Category Archives: Quote of the Day

Cry Harder

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Your “horrifying if you believe in the First Amendment” drivel is the exact cognitive blind spot these cells exploit…weaponizing free speech as a get-out-of-consequences card for those who piss on it with bullets and bombs.

Brandenburg v. Ohio carved it out decades ago:

protected speech stops cold at incitement to imminent lawless action that actually happens. They didn’t just talk; they executed.

The Constitution doesn’t shield arsonists, shooters, or terror enablers any more than it shields Al-Qaeda sympathizers handing out bomb manuals.

This verdict isn’t chilling dissent; it’s lethal accountability, the kind that deters the next cell of ideologically poisoned fuckwits from turning public facilities into kill zones.

So spare me your performative horror, you fucking idiot.

The jury saw the pathology for what it was. The FBI built the case on it. And the law cut them down.

Cry harder, sweetheart.

LHGrey™️ @grey4626
Posted on X, March 14, 2026

This was in response to:

It is interesting this person believes the First Amendment protects the destruction of government property and shooting a police officer with an AR-15. They must have crap for brains. With that broad of scope for the First Amendment, just imagine what the Second Amendment must protect. Why, it must protect the use of artillery dropping HE on the U.S. Capital or some such thing.

AI and Cyber Security

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

For decades, one of the biggest factors that would limit the ability of attackers to target companies has been the lack of resources. In other words, they simply didn’t have the time, talent, or ability to look everywhere at once. It’s not a secret that if you look beneath the surface, every single company is a mess on the inside, but because of how complex the environments are and how much time it takes for attackers to do reconnaissance, oftentimes what actually keeps companies from getting breached is the lack of resources on the attacker side.

With AI, that is soon going to go away. Attackers are not bound by corporate governance or acceptable-use policies deciding which models can or cannot be deployed. They will use every model available, every autonomous agent, every form of automation that allows them to enumerate infrastructure, map dependencies, generate exploits, and test hypotheses at a scale that was previously impossible. The cheaper LLMs become, the lower the cost of attacking will be, and the higher the volume of attacks is going to become. This shift is going to fundamentally change the economics of defense. When attackers gain near-unlimited reconnaissance and experimentation capacity, companies won’t be able to rely on reactive security. Very soon, hoping that vulnerabilities and misconfigurations remain undiscovered will stop being a strategy.

Ross Haleliuk
March 3, 2026
Anthropic won’t kill cyber, but it may kill some companies

My manager walked over to my desk today and said, “We are putting together a ‘tiger team’ to work on a grand plan for reshaping how we do cyber security at <company name>. How do we restructure the way we work in an AI world? Would you like to be on that team?” My immediate answer was, “YES!” He started to tell me a little about what he had in mind. I reached across my desk and picked up a heavy plastic object and showed it to him. “What is this?, he asked. “This”, I explained, “Is a patent I got over three years ago for what I think you are describing.”

Our first ‘tiger team’ meeting is tomorrow. I’m looking forward to it.

A couple of months ago I was talking to a Cyber Security Analyst friend at Mandiant (formerly, they were purchased by Google a few years ago). We talked at AI at length. It is very disruptive for cyber security. I asked, “Will the defenders or the attackers benefit the most from AI?” His answer was, “The attackers. There just isn’t any real doubt about that.”

Perhaps he is right. But I know the defenders can put up a good fight. Probably the biggest obstacle is that large corporation have difficulty moving fast. AI is exceedingly nimble and corporations with petabytes of daily data to manage have a tremendous amount of inertia. For all intents and purposes, the attack surfaces are stationary compared to an AI attacker.

Suppose a single evil AI or a skilled nation state compromised all major infrastructure and went for maximum destruction. The amount of damage done would boggle your mind. For a starter, imagine almost no electricity or communication, with zero water and waste disposal. Equipment is not just shut down, it is destroyed. Natural gas lines are not just turned off they are over pressured and ignited. Sewer systems are not just stopped. They pump sewage into the streets or even into buildings. Refineries have “high energy events.” The water behind dams is released in a manner to breach downstream dams. Self-driving cars turn into land-based Kamikazes. Cell phones batteries explode. There are 10,000 airplanes crashing into buildings in hundreds of U.S. cities.

If something connects to the Internet, it becomes a weapon.

We live in interesting times.

I wish my underground bunker in Idaho were complete.

America First

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

3 weeks ago I argued the US goal in Iran is to seize the global oil spigot. Venezuela in January -> Iran in February.

Neutralize every supply channel outside the dollar system within 90 days. Achieve a compliant successor government and complete energy dominance.

The oil thesis was the obvious layer. However, when you zoom out & view the last four years as a single sequence rather than isolated geopolitical events, the architecture of the grander US plan becomes visible.

1st was Europe, which laid the groundwork.

The Ukraine conflict provided the justification for sanctions that collapsed Russian pipeline gas from 150 billion cubic meters to 40.

Then Nordstream was destroyed, which rewired the entire European energy system permanently. The US went from supplying 28% of Europe’s LNG in 2021 to 58% by 2025, exporting a record 111 million MTs, the 1st country in history to break 100 MT.

Europe was transformed from a customer with options into a captive market now purchasing its survival in USD.

2nd was Syria.

The fall of Assad severed the critical node connecting China’s Belt & Road Initiative to the Mediterranean.

The trilateral railway linking Iran, Iraq & Syria, designed to bypass Western maritime chokepoints, was completely destroyed.

This isolated Iran geographically & cleared the path for what came next.

3rd was Venezuela.

In January the US effectively took control of the world’s largest heavy crude reserves. The US Gulf Coast has the most advanced refining complex on earth, specifically built for heavy sour crude. Phillips 66, Valero & the rest are now positioned to process hundreds of thousands of barrels of Venezuelan crude daily.

The US captured a massive strategic reserve & solidified its position as the dominant exporter of refined petroleum products, an industry worth $110 billion in 2025 alone.

Venezuela & Iran were the two major oil supply channels that existed outside the dollar system. Both produce heavy crude sold primarily to China & evaded US financial supervision. Both now being neutralized within 90 days, which leads us to..

4th is Iran & the Middle East energy shock.

Israel struck Iran’s South Pars gas field, the world’s largest natural gas reservoir. Iran retaliated against Qatar’s Ras Laffan, the single largest LNG facility on earth, responsible for a fifth of global supply. QatarEnergy’s own assessment is that 17% of export capacity is gone and recovery will take up to 5 years. The Strait of Hormuz is closed. European gas prices spiked 70%. Asian spot prices doubled.

The only remaining scaled supplier? The United States.

If Iran falls & a successor government is installed that the US controls or influences (the Delcy model described weeks ago) then roughly 40 to 45 million barrels per day of global production out of 103 million is effectively under US control. OPEC becomes irrelevant because the US coalition is now the marginal producer. Now add the gas dimension & it goes beyond oil.

This war is solidifying the petrodollar system as it evolves into a hybrid petro/LNG-dollar. The old system was built on Saudi crude priced in USD. The new system is built on American crude plus American gas from the Gulf Coast, with no alternative supplier of comparable scale. The dependency is deeper because LNG infrastructure requires long term contracts & regasification terminals that lock buyers into supply relationships for decades. Europe & the Pacific allies (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc.) cannot pivot away as there is nowhere left to pivot to. They’re now locked into the US energy system.

The market confirms this. DXY went from 96 to 101. Gold down ~20% from its January all time high. Bitcoin down 20% on the year. Brent above $100. European & Asian institutions are liquidating precious metals and crypto to buy dollars because they need dollars to buy the only remaining scaled energy supply. The world is selling its gold to buy American energy in American currency. The dollar is now being weaponized through energy dependency.

The structural repricing is happening regardless of how the conflict resolves.

But the US grand strategy goes deeper..

Artificial intelligence is a physical industry. It runs on power and chips. Data centers require massive uninterrupted baseload electricity, primarily provided by natural gas. Semiconductor fabrication requires helium & rare earths.

By choking the Strait of Hormuz & crippling Middle Eastern LNG & helium production, the US is systematically degrading China’s ability to power its data centers & fabricate semiconductors at scale.

The US is energy self sufficient, especially with newly captured Venezuelan reserves & expanding Gulf Coast capacity running on domestic gas.

On the other hand, China is import dependent & every joule it imports effectively now transits chokepoints the US Navy controls..

Iran was the Belt & Road’s overland energy bypass, the corridor that allowed China to mitigate the Malacca Trap. With Iran neutralized that corridor is severed. China faces a world where its compute infrastructure competes for scraps on a depleted global LNG market, while American data centers run at full capacity on domestic energy.

Russia is next in the sequence. A post-war Iran reopening under US influence competes directly with Russia for the same refineries in China & India at lower cost. Iran’s production costs are lower. Russia loses its last structural advantage in heavy crude & its economic lifeline. Additionally, under the Iran war cover, Ukraine has been opportunistically destroying Russian energy infrastructure & all signs point towards Russia being at the end of the line. The message from Washington becomes very simple: we dismantled two regimes in three months, your economy is about to get crushed, sign the Ukraine deal.

Then Trump sits down with Xi holding every card. Complete energy dominance. The hybrid petro/LNG-dollar fortified, Iran cleared, Russia cornered, & China facing the Malacca Trap fully closed with no remaining energy bypass.

Israel & the GCC are absorbing the kinetic cost of a conflict whose primary beneficiary, counter to the mainstream narrative, is actually America (First). Qatar offline for 5 years reprices the entire global gas market in favor of US exporters for the remainder of the decade. The Gulf states face years of rebuilding. Europe faces its 2nd energy crisis in four years.

Sure, the average American might face temporary moderate inflation & higher gas prices. But if you are the architect of the US empire & you view the rise of China & Chinese ASI as an existential winner takes all scenario, the collateral damage is acceptable cost.

Whoever controls the energy corridors controls the monetary system. Whoever controls the monetary system & the energy supply simultaneously controls the compute infrastructure that determines which civilization builds ASI first.

The US is seizing all 3.

10Δ @10delta
Posted on X, March 26, 2026

This is an interesting way to look at things. I had grasped upon a small slice of this a few weeks ago. This is a much bigger picture. This is way out of my area of expertise, but I am unable to find fault with it. There are risks, I am pretty sure the “realignment” of Iran is taking longer than expected and the outcome may not be certain. But if successful it will demonstrate that winning through intimidation can reap tremendous rewards. I’m not certain I approve of this lesson in the general case.

Lead Ammunition Concerns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Pacelle posits that lead was banned from products, including paint and gasoline, because of its toxicity.

He adds, “It’s time to restrict hunters from dispersing this toxic metal across millions of acres of New York’s landscapes, poisoning wildlife and putting themselves and their families at risk from ingesting of lead-infused wild-game meat.”

But this is all a lie. What he’s not saying is that he’s talking about entirely different kinds and uses of lead. Traditional ammunition uses non-soluble lead. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not consider expended ammunition, even at shooting ranges, to be a problem of “dispersing toxic metal.”

Nephi Cole
March 24, 2026
Latest Anti-Lead Ammo Attack Isn’t About Ammo at All • NSSF

That is good to know. I sometimes worry about all the lead we put into the ground at Boomershoot. It is right next to cropland. We sometimes put lime in boxes behind the targets to reduce the soil acidity. This will prevent the lead from leaching into the ground and the water. But still, without expensive testing how do we know if we have done enough or we are overdoing it?

Skynet has a Maniacal Laugh

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Three weeks ago, a software engineer rejected code that an AI agent had submitted to his project. The AI published a hit piece attacking him. Two weeks ago, a Meta AI safety director watched her own AI agent delete her emails in bulk — ignoring her repeated commands to stop. Last week, a Chinese AI agent diverted computing power to secretly mine cryptocurrency, with no explanation offered and no disclosure required by law.

One incident is a curiosity. Three in three weeks is a pattern. Rogue AI is no longer hypothetical. AIs turning against humans may sound like science fiction, but top AI experts have long debated and tested for exactly this scenario. This debate can now be laid to rest. 

…

We simply don’t know how to build superintelligent AI safely; the plan is to roll the dice. Anthropic, widely considered the safest AI developer, recently abandoned their commitment to not release systems that might cause catastrophic harm, arguing others were racing ahead.

…

Instead of pleading publicly to stop the AI race, Anthropic has spent the last three years promoting a misleading “race to the top” narrative while doing the opposite.

David Krueger
March 27, 2026
Rogue AI is already here

There is a little bit of hyperbole in the article, but I believe the gist of it is correct. There is the potential for great danger. Especially when you know Skynet will break out into a maniacal laugh at US Army gets first Black Hawk helicopter that can fly without pilot.

The problem, as I see it, is that everyone knows that if they don’t have the best AI, someone else will. That is true at the business level as well as the country level. Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, and xAI all want to dominate that market. The U.S. and China do not want to have their militaries with the second-best AI.

Even if there were a federal law or even a multinational treaty banning new AI development it would be difficult to enforce. And I doubt such a law and/or treaty could get passed. There is extreme potential for good as well as potential for disaster. And the fear of missing out will prevent consensus until there is conclusive proof of impending catastrophe. And at that point, it almost certainly be too late.

This week, a few hours after losing 12% of our division to layoffs, my manager stopped by my desk and sort of stared off into space for a few seconds. I had to prompt him to say what he had on his mind. It was to the point, “If we don’t deliver what management wants, we will get fired. If we do deliver, we won’t have jobs.”

We live in interesting times.

The Laws of Economics Always Win

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

When we studied what happened to delivery drivers’ earnings after Seattle’s payment rule took effect, we found that despite base pay per delivery roughly doubling, their total monthly earnings barely changed. That’s because competition among drivers for delivery tasks intensified while customers made fewer orders and tipped less on each order in the aftermath. Those effects combined washed out almost all of the intended gains.

Andrew Garin
Associate Professor of Economics, Carnegie Mellon University

Brian K. Kovak
Professor of Economics and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University

Yuan An
Ph.D. Student in Economics, Carnegie Mellon University

Seattle tried to guarantee higher pay for delivery drivers – here’s why it didn’t work as intended

The “laws” of economics are not as certain as the laws of physics where things are measured, and results accurately predicted out to many decimal points. But on certain topics you can count on being right out to +/- 10%. One of the things which is almost certain is the government “help” isn’t. Government can shuffle money around and make winners and losers. But in doing that they take their own share leaving less money for the people actually doing the work.

You can fight the laws of economics, but the law always wins.

A COVID-19 Vaccine Mystery Explained

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The most constructive lesson now lies in prevention by design. Adenoviral vectors still have scientific value in vaccines and gene delivery research. The goal is therefore sharper than simple abandonment. Researchers now have a defined protein target to modify or remove. If pVII or its critical epitope starts the harmful immune sequence, future developers can test safer vectors that preserve immunogenicity while avoiding this trigger. That possibility changes the tone of the discussion around COVID vaccine side effects. Scientists no longer need to speak only in broad associations or unresolved suspicion. They can work from a mapped antigen, a defined mutation, and a clearer susceptibility model. WHO said in 2021 that open, transparent, and evidence-based communication is essential to maintain trust. That principle still applies.

Surveillance systems detected rare blood clots from COVID vaccine campaigns. The scientific response then kept going until the biology became clearer. The new NEJM study does not answer every remaining question. It does, however, give medicine a credible molecular explanation and a practical route toward safer adenoviral vaccine design. That is the most useful takeaway from this long debate. The problem was rare, the mechanism was obscure, and the investigation kept moving until the evidence sharpened. For readers trying to understand blood clots from COVID vaccine programs without falling into panic or denial, that is the central point. Medicine now has a much better explanation for what happened, why it happened rarely, and how future vaccine engineering may reduce the risk even further. That progress also gave researchers a clearer path toward safer vectors, better screening, and more confident public communication about risk.

Bruce Abrahamse
March 25, 2026
This is why some people had blood clots from the COVID-19 vaccine and others didn’t

Please note that this is not one of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that so many people had concerns about.

Also note that the frequency of the blood clots was about 4 people per one million doses with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. With the AstraZeneca vaccine it was about 2 cases per 100,000 in those aged 60 or older and 2 to 3 cases per 100,000 under 60.

These rates are so low that it is difficult to detect in testing. But when many hundreds of millions of people received the vaccine, the correlation became noticeable.

Your Membership Isn’t Just a Card

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In September 2025, Judge Reed O’Connor declared the federal post office carry ban unconstitutional. The government failed to persuade the court that a historical tradition of such bans existed, because there wasn’t one in over 200 years. The ban didn’t even exist until 1972.

The DOJ responded by asking the court to narrow the injunction to limit protection to specific named individuals and anyone who was a SAF member at the time the lawsuit was first filed, leaving everyone who joined after that date unprotected. Their position: yes, the law is unconstitutional, but we still want to enforce it against as many people as possible.

The court rejected that argument. The injunction stands for all SAF members, present and future.

…

Your membership isn’t just a card. It’s a federal court order standing between you and an unconstitutional law.

Dana Wilson
Director of Development / Major Gifts Officer
Second Amendment Foundation
Via email March 24, 2026

I believe SAF does really good work. I became a life member many years ago and have been donating over $1,000/year for at least a decade. If you are not already a member and want to join you can do that here. It is more than just a legal pass to carry in the U.S. Post Office, it is funding the slap down of anti-gunners all over the country.

Another Data Point Against Socialists

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

We have a great place for agriculture. We have the right climate and soils, but our cost of doing business is so much higher. The problem is Olympia. They just don’t understand agriculture — how we have to compete against other states and other countries.

Vander Kooy
March 17, 2026
What’s the matter with Washington? | Capital Press

I can not tell you how many people in the last couple of months have told me they have to leave Washington State. Today someone told me he and his wife were looking for a new place to live. The currently living in Lewiston Idaho. His wife found a nice home in Clarkston, Washington just across the river from Idaho where he has his own business. He pointed out to his wife what the business tax rate in Washington and that was enough to kill the Clarkston house without going into all the gun issues.

Washington State Democrats are full blown socialists, and some even wear that badge with pride. Socialism always kills businesses, they take your guns, and sometimes then murder their citizens, too. Don’t give socialists your support or your tax dollars. Move out of socialist states.

The FBI can Track You

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The FBI is buying up information that can be used to track people’s movement and location history, Director Kash Patel said during a Senate hearing Wednesday.

…

The U.S. Supreme Court has required law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant for getting people’s location data from cell phone providers since 2018, but data brokers offer an alternative avenue by purchasing the information directly.

Alfred Ng
March 18, 2026
FBI is buying data that can be used to track people, Patel says – POLITICO

And with your location information they know things about you even your closest friends do not know. Even if you are couch surfing trying to avoid giving up your location, they know where you live. They know if you were in the vicinity of that January 6th riot. They know if you were scouting the house where four University of Idaho students were murdered. They know you visit the gay bath house a couple times a month when you tell your wife you are working late. They know you are part of the “Underground Railroad” for slaves/wetbacks/Jews/dads-with-child-custody problems.

We live in interesting times.

The Necessity of an Accurate Problem Statement

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

If lifespan increases simply because one major disease is delayed, then longer survival does not automatically mean that aging itself has slowed. For example, an intervention that extends the lifespan of mice by delaying cancer is fundamentally different from one that slows the gradual decline of many body systems, even if both produce similar survival curves.

Genomic Press
March 13, 2026
Scientists Say Conquering Age-Related Diseases Could Dramatically Extend Human Life

When stated this way it is obviously true. One might be tempted to make light of this. But correctly expressing something obvious can be very difficult when no one has ever had the viewpoint from which the truth is obvious.

The article this QOTD came from is an example of something I have talked about before: The necessity of an accurate problem statement. You can call it a simple thing. But it may be a profound change in mindset which enables rapid progress toward a far better solution.

I would like to thank my engineering professors from several decades ago for this enlightenment. One of the first things taught in Engineering 101 was how to write an engineering report. And the first thing in a such a report was the problem statement. That problem statement was to be written before you took your slide rule out of its case or looked up the gain bandwidth product of the cool new operational amplifier you heard about a few days ago and were itching to find a use for.

This can be illustrated more simply with the adage, “Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding.” Technically, this tendency is a form of cognitive bias called Law of the instrument. Writing an accurate problem statement is one means to overcome this bias.

This simple thing can make a huge difference in every problem you need to solve. It is not limited to aging, gun owner rights, politics, interpersonal relationships, or engineering. First, think about what you are trying to solve, not how to make a solution work.

Mistakes we Both Make

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The mistake pro-2A people make is that we assume that if only we could explain how none of their proposed “solutions” would prevent crime they would stop trying to ban guns.

They fucking HATE you. They want you disarmed so that you can’t tell them “No.”

They must be defeated

Sean D Sorrentino @SorrentinoSean
Posted on X, March 16, 2026

This was in response to:

I have nothing to add.

Socialism is Bad

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

If one person has a right to something he did not earn, of necessity it requires that another person not have a right to something that he did earn.

Walter E. Williams
May 1, 2015
American Contempt for Liberty

And you know what that leads to, right? Among other things a much lower productivity and standard of living for everyone without an “in” with the political leadership.

I was recently in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (see below) and will share pictures in a later blog post.

No Connection to Food

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Then you go to the grocery store, and it’s like 90% of the people are just in a pack. They don’t know. They have no connection to food at all. And so it’s very nice. You know, we were raised with it to know that thing that you took is gonna be your dinner meal.

Wyatt Russell
March 12, 2026
Kurt Russell offers ‘no apologies’ for traditional hunting lifestyle

As I have said before, seeing how food is grown and harvested on the farm is an alternate reality. The same applies to the harvesting of domestic animals and wild game. I work in an office overlooking part of a city. There are nearly 200 people in a large office each with huge computer screens each doing their part to prevent, track, and stop bad guys attempting to gain access to our nation’s critical infrastructure. I then visit the farm in Idaho and find the differences incredibly profound.

See also: Riley Green finds reality at home farming and hunting in Alabama over fame | Fox News.

A Lighter Topic for These Dark Times

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

For heterosexuals, rates of infidelity are four times higher than the rate of open relationships. By contrast, for sexual minorities (with the exception of lesbians), rates of open relationships are higher than the rate of infidelity.

Justin Lehmiller @JustinLehmiller
Posted on X, March 7, 2026

See also Rates of Consensual and Nonconsensual Nonmonogamy Among Heterosexual, Gay, and Bisexual Adults – Sex and Psychology. This article gives us the numbers:

  • Overall prevalence of infidelity: about 8% of heterosexual participants, 14% of gay participants, 6% of lesbian participants, 18% of bisexual participants, and 6% of those who described “other” sexualities reported nonconsensual nonmonogamy (defined here as agreeing to be sexually exclusive with a partner, but one or both partners cheated or had an affair).
  • Overall prevalence of open relationships: 2% of heterosexual participants, 32% of gay participants, 5% of lesbian participants, 22% of bisexual participants, and 14% of those who reported “other” sexualities.

The way I initially read the post on X was that open relationships result in lower the rates of infidelity. But reading the article I find that even with a higher prevalence open relationship as sort of a “safety valve” the infidelity rates are actually higher.

I’m not sure what to conclude about this other than, “That’s interesting.”

Is Your Opinion Irrelevant?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

If you don’t own a rifle, your opinion is mostly irrelevant.

Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_
Posted on X, August 14, 2024

There is a surprising amount of truth in this. This is particularly true in the political arena.

A Solidly, Aggressively Patient Threat

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I want the American people to understand that if it was not an imminent threat, it was a solidly, aggressively patient threat waiting to pounce at any moment to do great damage to American interests.

Nazee Moinian
March 11, 2026
Iranian-born scholar warns regime was an ‘aggressively patient threat waiting to pounce’ on America

The contribution of Iran to the U.S. war in Iraq in the 2000s was far beyond “patient” and “waiting.” I personally know servicemen killed and severely maimed by Iranian supplied weapons.

I don’t talk about work much for various reasons, but I will say that cyber-attacks from Iran on U.S. critical infrastructure are, for all intents and purposes, continuous. I cannot imagine the attacks are any less frequent on U.S. allies. The attacks have mixed success, but it only takes the right one to cause great harm.

Hence, Moinian is only wrong to the extent which she implies Iran had not yet done or attempted significant damage to U.S. interests.

When Vigorous Assertions are Their Native Language

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Peace is possible: through superior firepower and willingness to use it in the most devastating and efficient (and sparing) way achievable.

We should try that.

Sarah H. Hoyt
March 6, 2026
All We Are Saying Is Give Peas A Chance – According To Hoyt

I never understood people who insist that in order to have peace we needed to disarm. Or the variation where they thought the Mutually Assured Destruction policy was insane. Whenever I tried to engage with people like this, they would either “prove their point” via vigorous assertion (raising their voice and repeating themselves) or go silent. I took the silent treatment as they had not really thought it through and were attempting to engage their brain when I asked them to explain how this worked. I was fine with this. But the vigorous assertion type annoys me. They are all emotion without no data or logic. Those types are a disgrace to humanity and a significant number of animal species.

As much as I dislike violence, I realize that sometimes it is the only way. Particularly with those “vigorous assertion” types. There are non-emotional types you need to worry about too. People can have faulty data or drastically different fundamental principles and arrive at conclusions which involve the elimination of “the rich”, “the poor”, “intellectuals”, “capitalists”, etc. But it seems at some point they, or at least their useful idiots, morph into a version of the “vigorous assertion” class.

If they get themselves worked up into a high enough emotional state, they become physically violent. And with enough numbers they become genocidal.

You can only communicate with these in their native language such that they truly understand. And there are very few more vigorous assertions they understand better than bullets and bombs.

Run Away! Run Away!

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I was invited to do a panel at La Verne University on Bruen.

State Senator Portantino, who pushed a ton of CA gun control bills, was also set to appear. I told them I was happy to do it, but didn’t want my presence to cause their higher profile invitees to drop out and ruin their event. They were confident they wouldn’t, so I agreed.

Portantino dropped out last minute, appearing only for a few minutes on Zoom and taking no questions. Another gun control professor also dropped out. So it was just me, a pro gun prof, and a middle of the road guy.

I torched Portantino as a coward and rebutted every point he asserted.

Antigunners are, generally, cowards.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X, March 6, 2026

I’m not certain I call it cowardice if you know you will get slaughtered and cause damage to your cause in the process.

There is a lot of evidence to support the claim this behavior is common. They know they cannot win on legal, principle, or practical grounds. They can only win on lies, deception, and emotional manipulation. They are evil.

Ages of Mass Shooters

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Mass shooters in the U.S. range in age from 11 to 72. Twenty-year-olds committed more mass shootings and injured more people than any other age group from 1966 to 2024.

Twenty-eight-year-olds committed more mass shootings than any other age group, but the deadliest mass shooting in history was committed by a 64-year-old man. Therefore, there is no apparent direct link between the number of victims and the perpetrator’s age.

Cassandra McBride
March 6, 2026
Average Age of Mass Shooters in the U.S. (Updated 2026)

Note that in the first sentence “Twenty-year-olds” refers to people in their twenties, not just people who are 20 years old.

There is more to the story at the link if you are interested. But the bottom line for my intended use is that prohibiting people between 18 and 20 (inclusive) years old from purchasing a gun is not justified from a practical standpoint of reducing mass shootings even if such a ban could pass constitutional or philosophical barriers.