate, wounded, and very, very wrong.


Nathaniel of Tech Paladin
August 17, 2008
Book Review: Guns Don’t Die — People Do
[See also Confessions of a Former Gun Control Fanatic–it gave me a little thrill to see them describe themselves as a bigot. I think using that word in our battle to exterminate gun control is going to be exceedingly powerful.


I find it absolutely fascinating to hear the thought processes of people who are, and especially were, on the other side of the gun issue. It is easy for me to think of our opposition as evil because of the incredibly dangerous laws they want passed but, for the most part, they are not evil. They are bigoted but until they know you own a gun and many times even after they discover that they are nice people. I think that is important to remember–especially during the sentencing phase for their crimes.–Joe]

The future of guns in National Parks

Posted on by

A reliable source recently told me that once the rule change stopping the punishment of people exercising their RKBA in national parks goes into effect there will be numerous lawsuits filed all over the country. The anti-gun bigots are hoping to get some judge, somewhere, to issue a restraining order to stop the implementation of the rule change. Then they will drag things out in court until a new administration is in the White House.


If those lawsuits are filed it is my hope* that on her second day in office (Vice) President Palin sends Federal Marshals to arrest those involved and directs the Attorney General to charge them with violation of 18 USC 241 and/or 18 USC 242.




* I can dream can’t I?

Quote of the day–The Gun Guys

Posted on by

How does a Congressman from rural Indiana, or Alabama, or any outsider, have the gall to tell the residents of Washington D.C. that they can’t pass reasonable restrictions on guns to lower crime and reduce violence in their own communities?


The hypocrisy is absolutely stunning.


Gun zealots continually preach about government’s abuse of power. But that is exactly what the NRA and their puppets in Congress are doing.


The Gun Guys
September 10, 2008
The Gun Lobby’s War On Democracy and Local Control In D.C.
[Replace “gun” with “ni**er” and “NRA” with “NAACP” to see this in the proper light. These bigots appear to be unable to grasp the concept of individual freedom. In their small minds only government entities can have power. Power to oppress individuals is taken away from the local government and they can only think of it in terms of a power grab by the Federal government. I don’t believe these people can be reasoned with. They can only be politically defeated and destroyed.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman

Posted on by

American gun owners, who are increasingly becoming gun rights activists, are not the fools Democrats think they are.


Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman
September 12, 2008
Democrats may as well tell gun owners the party is over
[I think it’s time the Democrats were taught another lesson like the one they forgot from ’94.–Joe]

Cranking up the attack

Posted on by

The Apex of the Triangle of Death is cranking up the attack on Obama. The latest is this news release and brochure. There is also the website GunBanObama.com. Find lots of juicy tidbits like, “Just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right.” I wonder how he would respond to someone that said something similar about the 13th Amendment.


The odds makers have Obama winning. Former President Clinton says, “I predict that Senator Obama will win and win pretty handily.” Of course Clinton is a pathological liar so we can dismiss whatever he says and perhaps even go with just the opposite of what he says. For this reason and others I’m betting on the NRA and predict University of Idaho (everyone in my family is either a graduate or working on a degree from there) graduate Sarah Palin is going to win.

Of course they are worried

Posted on by

No one should be surprised that Concealed Weapon Laws Make Security Practitioners Worried. I’ll bet there were lots of “security practitioners” that were “worried” about blacks being released from slavery too. Reading the study they cite I found certain items particularly interesting.


The title of the study is “Preventing Gun Violence in the Workplace” (emphasis mine). It’s not about preventing violence in general it’s about preventing gun violence.


They claim “Research suggests that workplaces that prohibit weapons are significantly less likely to experience a worker homicide than workplaces that allow guns.” But they apparently include the police–“the risk of becoming a victim of a violent crime on the job is highest for workers in law enforcement occupations, who experienced more than 125 violent incidents per 1,000 employed persons.” One can only guess that the author, Dana Loomis, PhD, is of the opinion that the police would be safer if they were prohibited from having weapons. But then Loomis says, “Carrying a weapon is part of the function of some workers whose jobs involve the protection of people or property such as police officers, security guards, corrections officers, game wardens, and park rangers. Possession of weapons by such personnel is generally intended to prevent violence and is not regarded as a public health and safety concern.”


The most disturbing item I found in the report was the suggestion that OSHA should get involved:



The general duty clause of the 1970 Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act (Section 5(a) (1)) requires employers to provide “employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards.” An interpretation of the general duty clause written by OSHA’s solicitor in 1992 acknowledged that an employer could be found in violation of the Act for failing to take “feasible steps” to protect employees from violence and injury when the risks are “significant enough to be recognized hazards.


…


To date, OSHA, for example, has chosen not to regulate weapons in the workplace, but this position could change. It is conceivable that employers who fail to take feasible and effective action to protect workers from known risks of violent crime could be found in violation of the OSH Act, if OSHA were to take a more aggressive approach to workplace violence.


Can anyone guess who Loomis cites for data on concealed carry laws? That right, the Brady Center to Prevent Violence website. No mention of the NRA or other pro-gun organization as a source except for a brief mention which uses the type of language you might expect from such a bigot (emphasis added):



A critique posted on the National Rifle Association’s Web site alleges that the authors failed to consider whether workplaces at high risk of crime were also more likely to allow guns and that they ignored information about workplaces’ experience with crime (National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, 2005).


With an attitude like what I read here it’s no wonder Doomis is worried. He’s worried the good guys will win.


We have so much more work to do get rid of these bigots.