Category Archives: Crap For Brains

People and especially governments do some incredibly stupid stuff. This is about those stupid actions.

Not funny

Posted on by

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

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

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

Shudder

Posted on by

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

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

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

Sex numbers again

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote of the day–Steve Swain

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

Mayor, Mayor, Quite Contraire

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Another anti-gun blogger

Posted on by

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

My comment:

I find the following data points about Miller very interesting:

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

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

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

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

Quote of the day–Bryan Miller

Posted on by

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

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

Some might say it is ironic

Posted on by

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

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

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

What TSA really stands for

Posted on by

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

Regarding dust explosions…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote of the day–Richard Cohen

Posted on by

The more guns you have, the greater the chance they will be used. But both common sense and the law of averages escape presidential candidates, especially Republicans looking to assert their conservative bona fides. When it comes to gun control, they not only have to be against it but they have to insist — in raging opposition to common sense — that the more guns around, the safer everyone is.

[…]

He is the True Republican — a credit to his party, a threat to us all.

Richard Cohen
July 31, 2007
Thompson on Horseback
[Cohen is referring to Fred Thompson. What Cohen apparently believes is that any gun use is bad. This only demonstrates the mental problems of Cohen because in the same opinion piece he talks about the occasion when he wished he had a gun to protect himself. Cohen also neglects to take into account that during the 20th Century more people were murdered by their own government than were murdered by their fellow citizens–but only in countries with strict gun control. So, indirectly, people like Cohen who advocate strict gun control are a greater threat than those that advocate recognition of our right to keep and bear arms.–Joe]

Update: Uncle and Jeff both commented on this same opinion piece.

Quote of the day–Tom Robbins

Posted on by

Hardly a pure science, history is closer to animal husbandry than it is to mathematics, in that it involves selective breeding.  The principal difference between the husbandryman and the historian is that the former breeds sheep or cows or such, and the latter breeds (assumed) facts.  The husbandryman uses his skills to enrich the future; the historian uses his to enrich the past.  Both are usually up to their ankles in bullshit.

Tom Robbins
[What reminded me of this is the Brady Bunch reading of the 2nd Amendment and related documents.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Violence Policy Center

Posted on by

Washington, DC’s ban on handguns in the home has long protected DC’s residents as measured by the District of Columbia’s firearm suicide and overall suicide rate. The District’s handgun ban provides compelling evidence of how strict gun laws save lives by keeping handguns out of homes. The District of Columbia ranks 51st (last) in the country for firearms suicide for 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available. The District also ranks last for overall suicide. Maintaining the ban will ensure the health and safety of DC residents.

Violence Policy Center
July 16, 2007
Threat of Handgun Ban Repeal Puts Lives of DC Residents in Supreme Court Balance
[Apparently, according to the VPC, guns cause suicide. It’s telling they don’t compare the District violent crime, including murder, rate to states that honor our inalienable right to defend ourselves. See also this QOTD.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Ry Jones

Posted on by

Try it yourself–I’m sick of the bitching.

Ry Jones
Marble Falls AR15 magazine backwards refutation
[From Ry’s video on how a Police Officer can put a magazine in backwards an AR-15 long enough to get her picture in the paper. This refutes any claims it had to be a Photoshop job.–Joe]

Iodine is now a controlled substance

Posted on by

Via Tamara and Oleg we find out that iodine is now a controlled substance. Apparently it can be used in the production of meth. I just want it to make explosives.

I have some very fond, as well as scary, memories of my first home-made explosives which were made with iodine crystals.

This is what you get when people start believing you can prevent crime. There is no end of what they can and will justify once they buy into that repulsive concept. Legitimate crime control consists of punishment of those who injure others.

Quote of the day–Tamara K.

Posted on by

In his article, Westen proudly displays his passport from Bizarroland, a place superficially similar to planet Earth, but where drooling idiots with hearts full of hate run amok absent guidance from their spiritual and intellectual betters in politics and academe.

…

I was waiting for the lizardoids to show up around paragraph seven or so and symbolically rape Gaia while carrying off Al Gore to be a slave on their homeworld, Karlrovia.

Tamara K.
July 5, 2007
*sniff* It’s a thing of beauty.
[And so is Tam’s snark a thing of beauty. I find myself quite pleased at all the attention given to The Gun Guy (Gonzo) email and the book and article by Drew Weston which was the basis of Gonzo’s claim that emotion is what wins gun control arguments–not facts and logic. Here is a quick, perhaps partial, list of the chain of postings Gonzo’s email triggered:

And from looking at my log files I see where Gonzo himself visited to see where I quoted him. The web is a wonderful thing.–Joe]

Enabler of death and evil

Posted on by

My previous post, Quote of the Day–The Gun Guys, about anti-gun bigots demanding people use emotion to win arguments and their agenda in legislatures, deserves more attention. His email was inspired by Despite Large Majorities, Democrats Are Chicken on Gun Control by Drew Westen.

Weston claims people are at their most basic and inescapable level not logical. I’ll grant that he is not but nearly everything he says just does not compute with me. I associate him and his viewpoints with death and evil. I associate great emotion with the great evils of the world. Every genocide, the burning of “witches”, the war against us by Islamic extremists, racism, domestic abuse–the list is almost endless. Strong emotions and the exclusion of facts and logic have played a huge role in the killings of millions of innocent people. To endorse emotion as a means of “finding your moral compass” as Weston apparently endorses is flat out wrong.

Reading this article was about as pleasant as shoveling fresh cow manure out of a unventilated barn on a hot day (I’ve actually done this–it’s not for people with weak stomachs). Weston has the gall to claim facts are unimportant. Emotion is what is important and he claims this as a fact. There is no hypocrisy in his world view is there?

I was going to just ignore Weston’s factual errors in regards to gun laws but I can’t. Weston’s tries to convince us with facts and logic that facts and logic aren’t important. But he is so careless with facts that even if we were to overlook his hypocritical argument we just can’t trust him. Each time he erroneously states a “fact” it’s like he just broke out another window on his airplane. His argument is so drafty that no reasonable person could tolerate the ride even if his plane could get off the ground.

Here is a sample of the factual errors:

  • The Brady Act restricted the sale of “assault weapons” — Wrong. It was the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act passed in 1994.
  • The Brady Act caused 100,000 felons to loose their right to bear arms — Wrong. Convicted felons had that right infringed in 1968 with GCA68.
  • Hunters have a right to own firearms — The right to own firearms has nothing to do with hunting.
  • The National Rifle Association supports semiautomatics for felons — Wrong.
  • The National Rifle Association supports unrestricted access to automatic weapons — Wrong.
  • There exists some set of firearms “designed for no other purpose than to take another person’s life” — I suppose it’s possible but I’ve never seen or heard of such a gun.

I will grant Weston has a point in that emotion is a “card” politicians can and do play with great effect regardless of the facts and logic of reality. But this is not the way it should be. Emotions should be used by politicians to gain support for that which is true and logical. The “dispassionate mind”, which Weston apparently despises, should be the beginnings of any endeavor which has the luxury of at least a small amount of time devoted to planning. From the basis of what is true and good one can build up a web of logic and reach conclusions that will resonate and create passion. One should not start and end with conclusions and passion. To do that is to invite error into our thinking and that is why I see Weston and his ilk as enablers of death and evil.

Academia and other nonsense

Posted on by

Phil has a post up about the recent Supreme Court ruling on using race as a criteria for determining which school a child is to attend. The commies in the Seattle media and schools are going nuts and Phil takes them to task:

Leave the social work to the social workers. Schools are a place where instruction is supposed to happen. The only real lessons that the Seattle School District seem to favor are those of “If you’re not white or Asian you will need the government’s help or you will never succeed” and “If you are white or Asian, you’re only succeeding because of privilege” being taught in all twelve grades.

Disgusting.

This reminds me of when my son James took an honors level sociology class as a freshman in college. The first assignment was to write an essay on how the luck of his birth (white, male, upper middle class) enabled him to get into this “special” class. He wrote that it wasn’t luck. He had worked hard and gotten A’s in every class since the fourth grade. He got a “D” on that assignment. We counseled him he had four options. 1) Drop the class; 2) Suck it up and take the grade even though he knew he was right; 3) Make a big stink about it with her, and if necessary, the administration; 4) Give her what she wanted even when he knew it was flat out wrong. It was his choice to make but we would support whichever route he choose. He choose 4) and got an “A” in the class and to this day we refer to that class as the “socialism class”.

Choosing to give the instructor what she wanted was probably his mother’s influence. I had numerous similar things happen when I was in grade school but usually in science and math classes. I always went with 2) or 3). I always got very high scores on standardized tests and occasionally the results were literally “off the chart” but my grades were only a little above average. Sometimes you pay a price for being right.

Quote of the day–Rev. Jesse Jackson

Posted on by

I think people have the right to bear arms at a hunting reserve. But you’re not hunting deer with semi-automatic weapons. We’re going to keep protesting until America becomes more conscious of the domestic terrorism allowed by guns.

Rev. Jesse Jackson
Arrest motivates Jackson to fight for gun control
[Interesting. I’ve read the 2nd Amendment many times, as well as several state constitutions. It’s only been in recent years, and in just a few states, that I’ve seen any mention of a right to hunt. Jackson must be living in some other reality. But I suppose it could depend on his definition of “hunting reserve”. If you define “hunting reserve” as all 50 states with no bag limits on government employees then he is in line with the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment.–Joe]

Freedom or Coercion, Which Do You Choose?

Posted on by

It’s kind of bizarre to think that we have a “choice between coercion and choice” which is an oxymoron, but technically we do have it:

In a just world, we would never need to waste a minute discussing this, except with our young children, or in elementary school history classes, but see if you can guess which will outperform; a Soviet-style, government-run monopoly or a free market (our current public school system or school choice)?

Walter E. Williams of course nails it as usual.  The video, done by Stossel and 20/20, is excellent also.  I especially liked the “rubber room” concept they have in New York, as it upholds everything I’ve ever said about our socialist education system (I do have to hand it to them as I’ve often said we’d be better off paying certain public workers to stay away from the job, and here we find that they’re doing exactly that).

Our current system really is anti-American, anti-choice, and anti-success, and it needs to be scrapped as soon as possible.  The best teachers and administrators will form their own, better schools virtually overnight.  The worst ones?  They can always pick fruit for a living.

Man on rampage kills 9 (with a machete)

Posted on by

 

Damned good thing none of the victims had firearms, ’cause, you know, violence is never the answer and it only begets more violence:

The man then barged into a neighbor’s house, where he stabbed and hacked to death a 37-year-old pregnant woman and her three daughters and two sons, aged 1 to 9.

All I want to know is; who sold him the machete, how much money did he make on the sale, and is he proud of it?  How is it that a madman can so easily get hold of such a deadly instrument?  Why are iron and carbon made so widely available when we know things like this are going to happen as a result?  What are the Filipino legislators going to do about this?  What do the Filipino cutlery manufacturers have to say for themselves and their irresponsible production of such deadly products?

 

There is one word missing in all the descriptions of the victims, which bears notice:  “Unarmed”.  Add the correction and it makes more sense: 

“The man then barged into a neighbor’s gun free house, where he stabbed and hacked to death the unarmed 37-year-old…”

 

Here’s a news headline you’ll never see:  “Machete-wielding madman kills eight concealed pistol carriers.”

 

But some of our Great and Compassionate Leaders would prefer several dead innocent women and children to one dead criminal, shot by his intended victim.