Quote of the day—Stu Ronaldson

We are not your citizens. The actual relationship is that you are our elected official. You answer to us. Apparently, you’ve lost a little perspective. The reason the founders included the 2nd amendment was so that, if necessary, we could remove politicians that lost perspective. Regardless of your personal delusions, Mr. Pawlowski, Allentown is not your little kingdom where you can wave a scepter and institute what you want, when you want.

In America, Mr. Pawlowski, the people and the Constitution are in charge.

Stu Ronaldson
August 28, 2012
The Left’s New Gun-Control Strategy
[I’ve said essentially the same thing before but in a more general sense. It probably is beneficial to be a little more direct to an individual politician that is getting a little too uppity. Good job Stu.—Joe]

On that whole Rachel Corrie thing

A couple of possibilities come to mind.

Maybe she stood in front of the bulldozer believing that when
the driver saw her, he’s stop. That would imply that she believed the Israelis
are moral and reasonable, and directly gives lie to much of what’s been said
about them in defending her actions.

Maybe she thought the driver would not stop, meaning she deliberately
let herself get killed, to be used as a propaganda tool. This would sort of imply some serious psych issues.

Maybe she was so stupid / ignorant of heavy equipment that
she didn’t realize that the driver might not see her, and not stop because he
was in a military zone that civilians had been excluded from and had no reason
to believe that some idiot might be standing in front of him.

In no case do I see any reason to support her actions,
change my beliefs, or care about her and “her cause” in any way, because it’s
nothing more than a personal tragedy for her family (who failed to educate her
properly), and a propaganda tool for people who want to re-create the holocaust
and tear down the best parts of Western civilization.

There will always be useful idiots. That doesn’t mean we have
to give them a platform.

‘Shark Bump’

American veterans under attack by our government?  That DHS statement from a few years ago does come to mind.


People are being arrested and “committed” against their will as mental cases for saying things that, by the standards of this blog, are fairly innocuous.  They did this sort of thing in the Soviet Union, but it seems to be happening in the U.S. now.  Watch both videos, taking note of the things that were said openly by the left on national TV.


I’ve said for years that The Enemy will do things that are so crazy we’re afraid to even mention them for fear of sounding crazy ourselves, or things so crazy no one wants to believe it.  It’s happened before, so one can only assume that it will be done over and over.  Has it come to this?


What happens next is we start blaming the victims.  “They wouldn’t have been arrested if they weren’t doing something stupid or wrong…”  Neighbors start informing on neighbors, and “you wouldn’t mind being searched if you had nothing to hide” becomes the word of the day.  “We wouldn’t have all this trouble if it weren’t for those people saying things against the government.  It’s all their fault.  Get ’em!”


Look for it.  It’s all happened before, and the sharks are always on the hunt.

‘Stunning interview’

We see that term, “stunning” too often.  This interview with Dinesh D’Souza however was actually stunning.  Please watch the whole thing.  Wow!  In any other circumstance this stuff would dominate the headlines for months and then linger for generations.


Actually, this is dominating the headlines, but not in the Old Media.  You have to look elsewhere.  Forget about the Old Liars (ABC NBC CBS MSNBC NYT et al).  They are done.  How did they get away with it for so long?  That, I hope, will be one of the big topical questions in history classes for the next hundred years.


It’s been done, but I second the notion that we stop worrying about about the Old Media.  Some people still bitch about them, wringing their hands over the latest dumb thing they did, always reacting and rarely acting.  No, Young Grasshopper; move past them, like the wind.  They are nothing.


We have our own media and our own culture.

Gardening

This year I endeavored to keep a nice garden.  The biggest job, after the soil has been worked and the seeds planted, is weeding.  Early on, when the seedlings are all very young, it can be difficult to tell the difference between some weed seedlings and the ones you want, so I tend to let some of them get more established before I pull them.  It took a lot of work, but between planting the vegetables on little berms and watering only the berms, I have the garden relatively weed free, except for some morning glory that never goes away unless you blast the whole garden several times with Roundup before planting.


But something struck me along the way.  Even now, months into it, I find weeds that are mature, “hiding” among the desirable plants.  They have a color or a shape just similar enough that we don’t see them among the vegetables unless we look very carefully.  Several of us have taken it upon ourselves to hunt down and pull the weeds, but still a few of them can be found, growing and maturing, feeding off of the water, nutrients and sunlight intended for the vegetables, and producing seeds that will hang around until next spring.  Then the battle starts all over again.


Although there are many good techniques for keeping them in check, the weeds still find a way to exist and suck some of the life out of the garden, even if it’s just a little bit.  It is a never-ending battle that you never really “win”, see, but it can be rewarding all the same if you keep your eyes open and do what needs to be done.


As the Republicans are frantically trying to figure out just what it is they should pretend to believe during the upcoming election, and while we stand here and complain to each other that “we can’t vote our way out of this” there are organizations already in place already doing something about it and already having a positive effect.  Even if “we who uphold the principles of liberty” win and win and win, one election after another, we can never stop tending this garden.  There is never any final victory after which you can let your guard down and just live.  Life is like that.  We can complain about how the weeds have just totally taken over the garden, and yet who’s fault is that?


Weeds are what they are– we know exactly what they are and how they operate.  We know that they aren’t going to disappear from the Earth.  We also know what the vegetables are and what they need to thrive, right?  So…


(Sorry if you don’t like allegory.  For some reason I’m seeing it all over the place lately, as though life itself is one big set of metaphors and allegories.  I get on a kick like this for a while, and then it’s on to another.  It’ll pass)

Brains, learning, and school

I had started writing a essay on learning and the brain and
current understandings about it, and realized as it grew HUGE that it revolved around examining some rhetorical
questions. Here are some of the core questions, with their import and details left
as an exercise to the readers and commenters, unless there is significant
interest in a particular one being addressed in some future essay.

Compare and contrast data,
information, and knowledge.
                Why do people use them
interchangeably, and what problems arise when people do?

Compare and contrast school
and education.
                Must one imply the other
(or the other, one)?

Compare and contrast smart
and educated.
                Why do educated people get
them confused so much more often than smart people (both in themselves and
others)?

Compare and contrast teaching
and learning.
                How do you measure the
effectiveness of a teacher?

Compare and contrast knowing,
understanding and wisdom.
                How does one get turned
into the other?

Compare and contrast intrinsic
aptitude
and interest.
                Can one be leveraged into
the other, or are they merely randomly connected?

What is the most important thing a human should learn?
                Rank, in order, the top 10
things one should learn by voting age. Why?

How can you tell truth from falsity?
                How often do you ask
yourself “how do I know that? What
are my assumptions?”

At its most basic (biological) level, what is learning?
                What makes this happen?
How are repetition and strong emotional tagging different?

Is it important for children or young adults to learn how the brain learns and works at some point, before they become an adult?
               How could learning this help children in school?

How can a neural connection be strengthened, or made more interconnected
with others?
                Compare and contrast a
single, strong connection, with highly interconnected knowledge.

How many strong emotional “tags” are there in a very safe,
nearly risk-free, environment?
                Would this present a
challenge to learning?

What makes the brain think something is important enough to
learn (that is, remember and think about enough to apply the knowledge later)?

What is the brain designed to do, and in what sort of
environment?
                WHY? HOW? Can we use this to help teach and learn?

Random thought of the day

How is it people can think communism is viable when even very small children and animals defend their property and territory?

I have to conclude either they are incredibly naïve, stupid, or intend to be the enforcers and hence are incredibly evil.

Quote of the day—Alan Gura

To decide this case, it is enough to acknowledge what has long been established in our legal system: access to fundamental rights does not turn on some official’s whim. No “good and substantial reason” is required to exercise fundamental rights.

History, not social science or debatable notions of public policy, determines whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun. And because history determines that it does, the state lacks any legitimate interest in suppressing the right as an end unto itself. The exercise of constitutional rights simply cannot be against the public interest, and the state cannot satisfy any legitimate interest, however compelling, by voiding a fundamental right and forcing individuals to prove a special need to exercise it.

Alan Gura
July 30, 2012
From the appellees’ brief Raymond Woollard and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. v. Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein, Charles M. Thomas, Jr., Marcus L. Brown, Terrence Sheridan.
[In other words the question of “need” need not be answered in the case of a specific enumerated right.

I would go further and suggest that raising the question of need implies the asker should be put a watch list for potential past or future violations of 18 USC 241 and/or 242.—Joe]

Gun Law Bleg

I’ve spent hours looking.  Lots of opinions and assertions from sellers but few citations.  Plus, retailing is not the same thing as manufacturing.  I also searched the NRA HQ site and turned up nothing that obviously dealt with the issue of manufacturing and shipping an 1860s style pistol.  Idaho’s 18-3315A is pretty awesome, but I want to address manufacturing and trade across states.


I did like this bit from the link above;



(2)  A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Idaho and that remains within the borders of Idaho is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce.



(4)  Subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not apply to:

(a)  A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one (1) person;

(b)  A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than one and one-half (1 1/2) inches and that uses smokeless powder…

 

I had to read that twice.  It does say one AND one half inches.  so anything under that figure is Kosher?  And if you, or any “one person” can carry it, you’re good.  Giddy up.  Let’s see; do I know any professional weight lifters?

 

So OK; what is the STATE law, and what is the fed law with regard to manufacturing and interstate trade of black powder percussion pistols?  I saw one comment; “You can’t find out because there aren’t any.”  I wish we had a free country.

 

The barriers a guy has to get through to bail out this fucked up Progressive economy and drag people, kicking and screaming, back into prosperity and hope…  How long will we tolerate this insult?  I want an exhaustive, nationwide, all-states firearm law guide that will fit on one side of a postcard…in large print.  “Thou shall not murder.  Thou shall not steal.”  I think that about covers it, no?  NO?

Truth in advertising

Kevin points out that a proposed name change for the ATF to “Violent Crime Bureau” would be “truth in advertising”.

Quote of the day—H. L. Mencken

Whenever ‘A’ attempts by law to impose his moral standards upon ‘B’, ‘A’ is most likely a scoundrel.

H. L. Mencken
[I believe this to be true with both social and economic “moral standards”. Hence I hold nearly all strong Democrats and Republicans in low regard.—Joe]

History and dark spots

Many of those that don’t like America point to all the evil
things we have done over the years of our existence, and say “you can’t tell us
what to do, because YOU took land from the Indians, gave them infected
blankets, practiced the worst kind of slavery for almost a century, treated immigrants
poorly, interned the Japanese during WW II, didn’t give women the right to vote
until the 19th Amendment, dropped the atomic bomb, etc., etc.”

Well, yah, we did those things. What’s your point? We never claimed to be perfect. We freely admit
to our many mistakes, and when we recognize our mistakes, we usually try to correct
them as best we can, and move on. Times change, mores change, understanding of
human rights change, technology changes. But, can you name any nation of significance, at any point in history, that doesn’t
have blemishes as bad or worse, and with anything like the saving grace of America’s
accomplishments?And even then, how many of those nations still refuse to admit to the darker spots on their own record?

The Japanese militarists of the 1920s through the end of WW
II committed all kinds of atrocities in China and SE Asia, from the Rape of
Nanking to treatment of POWs to ugly medical experiments.

Various Russian pogroms killed millions, and the soviet communist
gulags and artificial famines killed tens of millions more.

Five of the ten bloodiest wars in history were Chinese civil
wars, and most of the dead were not soldiers, and a “middle-ground” estimate
for the number of dead in the famine caused by the Communist “Great Leap Forward”
is 30 million, and they are famously xenophobic and genocidal against the “wrong”
ethnic groups, and their harsh “one-child” policy has killed millions.

Turkey’s Armenian genocide killed on the order of a million
souls, and the preceding Ottoman empire was for centuries famously cruel to it
salves (mostly Christians as a policy), who they often took as children from
their parents, castrated, and were made government functionaries because the
Christian boys they took tested as smart, and the Turks to lazy to do the hard
work of administration.

Germans had their genocide during WW II against gypsies and
Jews, as well as Slavs and others perceived as inferior.

The Aztecs and Incas butchered millions in human sacrifices (in one recorded case, 80,000 in just four days, with priests working in shifts!),
eating still-beating hears, skinning victims alive and wearing their skins, and
worse.

The various African tribes and kingdoms routinely practiced
slavery, genocides against opposing tribes, witchcraft and executed those
accused of the same.

The Native Americans were at near constant war with one
another, taking slaves, stealing whatever they could, conquering neighboring
territories, and practicing harsh “coming of age” rituals that often left
people scared for life or dead.

The British Empire (and their colonial descendants) had an
active policy of “westernizing” aboriginal populations in Australia, Canada,
New Zealand, and elsewhere, by taking children from their homes and sending
them to boarding schools, where they suffered a shocking (30% to 60% 5 year in Canada’s
case) mortality rate.

The Mongols, Huns, Vandals, Norsemen, and others made their
way burning, looting, raping, and pillaging, across the lands of Asia and Europe.
The Romans were quite effective as reducing cities and nations that opposed
them, raping and enslaving their people, as were the Persian Empires, the Assyrians,
Babylonians, and the rest of the ancient empires.

The various Islamic armies gave millions the “choice” of “convert
or die,” conquering and enslaving tens of millions across the ancient world,
razing cities and destroying peoples left and right. Even today, some of the Islamists
push an active program of utterly destroying archeology sites that might,
possibly, in any way, contradict their particular interpretation of the Koran,
destroying possible insights into history as they do so.

The list goes on, but the pattern is clear. Virtually every
nation or people of note in history did terrible (by modern standards) things
to others that were not considered part of their tribe, clan, religion, or
group. But most of them did it without accomplishing much of particular
significance, furthering scientific advancement, making the average person
better off, broadening human rights, broadening educational opportunities,
helping other nations succeed, or otherwise improving the lot of their citizenry
other than at the expense of the oppressed.  The exceptions, like the Roman Empire, are
notable because they are so unusual,
but even they generally refused to acknowledge their flaws.

America admits the flaws, and tries to learn from them, and
get better. But to do so without also
acknowledging the truly great and unusual things the nation has done is to do
our nation and her people a great disservice, sort of like only looking at the
murders done with guns but not also seeing the cases of guns used for
self-defense. It’s a “cost-benefit” analysis that only looks at the costs, which
gives an entirely incorrect picture of reality.

That is why I think that history should be second only to
language as a field of study in public school. It is full of exciting stories that
anyone and everyone can relate to and learn from, it’s not always technical, it’s
got fascinating bits and pieces as well as sweeping, epic tales, interesting
people, great inventions and close-fought battles, and it can be made exciting and relevant to all age groups. To quote
George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to
repeat it”. We really, really
need to not repeat some of the missteps of the 20th C; to do that,
we need to be aware of them. To look at only the warts on our republic’s
history and demand radical changes is the same as admitting that you are
unaware of the worse warts shown to be on all other competing systems of
governance. We are not perfect; but neither are we as evil as some make us out
to be.

Let’s keep working to improve America, not to destroy it and
hope that, magically, something better replaces it; history says that’s
unlikely.

Quote of the day—Kiki

Just shoot yourself. The modern man doesn’t need to hunt, he has all he wants and can obtain anything without hunting or any other stupid sick barbaric medieval method. What the fuck do you know about nature? You’re just talking shit to give a “logical” explanation why you hunt, it’s all bullshit ! Cut the crap with the nice, civilized outspoken person, ’cause you’re not ! You deserve to be considered trash, you an hypocrite, people like you don’t need respect, you deserve all the swears in the world because you understand just one law, the fist in the jaw law ! Any anti-hunting or animal right argument isn’t ever good for you, you just know that one thing, that you’re the center of the world and for that you’re nothing,you’re just a waste of oxygen !

Kiki
August 10, 20112
Comment to More Attacks on Sport Shooters & Hunters
[Remember it’s in their nature for liberals to be violent.

I also have to wonder if Kiki thinks butchering animals at the slaughterhouse is somehow less barbaric than in the field. And that they want hunters dead but animals in the wild to be left unmanaged would seem to be further evidence they regard hunters as not only subhuman but even below animals in regard to respect for their lives and rights.

That’s some pretty sick stuff right there. And it’s a very good reminder of why the right to keep an bear arms is so important. People like that have no inhibitions about committing genocide.—Joe]

Regulation is a force of destruction

What made Milton Friedman so famous was not just that he was
smart, but that he had a way with words that made his views on market economics
so clear and easy to understand (often using pithy quotes), and once understood
they are very hard to argue against. Here is my attempt at a useful pithy
quote:

Regulations are a
force of destruction
. A business seeks to provide a product or service for
a price. Anything that drives up costs must be passed on to customers, or taken
out of profits. No profit, no business. If you are running a business, a
regulator can fine you, imprison you, or shut you down. All of those reduce your
productivity, meaning it destroys value.
Defensive actions in an effort to ensure compliance, such as hiring a CPA to
make sure the accounting is done right, hiring ANY sort of P to make sure Q is done
in accordance with the law that no normal person can know all of, destroys
productivity. Any decision to not
pursue a productive action because regulations will kick in forcing other
actions that will make the whole thing profitless or worse, is the corrosive
destruction of regulation.

That is where we are today. Regulations restrict, suppress,
repress, confine, compel, confuse, hold back – so many regulations that
business is stifled, dragged down, and killed. Why?

Cronyism – business with “friends in high places” shutting
out less connected folks who could provide a better deal, by “helping”
legislators write the regulations to favor them.

Protectionism – companies seeking regulations to block
others in the same business, or to block entry into the business by “grandfathering”
all the existing businesses.

Regulations as a business weapon – in too many places, it’s
not the company with the best product, or best price, but the best legal
departments to sue competitors, win.

When a company says the highest
ROI of any business investment is lobbying
congress,
it’s time to start cutting back on the number of laws and
regulations.

But, perhaps worst of all, Legal and OK get confused – Too many companies are so buried in regulations that
they get to the point where if the lawyers say something is legal to do, they assume it must be OK to do; they no longer have their conscious
constraining their actions, but only the technical letter of the law, and there
is a HUGE pressure to keep the business alive and profitable (kids, mortgage,
etc). This erodes and destroys two essential components of a free market
economy and a free society: trust and respect. So, not only does many regulations
destroy businesses, they destroy people and any culture of freedom and enterprise they have.

To be sure, some regulations are
needed – but I’m pretty sure we are well past the point of the necessary
minimum to ensure an operational economy and thriving culture.

Quote of the day—Charles Garcia

No politician, including the most powerful man in the free world, wants to pull the trigger on solving the complex issue of gun control. The odds of political survival after such a move are worse than those in a game of Russian roulette.

Charles Garcia
August 2, 2012
Politicians hammered by the NRA
[And no politician, including the most powerful man in the free world, wants to pull the trigger on solving the complex issues of speech, freedom of association, or religion control either. So what’s his point?

Is he saying he isn’t capable of understanding the right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right? In 2008 the U.S. Supreme court ruled guns in common use are protected. Earlier rulings said firearms used by the military are protected. Garcia needs to either 1) Advocate for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and get swept into the dustbin of history; or 2) Find a cure for his ignorance problem.—Joe]

Quote of the day—rbstern

People who raise the “civilian gunowners vs. U.S. military” forget that nearly everyone in the U.S. military has a hometown with family and friends. And many members of the military believe what they said when they took the oath: They are, first and foremost, bound to uphold the Constitution. Ask them to start dropping bombs in Salt Lake City or Paducah, and they’ll be seriously evaluating who is giving such an order and why it is being given. Except in the most egregious circumstances, many will either refuse, go AWOL, or worse for the government, actually point their weapons toward the political leadership giving the orders.

That would not be some unique history lesson. The dimensions of civil wars are rarely clear and unambiguous. That guy with a S&W .38 leading a popular revolt might actually have air support.

rbstern
July 27, 2012
Post to The “I need a personal arsenal to protect myself from the State” Argument
[A very good point backed up by many conversations I have had with active and veteran U.S. military personal.—Joe]

A 1st Amendment defense of gun rights

I recently had an art major friend of mine claim that a defendable definition of art was “anything not required for immediate survival”. This means that everything from the image of your stubble covered face in the mirror as you got up in the morning to the dirty socks you threw in the hamper that night and nearly everything you saw, did, smelled, touched, or heard in between qualifies as art.

I don’t have to squint very hard to see that definition being valid.

Our society currently has a very broad definition of 1st Amendment protection of art. This has extended to government grants for such controversial works of art as Piss Christ.

So why can’t a claim be made for First Amendment protection for 100 round drum magazines as works of art? It certain meets my primary definition of art which is, “Something aesthetically pleasing but without significant functionality.”

Random thought of the day

In response to Andrew Cohen in The Atlantic On Terrorism and Gun Violence, a 1,000-to-1 Spending Gap.

Terrorism isn’t a specific enumerated right to be protected. Gun ownership is. How much money is spent by the “Bureau of Religion and Speech” to license and regulate the practice of religion and book printing and distribution?

Those that want to “prevent gun violence” by restricting firearms shouldn’t have any problem with preventing violence done by religious extremist by restricting religious materials and activities.

Nor should they have a problem with preventing racial or gay bashing crimes by restricting the free association of people of different races and sexual orientation.

The infringement of everyone’s specific enumerated rights because some people abuse those rights is repugnant and cannot be tolerated. The abuser should be punished and those that exercise their rights responsibly must continue to be free to do so.

Micheal Savage Doubles Down

He’s so proud of his Brady Campaign talking points, he sent them out in a mass e-mail today;



‘You don’t need body armor to hunt deer’


Welcome to The Michael Savage Newsletter, your daily insider report on all things “Savage.”


In this issue: Michael Savage is in distinguished company. Last week, he was virtually alone in placing partial blame for the Aurora, Colo., movie theater massacre on Hollywood.


Now esteemed director Peter Bogdanovich has joined the chorus. With that, Savage renews his call for a moratorium on violent movies, as well as a ban on body armor and certain kinds of ammunition.
________________________________________
“After the slaughter in the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater, I immediately blamed the actors, the directors and the violence in the movies,” Savage reminded listeners, adding:
Nobody paid attention to it, because I’m only Michael Savage.


I’m not a legendary movie director, like Peter Bogdanovich, who I see from this morning’s Drudge Report more or less agrees with me.


Charles Hurt of the Washington Times also mentioned the connection between movie violence and the real thing, so I put a link up to his article on my website.


His article is called “An Open Letter to Christopher Nolan, Sean Penn and Warner Brothers.”


Maybe you already read it. Maybe you want to move on. But I don’t want to move on.


I’m going to say this again: Last Friday I said they should ban body armor for civilians, and they should ban drum magazines of ammunition.


Yet my point was missed by almost everybody in the media


I’m a gun owner. I was on the rifle team in high school.


I absolutely would defend the Second Amendment. But let me tell you something: There’s a huge difference between the right to bear arms and the right to carry around a weapon that could shoot a hundred bullets at police.


You don’t need body armor or drum magazines to hunt deer.


We conservatives must take the high road and say we are in favor of banning body armor and drum magazines.


That’s because unless our side controls what gets banned, we’re liable to see things happen that we don’t want to happen, because we have a communist in the White House who’s capable of doing anything.


(Emphasis mine) This man clearly has what I’ve come to call the “Beltway Disease” or the “Republican Disease”.  “We’ve lost and we’re going to lose more, so lets lose more in a way that’s a little bit more palatible by losing in a way of our choice.  It would be wise, my friend.”  Typical Republican– pretend to be on the side of liberty so you can woo us into submission.  Michael; go bang your head against a wall.  That, I would pay to see.


Oh, and; you do realize that city, county and state LEs are civillians, don’t you?  Just checking, Michael, being as you tell us on a regular basis that you are ever so highly educated.  Never mind that the CO shooter wasn’t wearing body armor, and that you’re asking us to be unprotected while the criminals could always get their armor, and their drum magazines, illegally under any “ban”.