Category Archives: Freedom

Independence: Imagine That

Posted on by

I’ve known of Hillsdale College for some time, but only recently did I learn from their publication, “Imprimis” that they long ago swore off federal funding, and the restrictions that naturally come with it.  Here’s a sample, but you’ll want to read it all:

The thousands of young men and young women who have studied here have been taught some fundamental truths; among these is that the freedom guaranteed them as citizens of this great country is the freedom to dream and aspire without limit and the freedom to fulfill their dreams and aspirations without interference; that our country’s greatness is the result not of government benevolence but rather of individual initiative and enterprise; and that responsibility is the counterpart of independence.

We hold these views to be as valid today as they were in 1844 despite the appearance and growth of a contrary philosophy based on government paternalism.

It is our conviction that this contrary philosophy is negatory to the traditional beliefs and teachings of Hillsdale College and is to be deplored as harmful to the continued development of our country, both morally and economically.

It is therefore the decision of the Board of Trustees of Hillsdale College to reaffirm its historic independence and to resist subsidization of its affairs by the federal government. Acknowledging that the possibility of failure is a concomitant of independence, the Trustees place their trust in God and in the dedication and generosity of students, alumni and friends who share their views.

They have courage and good principles.  You have to give them that.  The feds even tried to claim rule-making jurisdiction over the college based on the fact that some of the students were taking federally guaranteed student loans (surprize, surprize).  Well, Hillsdale was having none of that, so they started their own financial aid program and today they are flourishing.  Hillsdale is apparently one of the few institutions of higher learning that does NOT serve as a socialist indoctrination center.  Imagine that.

Now I have to find out if they support concealed carry on campus.  According to packing.org, Michigan and Washington State have a reciprocity agreement.  That’s a good start.

Now I have another reply for those people who have “Support our Troops, Opposed the War” bumper stickers:
“Support Education, Pull the U.S. Out NOW!”  I could go on about mistakes, quagmire, and how the Department of Education is nothing but a political tool for the empowerment of a few politicians and enrichment of the largest labor union in the world, but I won’t.

Corrupt Prosecutor, Rope, Tree…

Posted on by

Now that most of the months-long hype (or was it years? It seems like years) over the Durham / Nifong scandal has died down, we can discuss it here (’cause now we actually know what happened and we can’t indulge it guesswork and flapjaw).

All I can say is, well, both Ann Coulter and Thomas Sowell say it far better, so I’ll add just one point:

Nifong needs to hang.  Literally.  Its not because I hate him– I’ve never met him.  Its because he committed the worst possible form of betrayal: Someone in the Public Trust turning Public Predator.  Someone who’s sole job it was to protect Liberty & Justice turned enemy of Liberty & Justice.

I pity the fool, yet at the same time realize that if he doesn’t receive the maximum possible sentence, others will more likely follow in his footsteps.  If he gets away with disbarment and saying he’s sorry, we will have demonstrated that the cost of such a despicable and far-reaching crime is quite low.  We will have invited more of the same and we will get more of the same.

As much as I love Liberty, as much as I love my children and want them and every other American to live in Liberty, free to pursue their dreams of excellence, I want this pile of crap, and a few others who went along with him, to swing.  In Public.  Justice demands it, as an example to anyone who might get similar ideas, and as an example to all of us that someone believes our Liberty to be worth defending.  This society (our country of millions!) is not a toy for the cheap amusement of a few thousand public “servants”.

Lead Us Not Into Temptation, But Deliver Us From ‘Safety’

Posted on by

It bugs me every time I hear it or see it in print, but I haven’t been able to articulate it.  I will try anyway:

I do not want (nor could I ever believe it would be possible) for someone in government to “keep me  safe”.  I feel all icky whenever a politician, or anyone else, but especially a politician, tries  to assure us that they’re working hard to “keep us safe”.  I liked Joe’s title to a post on June 24th (“Help Kill Terrorists”) because it more clearly and directly addresses the job at hand.

When our president, blowhard senator du jour, or DC culture kool-aid drinker talks about “public  safety” I feel a lot like I did after a middle-aged man approached me at a Spokane, WA city park  when I was around 7 years old.  He asked me if I wanted to earn five dollars.  “OK” I said,  whereupon he led me to the restrooms and asked to see my underwear.  I dashed right out of there of  course, and never forgot the lesson: Someone you should be able to trust can turn out to be a predatory scumbag who sees you as nothing more than a means to his self gratification.

So here’s the deal.  I DO NOT want to be kept “safe” by my government.  Letting them try is far too dangerous.  I want my kids to feel reasonably safe, sure, and aware of their surroundings at the same time, but that is my responsibility and mine alone.  It is not the government’s job to make us “safe”.  It is the government’s job to be there to retaliate when someone violates our rights, and to make it known that the retaliation will be sure and swift.  To value human rights is to demonstrate intolerance for human rights violations.

In the best of circumstances you are going to be exposed to many risks (some of the richest lives are full of risks) and guess what; you are still going to die.  Its what we DO WITH OUR LIVES that matters, and for that we need maximum Liberty.  Living in a padded room in solitary confinement might be considered “safe” but somehow I doubt that is what the Founders of this Republic had in mind when they wrote the Bill of Rights.

When it comes to terrorism I want one thing and one thing only–  I want the Jihadi sons of bitches to die.  That is all.  I want them, and anyone who supports them, hunted down, shot (or bombed, etc.) and left to die in the dirt.  Let their countrymen clean up the mess, too– that’s not our job.  That killing the jihadis might make a few of us more “safe” is a side benefit.  Liberty and Justice are the aim here, and they’re not the same thing as safety.  They are very different, though slightly overlapping, concepts that should never be confused.

Meanwhile, I will not be trying to delude myself into believing that I am ever safe, either from the jihadi idiots, or from politicians trying to chip away at my rights for their self gratification.

I want to live in a civilized, polite society.  I do NOT want to live in a society with barriers, checkpoints, restrictions, surveillance, or some dipshit walking up to me and demanding, “papers please” no matter how “safe” a few deluded individuals might feel, and no matter how important it makes a politician or a woman in uniform feel.

So, Mister politician, lay off the talk about “safety” and start talking Liberty.  You couldn’t take the danger out of life even if you genuinely tried.  I want to you to protect our Liberty, and though there may be some overlap with safety, Liberty is a very different and far more precious thing.  It is the American way, and as much as you might like to forget it, you are sworn to it.

I think the slogan for the web site, American Snipers, then, should read: “Help real snipers get the real gear they need to kill more terrorists more efficiently.”  I like that.

Help kill terrorists

Posted on by

Ry has been telling me about the equipment deficiencies of our snipers in the sandbox and I had been meaning to blog about this for while. Kevin’s post reminded me. American Snipers appears to be a very efficient way of getting needed equipment and supplies directly to the people that will, as their home page says, “Help real snipers get the real gear they need to help keep us safe.”

If you want to help deliver a 168 grain message to terrrorists this (or this) seems to be one of the easiest and most efficient ways to do it.

Quote of the day–Mac Johnson

Posted on by

What the left does not get about the 2nd Amendment is that it is not about the National Guard, or sporting firearms or gun collections. It does not guarantee the government an army, nor does it guarantee civilians the right to hunt and shoot skeet. It’s about the right of the people to maintain some portion of the ultimate power of government — violence — to themselves.

Mac Johnson
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other ‘Rights’ May Soon be Found
March 15, 2007

Quote of the day–Marilyn the Patriot Matchmaker

Posted on by

I’ve always liked the kind of guys who’ll get me shot.

Marilyn the Patriot Matchmaker
Originally from http://www.westword.com/1996/112896/news1.html as of January 22, 1999
Currently this link is valid: http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.PrintableArticle?article_id=2988

Quote of the day–Henry David Thoreau

Posted on by

Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.

Henry David Thoreau
(1817-62), U.S. philosopher, author, naturalist.
Letter, 31 July 1849, to Ellen Emerson (then 10 years old), eldest child of Ralph Waldo Emerson (published in The Correspondence of Henry David Thoreau, 1958).

Quote of the day–Alan Korwin

Posted on by

Our nation and much of the developed world, thanks to digital technologies, is moving quickly toward a universal background database. Eventually, experts say, you’ll need your thumbprint (or similar) to ride an elevator, board transit, buy groceries (or anything), open accounts, get fuel or use your computer online. The most free places on earth will be the most primitive, like Africa, where human activity will remain largely untrackable.

Alan Korwin
New Gun Control Law to Monitor Entire Population in Central Database
[It’s very interesting to me that the people that scream the loudest, “Bush is Hitler”, overlook the dark side of the gun control laws they endorse. Korwin has great insight down this dim corridor.–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.

From the ‘only the government should be allowed’ file

Posted on by

I don’t blame the Sheriff’s office or FBI for this–some criminal is responsible. But I don’t want to hear anyone whining about only the government should be allowed to possess certain things when the government can be stolen from as well as private citizens or businesses. The following news release is dated June 13th:

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the FBI and the St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department announced today a joint reward of up to $5,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for the theft of explosives from an explosives storage bunker at the St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department training center.

An FBI agent discovered the theft at the center, located at 1835 Highway 94, yesterday. The magazine was utilized by the St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department and the FBI’s St. Louis office.

Investigators from ATF, St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department and the FBI responded to the scene immediately, and determined that commercially manufactured high and low explosives were stolen. The types include C-4, dynamite, cast boosters, safety fuse and detonating cord. Not all items in the magazine were taken. The follow-up investigation has determined the theft occurred within the last 10 days. Leads are being followed up as the investigation continues.

Also, someone should get their wrist slapped because the theft should have been discovered in seven days or less:

§ 55.204 Inspection of magazines.
Any person storing explosive materials shall inspect his magazines at least every seven days. This inspection need not be an inventory, but must be sufficient to determine whether there has been unauthorized entry or attempted entry into the magazines, or unauthorized removal of the contents of the magazines.
[T.D. ATF-87, 46 FR 40384, Aug. 7, 1981]

Sensible restrictions

Posted on by

Robyn Ringler is almost friendly to gun owners in her latest post:

The bill also includes an appeals process if you get listed in the database and feel it is unfair. This was insisted upon by the NRA. Fair enough and a good idea.

This distinguishes her from a lot of the anti-gun bigots who insist that if you are on “terror suspect” list you should be banned from owning a gun even if there is no way to challenge the validity of your name being on the list. Another intolerable situation is when someone shares a name with someone who is on the list and both have their rights restricted without due process.

However, Ms. Ringler still has more education in her future:

I cannot support the stand that there should be NO restrictions at all on gun ownership. We restrict free speech, we restrict behavior, we restrict what movies children can get into, we restrict certain foods, medications, products. And all for good reason.

It makes sense to restrict gun ownership to you, the sensible people who are out there being responsible.

I’m glad she compares gun ownership to free speech. It’s a good comparison. Both are constitutionally guaranteed rights. Kids going to movies and medications are not guaranteed rights. But she misses a critical point. The restrictions on free speech do not involve prior restraint. You are not muzzled prior to gaining access to a crowded theater so that you can’t do the classic “shout fire in a crowded theater”. You don’t have to get a license from the government before you can post your opinions on your blog. You don’t have to pass a background check before you can buy a printer for your computer. There are laws against slander and libel just as there are there are laws against murder and assault. It should make no difference whether someone murders someone with a baseball bat (video of an actual baseball bat crime–thanks Rob) or a gun. We don’t license or restrict baseball bats, possession of which is not a constitutionally guaranteed right, and we shouldn’t license or restrict firearms which are a constitutionally guaranteed right. We restrict the actions which actually cause harm. And we do that by punishing those people who engage in those prohibited actions. There is no victim when someone purchases a .50 caliber precision rifle so they can punch holes in paper or connect with boomers 700 or 1000 yards away. Driving drunk or at high speed in a residential neighborhood is sort of an edge case. By itself there isn’t a victim but the risk is so high with no reasonable justification for the action that restricting that behavior is acceptable. Plus it’s not a guaranteed right.

Banning some .50 caliber rifles when the number of shooting victims where the criminal used such a rifle in the last 20 years can be counted on one hand (even if you are missing a finger or two) is not “sensible”. It’s prior restraint and it’s bigoted.

Update: Jason pointed out to me in email that a baseball bat (clubs) could be considered arms and hence are protected by the Second Amendment. I tend to agree with him but worry that the anti-gun bigots might start claiming as long as we are allowed at least one type of club our RKBA is not being infringed.

Quote of the day–George Orwell

Posted on by

Though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found to be generally true: That in ages in which the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people will have a chance…

George Orwell
Essays, Volume IV 
[Just a reminder–Orwell wrote Animal Farm and 1984. Both should be required reading in High School.–Joe]

Limiting IED production

Posted on by

Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) are a huge issue for our forces in the sandbox. Because I have some experience in making improvised explosives this was one of the areas where I was trying to contribute when I worked at PNNL. Unfortunately that didn’t work out and I was involuntarily sidelined in that effort. Here is some tantalizing information on how the battle against IEDs is going:

There may be an unlimited supply of explosives in Iraq, but there is not an unlimited supply of people who know how to wire the detonators. In 2004, CIA operatives in Iraq believed they had identified the signatures of 11 different bomb-makers. They proposed a diabolical – but potentially effective – sabotage program that would have flooded Iraq with booby-trapped detonators designed to explode in the bomb-makers’ hands. But the CIA’s general counsel’s office said no. The lawyers claimed the agency lacked authority for such an operation, one source recalled.

Aside from the aneurysm inducing restriction imposed by the lawyers this is very interesting information. There are a very limited number of people in the Islamic extremist community with the technical skills to connect a remote garage door opener, walkie-talkie, or cell phone ringer, to the two wires of a blasting cap. This is an incredibly foreign concept to me. On the farm I was working with explosives when I was 10 years old and making electronic projects (and yes, some of them used vacuum tubes which means my son will claim it was in prehistoric times) by the time I was 12 or so. I don’t remember how much before that I was doing simple things with electric circuits — which is all the expertise you need to connect detonators.

I expect this is some sort of cultural difference. They think entirely different than we do, some say it may be more different that we can think. And apparently the reverse is true as well. Something that I could do as a child before my voice changed is a rare skill in their culture. So if we can’t remove those rare individuals from their society with sabotaged detonators how else can we take advantage of their lack of people with technical skills above that of a 12 year-old?

Communism victims memorial

Posted on by

We now have a memorial to the millions of victims of communism:

President Bush, attending Tuesday’s dedication of a memorial to an estimated 100 million victims of communist regimes, compared the fight against radical Islam to the Cold War battle against totalitarian communism.

…

The ceremony was held on the 20th anniversary of President Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, in which he implored Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” Two years later, the wall fell.

The Victims of Communism Memorial is a bronze Goddess of Democracy statue. It is a replica of a replica – a reproduction of the papier-mache statue that Chinese students modeled on the Statue of Liberty and carried into Tiananmen Square during pro-democracy protests in 1989.

What amazes me is that there are still people in this country who are advocates for such a murderous and failed economic/political system. A survivor of Russian communism when asked what he thought of “trying to do it right this time” said something to the effect of, “There are 100 million corpses from the previous efforts. Do you want to donate your body to the next attempt?” That was a pretty good verbal response. Numerous non-verbal responses come to mind as well but such hand signals can cause you to be talked about.

Quote of the day–John F. Kennedy

Posted on by

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

John F. Kennedy
In a speech at the White House, 1962
[For some reason when I think of the McCain-Feingold Act this quote comes to mind.–Joe]

“Real ID” gets some road blocks

Posted on by

I’ve been saying “Real ID” is a bad idea for a long time. It’s good to see some state legislatures are coming on board with that conclusion as well:

Defying Uncle Sam, four states have passed laws refusing to comply with federal rules to make state-issued driver’s licenses more secure, casting further doubt on the future of the 2005 Real ID Act.

Although it is rare for states to reject an act of Congress, New Hampshire and Oklahoma in May joined Montana and Washington state in passing statutes this year refusing to go along with Real ID. The refusals mean those states’ driver’s licenses eventually won’t be accepted as official identification when boarding airplanes or entering federal buildings.

In addition, the Idaho Legislature purposely left out any money to comply with the act. The Georgia Legislature passed a law giving Gov. Sonny Perdue authority to ignore the measure, but he is hoping the federal government will make the act more affordable, said his spokesman, Bert Brantley.

Quote of the day–Diane Holt

Posted on by

“Legal” doesn’t necessarily mean “good” — or “right” — or “reasonable”. Do you really just base your actions on what is and isn’t _legal_? Do you really just hand over all your decision-making power to the government?”

Diane Holt

Quote of the day–Mark Steyn

Posted on by

In Gaza, Islamic Jihad is planning to send waves of female suicide bombers into action against the Zionist Entity. Asked by an Israeli reporter whether self-detonating ladies enjoy the same 72-virgin deal as the lads, an Arab scholar said no, but that the gals will be served in Paradise by “dwarfs.” Snow White got seven dwarfs, but it’s unclear whether Blow White will get the full 72: Sleepy, Grumpy, Bashful, etc., all the way down to Incendiary, Non-Alcoholic and Anti-Zionist.

Mark Steyn
May 27, 2007
So much news, so little sense
[I’ve always wondered about the rewards for the Islamic female. So now we know.–Joe]

I don’t like the sound of this

Posted on by

Democrats, NRA make deal on new gun rules:

WASHINGTON — Senior Democrats have reached agreement with the National Rifle Association on what could be the first federal gun-control legislation since 1994, a measure to significantly strengthen the national system that checks the backgrounds of gun buyers.

The sensitive talks began in April, days after a mentally ill student killed 32 people at Virginia Tech University. The shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, had been judicially ordered to submit to a psychiatric evaluation, which should have disqualified him from buying handguns. But the state of Virginia never forwarded that information to the federal National Instant Check System, and the massacre exposed a loophole in the 13-year-old background-check program.

Under the agreement, participating states would be given monetary enticements for the first time to keep the federal background database up to date, as well as penalties for failing to comply.

To sign on to the deal, the powerful gun lobby won significant concessions from Democratic negotiators. Individuals with minor infractions in their pasts could petition their states to have their names removed from the federal database, and about 83,000 military veterans, put into the system by the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2000 for alleged mental health reasons, would have a chance to clean their records.

The federal government would be permanently barred from charging gun buyers or sellers a fee for their background checks. In addition, faulty records such as duplicative names or expunged convictions would have to be scrubbed from the database.

“The NRA worked diligently with the concerns of gun owners and law enforcement in mind to make a … system that’s better for gun owners and better for law enforcement,” said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich., who led the talks.

First: If someone is so dangerous they can’t be trusted with a gun then I don’t think they can be trusted with a can of gasoline and a book of matches either. Either they can be trusted in public or they should be locked up.

Second: Making the least agreeable portions of the infringement on our rights more palatable just means it will be more difficult to justify getting rid of it entirely later on.

Third: The longer this infringement stays in place the more accepting of it people are. The ban on new machine gun sales is so well accepted that most people believe they are banned entirely. Today it would be really tough to repeal the ban on machine guns and day by day it’s getting more difficult for people to even consider repealing the Brady Act.

Fourth: The Brady/FBI database and reporting system is so close to a database of all gun owners and their guns that it is a hazard to the health of our freedom. Which has one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peal anyway.

All that said, borrowing from a great book I just listened to recently, Survival of the Sickest, “Why would you take a pill that will kill you 40 years from now?” The answer is, “Because it will keep me from dying tomorrow.” And so it is with this agreement.

Porn for Peace is getting support

Posted on by

Thanks to David for bringing this to our attention. I named this plan Porn for Peace several months ago after Ry and I outlined the basics of it nearly three years ago.

That are lots of other implications for the data supplied in this posting. Think on this for a while:

Up to 70% of files exchanged between Saudi teenagers’ mobile phones contain pornography, according to a study in the ultra-conservative Muslim kingdom.

The study quoted in Arab News focussed on the phones of teenagers detained by religious police for harassing girls.

…

The men of Islam are obsessed with sex beyond even the wildest imaginings of the Western male’s mind. And the obsession is far from healthy and even further from reality.

We frequently joke about men’s preoccupation with sex and female body parts in the West, but our fascination with “T&A” is nothing when you consider that the Muslim world is literally consumed by female sexuality and with their fear of it. It is ironic that both Muslim men and women are under the mistaken impression that Western society is oversexualized compared to them, when in fact, it is practically impossible to be more obsessed with sexual matters than they are in Muslim communities.