A few miscellaneous items you might find interesting have come to mind...

Thanks to James for letting me know about a new (actually a re-birth) of a blog by Myria titled It Can't Rain All The Time... A gay woman who's lover is losing (or unfortunately has lost) the battle with breast cancer. She has some interesting posts about the nature of sexuality.

---

BTW, John R. Lott, Jr. has been kind enough to send me a copy of his latest book, The Bias Against Guns. Since this is a subject rather obviously dear to my heart, I'm looking forward to reading it over the coming week and I'll discuss it in a future post. Since John and I are in agreement on the subject I suspect anti-gunners (there's one who reads this blog regularly) will expect me to love the book. I expect so also. Hey! I'm allowed to do a "puff piece" around here now and then...

By the way, John has a new new article at NRO about the ramifications of the Supreme Court decision on campaign finance, media and the NRA considering buying a TV station. As he says:

So what distinguishes the NRA from these [media] companies? Surely, not that they are nonprofit. Churches own radio and television stations and publish newspapers.

Possibly the NRA is simply different because it has a well-known political opinion. But doesn't theNew York Times or the Washington Post also have a well-known stance on gun control? Newspapers can run an editorial or news stories supporting candidates any day. Unlike everyone else, the media can mention a candidate's name during the 60 days before the general election. Yet, the NRA is forbidden from placing an ad next to the editorials in those very same newspapers.

As they say, read the whole thing. I might add that I think the NRA should be allowed to own a TV station. You might call them a lobbying group but if Al Gore gets his new "liberal" cable network going, isn't that lobbying also? Won't Gore and company have shows espousing Democratic positions with the intent of winning over voters?

---

That Jay! HEH!

---

I have to agree (I usually do) with Greg at Hobbesian Conservative. I was underwhelmed by the new tower design planned for the WTC spot revealed this morning on Today. He's right: If we're going to build something there, make it the tallest, grandest... Well, you get the idea... Kathy Kinsley agrees.

---

Jason at Jason's Blog has discovered what it's like to drive a small car on today's highways. Yup. The Alphecca limo is a Mazda Protege.

---

Over at Lead and Gold, Craig has a couple of interesting posts (well, he always has interesting posts!) about advertisers' strategies and also their obsession with the 18-34 year old market. I pay absolutely no attention to TV ads anymore because they just don't speak to me. Perhaps, as Craig points out, the agencies should start hiring adults to create their campaigns.

---

Micha at Catallarchy has a challenge for "rights based libertarians" regarding property ownership. Interesting.

---

Mog has been stricken with the flu. Go wish her a speedy recovery. Now!

---

David at Medienkritik has more on the Libya decision to disarm. He's right, this is a triumph for Bush and Blair.

---

Wait a minute! Heh Indeed!

---

Okay, see you all soon! Same Bat-Channel. Have a great weekend and get well quick, Mog. (If I mention it twice, maybe she'll feel better twice as fast!)

We constantly hear from the leftist liberals of this country about how poverty has grown under G.W. Bush's tenure. There's an interesting op-ed in today's Washington Times about the definition of "poor" as used these days by the Census Bureau. Surprisingly, almost half of "poor Americans" own their own home which is typically a three bedroom affair. I don't even do that! Anyway, here's a quote:

Overall, the typical poor American has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, stove, clothes washer and dryer and a microwave. He has two color televisions with a cable or satellite hookup, a VCR or DVD player and a stereo. He can obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and isn't overcrowded. By his own report, his family isn't hungry.

In short, this individual's life, while far from opulent, hardly conjures the images of poverty often conveyed by the press, poverty advocates and politicians.

And:

As a group, the poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children.

Poor children actually consume more meat than higher-income children do and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are in fact supernourished, with the average male growing up to be 1 inch taller and 10 pounds heavier that the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.

I can't vouch for the statistics the authors use but if true, some of these people are living better than me. In any event, it certainly gives pause to take with a grain of salt the claims by some of the Democratic candidates and activists that President Bush has plunged this country into the worst poverty seen in generations.

And I guess that's one of the reasons I have trouble taking anything the left says seriously these days. Everything is an emergency. Everything is awful. Bush is ruining the environment, civil liberties, etc. etc. Always at a mega-decible shrill shout, they spew all sorts of phony statistics and rumours and innuendo and frankly, they just seem to lie about almost everything. I just don't believe them anymore. Further, their behavior in their news reports, op-eds, and blogs looks and reads as if written by some spoiled-brat 14-year-old. At least when listening to or reading something from a conservative or libertarian, I feel like I'm being addressed by an adult (most of the time).

Anyway, I guess this brings this week's edition of Alphecca to an end. I'll be back on Monday with the "Weekly Check on the Bias" and until then, have a great weekend everybody. Thanks for stopping by!

This one in California but incredibly, there are no charges filed yet. Via Keep and Bear Arms comes the report from KESQ NEWS:

Police say a man went into 22-year-old Andrew Gasper's apartment in Yucca Valley and took a handgun, saying he was going to go shoot someone who lived in the same complex.

The man fired off four rounds before Gasper came after him with a shotgun. Police say the suspect then pointed the handgun at Gasper. Gasper repeatedly told him to drop the gun, but he kept it pointing at him.

Police say Gasper then fired once, killing the man. Investigators say Gasper acted in self defense. The case will be reviewed by the district attorney.

I suspect there are a lot of details missing from this story since it implies that the man got or stole the gun from Gasper to use against someone else. None the less, Gasper did the right thing in preventing further violence. I have to give credit to KESQ for not inserting even a hint of bias into the story.

You know folks, time and time again we hear about justified defensive uses of firearms from "local papers" (I put that in quotes because with the internet, nothing is really local anymore) or news stations yet the big guys (the New York Times, Washington Post, the TV networks) never pick-up on these stories. I wonder if that's because it goes against their anti-gun bias? (No, I'm not really wondering, I know that's what it is.)

That's why it was so amazing last month when just such a story appeared on NBC's Today show. I wonder if sending them a letter of "applause" would have any merit? Or sending letters to the editor of condemnation for not reporting items like this would have any effect on the NY Times, et al...

Several weeks ago I reported on the elderly gentleman in Florida who used a handgun to save his friend from a beating he was receiving at the hands of thugs. Police arrested him but now my buddy Bill St. Clair reports that he won't be charged afterall. He sends this link from the St. Petersburg Times about it and here's a quote:

Pinellas-Pasco Chief Assistant State Attorney Bruce Bartlett said evidence showed Spaulding was trying to prevent his friend George Lowe, 63, from being killed or suffering "serious bodily harm" as others attacked him.

The law allows people to intervene in such cases to protect others from harm, Bartlett said.

Spaulding said he fired his .22-caliber handgun Nov. 30 because three young men were attacking Lowe and he was afraid his neighbor was in serious danger. The bullet hit one of the men, James T. Moore, 20, in the arm.

Something tells me though that Spaulding isn't out of the woods yet. Here's another quote:

But two of the alleged attackers dispute the description of the events by Lowe and Spaulding. They acknowledge having words with Lowe, but they say no one hit or kicked anyone before Spaulding fired.

Eric Palm, 18, said Lowe grabbed at his FUBU jersey, so he shoved his face to push him away. Palm said he then swung at Lowe and missed, and that's when the shot went off.

I wouldn't be surprised if these mutant punks file something in civil court. I hope not but these days young thugs refuse to fess up to their behavior.

---

Update 12/19 comment:

Civil court is probably still an issue, except that:

(a) Spaulding lives in a trailer & is 73 years old - fixed income most likely. It probably won't be financially worthwhile to sue him.

(b) The lady at the St Pete Times implied, although she didn't actually say, that there were independent witnesses.

(c) Even if Palm's account isn't a pack of lies, the young men don't have a leg to stand on in re self-defense, because at any time they could have left the area and avoided the conflict.

I can't see lawyer taking up this case, although strange do happen.

Cheers!
--Marie at Ordinary Galoot

Thanks, Marie.

Matt at Stop the Bleating! has a post about Democratic strategists trying to "take back" the gun rights issue. I've reported on this a few times now. Americans For Gun Safety (read "control") and the Democratic Leadership Council realize they've lost elections because of gun rights and gun control. So they've changed the slogan from "gun control" to "gun safety" and blather on how "we really do believe in the Second Amendment" and they just want to encourage safety with a few little things like closing the phony "gun show loophole" and extending the "assault weapons" ban.

I wouldn't trust them for a second. These creeps will say and do anything for votes. Matt correctly suspects that as soon as they were in office and a gun control bill came along or some federal registration or license scheme wended it's way through Congress, they'd sign on to it in a heartbeat.

All you have to do is look at a candidate's past record to see what they will probably do in the future. "Fake, phony frauds" indeed!

In today's Union Leader, a great op-ed by Kathleen Parker about the capture of Saddam Insane and how so many just don't get what it signifies. Here's a quote:

"When we were asking him difficult questions and throwing accusations, reminding him of his crimes, he was looking at Ambassador (Paul) Bremer and General (Ricardo) Sanchez, as if he was asking the Americans to protect him," Muwaffaq al-Rubaiye, a member of Iraq's Governing Council, was quoted as saying.

"He felt safer with the Americans."

And why would that be? Because we're murdering, immoral, invading, occupying evildoers? Or because Americans are known to be decent, generous, fair-minded and trustworthy?

How ironic that Saddam sees what even some Americans can't or wont see, that we are the good guys. That in a contest of moral rectitude, even in war, we have few if any peers. This isn't just gratuitous chest beating, but a statement of fact as demonstrated repeatedly by our men and women in the armed forces, often to their own detriment.

As we tend to say in the blogosphere, read the whole thing...

My friend Michael at Discount Blogger has sage advice for people thinking about getting a puppy. I would like to add something though... He says:

People, this is one of the reasons why you NEVER, N-E-V-E-R buy dogs from a pet store. First of all, it's not possible for the people who work ther to know everything about the breeds they "stock." Secondly, you don't know where those puppies came from.

Pet stores are awful. And I'm caught in a quandry because I'd like to see them put out of business, or at least their puppy and cat business. At the same time, I don't want to see these poorly treated animals disposed of. I want some good person to come along and adopt them and give them a much better life than they've had so far.

So what's the answer? I don't have it. Yes, I want it stopped and the only way to do that is to not buy them and put the pet stores out of business. But I want these animals already there to live and be happy. I'd much rather see folks adopt pets (both babies and adults) from animal shelters or private homes. To hell with pure-breds, mutts are better, smarter, and more loving.

What I really wish is that somehow a law was passed banning (at least for intelligent animals such as cats and dogs) the "puppy mill" practices and businesses and that minimum standards for pet stores be created that protect and insure proper care, health, and housing for the animals.

All I can add is that folks MUST start getting their pets spayed and neutered. The supply has to go way down. That's just a fact. Visit your local shelter to see how many are killed every week because there aren't enough homes for them.

Anyone who adopts a pet and then gets bored or frustrated and abandons that pet in the woods or roadside is a horrible person. I know. I had a boss once who did that sort of thing.

Lastly, I believe that anyone who abuses, hurts, kicks, hits, or in any other way tortures an animal is the lowest form of mutant life on Earth.

Okay, really lastly, I agree with Michael that getting a puppy (or any pet) is a huge, serious responsibility and commitment. I'd like to say that it's as big a decision as having a child but our society has already decided that that is no longer a big deal and is certainly not a real commitment. Now I'm depressed.

---

Update 12/18 comment received:

I just read your piece on wishing all pet stores would go out of business. I used to write software for a pet supply distributor, and learned that many, if not most, pet stores do not sell cats or dogs. Most sell food and other supplies for cats & dogs. They also sell fish, lizards, snakes, and birds. Many have people that know quite a bit, too.

--Scott P.

I've been to more than a few pet stores, especially the ones in malls, and have seen puppies and kittens for sale. None the less, I should have written more clearly that I don't want the stores to go out of business, just out of the business of selling cats and dogs, thereby putting the "puppy mills" and such (the suppliers) out of business.

I couldn't agree more with James at Hell in a Handbasket about the comments of a fool at the Vatican. A cardinal thinks we've "humiliated" Hussein. Folks, if you (that's rhetorical since I know most of my readers don't) think that releasing a video of Saddam Insane (Ghod I'm clever...) was humiliating for him, think of the million plus people he tortured and murdered, most in public view. Cutting out people's toungues, feeding them into plastic shredding machines, raping their wives and daughters in front of them, gassing them, cutting off their genitals, ... Saddam Insane was/is a monster from Hell.

I said earlier this week that we should turn him over to the Iraqis for trial and punishment. Fuck the EU and the left and Wesley Clark and all the other assholes who worry about one of the most evil pieces of garbage to ever taint the Earth. Fuck them and fuck Saddam. Let him be humiliated. Let him be slowly torn apart in front of the world to show that mankind will no longer tolerate or exonerate Satan's minions.

And you know what, I'm getting a little fucking tired of hearing the left make excuses for the radical Muslims. And by the way -- I'm sick of hearing the right make excuses for the radical Catholics in the Vatican. I don't think too highly of the Hasids either. Folks, murder, torture, rape, suicidal bombings, bigotry -- none of these fucking mutant behaviors should ever be excused as "culture."

Murder and rape and torture are not justifiable features of a "culture." You hear all this bullshit coming from the left about how we "just don't understand their culture." Murder is not a cultural issue. It's a moral one that has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with a mutant, sick, diseased society or a horriblely wrong interpretation of religious writings.

I do not believe that if there is a God, he is an "interventionist" God. He got things going but we're on our own now. Don't bother asking him to help you win the lottery because there are nine billion others doing the exact same thing. Once in a while he might help out but in general he's hands-off. But he is watching. And I know from the bottom of my being that there are some things he cares about and some things he doesn't.

For instance, I know, intrinsically -- I know because he let me know with absolute clarity and purpose one desperate night a long time ago that he couldn't give two-shits if two guys fall in love. It's not on "his radar." God has no problem with love, only with hate.

I know deep down inside that he does not want orthodox Jewish men to treat their wives as something dirty -- to the point that the men insist on putting a sheet between them when they pro-create. That -- for the woman -- is humiliation, treating her as something evil that shouldn't be seen or touched.

I know in my heart that he loaths all the white, right-wing Christians who consider Blacks or Indians or Jews as somehow belonging to a stupider, lower species.

And I know deep from within me that he will punish with all his might any radical Muslim who thinks that murder, torture, rape, and suicidal murders are somehow a glory to his name. He has a special place in Hell for them and I promise you there aren't 72 Virgins waiting.

Here's a message for all radicals: Do not ever, ever think that God accepts hate and murder and rape and prejudice. He doesn't and if you think he does, you're a doomed fool.

Here's a message for other radicals: Do not ever, ever think that God agrees with your excuses for and forgiveness for evil, murderous behavior or your wish to subjugate and control everyones' lives.

Here's a message for everyone: If there is a God, he does very much believe that if you commit evil, you should suffer the consequences. Pardon the cliche but you reap what you sowed...

Saddam deserves everything coming to him.

... I don't know about you but I feel better having gotten all that off my chest...

My blogsister Bitter Bitch has finally got her carry permit!!! This is no easy task in Massachusetts. In some parts, including hers, it takes a herculean effort, especially for someone young, and who is only a recent arrival there. Good for her. Go over and congratulate her.

from the Robesonian (NC):

Patterson said that the two men had been playing with a 9 mm handgun most of the day on Sunday. When Deese walked down the hallway to take a shower, Strickland pointed the gun one last time, pulled the trigger - and it fired.

Patterson said Deese, who was shot once in the back, was pronounced dead at the home. He said the shooting death occurred at about 9:30 p.m.

Idiots. Guns are not toys anymore than knives or chainsaws or anything else like that. There was a similar case here in St. Jay Vermont about five years ago when two micro-brains shot up their house in "play."

Several rules of safe gun handling were ignored including (1) always assume a gun is loaded and (2) never point a gun at something you don't intend to destroy and (3) keep your finger out of the trigger guard.

Idiots.

Here's how you can tell a Democratic presidential candidate's poll numbers are in the toilet: He's now blaming President Bush for the lack of flu vaccine and for resisting attempts to import more doses of the vaccine from other countries. Here's a quote from the Union Leader:

"When it comes to the flu, we don¹t need to panic; we need to prepare," he said. "We need to have enough vaccine and to move more quickly in response to outbreaks so we stop the flu before it stops us."

Last week, Edwards called for an investigation into the current vaccine shortage and urged President Bush to import the vaccine from overseas. Federal officials already are considering the latter idea, but Edwards said he believes Bush opposes it as part of a larger policy of not allowing the reimportation of prescription drugs.

An investigation? We already know why the vaccine is in short supply. The two companies that manufacture it have to make predictions up to nine months in advance of flu season. They already do a lot of tracking! They, and the CDC, try to predict how many doses to make by studying the previous year's flu cases and vaccine demand. Then, they try to pin-down the prevalent strain of flu (this is during the Spring months) making the rounds in Asia and Australia. That usually becomes the strain that will affect Americans and Europeans the following fall. Then they produce the vaccine for it.

This isn't an exact science and unfortunately, viruses don't tend to follow government regulations and instead can mutate into other strains. I think it's called evolution, John?

From USA Today:

Chiron and Aventis, the two U.S. producers of flu shots, reported this month that they had shipped all their doses for this year. The U.S. manufacturers produced about 85 million doses of vaccine, normally adequate to meet demand. But the highly publicized deaths of at least 20 children and young adults so far this year, and reports of overcrowded emergency rooms across the nation, have helped fuel an unprecedented run on vaccine.

So in actuality the vaccine shortage was created by the media. The flu arrived earlier than usual and the media, always hunting for a "scare story" for ratings, plastered our TV sets and newspapers with horror stories about children dying in Colorado. Folks, the flu kills 20,000 to 35,000 people every single year! But since people were bored with Lyme Disease, West Nile Virus, SARS, et cetera, the news shows needed a new "terror" to report on.

And (also from USA Today) here's the thing:

Most years, millions of doses go unused and are thrown away. Their potency expires before the next flu season.

This isn't something the president even has any control over -- or should. Private industry does, and it's in their best interest to insure sufficient supply since they make money from it and are far better at "tracking" the disease than any governmental agency ever could be. This year was a fluke much like the "toilet paper shortage" created by a joke on the Tonight Show years ago.

More than that, the federal government already IS purchasing additional vaccines from England -- this isn't about prescription drugs reimportation -- as reported by Reuters:

The U.S. Health and Human Services Department said on Monday it had contracted to buy 375,000 doses of influenza vaccine from Chiron Corp. and had negotiated a good price for 3 million doses of a second vaccine, FluMist, for any states that want to buy it.

The Chiron vaccine was made in Britain but is fully licensed for use in the United States, an HHS spokesman said. Last week Dr. Julie Gerberding, head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the government was seeking to buy 500,000 doses of the vaccine from the company.

Obviously President Bush isn't trying to block this from happening. So Edwards is simply knocking over a straw-man in a desperate attempt to boost his polling. Is he so bereft of ideas that he's now reduced to telling people they should put him in the Oval Office because he would better handle communicable diseases than Bush? How pathetic. Can we next expect him to blame the President for the recent solar flares? Perhaps we should have an investigation...

---

Update 12/17: For those who think the government could or should do a better job of distributing vaccines, read this op-ed in the Washington Times.

...then you're part of the problem. I know I'm preaching to the choir here. I've often encouraged readers to get involved writing letters and emails. There are plenty of others out there doing the same thing including many of you. Anyway, over at Armed Females of America there's a good article by Nicki Fellenzer titled The Lessor of Two Evils, is Still Evil! She says much more eloquently than I could what happens when good people do nothing about the sorry state of our Bill of Rights and specifically the Second Amendment. Or worse, when George W. Bush, who promised to uphold the constitution, doesn't. Check it out.

Oh sure, one scruffy, homeless despot is nabbed somewhere in the Middle-East and everyone focuses their attention on that. Well NOT US! Here at the world-wide headquarters of Alphecca International we're sighted in on gun-rights and the media bias against it. ("we're" is comprised of me and three cats. Don't mess with us -- I've got guns and they've got claws...)

Seriously, it's a wonderful moment for our brave troops to capture one of the truly evil beings (I can't even bring myself to call him a man since no normal human would have committed the horrors he did) who has perpetrated such unspeakable atrocities on his subjects as well as neighboring countries. For my graphic this week I've chosen to show an Iraqi showing his pleasure (and no doubt relief) in Hussein's capture by celebrating in the traditional way of firing shots into the air with his AK 47.

He understands the sweet, fresh taste of freedom (thanks to the U.S. and her coalition partners) much better than the leftist, liberal chattering elites here in America and over in Europe who seem to have forgotten what real freedom and liberty are all about. Unfortunately, there are a lot of politicians here who have forgotten as well.

So here's what has been happening on the Yahoo Gun Control Debate page. No, there as been no wild swing towards sanity this week; no sudden recognition of the true benefits of the Second Amendment...

Regulars know I've been following the story of Geuda Springs, Kansas for a couple of months now. Back in early November the town council passed a resolution requiring all heads-of-households to own a firearm and ammunition. The purpose was simple: Geuda Springs has no police force. In order to keep crime in check, an armed populace was the simplest (and still the best as John R. Lott has clearly shown) way to do this.

Unfortunately, the misguided mayor of this town has decided to veto, or at least prevent this legislation from actually happening. Now, this is a weekly report on bias by Yahoo. Here's how bias really works in the selection of news stories Yahoo chooses to link to. When the story of the resolution passing was first reported (and I first noted it here) from this MSNBC story -- hardly an unknown news source, yet Yahoo's editors didn't link to it. But when the bill is rejected -- then Yahoo links to it with this AP story:

The mayor of this small prairie town has vetoed the town council's plan to require most homeowners to own guns.

Mayor Ed Lacey also nixed plans to poll Geuda Springs residents on the issue. He felt the dispute was dividing the town of 210, City Attorney Tom Herlocker said.

Last month, the town council voted 3-2 to require the heads of most households to own a gun and ammunition or face a $10 fine.

Don't report a positive gun story, just a negative one. That's how most news organizations work. Folks, I call that liberal bias against guns. Yahoo just proved it exists.

Speaking of bias against guns, I discussed this CS Monitor story last week but since I love the sound of my voice I'll do it again... Since the anti-gun issue doesn't work these days, try tarnishing a supposedly pro-gun politician. According to this article, Republican environmentalists are unhappy with various Bush policies. Here's a quote:

For the current president, who relied upon unwavering support from the so-called "hook and bullet" crowd to win in 2000, the kind of public criticism now being voiced by political conservatives like Rosenbruch represents a potential problem in 2004, observers say.

According to a report from the Fish and Wildlife Service, hunters and anglers are a formidable force not only in what they spend, but also in the political power they wield. More than 34 million Americans over age 16 fish annually; 13 million hunt.

Can I just say something here? [Of course! -- ed. Thanks! -- js] Most of G.W. Bush's policies regarding environmental concerns are identical to Clinton's. That's just a fact. As far as opening up national forests to increased logging, the purpose is to allow some "thinning" to prevent the three million (plus) acres of forest that typically burn down each year from natural fires.

How much thinning is good? I don't know but considering that the present method of "not allowing any" isn't working and is resulting in tremendous loss of forest lands, homes, and life, I'd say a new policy is needed. Does it help the logging industry? Well yeah... So what? They're the ones who have to do it. And unless these "Republican activists" send Christmas cards made of aluminum foil and wipe their butts with cotton rags, they probably consume as much in forest products as anyone else.

Here I go off on a tangent: The claim that animals like deer will disappear if some forests are thinned a bit is nonsense. Just ask anyone in rural-cum-suburban areas such as in New Jersey, Massachusetts, Michigan, etc. about that. Despite massive homebuilding in forested areas, clearing of trees, roads going through, most of these folks have to stop for herds of deer and other critters meandering across the roadways, munching on their shrubbery, and so on. Animals are very adept at adapting -- something about evolution, you know. And their numbers are increasing anyway to the point where many states with large suburban areas have had to increase their hunting seasons to thin them out!

Of course, the Christian Science Monitor has been virulently anti-gun forever and they make it sound as if the entire membership of the NRA is turning on Bush. Now, that might be happening but I doubt it's because of his logging rules. I suspect it has more to do with his support for extending the phony "assault weapons" ban (notice that for over a year I've put that nonsensical law in "quotes.") Or the fact that he has not used his political muscle to get the bill protecting gun makers and distributors from frivolous lawsuits out of committee and onto his desk where he claims he will sign it. Or maybe it's because of the following...

From the AP:

President Bush quietly signed legislation Tuesday that would extend for 10 years a ban on plastic guns that can be slipped past airport metal detectors or through X-ray machines.

The legislation bans the manufacture, sale or possession of such firearms, but exempts military and intelligence agencies. It renews a ban that was last reauthorized in 1998 and expires this month.

Now maybe this is just a "show" concession to some in the Homeland Security sect. There is no such thing as an all plastic gun. That is, there are certain parts of any firearm that MUST be made of metal -- steel -- or it will explode from the cartridge propellant. The name Glock comes to mind as a brand of guns that caused all sorts of hysteria until it was pointed out that the barrel and firing pins and such DO show up on X-ray machines because they are -- have to be -- made of steel. I suppose that someone, somewhere, has created an all plastic gun that might be capable of firing a few (it wouldn't last long) rounds of whimpy ammo such as .25 but I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere...

There wasn't much else on Yahoo. Last week I mentioned that Ohio Gov. Taft was planning to defy the will of the people and legislaters by vetoing a bill allowing concealed carry in his state. He says it doesn't allow public-disclosure of permit holders. That's a silly argument since the whole concept of concealed carry is that it's... uh, you know, concealed... Your neighbor isn't entitled to know that you carry a gun anymore than they are entitled to know you have high-blood pressure or a 30-year mortgage on your home. And according to that article, the Republican controlled house and senate of Ohio could easily muster a veto overide but are too chicken to do so against a Republican governor. I feel for my brethren in Ohio.

Here are a couple items stolen found at Keep and Bear Arms...

The always pro-gun Detroit News (that's a joke, folks) has this report (also a joke) on how firearm manufacturers are "blithely" ignoring all the safety features that "experts" claim should be built into firearms. Complete with heart-tugging photos, this "report" claims that:

In addition, many manufacturers routinely disregard customer complaints and fail to recall guns even after losing or settling lawsuits over faulty, dangerous firearms. Some gun makers go further, using confidentiality agreements as part of legal settlements to conceal problems with their firearms.

Gun manufacturers have strong allies in the National Rifle Association and the U.S. Congress.

In fact (a fact is something the Detroit News tends to ignore when brewing up their hysterical reports) most gun makers are VERY responsible and I can think of several instances where companies such as Sturm Ruger have made great effort and spent a lot on magazine ads announcing safety recalls and measures. But never mind that now since the Detroit News doesn't either.

There are always some folks who ignore basic safety rules and mishandle a firearm or leave it unsupervised and who then find some bottom-feeding trial lawyer to help them blame the manufacturer. Most gun makers, like any other industry, tend to settle these suits because it's cheaper than going through the trial process. This has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with the nature and expense of our litigious society. "Confidentiality agreements as part of legal settlements" is a COMMON practice. It's not some sneaky thing confined to gun makers -- it's part of almost every settlement in the long, unglorious history of civil suits. As any intelligent person who follows legal matters knows, these frivolous, nuisance suits have nothing to do with a defective product and everything to do with trying to win some money in the "legal lottery." Manufacturers routinely settle as a matter of economics, not admission of guilt.

For the Detroit News to somehow imply that the firearm industry is trying to conceal something because of this is total fiction, a misleading lie, and frankly, so ingenuous as to call into question their editorial bias and motives in publishing this garbage.

And then -- "out of the blue" -- with total gratuitousness and nothing to do with the issue at hand, they announce that firearm makers are supported by the NRA. I know folks, you're shocked, shocked! An industry that recieves support from an industry related lobbying group. Hold on to your hats because I've just learned that the NEA supports teachers and schools and the AMA supports doctors!!! My Ghod, where will it end?

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean races around the country touting his "A" rating from the NRA in days gone past (but now that he's a national candidate he's "folded like a cheap camera" (thank you Bob Grant) on the national debate by supporting such bogus anti-gun measures as the "assault weapons" ban extension and the fictitious gun show "loophole.")

Virginia Democratic candidate for governor Mark Warner is doing the same. From Boston.Com:

Mark Warner brought a Harvard law degree, a successful career as a venture capitalist, and a no-new-taxes pledge to the race for Virginia governor. But one key to his election in this conservative, Republican-leaning state was the "A" rating he got from the National Rifle Association.

Hey look, I'm glad that some (rare) Democrats support Second Amendment rights. I wish they all did. I wish everyone did. Then, I'd be out of a job, or at least I'd have to find something else to blather about on Alphecca.

Of course, the writer of this article elaborates:

Strader, a competitive marksman and firearms instructor for the US Capitol Police, is the type of voter Democratic presidential candidates are targeting with a new strategy: Neutralize the divisive gun issue by embracing the constitutional right to bear arms, speak of gun safety instead of gun control, and pledge to enforce the gun laws on the books.

I've ranted on all of this before. These politicians are now using phrases such as "gun safety" where they used to say "gun control" as if all of us average citizens who live on the frontlines of crime don't know the difference. "Gun Safety" is a codeword for more regulations and licensing and registering of gun owners. It's baloney.

Still, I will give this article writer credit for presenting an unbiased story. She (Mary Leonard) mostly stuck to the facts of politics these days -- that any candidate espousing gun-control platitudes faces certain death at the polls. And she provides evidence and quotes to support that. Yes, at the end of it she quotes a stupid ultra-liberal Democratic Pollster, Celinda Lake, as claiming the younger Democrats would support gun controls. This flies in the face of polls showing that college kids are becoming more conservative but in any event I view it as just providing balance to the story. That's what makes it free of bias.

That's what this weekly report is all about. I'll continue to report more as the week goes on and of course I'll have a report on it all next Monday. Just a reminder now that for those bloggers who like my "weekly report" but not my other postings, I'm so accomodating that I actually provide a seperate page and link with JUST my weekly reports here.

Thanks for stopping by!

I just got home from work (in a snowstorm as usual) and on the drive home I had an idea for a political cartoon: In the background is somehow depicted the mass graves of the 400,000+ Iraqis brutally murdered by Hussein. In the forground, a couple of American soldiers are pointing their rifles at the figure of Saddam climbing out of a hole in the ground. One soldier says to the other (or as a general caption) Looks like we found the elusive "weapon of mass destruction."

Hey, I said it was an idea, not necessarily a good idea...

You know, it's weird that when Lester Holt and NBC News broke into the broadcast this morning at about 5:50 AM (mercifully -- I was watching an insufferable version of "A Christmas Carol" with George C. Scott) I quickly booted up the tired old iMac and tried to find a web link. Nothing! Not on Drudge or Yahoo or anywhere. That's why I had to take the photos off my TV.

Anyway, I won't bother linking to all the stuff everyone else already has all day while I was toiling at work but I did find time to surf and found what has to be the most unusual post --from Debka-- about this event, a conspiracy theory! Saddam wasn't in hiding, he was being held captive for the 25 million dollar bounty! The article lists several (some rather speculative) reasons for this. Then it concludes:

According to DEBKAfile analysts, these seven anomalies point to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein was not in hiding; he was a prisoner.

After his last audiotaped message was delivered and aired over al Arabiya TV on Sunday November 16, on the occasion of Ramadan, Saddam was seized, possibly with the connivance of his own men, and held in that hole in Adwar for three weeks or more, which would have accounted for his appearance and condition. Meanwhile, his captors bargained for the $25 m prize the Americans promised for information leading to his capture alive or dead. The negotiations were mediated by Jalal Talabani¹s Kurdish PUK militia.

These circumstances would explain the ex-ruler¹s docility ­ described by Lt.Gen. Ricardo Sanchez as ³resignation² ­ in the face of his capture by US forces. He must have regarded them as his rescuers and would have greeted them with relief.

Granted, Debka swims in the same murky waters as Art Bell and George Noory at Coast To Coast AM. But who knows? I certainly don't, and that's why I tend to avoid international stuff around here unless it has to do with gun-rights. It could be...

See you sometime tomorrow with the Weekly Check on the Bias...

UPDATE 7:20 here's a new photo of him after his capture and before they shaved his beard off.

NBC news just announced that US troops in Iraq believe they've captured Saddam Hussein. He had been hiding in a cellar in Trikit. If true, this is a huge boost for Bush. More importantly, it will relieve the citizens of Iraq who -- while celebrating their liberty -- have had to temper their feelings because their former oppressor was still on the loose.

The question now is what to do with him. No doubt the leftist elites will want to transfer him to some cushy EU detention area to insure "good treatment."

Iraq already has begun setting up a war-crimes tribunal.

Me? I say turn him over to his former political prisoners -- those that have survived. They'll take good care of him I'm sure... Heh.

Iraqis traditional celebration of firing guns into the air.



I think I'll find a good one to use for tomorrow's Weekly Report.

Update 7:12 I had no idea when I wrote this post a little over an hour ago that the news conference would start with, "We've got him!"