From here:
If guns were phallic symbols, no man would ever buy one with a two-inch barrel.
Nor one with a barrel less than an inch in diameter.
Summer brunch
Three kinds of lettuce, two kinds of basil, cilantro, chard, green onions, radishes and fresh raspberries, all harvested within minutes of serving, topped off with sliced eggs, some ground black pepper and a little balsamic vinegar.
Followed with the last of a batch of home-made rhubarb ice cream.
Needs a little more rhubarb
It isn’t “OMG, yum yum”, five start restaurant quality. Not by a long shot. For one thing, one of the lettuce varieties has been attacked by insects and has a lot of little holes in it, and the radishes are starting to get slightly pithy. The tomatoes aren’t quite ripe yet, so no tomatoes either. Maybe next week. I should have added a little more rhubarb to the ice cream. Next time.
I have learned that the radishes should be planted in relatively small quantities about once per week, all season, so you always have nice, peak quality ones. I just haven’t actually done it that way yet. Similar deal with the lettuce.
So it’s nothing that would pass muster at any restaurant. It’s just good food though. Good for the body and the soul. Soul food.
Bad choices
Daniel Drew has some good points:
The Charleston church shooting flooded newsrooms around the world. Did the killer act alone? How much did he really hate black people? Should we burn every Confederate flag in the country? When will another racist strike next? Stay tuned for more! After reading this, one would assume there was an evil Confederate in every town, ready to open fire on every family in America. The reality is much different. The greatest danger to the average American is the cheeseburger they ate for dinner last night.
He goes on to give graphs and charts with the data on how people in the U.S. are most likely to die. The most common form of death is heart disease followed by cancer. I have no reason to believe anything he said not true. But there are some caveats I would like to add.
Heart disease is mostly preventable and someone that dies from heart disease after a lifetime of obesity and virtually no exercise isn’t going to get as much sympathy as someone who was killed by a drunk driver or a group of people murdered by someone they welcomed into their group. It’s the difference between self-inflicted “wounds” and being an innocent victim.
Hence expending public resources is more likely, and more appropriate, to get legislative approval when you have innocent victims that need protection from others. It’s appropriate to protect the innocent from those who would deliberately or carelessly inflict harm on them. Most people instinctively get this.
But protecting the innocent frequently goes astray when government extends its power to include protecting people from themselves. Examples include New York City banning large sugary soft drinks and high salt content foods. That’s obvious to most people.
But the same principle applies to recreational drugs. Alcohol and tobacco use has recreational benefits as well as potential for damaging your health. Crack, heroin, and meth have even more potential for risk. But it’s self inflicted harm. I don’t have much sympathy for those that inflict harm upon themselves. If they are stupid enough to harm themselves then why should I, or anyone else, expend either my or public resources to protect them?
Bringing this back to the gun issue we can apply the same principles to suicide. Suicide by gun is little different than suicide by car and only differs by degrees of certainty and speed from some of the worst recreational drugs. Those who advocate for gun control to prevent suicide are showing their totalitarian colors.
They are demanding control over how you choose to live and die. They are not trying to protect innocent life from predators. They are demanding control over you. Some may think I’m exaggerating. Perhaps this extrapolation is unfounded and I’m paranoid.
No. I am not.
If you think I’m wrong then explain to me why the big fuss over the Confederate flag isn’t conclusive proof that I am correct? Add in the multitude of laws, ordinances, and regulations affecting of tens of thousands of aspects of our lives and get back to me.
As Drew points out the media bears a lot of responsibility for this. But if we value our freedom we must recognize the freedom of the press to do despicable things such as their encouragement of totalitarianism. It may be inadvertent. Perhaps just recognize this is how they can best make money in the short time. Our response must be to recognize their actions for what they are and point out they are little different than the racist attempting to start a “race war” and differ only on the scales of time and scope from those who would incite a riot.
Freedom isn’t free. It appropriate to bring attention to these costs and appropriately minimize them. It is part of the job of the media to do this. But they would be well advised to note the costs of totalitarianism are immeasurable and should be avoided at any cost. They don’t do this. This is a bad choice for everyone.
The main stream media is going through financially hard times and if they were to die a slow and painful death I would have no more sympathy for them than a disease riddled drug addict dead in the gutter. They both made a lot of bad choices to get there.
Quote of the day—Scott H. Greenfield
No, you have no right to feel safe. You have no constitutional right. You have no moral right. You have no right at all. You have a right not to be physically harmed, but your feelings, just like everyone else’s, are fair game for bruising. No one says you have to suffer in silence. Don’t like how your Columbia professor uses classic literature that “triggers” your unsafe feelz? Go to Dartmouth. Don’t like how other people on the internets call you stupid? Don’t be stupid. Or turn off the computer. Or only click on links to cute kitteh pics.
Or just toughen up already, you special little snowflakes.
Scott H. Greenfield
July 7, 2015
Feelzplainin’ and The Constitutional Right To Triggerdom
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Eighteen states have laws that expand Brady background checks. A recent study shows that states with expanded Brady background checks see 46 percent fewer women murdered with guns by intimate partners; 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers killed by handguns; and 48 percent fewer gun-related suicides.
Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
July 8, 2015
Charleston Families Join Brady Campaign and Members of Congress to Call for a Vote on Expanding Brady Background Checks
[What they don’t tell you is just as important as what they do tell you.
- They don’t tell you the details of this “recent study”.
- They don’t tell you if the total number of women murdered went up or down.
- They don’t tell you if the total number of law enforcement officers killed went up or down.
- They don’t tell you if the total number of suicides went up or down.
- They don’t tell you if the number violent assaults went up or down.
- They don’t tell you the right to keep and bear arms is independent of the number of crimes committed with guns.
And most importantly they don’t tell you that they have a long history of deception and lies.—Joe]
Quote of the day—James E. Clyburn
But I do know this — we know from our experiences that background checks are effective in preventing a lot of people who should not have guns from getting guns.
James E. Clyburn
July 8, 2015
South Carolina Rep.: Removing Confederate flag matters, but what about guns?
[The CDC has been unable to find convincing evidence of this claim. Does Clyburn have evidence the CDC doesn’t have access too? Of course not. Clyburn doesn’t “know” things the same way as normal people do.
How do I know this for certain? The article also says:
Clyburn said he has “no way of knowing” whether the bill would have stopped the Charleston shooting.
We do know whether the bill would have stopped the Charleston shooting. The shooter passed a background check when he obtained his gun. Therefore we know that requiring background checks for sales unrelated to his gun purchase could not have affected his shooting of innocent people. It is magical thinking to believe it would have. These anti-gun people need help with their mental health. They have no business in positions of power. There is no point in attempting “reach a middle ground” with them. The only reason you would negotiate with people this crazy is to buy yourself some time to deal with them in a more appropriate manner.
I’m reminded of something Will Rogers said,
Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘Nice doggie’ until you can find a rock.
If you already have a “rock” there is no point in engaging in diplomacy with them. You instead force them into submission with the minimum amount of effort required.—Joe]
Quote of the day—David Leonhardt
The legalization of same-sex marriage is a potent example of a dominant theme in American history: Over time, civil rights expand, and discrimination ebbs.
…
As a result, it’s fair to divide the major issues in American political life into two broad categories. In one category are the rights-based issues in which the future can be safely predicted. In the other category — which includes abortion, gun control and climate change — there is far less clarity about the direction of public opinion.
…
People who favor abortion rights can point to a woman’s right to control her body; people who oppose abortion can point to a fetus’s right to live. People who favor gun rights can point to a gun owner’s right to bear arms; people who favor gun restrictions can point to Americans’ right not to die and be injured by gun violence.
David Leonhardt
June 30, 2015
Why Gun Control and Abortion Are Different From Gay Marriage
[If you read the whole thing he makes some good points. But what is interesting is his handling of the gun issue. Almost his entire treatment of it is contained above.
It is my belief that he is in denial. He doesn’t seem to see that the Second Amendment clearly enumerates the right to keep and bear arms versus some nebulous “right” to be safe from criminal acts. He doesn’t seem to see the importance of the Heller and McDonald decisions.
While we do not have the freedom in the area of guns that we did 100 years ago we certainly are much freer than we were 20 years ago and the momentum is on our side. I could see gun rights on a trajectory that parallels gay rights but lagging by 10 or 20 years. Our “gay marriage” pinnacle analog might be the full legalization of machine guns after mandatory background checks are abolished and we have constitutional carry everywhere. And then my “I have a dream” moment will be realized.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Jon Gabriel
Instead of pointing fingers at the innumerates running Athens, they should consider our own situation.
…
It’s an imperfect analogy, but imagine the green is your salary, the yellow is the amount you’re spending over your salary, and the red is your MasterCard statement.
Jon Gabriel
June 30, 2015
Athens on the Potomac
[I am not the only one wondering if we are watching a version our future play out in Greece.—Joe]
Quote of the day—J. Michael Winmore
Come July 1, any person with a “troubled” mind, or just your garden variety fool, can openly carry a gun, without training, without permit, without background checks. It’s the brainchild of the most comical state legislature in the nation. (see story from KC Starfrom back in April of 2015)
It’s the type of tired, faux tough guy, cock waving that socially conservative Libertarians and Republicans always tout as being a protection of “Americans’ freedoms.” Meanwhile, it puts more Americans at the risk of a gun-smoked catastrophe.
J. Michael Winmore
June 30, 2015
Kansas Gun Laws: Wyatt Earp Would Be Appalled
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via email from Bob S.
We have the Bill of Rights, SCOTUS rulings, and decades of data from all over the country. He has grade school insults.—Joe]
Sea level to 7000 feet
Yesterday Barb and I were riding a ferry at sea level.
Today (after driving to 6400 feet at Sunrise on Mount Rainier) we hiked to Dege Peak which is over 7000 feet above sea level:
This is the hike we attempted during Memorial Day Weekend.
The views were surreal.
Quote of the day—David Hardy
On January 14, 2013, Brady boasted that the incident had raised $5 million for it..
…
But if you look at Brady’s IRS Form 990 report, its total fundraising for 2012 was $4.8 million, and for 2013 was $4.2 million. (That’s gross: net would be those figures minus fundraising expenses of $1 million and $800,000 respectively). So the surge in funding Brady claimed was in fact more than it brought in total for either year in question. And the 2013 claim was that the cash had come in “since late December (2012),” but in fact 2013 saw a fundraising decline of 13%.
David Hardy
July 4, 2015
Brady Campaign puffs smoke regarding fundraising
[You should not be surprised at this. The anti-gun crowd and the Brady Campaign in particular have a long history and culture of lies and deception.—Joe]
Public health strategies
Via a Tweet from Firearms Lawyer we have this article from Business Insider.
From looking at the map it appeared that Idaho was in third place and I was wondering if there might a be a prize for that:
Instead I find this:
Gun cultures may need to be considered for public health strategies that aim to change gun ownership in the USA.
I considered there was a remote chance that the authors would consider it a “public health strategy” to increase gun ownership. But I got a copy of the report and of course they took just the opposite view:
Therefore, we cannot infer whether exposure to social gun culture predisposes one to gun ownership or whether the latter increases likelihood of participation in the former. However, this is not particularly germane to the observations being drawn here, suggesting simply that prudent gun policies that aim to reduce gun ownership and gun-related injury might need to actively consider the prevailing social gun culture in the USA.
Emphasis added.
This report confirms something we already were pretty certain of. Gun ownership is more likely when you have friends and family that own guns. If you want to be able to keep exercising your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms you should “come out of the closet” about being a gun owner and take friends and family to the range.
And don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
Camping and hiking on Lopez Island
While on Lopez Island yesterday and today we went on some short hikes.
Ferries
Barb and I spent last night on Lopez Island. We boarded the ferry in Anacortes and got off on the north end of the island. We saw a lot of ferries on our trip.
Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield
The left exists to destroy you. It does not seek to co-exist with you. Its existence would lose all meaning. Any common ground will be used to temporarily achieve a goal before the useful idiots are kicked to the curb and denounced as bigots who are holding back progress.
The purpose of power is power. The left is not seeking to achieve a set of policy goals before kicking back and having a beer. The policy goals are means of destroying societies, nations and peoples before taking over. If you allow it a policy goal, it will ram that goal down your throat. It will implement it as abusively as it can possibly can before it moves on to the next battle.
It’s not about gay marriage. It’s not about cakes. It’s about power.
More fundamentally it’s about the difference in human nature between the people who want to be left alone and those who want power over others.
You can’t work out a truce with tyrants. You can give in or stand up to them. There’s nothing else.
Daniel Greenfield
June 30, 2015
No Truce With The Left
[Via an email from Ry.
While at the Washington State Steel Championship a couple weeks ago a few of us were talking about something closely related. “Why do they want gun control? They know it doesn’t make people safer. They know almost all the mass shootings have been in ‘gun-free zones’. What is the real reason to keep pushing for gun control?”
Bill, who sometimes comments here, said, “I read your blog. You know the reason.” Another guy and his wife said essentially the same thing and continued with, “We were just talking about this the other day. What we don’t get is what do they think they are going to do if they get their way? Their lives, as well as ours will be worse off then. Everyone loses.”
But as Greenfield points out, to them it’s not about money, physical possessions, or quality of life. It’s about power and control. There are people that crave power. There are people that who are frightened if “someone isn’t in charge”.
I can sort of understand wanting power even if I don’t really crave it myself. Power can silence your enemies, bring you wealth, give you status, bring you respect, and help preserve your health compared to those with lesser power.
It is more difficult to understand those who are frightened if “someone isn’t in charge”. But keep in mind that at the end of the civil war there were slaves who were frightened by the prospect of freedom. Slavery was all they had ever known and they were frightened of freedom. Today we have people who crave a form of slavery because they see it as providing security. Samuel Adams quote from 1776 is my response to them.
My response to those who crave power and control is to remember that today is July 4th and that has meaning to me and they will be well advised to understand the significance of that in their quest for power.—Joe]
Quote of the day—AWR Hawkins
According to Suffolk University, in addition to not wanting to hear about gun control in 2016, a majority of Americans do not believe increasing gun control via expanded background checks will curb mass violence. Fifty-six percent of respondents said it would not, while only 40 percent of respondents said it would.
This makes sense, when you consider that Roof allegedly purchased his gun via a background check at a Charleston gun store.
AWR Hawkins
June 30, 2015
Survey: Majority of Americans Not Interested in Gun Control for 2016
[Makes sense? It would make sense if it were 95% instead of 56%. That 40% think expanded background checks would “curb mass violence” when the example immediately in front of them is completely counter to that hypothesis is proof of their inability to draw even the simplest of logical conclusions.
This is a demonstration the fact that for a very large percentage of the population they, at best, make reasoning sounds. The concept of reason is completely alien to them. This is really frightening to me. I would expect dogs, cats, dolphins, and some birds, let alone all primates, to have that good of reasoning skills with similar problems. Apparently humans, on the whole, can do little better than chance.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Jo Ed
Accept the fact that freedom is risky. If it weren’t risky, it wouldn’t be freedom.
Accept the fact that the very worst mass murders were not committed by gunmen, but arsonists, bombers, and pilots.
Jo Ed
June 29, 2015
Comment to LETTER: What gun control measures would work?
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Quote of the day—Jonathan Hutson
Through simple, common-sense solutions, supported by nearly all US Americans, including the vast majority of gun owners, the Brady Campaign plans to realize the audacious but achievable goal of cutting gun deaths in half in the United States by 2025.
Jonathan Hutson
Chief communications officer for the Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence
June 30, 2015
Is Strict Gun Control the Best Way to Prevent Shootings?
Another Massacre Begs What Can Be Done
[It’s fascinating to read his entire answer to the question. He writes entirely about how great and wonderful background checks are. But not once does he say they would have prevented the Charleston massacre. Not once does he even hint at any evidence that “simple, common-sense solutions” will cut “gun deaths” by any amount let alone half in the next 10 year.
His entire response is an exercise in avoiding the question asked. There are two possibilities here:
- He knows gun control, of any type, will not prevent the shootings that make headlines and he is deliberately avoiding the question.
- He has mental problems similar to Peterson Syndrome. He literally sees and hears something very different from what others write and say. He brain is malfunctioning and he is incapable of rational thought.
In either case Hutson is making it clear to everyone that he and his organization are either malicious or have crap for brains and are to be ignored in the political debate.
Because of the evidence supplied by Brady Campaign board member Joan Peterson, for which Peterson Syndrome is named, and the actions of their lawyers, I’m inclined to believe crap for brains is a requirement for everyone aligned with them.—Joe]
Quote of the day – Roy Masters
“Liberty lives in the hearts of men and women. If it dies there, no constitution, no law and no court can save it.” — Roy Masters, June 29, 2015
To that I would add “no military and no armed citizenry” can save it.
I heard him say it while listening to his radio program on internet re-feed on the way to work. He may have been quoting someone else for all I know, so don’t hold me to the attribution. It’s the kind of thing he’d blurt out spontaneously anyway, so I figured it was his.
Quote of the day—Michelle Ye Hee Lee
Lawmakers have a responsibility to check out the facts in the reports they use, especially ones that come from advocacy groups. If they are aware there are definitions that are disputed, or that are defined in other ways depending on who uses them, it is incumbent on lawmakers to clarify exactly what they are talking about and not mislead the public. In particular, lawmakers should rely more on official government statistics, such as from the FBI, rather than misleading metrics cobbled together by interest groups.
We wavered between Three and Four Pinocchios. But this is a definition of “school shooting” that was widely disputed a year ago, and lawmakers need to present information — especially for such a controversial topic as gun control — in a clear, responsible and accurate way. Murphy’s failure to do so tipped the rating to Four.
Michelle Ye Hee Lee
June 29, 2015
Has there been one school shooting per week since Sandy Hook?
[Gun control advocates lie because it is in their nature and they have to if they are to have any hope of achieving their goals. That people at The Washington Post are pointing out their lies is a really big deal.—Joe]