Well, first of all, you have to believe that there is a “Heaven.”

I’m only thinking about this because my newest edition to the family, Gracie, was very ill when I woke up this morning. She was fine last night when I fell asleep. This morning she was sick. I won’t go into details but I took off from work to take her to the Vet. She has a fever, infection, etc.

I’ve thought about this stuff a lot. I’m not religious. I don’t subscribe to any definition of a “God” although I don’t scorn anyone who does because “God fearing people” have done some good in this world helping others. They’ve done some harm, too, but so has everybody.

But, what if the scriptures are accurate? What if, when we die, we go to some “pearly gates” and are judged and are (hopefully) granted admission to “Heaven?”

I have listened to various theologians discuss the issue of our pets and Heaven and most have said that since animals “don’t have souls,” our pets ain’t going there.

I doth protest. I can’t speak from experience with most critters but Dogs and Cats most definitely have souls.

I have a rule I live by. See, I’m a carnivore and I like to eat meat and I like leather jackets and shoes and belts. I don’t believe that cows have souls. Why? Well, I don’t know but I see no signs of a mind at work in them.

Dogs and Cats. I truly believe they do have souls. They are capable of loving us. Lots of animals are. What’s the difference? Cats and dogs like to have fun! Take your loving dog to the park and let him run with other dogs. They play, explore, they enjoy it. ENJOY! A stupid animal doesn’t know what it is to enjoy anything.

Cats play. They do it for most of their lives. They chase each other (yes, I grant you it is an exercise in predation but they still have fun at it as they chase each other and quickly reverse roles and do it again) and make friends with each other and — curiosity killed the cat — explore everything in their domain. They actually say, “ouw” when they are hurt. They purr when happy. They are one of only four animals on Earth that have visible smiles when happy. They invent games of play when with each other. They know what pleasure is.

Stupid animals aren’t capable of any of that.

Back to the subject. I love my cats, both living and gone. If, IF there actually is an afterlife and I’m dragged into Heaven, I will only go if all, ALL the wonderful cats that have blessed my life are with me.

If I’m at those “Pearly Gates” and St. Peter says, “Come on in, but cats aren’t allowed.” I will tell him to go fuck himself and send me downstairs. My “Heaven” will always include my best buddies, all of my cats. If they aren’t allowed in, I don’t want to be, either.

My cats are a part of me. No cats, no Heaven. Not for me, anyway. I’ve told all of my cats, “I love you forever. Unconditionally. And, I always will, no matter what you do, for now and for all eternity. I want you with me, in body or eventually, in spirit. I will not live or enjoy life without you. I want you with me.”

Does that sound stupid? Am I so lame that my love of my cats should subject me to shame?

I hope not. If it does, I don’t care.

I want you all, most of you dog folks, to picture your afterlife without your good dog. Do you really want that?

If there is actually a “God,” well, he better understand that my pets are a vital, wonderful part of my life. If they aren’t in “Heaven” with me, then I’m not interested in being there either.

Clay Robinson of the Houston Chronicle doesn’t like the idea:

Texas legislators can’t help themselves. Even before their upcoming session hits its stride, they will do something to get national attention, the kind that makes TV hosts snicker and roll their eyes.

A surefire attention-getter this session will be an anticipated bill to let Texans openly pack pistols on their hips, in their belts or elsewhere in public view as they go about their business.

Although many other states apparently already allow the practice, the “cowboy” image of holstered Texans strolling down Main Street or through the mall, arms dangling at their sides and wary eyes on the lookout for trouble, is an easy script for late-night satire.

Aside from the fact that there’s really no reason NOT to allow open carry — after all, cops do it all the time — there’s the fact that law abiding citizens licensed for concealed carry are often ticketed or arrested if their concealed handgun accidentally becomes exposed. The wind blows back the side of your jacket, exposing your shoulder holster, as an example. A cop sees that and you could actually lose your CCW permit. I don’t know if that happens a lot in Texas but it did happen in Massachusetts. This bill should put a stop to that.

We’re no longer using enough fossil fuel in this country so Washington wants to raise the federal gasoline tax:

Motorists are driving less and buying less gasoline, which means fuel taxes aren’t raising enough money to keep pace with the cost of road, bridge and transit programs.

That has the federal commission that oversees financing for transportation talking about increasing the federal fuel tax.

A 50 percent increase in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes is being urged by the commission to finance highway construction and repair until the government devises another way for motorists to pay for using public roads.

Once again proving that politicians never learn from history. Raising taxes will never — in the long run — make up for revenue shortfalls.

And when the eco-nuts get their way and we’re all driving peanut-sized cars or taking mass-transit, will they have to raise taxes again?

And all of this time I figured that Chavez and his socialist thuggery had things under control. From CNN:

Foreign Policy magazine said in September that Caracas tops the list of five murder capitals of the world, with an official tally of 130 homicides per 100,000 residents. The city, which is Venezuela’s capital, has about 4 million inhabitants.

Of the top five, only one U.S. city made the list: New Orleans.

The reliably pro-2A Hawaii Reporter has a month-by-month list for 2008 of events effecting gun rights.

So, let’s have some fun. Or some depression. Or something in between.

Here are my own predictions:

1. The Democratic control of all branches of government (with the possible exception of the judiciary) will introduce and pass more gun control starting with another version of the fake, phony “assault weapons ban.”

2. The economic crisis will continue at least through the Summer.

3. Here’s one I heard last night on Coast-to-coast with, as usual, Art Bell moderating: Definitive proof that “Big Foot” exists. Dead or alive. Okay, so most of you could care less about that one!

Here’s an open forum for all of you to offer your predictions for the New Year. They can be psychic, or intuitive, or just hopeful.

And, again, Happy New Year!

My sincere wish is that it be a good one for all of you. May you enjoy good health, prosperity, and happiness.

All I can say is, thank God that 2008 is over.

I hope 2009 is better for all of us, in every way.

That’s what some auto groups are calling for:

Automatic speed control devices should be installed in cars to force motorists to stick to speed limits, an influential pressure group recommended today.

The Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT), a government transport advisory group, said that up to 29 per cent of injury accidents on the road could be prevented by the voluntary introduction of intelligent speed adaption (ISA).

The nanny-state never sleeps.

Speaking of speeding, and nanny-states, in local Vermont news, actor Matt Dillon was ticketed yesterday on I-91 for cruising along at 106 MPH. Happened in Bradford, just one town north of me.

You know, we on the pro-gun side and others on the anti-gun side are always throwing statistics around. I, personally, wish there was a statistic showing that no police were killed. Unfortunately, in a world, a country filled with mutants, that might never happen. Still, this is somewhat good news:

The number of officer fatalities due to gunfire is the lowest in 50 years, noted Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. A report out Monday said that this year, 41 officers have died from gunshot wounds, down 40 percent from the 68 who died by gunfire in 2007. Yet the number of concealed carry permits issued by the states has risen, dramatically in some areas, in the past 12 months.

I truly wish that number was zero. I’m thankful it is dropping but 41 killed cops is still too much. The thousands of our youth — mostly gang members — killed, is also too much. Folks, if I just had that magic wand and could end all of this . . . .

Lack of parenting, lack of responsibility, lack of family doesn’t help:

Black teenagers are killing each other in rising numbers but the troubling trend has been masked by a falling crime rate in the United States, according to a study released Monday by Northeastern University.

FBI crime statistics show overall decreases in murder and other violent crimes. But a report by criminal justice professors James Alan Fox and Marc Swatt uncovers other disturbing trends within that data.

Among their findings: an increase of more than 39 percent in the number of black males between the ages of 14 and 17 killed between 2000 and 2007, and an increase of 34 percent in the number of blacks that age group who committed homicide.

Truth in blogging, homicide by white teens also rose, but not nearly as much.

Folks, what are we doing, or not doing, for our kids?

This one should be for Lions fans:

They’d known for weeks it was possible, each loss bringing them one stumble closer to a mark no team wants — or even wants to think about.

Yet when it finally happened, the Detroit Lions were still stunned, unable to find words to adequately describe the shame in their accomplishment. They are losers of historic proportion, the worst team ever in the NFL. Sixteen games, 16 losses, the perfectly imperfect season.

“I don’t have anything positive to say,” Calvin Johnson said.

What’s to be said? That can be printed, that is.

With a 31-21 loss to the Green Bay Packers on Sunday, the Lions brought a merciful end to their “annus horribilis.” Not since 1976, when the Tampa Bay Buccaneers went 0-14, had a team failed to win at least one game in a full season. (And those Bucs had the excuse of being an expansion team, not to mention some really bad uniforms. Detroit, in its 75th season, is one of the NFL’s senior citizens.)

I believe the fans should be reimbursed the price they paid for tickets.

On a more serious note, what should be done is what ought to have happened at GM, etc. Fire Matt Millen.

. . . Never mind:

Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph.

The first, on May 21, headed “Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts” , reported that the entire Alpine “winter sports industry” could soon “grind to a halt for lack of snow”. The second, on December 19, headed “The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation” , reported that this winter’s Alpine snowfalls “look set to beat all records by New Year’s Day”.

Here in Vermont, last year set records for snowfall and already, early this Winter, we’ve set new ones.

For a week, Hamas fired over 125 missiles into Israel. Israel told them to stop. They didn’t. So, Israel finally retaliates. Naturally, the leftist Main Stream Media makes Israel the heavy in their stories.

I’ve written about it countless times here. Now, a Minnesota city councilman and college professor does it better:

However, if some people had their way, my father would be a felon the next time he passed on a firearm to a family member. These people complain about a so-called “gun show loophole,” which, if you were to accept the rhetoric of firearm prohibitionists, is responsible for an endless stream of death and carnage.

In truth, attempts to close the “loophole” are really attacks on cherished freedoms that have been quietly enjoyed by millions of Americans since the founding of our nation. With the exception of those unfortunate residents of a few nanny-states, citizens of the U.S. always have been able to gift, buy, sell and trade firearms without the interference of government.

Read the whole thing.

What I’ve said in the past is that the problem with laws attempting to “close” the fictitious “loop hole” is that they first define a “gun show” as almost any gathering of two or more people possessing firearms as a gun show.

So if you and your hunting buddies are having early morning coffee in the kitchen before heading out to the woods, that’s a gun show and one friend can’t sell or trade a firearm to another without a background check.

Or, as is the case with this op-ed, a father/grandfather passing on his cherished rifle to a son/grandson/daughter, etc.

A couple friends at the range would suddenly become a “gun show.”

All FFL dealers at gun shows are already required to run an NICS background check.

There is no loop hole.

Let’s hope not. From The Hill:

The Bush administration recently altered federal regulations to allow people with permits to carry concealed firearms while in national parks if the park falls within a state or district that allows concealed weapons.

Washington D.C. does not allow concealed weapons, but Norton and other think confusion over the rule could lead visitors to bring guns to Obama’s Jan. 20 inauguration, which will be held on two miles of National Park land – the National Mall.

Somehow I doubt that any intelligent law abiding citizen is going to think he can carry a gun to the new President’s inauguration. Security there would be incredibly tight and frankly, legal or not in D.C., it would be a bone-headed thing to try.

I’ve said before but I’ll reaffirm it now: I didn’t vote for Obama but I wish him well. Heck, if, somehow, he can turn the economy around — God bless him.

I certainly don’t want some psycho-mutant or racist jerk taking shots at him. That’s the last thing this country needs right now. If it happened, there’d be riots, and I could almost guarantee that whatever gun rights we still have would be quickly eliminated through knee-jerk legislation.

The way to get rid of a politician you don’t like is to vote them out next time at the ballot box.

Last week, this area — Northern New England — was hit by a serious ice storm and over a million residents lost electricity due to downed power lines. I was lucky — I only lost mine for about 15 hours but many, especially in New Hampshire, were without electricity for many days.

One thing I’ve noticed in the past is that public service utilities all help each other out during these crisis.

Yesterday morning I saw a rather impressive sight. I was driving down Interstate 91, going to work, and in the north-bound lane was a convoy of what must have been over 50 electrical utility trucks belonging to Hydro-Quebec. Hydro-Quebec must have sent all of these crews to help out in hardest hit New Hampshire and after spending many days in this area assisting our local power suppliers, they drove up I-89 and then were heading home on I-91.

I know that many utilities from other states here in the U.S. also helped us.

It was a cool sight, all these trucks from one utility. I’m sure there were other convoys heading other directions.

My thanks to all of them and I wish them all a Merry Christmas.

Okay, so Macs still make up only a small part of the computer market, especially in business, but it is showing strength. From Infoworld:

The Mac’s been on a roll, both due to its highly regarded Mac OS X Leopard operating system and to an unhappy reception for Microsoft’s Windows Vista. The result: For the first time in memory, the Mac’s market share has hit 9.1 percent, according to IDC data, and Windows’ market share has dipped below 90 percent. (Linux distributions make up the rest.)

[…]

Of the plausible alternatives to Windows, Apple’s Mac OS X has the largest market share and history. InfoWorld chief technologist Tom Yager has written that the latest version of the Mac OS, Leopard (10.5), is simply the best operating system available. And Macs are indeed popping up more frequently even within IT circles — I’ve seen more MacBook Pros in the hands of CTOs and IT execs at conferences in the past year more than ever before. Although there are no real numbers on just the business adoption of Macs, it’s clear that Apple is in growth mode, gaining an increasing proportion of all new computer sales for more than a year now.

I have a Windows XP Professional computer in my bedroom that I use mostly as a juke box and also toy with Bryce on it (Bryce runs on both platforms) but for my day-to-day computing, blogging, and web surfing I use my kitchen Mac. The difference between the ease of use of the operating systems is like night and day. Mac is simply a better and more fun OS.

Now watch me get torn to shreds in the comments . . . .

The N.J. Supreme Court has finally vindicated a Millburn man’s right to purchase firearms. From NJ.com:

The case began in 1997 when Sweetwood and his wife filed domestic violence charges and obtained restraining orders against each other in the prelude to a contentious divorce. Sweetwood, a 45-year-old father of six and owner of a photography supply business in Fairfield, had to forfeit five handguns, which he was allowed to sell to a dealer, and his firearms identification card, which was kept by Millburn police.

The domestic violence charges were dismissed days after they were lodged and the restraining order against Sweetwood was lifted in 2000, with his wife’s approval, just before the couple’s divorce became final.

But when Sweetwood sought the return of the identification card in 2005, the prosecutor’s office re fused, arguing that he was not entitled to purchase firearms under the 2004 gun control law because the weapons he had surrendered were never returned to him.

Though the prosecutor’s decision was reversed by a Superior Court judge, the refusal to return the card was upheld by the Appel late Division, whose decision was reversed by yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling.

In its ruling, the state’s highest court said that although Sweetwood’s firearms were never returned, making him technically ineligible for an ID card under the 2004 law, the prosecutor’s office never held a hearing to determine whether he met any of the criteria for a ban on handgun ownership, such as a criminal conviction, mental defect or a “continuing domestic violence situation.”

It’s about time.

There’s an interesting report in today’s Civil Liberties Examiner that says that in many European countries with draconian gun laws, there are still a lot of law abiding people owning firearms. They just do it illegally which I guess makes them not so law abiding. Except, to my mind, if a law [banning firearm ownership] is improper and in fact flat-out wrong, then it should be ignored.

Well that gets into a sticky argument: What laws is it alright to ignore?

In my opinion, a law that prevents you from owning the means to protect yourself and your family is a bad law. Self-defense is a natural right for all creatures.

Here in America, we have plenty of bad laws. One example will suffice: How many upstanding citizens smoke pot now and then?

It’s said that America is a “Nation of Laws” and while that might be true, it is also true that we have state and federal legislatures working overtime to pass more and more — thousands — of laws that accomplish nothing but to try to regulate every last facet of our lives. That’s wrong. It’s bad for us and for freedom in general. Whether it’s laws making pot illegal or — as was the case in many states not that long ago — making oral sex illegal even between husband and wife, there are some laws that should not exist and that beg to be broken.

I don’t consider pot smoking a crime, regardless of what the law says. And I say that even though I, myself, am allergic to the stuff and can’t “partake.”

And, if law abiding citizens of certain countries in Europe are not legally allowed to own a gun to protect themselves, I don’t consider them criminals if they do, anyway. Now — if they use those guns to commit crimes against others such as stealing and killing, then they become criminals.

So for me, and I suspect it is so with most of you, it isn’t the gun, it’s the crime committed with the gun that makes someone a criminal. That’s how it is in most states here in the U.S. and that’s as it should be. Chicago take note!

Does anyone even consider the NY Times a valid, unbiased news source anymore? When, this past Sunday, they spent six pages bashing President Bush as bearing sole responsibility for the housing and mortgage crisis while failing to even mention the prominent roles that Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd played in all of it, it’s hard to fathom how someone with a functional brain could rely on anything they print.

So, today they have an editorial calling for stricter state gun laws. It starts out:

For years, the gun lobby has defeated new gun control laws partly by arguing that stronger laws do not deter crime. A study prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group headed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, should finally put that myth to rest.

We don’t even need to get into what the study says because the very fact that it was prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns indicates to anyone with an IQ over 90 that anything in it is biased against gun ownership. Yet, the New York Times editorial uses it as a source of facts. Would they do the same with a report put out by the NRA?

The Mayors’ report claims, among other things, that:

Weak gun laws also put a state’s own citizens at risk. There were nearly 60 percent more gun murders in the 10 states where exports were highest than in the states with low export rates — and nearly three times as many fatal shootings of law enforcement officers.

I’ve already put that one to myth and pointed out that it is the composition of the population, the demographics, that determines — more than anything else — the murder rate of a state.

The New York Times would like all states to have the same draconian gun laws as New York City. That’s their bias and it shows. Again.

If Democrats are going to bring back the falsely named “Fairness Doctrine” then they should include newspapers in it. They won’t, of course, because the whole principle of the “Fairness Doctrine” is hypocritical.