Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

Welcome to the March 29th edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias by media against guns and the Second Amendment.

Last week we saw the horrific shooting at a school in Red Lake, Minnesota and I had predicted a rash of editorials to follow demanding more gun control. Aside from a handful, it hasn't happened. One that did was the Laura Washington piece from the Chicago Sun-Times that I mentioned yesterday. She said:

...Sarah Brady asked: "When will our leaders have enough? When will the government do something to help stop the bloodshed?"

Not any time soon, it seems. The culture of death is nourished by political leaders with other priorities. Last week, President Bush and other conservatives were consumed with a national crusade to keep Terri Schiavo alive -- against her own wishes, her husband says. It's a crusade, the politicians say, to protect and preserve life.

Last September, Congress and Bush allowed the 1994 federal ban on assault weapons to expire. The law kept AK-47s and other semiautomatic assault weapons off the streets and out of the hands of the gang-bangers and drug dealers who trade in them. What was that about protecting lives?

Last November, we re-elected Bush -- and most of Congress.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration has spent billions in Iraq and Afghanistan to keep us safe from terrorism. The administration crows that since Sept. 11, 2001, there has not been a single terrorist attack on American soil. That's great. But in that time, we have lost at least 21,800 lives to gun-related murders on our streets. What was that about preserving lives?

[...]

Unless we get serious about gun control, the killing will continue. There is a gun around every corner. One of them could have your name, or the name of your child, on it. Live -- and die -- with that.

Quite a wide swath she cuts there! In just a few paragraphs she manages to blame President Bush and other political leaders for encouraging a "culture of death" by ignoring crime while focusing on such unrelated subjects as Terri Schiavo and the war in Iraq.

Then she blames him further for the demise of the phony "assault weapons ban" without acknowedging that he had stated he would sign the bill if it came to his desk.

THEN, she apparently blames the voters of this country for re-electing Bush (and most of Congress). And lastly, declares that it's all about the gun and we have to get serious about gun control. I might ask her how any gun control laws enacted anywhere would have prevented Jeff Weise from stealing his grandfather's guns (which, being a cop, he was entitled to own) or would have stopped Brian Nichols from grabbing the gun of a deputy in the Atlanta courthouse?

Another -- near hysterical editorial dealing with a rise in shootings in Philadelphia appeared in the Philadelphia Daily News:

The evidence is clear: Philadelphia needs greater control over handguns. To hell with the rest of this happy-hunting gun-nut state, which remains hostile to any gun-control legislation, and the legislators who claim nothing can be done.

What must happen is:

• Repeal the 1995 legislation that kept Philadelphia from passing its own stricter gun laws. Those strict laws were first pushed by then-mayor Rendell, who became a national figure for urban gun control... until he backed away from the issue.

The rest of the state can do what it wants, but Philadelphia MUST control its own destiny on this issue.

• Enact state Rep. John Meyers' one-gun-a-month purchase law. This concept is among the most reasonable in a gun-happy state like Pennsylvania. It gets to the heart of "straw" purchases, when an individual legally buys several guns, then sells them on the black market. Rendell likes this proposal, but has said it is unlikely to pass, because lawmakers believe any such law will be the start of further infringements on their constituents' gun-toting rights.

But this law would affect only handguns favored by criminals, not rifles and shotguns favored by sportsmen and hunters. Why would anyone need to buy more than 12 handguns in a year?

• Strengthen requirements to obtain permits to carry concealed weapons, and limit the number of permits. Street supports this.

Strengthening carry permits would be more symbolic than effective. Few of the 29,000 permits to carry in the city are revoked because the owners are involved in a gun-related crime. But that ignores the point that 29,000 legally gun-toting people on the already dangerous streets is far too many.

We really don't need another task force. We need action. And politicians with vision and guts.

Wow! So cops are having trouble controlling crime in the City of Brotherly Love! Therefore, to hell with Pennsylvanian residents who don't live there, we want to enact new laws that could effect anyone.

The writer asks, "Why would anyone need to buy more than 12 handguns in a year?" Because to collectors and enthusiasts, each one is unique, different, a new challenge at the range, an opportunity to explore other calibers, barrel lengths, and so on. Or maybe they just WANT them. Why would anyone buy more than 12 DVDs a year?

I love the fact that while the writer acknowledges that almost none of the 29,000 legally permited CCW holders have committed any crimes (what is it, like 2 in the past 3 years?), that's still 29,000 too many. Hmmm, sounds like they would prefer the Chicago solution where there are none. Hasn't helped Chicago any, though... But history likes to repeat itself.

Of course, the writer also falsely states that Philadelphia should be allowed to pass stricter gun control measures regardless of what the rest of the state does. But that opens up the exact same problems for non-City residents as was experienced a couple years ago when Denver did the same thing. Suddenly, Colorado citizens legally carrying a gun in their car became a felon if they drove down a highway that passed through Denver City limits. So such legislation DOES impact residents from other parts of the "happy-hunting gun-nut state" of Pennsylvania.

Fortunately -- or surprisingly -- most stories have adopted a more realistic view of the recent glitch of violence we've seen. One by Nathan Gorenstein appears in today's Philadelphia Inquirer regarding the recent spate of murders in that city. While guns are mentioned as being part of the problem, that is hardly the focus of the point being made:

Changing attitudes is crucial, said State Rep. Jewell Williams (D., Phila.), who represents an area on the west side of North Broad Street that in recent years has had more shootings than any other city neighborhood.

"You're dealing with a Colosseum type of environment," Williams said, in which some residents "sanction the violence" and some children grow up in families that have long been dysfunctional.

"We have not been able to give hope to people who are hopeless," Williams said. "I can look at four or five generations that have gone wrong."

[...]

That [$4.2 million dollar initiative] opened a "gun court," tightened laws on the use of firearms while committing a crime, and helped fund the Youth Violence Reduction Partnership, which provides intensive monitoring to youths considered at risk of killing or being killed.

[State Rep. Dwight Evans (D., Phila.)] warned those at the meeting against making passage of tougher gun laws "the only measure of success."

Despite Republican opposition to tougher gun laws, Evans said that House Speaker John Perzel (R., Phila.) and other city Republicans helped secure last year's $4.2 million appropriation. "Every other item, there has been support for" by GOP legislators, Evans said.

It should be noted that Evans IS a fierce proponent of increased gun control yet even he is saying that won't solve all the problems. My point here is not that this article (it's actually a news story, not an op-ed) isn't anti-gun, just that the blame for recent shootings in Philadelphia are not being blamed in total on guns.

Much better was this Whittier Daily (CA) editorial:

It's become clear over the years that most of these spectacular episodes are so freakish that they are not amenable to regulatory solutions. It's also become clear that any imaginable gun-control laws are not likely to have much effect on crime in America.

Even the staunchest anti-gun organizations made only perfunctory efforts to capitalize on the Minnesota shootings. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence used the opportunity to criticize Congress for letting the federal "assault weapons" ban expire, mandating immediate destruction of the records of gun sales, and considering a bill to limit lawsuits against gun dealers.

But these had nothing to do with what happened in Red Lake. Records of gun sales? The killer, 16-year-old Jeff Weise, wasn't old enough to buy a gun legally in Minnesota. At least two of his guns were stolen from his grandfather, a police officer whom he killed.

Assault weapons ban? His arsenal included no such weapons -- only a .22-caliber pistol, plus a police-issued .40-caliber handgun and 12-gauge shotgun. Limiting lawsuits against dealers? A bill that hasn't been enacted couldn't have caused a mass shooting yet.

The Violence Policy Center charged that the problem lies in "America's love affair with guns," and held up the example of countries that, it says, have prevented mass shootings through "severe restrictions on the availability of specific classes of firearms, such as handguns and assault weapons."

This statement only confirmed the National Rifle Association's suspicion that gun-control advocates are bent on banning entire categories of common firearms -- even though most owners use them in a responsible and law-abiding manner.

But decrying America's love affair with guns is like decrying America's love affair with football or movies. There are some 260 million firearms in private hands in this country. Any solution requiring vast numbers of people to reject something they have long valued is not a solution but a fantasy. It's also an admission that no politically feasible options are likely to have any perceptible effect on crime.

Support for gun control has been sliding in recent years. In 1990, 78 percent of Americans said they thought laws on firearm sales should be stricter. By 2004, only 54 percent agreed. By a 2-to-1 margin, they oppose a general ban on private ownership of handguns -- as dreamed of by the Violence Policy Center. When Congress let the "assault weapons" ban expire last year, there was no public uproar.

Past experience with school shootings, horrific as they are, may have also made people skeptical of overreaction. As it happens, this sort of mayhem is rare and getting rarer. Last year's annual federal report on school crime and safety notes that the number of kids killed at school dropped from 33 in the 1998-99 school year to 14 in 2001-02. Other violent crimes against students at school have also declined.

I'm hoping The Whittier Daily will excuse my long quote but they are to be congratulated for sound thinking in this unsigned editorial (which means it didn't come from a "guest writer"). Those of you in California should buy a few copies to show support!

Turning to Florida, I had mentioned last month that the state legislature was trying to pass a bill that would untie the hands of people defending themselves from home intruders. I'm dazzled that the story I had talked about from the St. Petersburg Times is still available:

Under current law, homeowners cannot use deadly force unless they believe an intruder intends to kill them or a loved one, or severely harm them. Although criminal case law tends to favor homeowners, anyone who kills an intruder can be arrested.

Under the bill, anyone who breaks into an occupied house or car would be presumed to have deadly intent. Victims would no longer have to determine the intruder's intent.

"You can't expect a victim to wait and ask, "Excuse me, Mr. Criminal, are you going to rape me and kill me, or are you just going to beat me up and steal my television?' " said Marion Hammer, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

The bill has law enforcement support because it does not allow homeowners to shoot law officers who legally break into homes, such as when they believe someone is in harm or evidence is being destroyed.

"I think if you talked to the average Joe or Jane Citizen they would say, "There ought to be a law.' This is your chance to make a law," said David Murrell, lobbyist for the Florida Police Benevolent Association.

The bill does not allow people to shoot intruders outside the home.

Note that an amendment would now permit the principles expressed in the law to apply (in a limited way) outside the home. That is, if you are attacked in the street or while riding in your car, you could also use deadly force to protect yourself.

So what's the problem? I don't see one but Florida U.S. Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, D-Miramar apparently does and writes in yesterday's Sun Sentinal (FL):

The Florida Legislature's passage of legislation making legal the use of lethal force any time an individual feels threatened is nothing more than political pandering that will ultimately leave our communities more dangerous than ever...

[...]

Law enforcement personnel are regularly trained on clear standard operating procedures when determining if the use of deadly force is necessary. It is this process that protects us from potentially overly aggressive police officers and keeps us from turning our streets into a showdown at the OK Corral.

Here we go (again and again and again...) with the claim that the streets will flow with blood, the wild west, and so on in all the same arguments used in other states that passed concealed carry laws -- except that Florida already allows it and it hasn't happened. In fact, it hasn't happened anywhere where such laws were enacted. All this law says is that you don't have to administer a rorschach test to some mutant who's assaulting you before defending yourself. Hastings goes on:

This legislation allows individuals to invoke their own personal subjective analysis of a situation, without requiring them to factor in possible racist tendencies or prejudicial attitudes that they may hold toward people who may look or sound different from them. All of this with full immunity from prosecution.

[...]

Shame on anyone who suggests that this bill will make our streets safer. Even more, shame on the state Legislature for trying to make it legal for one citizen to take the life of another.

Ah, the crux of the matter: Folks shouldn't be allowed to defend and protect themselves because they might be "racist" or "prejudiced"? Hastings -- who is Black -- is playing on the racial-victim fears of his constituency. Is he implying that Blacks will be killed without cause by Whites? Who's pandering now?

In fact though, Blacks are more likely to be attacked by other Blacks than by others. I have argued many a time here that minorities (Blacks, Gays, Jews) should be the first ones embracing the concept of concealed-carry for personal defense. Apparently Hastings feels otherwise. Here's a snap of him from his own website sharing the love with Janet Reno...

That explains a lot!

Personally, I think the proposed laws are a good thing. They put Florida mutants on notice that if they target someone to hurt, they might become a target themselves. And folks, there's a universal language that crosses all ethnic and racial borders. If some thug is breaking into my home, I don't need to stop and think, "hmmm, he's ___________ (fill in the blank), maybe I just don't understand his culture." He's there for no good purpose and I will gladly present him with another universal symbol, that of my Para .45 caliber pistol.

I'm not saying that if you confront a mutant and he stops, backs-off, dives back out the door he broke into, you should shoot him. But if he keeps on coming despite a warning, he'll experience another universal phenomenon called death.

Here's what's happening at some other fine pro-2A blogs:

Zendo Deb at TFS Magnum reports that St. Louis is running out of excuses for not issueing concealed carry permits.

Jed at FreedomSight announces a new page of his listing Colorado gun shows.

Just a reminder that Joe Huffman is organizing -- and you have less than a month left until -- Boomershoot 2005!

Hey, Bruce at mASS BACKWARDS has a shirt just for women!

Say Uncle reports on how gun control laws are making it tough in Iraq.

A nice piece of porn over at North Georgia Dogma. Or is that porn of a nice piece?

James at Hell in a Handbasket on packing. I'm with him, give me a small pocket-rocket, not the big honker shown in the photo...

And I guess American Drumslinger has made up his mind for April 15th, Buy A Gun Day.

Countertop Chronicles gives his own thoughts on an anti-gun parent.

Time to get this up. You can listen to me later today on NRA News (link to the right) and until then, thanks for stopping by!

Ban All Guns?

That seems to be the implication by Laura Washington in this Chicago Sun-Times editorial:

After 16-year-old Jeff Weise shot himself and nine others to death last week on the Red Lake Indian reservation in Minnesota, the post-mortem focused on child psychiatrists, educators and law enforcement officials who speculated on what triggered his rampage. They recommend more metal detectors in schools, closer monitoring of child mental health, curbs on media-based violence.

The boy used a gun that belonged to the grandfather he murdered. Still, the issue of gun control seemed to stay mostly under the radar. It's as though we have come to a place where society has accepted gun violence as an irrefutable fact of life -- and death.

The guns Weise stole from his grandfather (and used on him) were ordinary ones by Main Stream Media standards. The gun used at the Atlanta courthouse was a service pistol taken from a guard. I mention these two examples because no matter how draconian new gun control legislation becomes, it would not have prevented these shootings. Banning "assault weapons" wouldn't have done it because so-called "assault weapons" weren't involved. Closing the "gun show loophole" wouldn't have prevented anything in these cases.

Therefore, I can only assume that while the writer dismisses such suggestions as curbing media violence and closer monitoring of kids, she seems to think that -- since it's all the fault of the gun -- those have to disappear from our culture. Does she then mean ALL GUNS?

But that's not ever going to happen because criminals will never surrender theirs. It will simply leave the rest of us at the mercy of soaring crime by emboldened mutants as has happened in England and Australia.

I had predicted that op-eds like this would start appearing in short order after the Red Lake incident. Unfortunately, I was right.

Sunday Sex Doll Blogging

Given the popularity of this post I thought I'd return to the well. No, not really but then I came across this press-release from Landover Baptist Church:

When Mrs. Tawny Huxton opened her son Timmy's bedroom door, she was shocked to see his innocent white hiney nestled into the new 7ft Jar Jar Binks doll she had bought him for his birthday. Lately, many Americans have suffered similar incidents. Young children are being seduced by the character of George Lucas' latest Star Wars Movie. Jar Jar's soothing voice, and timid childlike manners, seem to lure young teens into a world of lustful abandon. Unsuspecting parents purchase the popular life-size doll, only to find out later that it is being used by the child as a masturbation toy.

Under the guise of family entertainment, Lucas' "Star Wars" prequel has contaminated America's youth with subliminal sexual innuendo. Pastor Ebeneezer Smith of the Landover Baptist Church commented, "The demonic characteristics of the Jar Jar binks creature become obvious when one pays close attention. His forked tongue, his lapping, his malignant features, are all too noticeable to the Christ centered man." Experts who have examined the life-sized doll that has become the favorite 'toy' of 12-14 year old children, say that the evidence is overwhelming. The doll was created for the sole purpose of masturbation. It has four openings, and three extrusions, making it compatible for male or female pleasure.

It's good that the church has "experts" in sex dolls. I'd tell you to read the whole thing but you might not be able to stop laughing...

But wait, there's more! From the same site, another action alert:

A quiet family dinner at the Gillman home turned into a nightmare from Hell on Sunday evening when little Matthew Gillman, innocently playing between the legs of his new Grinch toy, peeled back the green hairs to reveal a tiny, but instantly recognizable, green penis. Mr. Gillman, a prominent member of Landover Baptist, told authorities that he had just turned his head slightly to see what Matthew was doing when he saw the little green genitals hanging between the legs of the Grinch doll. "My stomach reacted instantly, and I threw up my entire dinner," he said. "Everyone was covered in vomit."

The family called church security, and officers arrived shortly thereafter to remove the disgusting little toy. It was quarantined for two days before a team of Landover Baptist media experts could have a close look at it. "Make no mistake," reported Dr. Jonathan Edwards, "This is not just a tangle of little green hairs. This is male genitalia. It was willfully crafted and appears to be 'part' of the toy itself." Pastor Deacon Fred spoke at a news conference the next day. "We have some sick minds in Hollywood, folks. I think this is a Disney movie and probably a Disney product, so you can bet some homosexual or Democrat in Florida was behind it."

As a result of the incident, the Gillman family was forced to pay a $5,000 fine/tithe to the church since they had in their possession a product from a restricted movie.

Church security required to "remove the doll?" Quarantined for two days until "experts" could determine that the doll had a green penis?

IN ACTUALITY , this site is a parody and it is truly hilarious. Check out the photo and caption on this page. I suppose it's sinful to make fun of someone's religion but someone put a lot of brilliant effort into Landover Baptist and I'm glad to send you to it. The Onion would be proud!

One More, About Food...

It's almost Noon here and I remember arguing yesterday with a co-worker about condiments... I am not a cook (although I play one on TV) and while I might never enjoy the wonderful meals cooked up by a blessed family such as Jay and Deb and Sadie but I will still strive to (like most single guys) char-up some grub. But what to put on those remains...

Folks, I am (*gasp*) 50-years-old and I am way set in my ways. Maybe because of my dear parent's training, I believe the following:

Tomato Sauce: (and if you need the history of it, go here.) I have been raised with Heinz. Up until two years ago, that is all I would accept for ketchup. I've recently found that ketchup (catsup) is no big thing and now I buy cheaper stuff like Del Monte and Shur-Fine which taste just the same and as good.

Now, Mayonnaise is something different. For me, it absolutely has to be Hellmann's. And don't give me that Kraft Miracle Whip crap because it just doesn't measure up to Hellmann's.

Peanut Butter HAS to be Skippy. Period.

I'm pretty particular about mustard, too. I like the yellow stuff from French's that all the snobs hate. Don't even try to give me nasty stuff like Gould's.

Salt must be Morton and strawberry jelly must be Smucker's.

Tuna Fish has to be those solid-packed, tasty Bumblebee solid white Albacore ones packed in spring water.

Pepperidge Farm makes the best bread.

White eggs are better than brown eggs because they don't have those blood spots.

Coke is better than Pepsi.

And while most supermarkets have stopped selling it because most folks don't want to pay for the bone, T-Bone Steaks are the best there is in good-eats. Weirdly enough, BJ's sells them still. Now, here's something you didn't want to know about me: I like to gnaw all the tender meat and fat off of the bone. Hate me if you will...

Now, here's something that will really gross you out: I like butter on my roast-beef and ham sandwiches.

And! And I leave my butter in a covered dish on my kitchen counter so it's always soft. You should know that I (in defiance of the American Heart Association) consume a quarter-stick every two days. Ahhh... I can feel my arteries hardening now...

Okay, tear me apart or offer your own opinions...

This Weekend...

Hey, folks, I wish all of you who celebrate it, a very Happy Easter and while I'm not Catholic, I do wish an end to Pope John Paul's suffering. I also wish an end to Terri Schiavo's suffering. There are no easy answers in her "case" and I just hope God will shed some mercy on her and make her "death" not so awfull. I wish I had supreme power and could make everything alright again for her. I don't know if prayer works but I will offer one up tonight for Terri. It might mean nothing but it can't hurt...

Have a great weekend and play nice! Thanks for stopping by!

Changes Here...

Well, I'm rather bored with the look of Alphecca. I've written to a couple other bloggers and one, Kim du Toit was kind enough to answer and educate my lame knowledge of HTML. Thank you, Kim.

I will be searching out and trying some new "looks" (MT styles) for Alphecca over the weekend so don't be alarmed if my page comes-up looking weird. By Monday I'll be back to normal and if I make a real change I'll give you forwarning...

Spring is Here!

For the past several days we've (here in Vermont) been in the 40 degree range with much Sun. Today is wonderful and tomorrow, Easter Sunday, is expected to be up to 50 with mostly sunny skies. Amen!

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I need money...

My bandwidth usage this month, according to Hosting Matters, is -- as I write this -- 31 gigs. And there's still five days to go... That's WAY over my allotment and they will bill me for it this Friday. Part of it was that several evil sites were "hot linking" photos from my two blogs. Another was that Yahoo somehow had me ranked number one in web searches for the phrase "Jeff Weise", the mutant who shot up his school this past week...

Please consider a donation to the cause by hitting Yosemite Sam on the right-side sidebar.

Also, I am slowly catching up to all the 4,300 emails I didn't receive because while deleting some stuff from my "space" at Hosting Matters, I deleted the email forwarding files that sent your emails to me at my home account. As best as I can tell, this started and your emails to me were lost starting about February 22. It's all fixed now but if you wrote to me, or responded to me, it was lost. Please write again...

IN CASE I haven't said it lately, thanks for stopping by and thank you for your support.

Lots of Good Stuff Out There

I tend to take weekends off but there's all sorts of bloggy-goodness awaiting you...

One of the newer pro-2A bloggers has all sorts of good posts up so head on over to Fun Turns to Tragedy!!! for interesting stuff.

Another interesting fact is that most Pro-2A bloggers don't ever mention or blogroll me. But since I consider gun-rights VERY important, might I direct you to the latest Carnival of the Cordite? I knew you wouldn't mind... I'll wait...

My buddy Say Uncle is seeking CCW advice for a paraplegic who wants to carry.

My friend James at Hell In a Handbasket asks and answers the simple question, Why pack two when one will do? Yes, I am a poet...

Lots of good stuff over at Countertop Chronicles too.

Another Dolt

Via Drudge, another idiot brings a knife to a gun fight... From NY Newsday:

SEMINOLE, Fla. -- A man was arrested after trying to steal a weapon from a gun shop so he could "take some action and rescue Terri Schiavo," authorities said.

Michael W. Mitchell, of Rockford, Ill., entered Randall's Firearms Inc. in Seminole just before 6 p.m. Thursday with a box cutter and tried to steal a gun, said Marianne Pasha, a spokeswoman for the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office.

[...]

Randy McKenzie, the owner of Randall's Firearms, said Mitchell pulled out the box cutter and broke the glass on a couple of display cases.

"He told me if I wasn't on Terri's side then I wasn't on God's side, either," McKenzie told The Associated Press.

McKenzie said he then pointed his own gun at Mitchell and ordered him to lie on the ground. But Mitchell fled out the store's back door before police arrived, he said.

Mitchell was later arrested in a parking lot and was scheduled to appear in court Friday. He was being held on $125,000 bond on charges of attempted armed robbery, aggravated assault and criminal mischief, officials said.

Sorry, no sympathy from me. I don't care the cause -- violence and breaking the law is never acceptable as a means to an end.

Time to Lighten-Up

I've been far too ranty and ravy (or some-such word) this week. I think I'll lighten things up around here today and through the weekend.

Also, just a reminder that I wasn't getting emails forwarded to me for the past three weeks so if you sent something, please re-send it. I fixed the mail forwarder on my account at Hosting Matters...

Calling the Kettle Black?

Democrats rigging elections? I'm astounded! Head over to Captain's Quarters and read this.

From the Low IQ Department

Ya know, if you're going to hunt illegally and you're caught, just pay the fine and accept the consequences. From the AP:

An Alabama man has been given three years' probation and fined $5,000 after he was convicted of impersonating a federal tax agent in an effort to keep from being cited for hunting violations.

[...]

Authorities say the 36-year-old Blankenship posed as an IRS agent in January 2004 when he was confronted by enforcement officers of the state Game and Fish Commission.

The game officers found that Blankenship had killed six white-fronted, speckled-belly geese when the limit was two. They also accused Blankenship of luring the geese with an illegal electronic calling device and using lead shot.

[...]

Blankenship's felony conviction could cost him his job as a civil engineer for the state of Alabama, and, since he can no longer legally possess a firearm, he is effectively barred from Hunting, Moody said.

This Rhodes Scholar tried to intimidate the Fish & Game guys by threatening to have them audited. Doesn't he know that IRS agents are NOT the most admired people in the world? If he had fessed-up, his fine would have been about $627 dollars. Now...

Going Bananas

You can prevent a crime even if armed only with fruit! From the AP:

Crystal Senger stopped at a convenience store to buy pop and cigarettes, and she saw the clerk being choked in a robbery attempt. She ran to call for help. Then she started throwing bananas.

Senger, 19, said she grew up playing organized baseball, and used those skills to pelt the suspect in the head with every banana she threw, from about 10 feet away.

"I was seven-for-seven," Senger said in a telephone interview Thursday. "They were green bananas — not the ripe mushy ones — so they hurt."

Senger said the suspect, who police said was intoxicated, was stunned from getting hit by the flying fruit.

A 17-year-old was arrested after he bolted from the Devils Lake store and tripped over a piece of wood, after a short foot chase, Police Chief Bruce Kemmet said. The teen had no weapon and no money was taken from the store, Kemmet said.

Don't let Chuck Schumer find out or he'll introduce a bunch of banana-control bills.

Despair in Minnesota

I wonder if mutants such as Jeff Weise realize that the carnage they leave behind -- after they murder so many of their fellow townspeople -- only leaves anger, not admiration. A touching tale of the problems that afflict a small Indian community in this report from the Boston Globe:

In his kitchen yesterday, Roland Lussier Sr. did not watch. He knew more than he wanted or ever thought possible. Clasping his hands between his trembling knees, his expression dazed and disbelieving, Lussier spoke softly about his 15-year-old son, Chase, who was gunned down Monday afternoon in the second-deadliest school shooting in US history.

''He was a good kid, well-liked, a nice person," said Lussier, 44, his eyes brimming. ''You think this goes on outside, but not here."

But even Lussier acknowledged that this tribe has ''a bad name," one that has been acquired through sporadic violence over the last quarter-century -- and a much longer time from crushing poverty. From a revolt by tribal dissidents that left two teenagers dead in 1979 and the fatal shooting of a tribal judge in 1986, to a staggeringly high unemployment rate and a dashed hope of casino riches, trouble has dogged the reservation.

It is an 882-square-mile reservation 260 miles north of Minneapolis where everybody seems linked to everyone else, even in death. Jeff Weise, 16, who shot himself after taking the lives of nine others, is a distant cousin of Lussier's. And Daryl Lussier, 58, Weise's grandfather who also was killed, is Roland Lussier's first cousin.

''There are a lot of stereotypes about the tribe, but there are a lot of good people here," said Lussier, who works in forestry. ''Our people have passion and a lot of other good ethics."

''I am proud," he added, to be a Chippewa.

Tribal pride is plentiful among the vast, snow-girdled stands of pines and birch trees, from the license plates that read ''Chippewa Nation" instead of ''Minnesota," to the highway billboard that salutes the high school's Red Lake Warriors. Nature's jewels here are the expansive Upper and Lower Red Lakes, which the tribe regards in spiritual terms and where crappie and walleye fishing is renowned. Such a place, tribal members remind outsiders, is sovereign territory where visitors are allowed only by permission.

But pride alone cannot mask the problems that afflict Red Lake, where the $22,000 median household income is second-lowest among Minnesota Indians. In 2001, the Red Lake tribe reported a 57-percent unemployment rate, and some locals say the true rate is even higher. For Native Americans nationwide, the rate that year was 49 percent, according to federal figures.

Along the two-lane paved roads, modest wooden homes and single-wide house trailers are set on widely scattered lots where rusting automobiles are stashed unused in many yards. Red Lake High School ranks among the worst-performing in the state. And methamphetamine abuse is a festering sore on the remote reservation, where a small casino does not take much of anyone's money except the Chippewas'. Teenage pregnancy is not uncommon. Indeed, Chase Lussier recently had become a father.

Jeff Weise was a monster who gave off all the signals of planning to commit a terrible crime. No one took him seriously or at least they didn't take it seriously enough to corner him and take him off the streets.

I can't blame the parents because as I've written in the past few days, they could not be there (his father committed suicide and his mother is confined to a nursing home) but damn-it, the signs were all there -- true parallels to the Columbine mutants.

Home alone kids are not acceptable. One parent families are barely acceptable; leaving teenagers unsupervised and un-parented are invitations to tragedy.

In a community living on the edge -- without benefit of all that "casino money" flowing into it, without hope, without prospects, without adults taking responsibility for the children, damn, I'm surprised this sort of horror doesn't happen more often.

Jeff Weise's classmates and teachers knew -- they had warnings -- that this kid was demented and they did NOTHING. And now, damn-it, some of them are dead.

Common Sense in Canada

The horrible shooting of four RCMP in Canada two weeks ago resulted in this letter to the Toronto Star:

Finally, the Commissioner of the RCMP has admitted the gun registry will not deter criminals or protect police officers. The silence from his boss, however, is deafening. Well, I suppose being Liberal means never having to say you're sorry. It takes real integrity to admit a mistake, so admit the error, cut our losses on the gun registry and invest the savings in more front line police. It is just the right thing to do.

Exactly!

Email Eff-Up

I couldn't figure out why emails I was forwarding to myself from work weren't showing up at home tonight. Now I have. I logged onto my web host for the first time in a month and there were tons (over 2000) emails that didn't get forwarded to me. See... I deleted a bunch of files from my web-host server several weeks ago and apparently I deleted my email forwarders by mistake. If you've sent me email in the past three weeks or so, I didn't get it. I'm sorry; my "bad". Please send it again. I think I've fixed it but I'm not sure...

I also discovered that I am WAY over my allotted bandwidth because of -- I suppose spammers or picture hi-jackers. I don't really know but I sure-as-shit know that Hosting Matters says I've used 25 gigs of bandwidth this month and they're billing me for it. I've asked them for advice but in the meantime, if you just got your IRS refund, please consider hitting my "tip-jar" which is (if you scroll down on the right side) the Yosemite Sam icon. Thanks so much!

Update: Seems a bunch of sites were "hot linking" some of the photos here and on Tarazet. I think I've fixed that now but I'm still going to have a whopper of a bill at the end of the month.

A Biased Blast From the UK

A British newspaper, The Mirror, further examines the twisted mind of Jeff Weise:

SCHOOL massacre gunman Jeff Weise was a silent, lonely, Nazi- loving misfit, schoolmates said yesterday.

Police were trying to discover what drove 16-year-old Weise to shoot dead five pupils, a teacher and security guard before killing himself in America's worst school shooting since Columbine in 1999.

Earlier he murdered his granddad and the man's young girlfriend on the Red Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota.

But Allan Mosey, 14, said: "He was a Goth. He had no friends and he did not communicate."

And Willy May, 18, said he was not surprised that Weise was the gunman. He said: "He fits the profile of a Columbine shooter - he always wore combat boots with red shoelaces.

"He always had stacks of drawings - disturbed drawings. Some showed people with bullets going through their skulls."

Okay, so far that jives with the facts revealed so far. But then, farther down, the Mirror says:

Relatives gathered at the school. Chanelle's father Kevin Martin, who recently had a huge tattoo of her name on his back, said: "I just wish I could have traded places with her. She didn't deserve to die." Weise always wore a long trench coat, like the two teenage Columbine gunmen who called themselves the Trench Coat Mafia.

And like them he was obsessed with Nazism, writing 34 messages on a right-wing website.

Huh? When they say "right-wing website" I presume they are referring to a conservative website? There are a lot of right-wing websites on my blogroll and reading list and I don't know any of them hosting or celebrating Nazism or any other form of demented racism.

Jeff Weise wrote messages on a "Nazi website" or a "white supremicist website" or something like that; an extremist website. But then we've seen over and over during the past election how those "on the left" equate conservatism and Bush and Cheney with Nazism and Hitler that maybe I shouldn't be surprised. I wouldn't be if it were coming from moveon.org or the Nation but I expect better from a newspaper.

Heck, a lot of folks consider Alphecca a "right-wing website". Sorry, no swastikas around here!

Gun Control and Crime

Over at NRO, John Lott, Jr. has an op-ed on gun control laws and the recent episodes of violence. Here's a quote:

Police are extremely important in deterring crime, but they almost always arrive after the crime has been committed. Annual surveys of crime victims in the United States continually show that, when confronted by a criminal, people are safest if they have a gun. Just as the threat of arrest and prison can deter criminals from committing a crime, so can the fact that victims can defend themselves.

Gun-control advocates conveniently ignore that the nations with the highest homicide rates have gun bans. Studies, such as one conducted recently by Jeff Miron at Boston University, which examined 44 countries, find that stricter gun-control laws tend to lead to higher homicide rates. Russia, which has banned guns since the Communist revolution, has had murder rates several times higher than that of the United States; even under the Communists, the Soviet Union's rate was much higher.

Good intentions don't necessarily make good laws. What counts is whether the laws ultimately save lives. Unfortunately, too many gun laws primarily disarm law-abiding citizens, not criminals.

As we are wont to say in the blogosphere, "Read the whole thing".

Your Source For News...

I noticed a surge in visitors yesterday and examined the referrals. Through some strange twist in the fabric of the universe, Alphecca comes up #1 when doing a general web search for Jeff Weise. I can only assume my Weekly Report on Tuesday (which covered Weise) was ahead of most other sources getting crawled that day... Or maybe (he said, delusionally) I'm that important as a source for news!

Weekly Check on the Bias...

It would be hard to start this edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias without mentioning the horrendous school shooting in Red Lake, Minnesota yesterday. The police and FBI are still sorting it all out but here seem to be the facts so far:

A teenage student at Red Lake High School, Jeff Weise, was known as a loner who may have spent time visiting neo-Nazi websites, wore black, was teased by other students, and came from a tragic home. His mother suffered a brain injury in an automobile accident and was in a nursing home. His father committed suicide several years ago. The boy was living with his grandparents. His grandfather was a tribal policeman in the small community.

At some point yesterday, Weise took his grandfather's guns (two pistols and a shotgun) and murdered his grandparents (or grandfather and girlfriend in some reports). Then he went to his school and killed an unarmed security guard, entered the school and killed a teacher and five more students, injured at least a dozen others, and then took the coward's way out by killing himself.

According to one report I heard on NBC news, Weise was angry at students in the school for reporting him to the principal as having made a previous threat to shoot students. All of this is unconfirmed as I write this.

I'll only make the following observations since it's too early for the editorials and op-eds to appear decrying the lack of gun control as somehow having lead to this horror.

None of the newspaper or TV accounts are playing up the "gun" angle yet since it appears they were ordinary ones that don't fit the media's profile of "rapid spraying assault weapons" that they love to blather about.

Since the weapons were obtained at his grandfather's home, the usual mantras about "gun show loopholes" or gun makers "flooding the streets with guns" isn't being heard, either.

One curious quote appeared in today's New York Times:

Clyde Bellecourt, founder of the Minneapolis-based American Indian Movement, said he could not "remember anything as tragic as this happening" on a reservation.

"Everyone in the Indian community is feeling really bad right now, whether they're a member of the Red Lake or not, we're all an extended family, we're all related," he said. "Usually this happens in places like Columbine, white schools, always somewhere else. We never hear that in our community."

Unfortunately no, Mr. Bellecourt, a disturbed young man can appear almost anywhere and wreck havoc on a community.

Thusly, we are left with a conclusion that the problem wasn't gun control but mental illness control. There were certainly enough clues. From today's Pioneer Press:

At least a dozen other students were wounded by the teenage gunman, identified by tribal members as Jeff Weise, a sophomore who enjoyed Marilyn Manson music and had expressed his admiration for Adolf Hitler on various online forums.

[...]

In a couple of postings to a nationalist forum last year, Weise eerily foreshadowed Monday's events. He claimed last April that authorities had questioned him about alleged plans to "shoot up the school on 4/20, Hitlers (sic) birthday."

On Internet sites Weise sometimes used the names "Todesengel'' — German for "angel of death'' — or "NativeNazi."

And from the Evening Standard (UK):

A couple of his friends had said he was suicidal and had once said: "That would be cool if I shot up the school."

[...]

Weise posted a message on a Nazi website, which said: "Hello all. My name is Jeff Weise, a Native American from the Red Lake 'Indian' reservation in Minnesota.

"I'm interested in joining the group, as I support your ideals and even though I am young, I still want to join. What is the age requirement (if any)?"

If true, this eerily shadows the Columbine incident where there were previous threats not taken seriously enough.

I guess we'll see how it all plays out but my heart goes out to all of the victims and their families.

One might well ask how something like this can happen, where was the parental control? Well, we know in this case that his parents couldn't be there and most policemen are kept very busy, leaving a disturbed kid to his own devices such as an unsupervised computer. And there were probably no social workers from the school trying to find out what was bothering him. We may never know.

With a hat-tip to the always hyper-active (and excellent) pro-2A blogger Say Uncle my attention was drawn to this silly editorial from the student newspaper of the University of Wisconsin which says:

While I am a full-fledged supporter of the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, I have a really hard time believing that our forefathers, when writing the Amendment, thought ordinary citizens would end up hiding behind it to own semi-automatic weapons.

The original reason these gentlemen added this amendment was because they believed citizens of the newly created United States of America deserved to defend themselves against an enemy, foreign or domestic.

Let's recall that at that point in time, we had just defeated the British Army and ended the tyranny on our soil by the government of Great Britain.

These founding fathers had in mind that each individual had the right to own their rifles or pistols, and, while they never specifically clarified what type of arms these are, I really cannot fathom that AK-47s and semi-automatic machine guns were what they had in mind.

Presumably the writer, Matt Werlein, is also a "full-fledged supporter" of the First Amendment. I might point out that the founding fathers crafted that one to allow open discourse on politics and the right of people to speak or to print news and opinions free from the control of government. They certainly didn't have in mind the free-flow of pornography, violent television shows and computer games, displaying the crucifix in a jar of urine, or burning the American flag. Does he think we should allow these examples of "free speech" to be banned? Neither do I. The First Amendment and the Second Amendment have served us well and they don't need to be "regulated".

He goes on to make many mistatements about firearms but Say Uncle dispatches with those.

There's other fallout from the recent violence in Wisconsin including a bill that would require all private gun sales to be reported to the police. From the Janesville Gazette (WI):

Three mothers of shooting victims are pushing for a law that would regulate gun sales by unlicensed gun sellers in Milwaukee County.

One of the mothers, Debra Fifer, is being backed by Sen. Spencer Coggs, D-Milwaukee. Coggs said he plans to introduce such a bill in the state Legislature and is looking for a co-sponsor.

The law would require county residents to register their guns and report gun sales between individuals with the state Department of Justice.

Fifer said the law would hold responsible whoever sold the gun to Jaki Marion, the man who shot and killed her son, Kirk Bickham Jr., and two other men outside a Milwaukee bar in 2003.

Bickham is serving three life-terms for the murders. That seems right to me and I wonder why Fifer thinks the person who sold him the gun should be liable? If I sell a car to someone and they then drive drunk and kill a family, should I be held liable? Of course not!

Fifer is also fighting a different sort of legislation working it's way through the Wisconsin Statehouse:

Fifer is also fighting a bill working its way through the Legislature that would largely ban injury and death lawsuits against gun manufacturers, dealers and importers and others.

That bill is working its way through the legislative process.

State Rep. Mark Pettis, R-Hertel, who introduced the bill, said it's necessary to prevent frivolous lawsuits that could put dealers and small gun manufacturers out of business.

The bill would also protect hunting clubs and shooting range owners from liability.

Gun control advocates have turned to lawsuits in the courts because they have failed to undermine gun owner rights through legislation, Pettis said.

[...]

Fifer said she supports gun owner rights. But she wants dealers and manufacturers held responsible when those weapons fall into the hands of children or others, such as convicted felons, who have no legal right to possess them.

If someone doesn't have a legal right to own a firearm, that is the responsibility of the law, not the manufacturer if he has made a legal product and distributed it legally. It is her type of thinking that makes such a bill necessary.

The last story once again takes us to South Africa. I've written and ranted about how new laws there make it all but impossible for the average law-abiding citizen to obtain a firearms permit (license). And just as we saw in England and Australia (where guns were all but banned) the crime rate is skyrocketing. From CNN:

South Africans are more likely to be shot than suffer any other kind of unnatural death as gun crime pushes the country's violent death rate to up to 8 times the global average, a study showed on Tuesday.

Firearms and alcohol were key culprits in the report by the Medical Research Council, providing a fresh illustration of the dangers of life in a country known for some of the highest rates of violent crime in the world.

The survey showed 48 percent of more than 22,000 unnatural deaths surveyed were caused by violence.

Firearms made up 28 per cent of the total and sharp force injuries such as stabbings accounted for 15 percent. Twelve percent of those suffering unnatural deaths were pedestrians hit by vehicles.

"A lot of these deaths take place in the home or on the streets," said researcher Richard Matzopoulos. "A firearm gets picked up. If there hadn't been a firearm in the house it wouldn't have been a fatality."

I included that last inane quote because, how does Matzopoulos know that there wouldn't have been a fatality? They could have used a knife, as 15% did. They could have run over them with the car or "brained them" with the bottle of alcohol that figures so prominently in his statistics. Since CNN didn't bother gathering any quotes other than from the writer of the press-release it's difficult to know what else is going on in these homes and on the streets.

I'd say, though, that with a rising crime-rate, maybe the answer is in criminal control, yah? Unmentioned is how many "unnatural deaths" were prevented with firearms, a common ploy also used by gun control advocates here in the U.S.

I'd better get this posted. You can hear me live later today on Cam's NRA Live. Thanks for stopping by!

Heh.

by Robert Ariail, Copyright The State

End-Around Gun Bill in Illinois

One lawmaker in Illinois is trying to find a way to prevent individual cities from enacting tougher handgun laws. At least, that's what it sounds like and I can't fault him for that. From Northern Star Online:

What began as a bill to legalize the use of handguns for turkey hunting may stop local governments from placing further restrictions on state gun laws.

Illinois is one of eight states that allow municipalities to prohibit and regulate the use of firearms.

Heavily-populated areas such as Chicago, Aurora, Carol Stream and Wilmette will continue to have extra requirements on guns, said Todd Vandermied, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

State Rep. Brandon Phelps (D-Harrisburg) proposed a bill in February to legalize the use of handguns to hunt wild turkeys.

The bill, which was amended later that month to forbid municipalities from restricting firearms used for hunting wildlife in the state, would go into effect immediately if passed, Phelps said.

"We’re trying to tell the local governments that banning legal guns to hunt is wrong," Vandermied said.

Not being a hunter, I can't really comment on turkey hunting. Intentionally or not though, if the bill passes, it might provide some relief for those who would like to own handguns in towns that forbid it. But will it effect existing laws? I doubt it. No hope in Chicago.

Gun Legislation Swirls in Statehouses

The recent spate of well publicized shootings has spurred a number of bills in different states. From the LA Times/Yahoo:

The massacre at a Wisconsin church service 10 days ago left Corey Graff outraged.

Outraged at the loss of life, of course. But furious, too, at state legislators who have refused to grant citizens the right to carry concealed handguns.

Graff plans to push the issue again this spring. This time, the Wisconsin activist hopes that lawmakers will imagine themselves in that church service — cowering, crying, wishing they had a gun at hand to defend themselves.

"Hopefully something positive can come out of the tragedy," Graff said.

[...]

"I try not to form my public policy decisions in response to specific events," said Nebraska state Sen. Adrian Smith, a Republican.

Still, he said, hearing about so many brutal incidents in such quick succession "gives you pause…. You think, 'How can we try to prevent something like that from happening again?' "

Smith's answer, in part, is to push a bill that would let Nebraskans carry concealed weapons, as citizens of 46 states can. Pro-gun legislation pending elsewhere in the nation includes a measure in Utah to allow hidden handguns in cars and a bill in Tennessee that would let residents take firearms into schools, day-care centers and bars.

Plenty of gun control legislation is also on the table. Washington, Oregon, Florida and several other states are considering banning assault weapons. Connecticut, New Jersey and New York may block the sale of .50-caliber rifles, as California did last year.

Read the whole thing, it's a rather meaty article. It's also balanced, with plenty of quotes from both sides of the issue. In fact, if anything, the story focused more on legislation allowing concealed carry and allowing judges to arm themselves. I didn't feel the writer was editorializing at any point and I can't really ask for more than that from a newspaper story.

Like You Said...

Regarding the courthouse shootings in Atlanta, where a mutant --up on a rape charge-- grabbed the gun of a 5'1" grandmother bailiff, many of you have correctly said, use BIG GUARDS! Wise indeed and in her inimitable way, Ann Coulter drives the point home:

I think I have an idea that would save money and lives: Have large men escort violent criminals. Admittedly, this approach would risk another wave of nausea and vomiting by female professors at Harvard. But there are also advantages to not pretending women are as strong as men, such as fewer dead people. Even a female math professor at Harvard should be able to run the numbers on this one.

Naturally, you MUST read the whole thing.

There's a reason Coulter appears in my "interesting links" (and I've taken email flak for it). Yes, she's over the top sometimes (as if nobody on the left is?) but Ghod she is good and her sarcasm and irony are second to none. I love reading her and Mark Steyn (who lives just 10 miles away from me!) and Jonah Goldberg and Taranto and... Well, you get the idea. Alas, another great, witty, conservative columnist, Michael Kelly, is no longer with us. I miss him, too. So now you know my taste in political commentary.

Pro-Gun Column in California

Interesting op-ed by Marc Folco at South Coast Today debunking many gun-control myths. He also talks with John Lott, Jr. Here's a quote:

There are several recent national and world reports --exposing the dangers of misbegotten gun legislation that has backfired -- causing crime rates to skyrocket and costing taxpayers millions of dollars. It's proof that most gun laws infringe only upon the law-abiding citizen and further threaten continued lawful gun ownership by all sportsmen.

Ballistic fingerprinting was all the rage just a couple of years ago and Maryland and New York were leading the way in the use of a computer database that records the markings made on the bullets from all new guns, says author John Lott Jr. It was predicted that "the days of criminals using guns were numbered."

Yet, according to a recent investigative report by Lott, the Maryland State Police's forensic-sciences division shows the systems in both states have been expensive, miserable failures. New York is spending $4 million per year. Maryland has spent a total of $2.6 million, about $60 for every gun sold. But in the four years that the systems have been in effect, neither has solved a single crime.

"The systems have drained so many financial resources from other police activities that ballistic fingerprinting actually could end up increasing crime," says Lott. "In New York, how many crimes could 50 additional police officers (equal to $4 million in combined salaries) help solve?"

Read the whole thing of course.

Truly Concealed...

A proposed bill in Texas would help avoid the mess that occured in Ohio when anti-gun newspapers started publishing the names and addresses of concealed-carry permit holders. From Yahoo:

The identities of concealed handgun carriers in Texas would be kept secret under a House bill designed to protect gun owners. It's a proposal that critics deride as "paranoia" and government secrecy. Current Texas law requires the state to disclose whether a person is licensed to carry concealed guns in response to open-records requests. The House this week gave preliminary approval to the secrecy bill. The author is Representative Suzanna Gratia Hupp of Kempner. She says the whole idea is made very clear in the title of the license. It's concealed...

Once again, Hupp shows what a good friend she is to those of us who still respect the Second Amendment.

It's nobody's business if you are able to defend yourself.

Over at Joe Carter's...

In a world filled with ugliness, Evangelical Outpost gives us something beautiful in the art of Frederick Hart.

Meanwhile...

Alec at Posse Incitatus is delivering a justified fisking to one of his own commenters!

A Lame Op-Ed

David Feige is both a public defender and a stooge for George Soros. He has a foolish op-ed in the New York Times claiming that because of the incident in Atlanta, court officers, bailiffs, cops, et al should all be unarmed when in court. Here's a quote:

The typical hall of justice is chockablock with weaponry. Court officers, court clerks, parole and probation officers - not to mention police officers - all carry handguns for the ostensible purpose of maintaining order and security. This stands in stark contrast to our prisons. While corrections officers may carry weapons in public, in nearly every jail and prison across the country those guns get checked at the door.

One of the elemental rules of a prison is that any weapon will eventually be turned against its owner. That sane and simple logic dictates that firearms are restricted to the guards in the towers and on the perimeter. With no guns to take away, the net result of overpowering a guard is just that - having overpowered a guard. Nobody is going to shoot his way to freedom.

It is true that in many prisons, the guards are unarmed. It's also true that the prisoners are mostly behind bars. Since the presumption of innocence in our court proceedings is a staple, we can't show the alledged in chains or in a cage. If no one around the defendent is armed, what's to stop the mutant from picking up a chair and "braining" everyone in sight? How many unarmed officers would need to be stationed around the defendent in case --in a wild, uncontrolled moment -- he goes nuts?

Feige says the prisoner could have a stun-belt under his clothing, or the bailiffs could carry pepper-spray. I can tell you that these types of things are USELESS against someone in an agitated mental meltdown.

The tragedy in an Atlanta courthouse was isolated. It is a very rare occurance. Courthouse policies do not need to be changed. Indeed, I'd rather see judges armed.

Policing Blogs?

Mark at Cranial Cavity reports that police in Michigan are now snooping around kid's blogs. Look for a new Law and Order series shortly...

Gay Marriage in California

Mike Silverman -- who happens to be gay -- worries that the court ruling in California could do more harm than good to gay civil rights.

Georgia Moving Backwards?

Michael at Gay Orbit reports on a disturbing proposal by the state school superintendent.

Gun Stuff...

Well it certainly looks like Cowboy Blob has been having a good time!

A Few Thoughts on Terri Schiavo

Regulars know that I am pro-life. I'm not rabidly so, I don't picket or march on the issue and I don't write about it much here, but I am. I don't buy the argument that it's simply a "woman's right to her own reproductive decisions". The baby might not have been born yet but it is still alive. Certainly by 4-5 months the nervous system is developed enough that the fetus can feel things. Certainly the fact that mothers can feel the child moving or "kicking" is proof that there are nerve synapses firing. That unborn child can also feel it's own death if aborted.

I have no argument with what a woman chooses to do with her own body. My concern is for the body within her body.

Now, I believe that an adult, for whatever reason, has the right to take their own life. Maybe they're in excruciating pain. Maybe they just hate the hand they've been dealt and want to fold. I don't care. I do not attach any stigmata to suicide. That's not inconsistant with my pro-life position because in my case, neither are predicated on any religious teachings. They are simply what seems logical to me.

An adult can make decisions for him/herself. In fact, I have no problem with doctor assisted suicide, either. A youngster isn't emotionally stable enough -- mature enough if you will -- to do that and so they should be prevented from taking their own life. An unborn child is at the mercy of a woman practicing "reproductive health".

This brings me to Terri Schiavo. I won't recount the details because you all know them already. Let me just say that if she had penned a living-will, or had said in front of many people that she would not want to be kept alive by extraordinary means then I would be all for removing her feeding tube. I would not want to be kept alive if I was in a years-long coma, with no detectable brain activity.

Unfortunately, no such document was made. Her husband Michael claims she said she wouldn't want to be kept alive by a feeding tube but we have only his word for it.

There's one other concern of mine: There have been a few instances where people in long-term comas, believed to be "brain dead" did in fact "wake up" one day and many have gone on to lead wonderful lives. I won't list them here but a quick search on Google will show you that. Sometimes brains can take a very long time to heal, to build new pathways for messages to travel by. Perhaps the brain is simply hiding in shock from the initial incident.

So, Terri can't speak for herself and her husband has been granted a divorce, I believe? I read that he has a fiance. Or maybe he's waiting for her to die so he can remarry. I don't know but I do not believe he has Terri's best interests in mind.

Without specific knowledge that Terri would want to end her life, I believe she should be kept alive. I am saddened that for all the political and legal contortions, the feeding tube has been removed. Death by starvation cannot be pleasant. But would she feel anything? Oh yes, I think she will. I believe there is still some dream activity going on within her mind, at a level that might not be able to be recorded.

Sometimes, when I'm sleeping, I dream of thirst or hunger, and seeking water or food. I would imagine that Terri Schiavo will unfortunately experience days or weeks of such nightmares.

Lastly, again -- without any real proof that she approves of being allowed to die -- a civilization is judged by how it cares for those who are least able to care for themselves, be it an unborn child or a comatose woman.

America seems to fail at both.

My prayers are with Terri Schiavo and my hope is that God will work a miracle.

Friday Sex Doll Blogging

Has this ever happened to you? You find that the sex doll you ordered is defective so you package it up and send it back in the mail... From Reuters:

Reuters photo

A blow-up sex doll sparked a bomb alert in a German post office after it started to vibrate inside a package awaiting delivery, police said Wednesday.

"Workers were unsettled when it began vibrating and made strange noises," a spokesman for police in the eastern city of Chemnitz said. "They were worried the package might be a bomb."

Officers brought the sender to the scene and discovered the source of alarm was an electrical device inside a life-size female sex doll. The man told police he had wanted to return the doll because it kept turning itself on at the wrong moment.

The problem was solved when the batteries were removed and then the package was sent on its way. The man, meanwhile, went in search of a much larger hole, one he could crawl into, I'm sure...

Meanwhile in South Africa...

Just because a government decides that buying a gun should be a near impossible feat doesn't mean that crime disappears. From IOL South Africa:

Tighter gun ownership laws are pushing South Africans to buy crossbows, spears, swords, knives and pepper sprays to protect themselves from violent crime.

"We've had to build an entirely new shop because the demand from people is so great," Justin Willmers, owner of Durban Guns and Ammo, said. "It can be anything from a Zulu fighting spear, battle axes, swords, crossbows."

New gun controls came into force last year under South Africa's Firearms Control Act, but some weapons shop owners say high crime rates are pushing law abiding citizens to look for alternative means of defending themselves.

Despite official figures showing the murder rate falling 10 percent in the year to March 2004, South Africa's Arms and Ammunition Dealers Association says individuals face a one in 60 chance of being the victim of a violent crime in any given year.

Many houses are surrounded by razor wire and electric fences, but with police turning down 80 percent of firearms licence requests after an 18-month application process, association spokesperson Alex Holmes said people were forced to look at other options.

[...]

"It's mostly been grannies and grandpas that are handing in weapons that are probably unusable anyhow," Willmers said. In the meantime, people from all walks of life are acquiring weapons not restricted by law.

"The guys have just had enough," Willmers said.

Men are buying machetes to fight off hijackers or crossbows to shoot people breaking into their property, while women are more likely to buy a pepper spray, he said.

Of course, with many hard-core criminals possessing illegal firearms, they still have the upper hand. Really, forbidding law-abiding citizens from the proper means to defend themselves just makes it all the easier for the mutants. Plus, it robs the honest folks of their dignity. Yes, there is dignity in being able to properly protect your home and family.

San Francisco take note!

What We're Posting About...

I just discovered Pro Politics Blog. Think of it as a "Drudge" for blogs, listing the latest posts from the entire spectrum of bloggers. Check it out!

Philadelphia Gun Control

Following a "wave" of shootings in Philadelphia, the Mayor is considering more gun control. From WNEP TV:

PHILADELPHIA City officials in Philadelphia are considering gun control measures after a rash of murders that's left 23 people dead in ten days.

Mayor John Street, for instance, is considering a 90-day moratorium on concealed handgun permits.

Gun-control advocates say restrictions will help, even if they don't directly address the illegal-gun problem.

In addition, Street wants to meet with the Governor to discuss more gun control state-wide. From Reuters/Yahoo:

Calling the rash of killings a "crisis," Mayor John Street urged state lawmakers to amend Pennsylvania's relatively lax gun laws.

[...]

Under state law, some 28,000 people have permits to carry guns in Philadelphia, a city of about 1.5 million people. That compares with 16,000 such permits in New York, a city with a population more than four times larger.

There is no justification for most people to carry guns in the city, the mayor, a Democrat, told a news conference.

"These are not hunters. People should not be authorized to carry weapons on the streets of Philadelphia unless they have a good reason to do so," he said.

Well, I would say that if murders are rising in the City of Brotherly Love, that's good reason enough to conceal-carry.

What the news article doesn't mention is that most of this violence is the result of street gangs, drug gangs, et al. Frankly, I wouldn't worry about the 28,000 legally licensed citizens concealed-carrying. I'd be more concerned about the thousands of criminals who haven't bothered (and never will) obtaining a permit. They're the ones commiting mayhem.

Bust-up the mutant gangs, throw them in jail, and watch the violence decrease. Don't start leaving the haplass honest folk defenseless.

Around Town...

Jed runs the fine Pro-2A site, FreedomSight and could use some assistance right now. Head on over there and after reading some of his many good posts, don't forget to hit his tip jar.

Bitter Bitch is live blogging the House hearings on HR 800 (the Lawful Protection of Commerce in Arms Act).

Bruce at mASS BACKWARDS has the latest on the attempt to ban .50 caliber weapons in Massachusetts.

Publicola offers a plan to go on the offensive against gun-grabbers and is soliciting your opinions. Join the fray because many of the comments are quite interesting.

Someone at Yahoo Needs Glasses

Yahoo has a page of gun control stories as you all know (that's how my Weekly Check first got started). Whomever is selecting the stories to link there might want to get their specs checked. Under "feature articles" they list this Time Magazine story:

Gum control is popping up high on the priority list of a growing number of cities around the world fed up with the gunk on their sidewalks. In London, representatives from Belfast, Cardiff and other British cities gathered last month for a summit on gum pollution. London's Oxford Street alone is smeared with some 300,000 bits of used gum; chew-goo cleanup costs Britain an estimated $290 million a year. A new bill in Parliament would fine gum droppers $145.

The only way they'll take my gum from me is to pry it from my cold dead teeth, and that could be messy...

Heh.

The Great White OJ

Call me cynical. Our justice system operates on the principle that if you are a "star" and have lots of money and can afford good lawyers, you can do anything you want including murdering your wife. I'm not saying that OJ did that -- after all, he was (*cough*) acquitted of the charges against him. Judging by how Michael Jackson's trial is going, he will be acquitted, too. And now, the white version of OJ has been acquitted. From the AP:

A jury acquitted tough-guy actor Robert Blake (news) of murder Wednesday in the shooting death of his wife four years ago, a stunning verdict in a case that played out like pulp fiction.

The jury also acquitted Blake of one charge of trying to get someone to kill his wife, but deadlocked on a second solicitation charge.

Hey! I'm not saying he was really guilty. That would leave me open to lawsuits. I have (*cough*) no problem believing that he went to dinner with the wife he hated, carrying a gun, they left the restaurant, he ran back in to get a gun, suddenly, she's shot dead with a gun, he runs up to a house nearby, vomits (but not from stress or guilt, I'm sure) on the steps, and... Well, you know the rest. He has lots of money. And now he's free.

No doubt he'll enlist OJ's help seeking the real murderer, you know, out on the links...

Money talks and a killer walks... Welcome to justice in America!

Didn't Hear A Thing...

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, the Brady Bunch and the Couple of Dozen Moms were ringing bells today:

On March 14, activists in Washington, D.C. delivered bells to Members of Congress, and urged them to oppose S. 397 and H.R. 800, the pending immunity legislation.

Today at 11 a.m. local time, bells tolled 82 times in towns, cities, schools, churches, neighborhoods and homes across the nation in remembrance of the number of people killed every day in this country by gun violence, including the bells of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, the nation's patronal Catholic church.

"We're ringing bells today to remind people that 82 gun deaths a day in this country are 82 deaths too many," said Marsha McCartney, president of the Texas Million Mom March Chapters and national spokesperson, speaking from Thanksgiving Square in downtown Dallas. "We're calling on our members of Congress to do the right thing and stand up for victims of gun violence, not the industry that created those victims."

How corny. How simplistic. How about ringing bells everytime someone legally uses a firearm to defend their life? How about ringing bells everytime a firearm prevents a rape, a robbery, a murder?

If the gun maker shield law (mentioned in my Weekly Report below) passes this time, I'll go outside and ring a bell, how's that?

Anyway, I leaned out my window today and didn't hear any bells ringing. Apparently nobody in the main stream media did either since I saw almost no coverage of this "event" on the news.

No one is taking these groups seriously anymore. That's a good thing! Talk about a bunch of ding-a-lings...

Litigation Gone Nuts

Remember the activist girl who refused to move out ot the way of Israeli forces when they were demolishing homes and tunnels used to smuggle weapons and bombs into Israel? Her family is suing the maker of the bulldozer. No, really. From AP/Yahoo:

The parents of a 23-year-old activist killed while trying to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian home is suing Caterpillar Inc., the company that made the bulldozer that ran over her.

The federal lawsuit, which lawyers said would be filed here Tuesday, alleges that Caterpillar violated international and state law by providing specially designed bulldozers to Israeli Defense Forces that it knew would be used to demolish homes and endanger people.

Rachel Corrie, a student at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, was standing in front of a home in a refugee camp in Rafah, near the Egyptian border, in March of 2003 when a bulldozer plowed over her.

"The brutal death of my daughter should never have happened," Corrie's mother, Cindy Corrie, said in a statement released by the Center for Constitutional Rights, a law firm handling the case. "We believe Caterpillar and the (Israeli Defense Forces) must be held accountable for their role in the attack."

This is insane. To actually try to suck lottery money out of Caterpillar is obscene and combined with all the other bullshit lawsuits by greedy trial lawyers (I do distinguish them from other legitimate lawyers) is proof positive that we desperately need ligitagion reform in this country. We must have tort reform NOW!

Weekly Check on the Bias

In the last two weeks, we've seen a rash of highly publicized shooting crimes. We've had the murders of a Chicago judge's husband and mother. We've had a shooting inside an Atlanta courthouse of a judge, a court reporter, a deputy, and later that night, a federal agent. We had a shooting outside a court house in Tyler, Texas where a mutant killed his wife and another man who tried to intervene. And we've seen the massacre of church-goers in Brookfield, Wisconsin.

Sometimes it just happens that a series of tragic events cluster together at about the same time. We saw this a few years ago with closely grouped school shootings. The news coverage of late can certainly lead the average person to think that citizens in this country are under siege from gun-wielding phychotics. The fallout of that is that those who defend gun ownership and the Second Amendment find themselves on the defensive.

In this week's report I'll focus on a few of the many editorials in the press that are calling for stricter gun control. This will not be in my usual format and I find (having already written much of it) that I am doing rather a lot of editorializing myself.

A perfect example is the call from the Chicago Sun-Times not only for more security for federal judges but also:

...In the end, it's up to all of us, in striving to keep our our hopes ahead of our fears, to press for more aggressive crime prevention. That includes demanding that gun laws be enforced far better than they are and insisting of some tougher measures, such as Mayor Daley's proposal to limit gun purchases to one a month, to keep weapons out of at least some potential killers' hands.

Since Bart Ross, the killer of Judge Lefkow's mother and husband only had one gun with him when he did his evil deed, it's hard to see how limiting gun purchases to one a month would have helped anything. It only takes one gun. Strike that; it only takes one mutant with one gun to stalk and kill. It [the crime] certainly can't be blamed on the gun which was (even by Brady Bunch standards) a common low-power .22 caliber handgun almost exclusively used by target shooters and plinkers.

Keeping guns out of the hands of potential killers is the purpose behind the Instant Check system (NICS) which the FBI uses to see if a potential purchaser has a criminal background or restraining order against him. Some states also check mental-health records on their own. I would not mind seeing those records included in the NICS searches by the FBI. These records are not predictive but they would go a long way towards preventing some purchases by some people. Mental health advocates have lobbied against this and some of their arguments are persuasive. A person is treated or confined for depression. After treatment (and medication?) they're fine again. Why should that person be sigmatized for the rest of their life? I have no valid argument for that.

As for Mayor Daley, he's already effectively banned handgun ownership or possession in the City of Chicago and it didn't prevent these killings. He wants to ban guns from all of Illinois if he could, and then the entire nation, and finally the world and universe... Alas, criminals will still have them and we'll all be slaughtered.

That brings me to the rampage by Terry Ratzmann at a church function in Brookfield, Wisconsin last Saturday. What we do know is that Ratzmann, a member of the local branch of the World Wide Church of God pulled out a 9mm pistol during the service and shot seven fellow congregants dead before turning the gun on himself. What we don't know is why he did that. At first, speculation was that he was upset about (among other things) losing his job but it now appears it was something he had heard at the church a couple weeks ago. From the New York Times:

An earlier theory that the gunman, Terry Ratzmann, may have been upset about losing his job has been discarded after the police found that he had long known his contract as a computer technician for GE Healthcare would end on March 25. The authorities also said they found no evidence to support church members' reports that Mr. Ratzmann, 44, suffered from depression, and said that he was not on medication.

So while they remain unable to explain why Mr. Ratzmann stormed out of services two weeks before - or even whether the sermon that upset him was given via videotape by the church's international leader, Roderick C. Meredith, or by Mr. Gregory - the police see the little-known church as the key.

Reading this story, it might be one of the few instances where the gun isn't the focus of a crime reported in the New York Times but instead his church is. The Times describes his church as almost a "cult" like one but then they do that with regard to most religions, except Islam. Sorry, I almost went off on a rant.

Local reaction to the church shootings varied. In an editorial from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal:

Saturday's incident goes to show that gun madness may erupt anywhere. Surely, few situations feel as safe as a church service, where you put yourself in the hands of a higher power in communion with others. Yet a gun-wielding man disturbed that sacred haven and rained down death and destruction on the congregation.

[...]

At a later time, we must try to decipher the lessons of the tragedy. The authorities should trace how Ratzmann got his gun. Did he do so legally? Are there any safeguards that can be put in place to keep guns out of the hands of would-be mass killers?

Gun violence has dropped in America. Can it drop more drastically?

Certainly it is shocking when a shooting like this occurs, not just in a church, but anywhere. Police now know Ratzmann bought his pistol last June, presumably legally. Signs of his disturbed emotional state didn't surface until just the recent couple of weeks. While I don't want to read too much into the final line of the quote, the implication is that perhaps more gun control is needed to continue the reduction in crime (and after all is said and done, a mass shooting such as this is still "just" a crime).

Many states have recently enacted laws allowing concealed carry. Most of them allow a place of business or churches to post "No Guns Allowed" signs. I don't know the details of this particular church but what if? I know that anti-gunners hate to hear this but WHAT IF one of the other people in that congregation had been armed? Monday (or in this case Tuesday) quarterbacking is an exercise best left to political pundits. Well, in a way, I am one, so allow me to second-guess. Ratzmann storms into the church (located in a local hotel) and opens fire. He first directly targeted the pastor and his son. What if someone else there was able to take Ratzmann out?

I'm not saying that yes, definitely, the outcome of this shocking event would have been different. I'm saying that there's a chance it would have been different. Indeed, what if the killer knew there was the chance of someone sitting there who could quickly end his rampage?

What if the judge in Atlanta who was killed when a defendent, Brian Nichols, grabbed the sidearm of a bailiff, had been armed himself? In Illinois that question is being debated. From the Springfield (IL) State Journal-Register:

A proposed state law that would allow judges to carry concealed firearms won't make courthouses any safer, one Sangamon County judge said Monday, while the judge who came up with the idea suggested it was only "an option that might be available."

[...]

Meanwhile, state Sen. Larry Bomke, who last week indicated that he intends to introduce legislation that would allow judges to carry concealed weapons, said Monday he is considering expanding his proposal to include prosecutors because they also can be the target of grudge-holders. He said he supports broader "concealed-carry" proposals for qualified Illinoisans but prefers to keep his legislation fairly narrow to help its chances in the legislature.

"My concern is it's going to be difficult to pass as it is," the Springfield Republican said. "If we include too many folks, it may cause a problem."

At a Chicago news conference on gun control, Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he's "skittish" about Bomke's plan, which the Democrat fears could open the door to wider concealed-carry in Illinois.

[...]

Associate Circuit Judge Stuart Shiffman said the issue is "one where people are going to differ greatly in their attitudes."

"I don't believe putting more guns in the hands of more people will accomplish the ultimate goal of making us safer," he said.

Shiffman said he and Kelley talked about the proposal Monday.

"I know judges, and many of them can't pour a cup of coffee in the morning without spilling it all over themselves," Shiffman said. "Having them come in here carrying guns would trouble me just a bit."

He acknowledged that some judges would be quite capable of safely carrying a concealed firearm, "but I just don't believe packing a gun would make any of us safer, me included."

The question is, why? Doesn't a fire-extinguisher help make you safer from fires? Don't airbags make you safer from other, bad drivers? And if there are judges who can't handle a cup of coffee in the morning, why are they competent to be hearing and adjudicating court proceedings? Besides, passing a law that allows a judge to conceal-carry doesn't require it. Why remove that as an option from others who don't think as lowly of their judicial brethren as Shiffman does?

Thanks to a couple readers in the previous post, here's another response to the recent shootings, by Derric Z. Jackson in the Boston Globe:

Yet, nearly six years after Columbine and other mass shootings, the nation seems even further away from any serious control on guns. Congress is hearing testimony on new resolutions to shield gun makers from liability lawsuits. Leading the effort, of course, is the National Rifle Association, which shamelessly links liability immunity to patriotism. Saying ''the entire gun industry is at risk of being eradicated'' and ''Americans remain one antigun judge or jury away from seeing the firearms industry destroyed,'' the NRA says on its website, ''Remember, too, that this is the same industry that provides firearms to our fighting men and women in the US military.''

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry, adds that such lawsuits ''are meant to eliminate a segment of the manufacturing industry and the jobs of tens of thousands it employs. ... These businesses not only provide materials our men and women in uniform need to win the war against terrorism, but also the goods that 40 million Americans use to enjoy recreational shooting and hunting with firearms.''

A key pro-gun politician, Republican Senator Larry Craig of Idaho, has said, ''These outrageous lawsuits attempting to hold a law-abiding industry responsible for the acts of criminals are a threat to jobs and the economy, jeopardize the exercise of constitutionally protected freedoms, undermine national security and circumvent Congress and state legislatures. They must be stopped.''

It is of course of no interest to the pro-gun politicians that the gun industry tries to outdo itself to pump out guns that have ''greater force'' than the next. A new handgun that can fire bullets capable of penetrating body armor recently was found during a drug bust in New Jersey.

But with the assault-weapons ban expired even for machine guns, stopping the proliferation of potentially cop-killing guns seems a long ways away on Capitol Hill. That is even with the police commissioners protesting the guns. In a post-9/11 United States, where a president was reelected partially on lingering fear of international terrorism, it still does not register with Americans how we do ourselves in with everyday domestic terrorism.

Without any help from Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein, we take out 30,000 of our own people a year with firearms through homicide, suicide, or accidents. Yet, The Boston Globe just this weekend had an article on the growth of target shooting by women from 2.7 million in 1998 to 3.9 million in 2003, according to the National Sporting Goods Association. I have no qualm about target shooting or seasonal hunting. But inevitably, as statistics show, some women who go on to purchase a handgun for the home will eventually be killed with it in a domestic violence dispute. The gun lobby says we need the firearms industry to win the war on terror. They could care less that we are losing the war on violence right here at home.

Where to begin with a screed like this? First, let's clear-up a factual error: The phony "assault weapons ban" did not cover machine guns, nor has it's demise allowed them to be purchased over the counter, as it were. Machine guns (full automatic weapons) are covered by much older laws and regulations and require a battery of applications, license, hoops, and background checks to obtain. So Jackson's remark is just plain a lie.

As for the NRA, here's the full paragraph that Jackson editorially butchered out of context:

Firearms manufacturers have already spent more than $200 million in legal fees, yet have not been found liable by a single court for the criminal misuse of their highly regulated products. Unfortunately, as long as gun-ban advocates are able to burden firearm manufacturers with the costs of defending themselves in court, the entire gun industry is at risk of being eradicated. Remember, too, that this is the same industry that provides firearms to our fighting men and women in the U.S. military.

It's about all of the frivolous lawsuits filed by greedy cities and their trial-lawyers. And by the way, if a municipality can win money in the civil-litigation-lottery of our courts, what's to stop the families (and their lawyers) from trying to sue these same --legal-- gun makers when one of their spouses, sons, daughters are killed in the line of duty in our armed forces? Blame the gun, not the war, or the Islamic mutants who are firing at them. I think the NRA is perfectly right in raising the question of where should --or rather would-- the line be drawn in firearm liability. Besides, the NRA has four million members paying them to act as their lobby in Congress. The AARP has 30 million members paying (hiring them, if you will) them for representation. Does anyone in the media dare criticize them for doing the bidding of their members?

Jackson's claim that because some women who purchase guns might wind-up the victim of that same gun from domestic violence is as specious as saying we should ban swimming pools because someone in some family somewhere will eventually drown? Last month I had a tongue-in-cheek report on a women who "brained" someone with a frozen pork-chop. I had some Photoshop fun with it but... It was a true story and she was arrested on assault charges. Do we ban frozen meats?

Lastly, he says "we are losing the war on violence right here at home". No we're not. Regardless of these recent stories, gun violence here in America is dropping in most categories. I believe it is because more people in more states are taking advantage of arming themselves and their homes.

Regarding the bill to shield gun makers and distributors from frivolous lawsuits, Crosswalk (CT) says:

The National Rifle Association and other supporters of the legislation (H.R. 800/S. 397) call it a "reckless lawsuit preemption bill." They say the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" will prevent anti-gun groups from accomplishing their goal of suing the gun industry into bankruptcy, based on the unforeseen acts of criminals.

But the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence says the legislation "would grant unprecedented immunity" to all gun dealers and manufacturers, even in cases of "obvious negligence."

Another lie. Via Thomas Online, a quote from Senate Bill S. 397 which prevents ordinary, frivolous liability lawsuits but does NOT prevent lawsuits based on:

(5) QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTION-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term `qualified civil liability action' means a civil action or proceeding or an administrative proceeding brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, or penalties, or other relief' resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party,

but shall not include--

(i) an action brought against a transferor convicted under section 924(h) of title 18, United States Code, or a comparable or identical State felony law, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;

(ii) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;

(iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought, including--

(I) any case in which the manufacturer or seller knowingly made any false entry in, or failed to make appropriate entry in, any record required to be kept under Federal or State law with respect to the qualified product, or aided, abetted, or conspired with any person in making any false or fictitious oral or written statement with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of a qualified product; or

(II) any case in which the manufacturer or seller aided, abetted, or conspired with any other person to sell or otherwise dispose of a qualified product, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the actual buyer of the qualified product was prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm or ammunition under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code;

(iv) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product; or

(v) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that where the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injuries or property damage.

(B) NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT- As used in subparagraph (A)(ii), the term `negligent entrustment' means the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.

(C) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- The exceptions enumerated under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A) shall be construed so as not to be in conflict, and no provision of this Act shall be construed to create a public or private cause of action or remedy.

So. SO! The Brady Bunch is LYING. Period. There it is, folks, the actual text of the bill introduced in both the House and Senate last month. Legitimate civil action IS allowed if a product is defective, or the seller knew the buyer had bad intentions, or the manufacturer conspired to distribute illegally. THEY ARE LYING because the facts are on record. Damnit, why don't the editorial writers acknowledge this?

You know, people, we have freedom of speech in this country and there are some on both the left and the right who abuse it. I don't think that means we should strike that right from our Constitution. A series of terrible news events involving firearms shouldn't mean we end that right either. Once we lose a right, we can, will, never get it back.

Alphecca is a "one issue" blog. I write about many things here but the main theme is our Second Amendment rights and the media's bias against them. I will never stop defending them and shouting out about them. I am so nearly in rant-mode that I have to stop here. I'm not doing Cam's show today (but you should still listen to it, of course, link on the right...) because this report has been mostly about editorials rather than news stories. And I've done a lot of editorializing myself.

We're going through a tough time right now because of some recent incidents but that doesn't change the facts or the legitimacy of our arguments. Make your voice heard.

A prominent conservative gay blogger once emailed me, "No Fucking Surrender". He eventually did. I won't. Ever.

I'm two hours late with this so I better get it posted. Thanks for your support, your donations, and especially, thanks for stopping by!

It's Coming...

I'm working on the Weekly Report right now. It's not going to be the usual but will be more of a gun-owner's response to the recent spate of gun violence reported in the news.

To that effect, I emailed everyone at NRA News to say that I would have to take a pass this week doing my segment because of the different approach and the heavy editorializing by my self. I'm about half-way done and it should be up by Noon.

For Sale

Update 3/15: The Camp Carbine has SOLD. That was quick! Thank you.

I HATE selling any of my guns but sometimes that's the only way to give my anemic checking account a little boost. So, since I have a ready made audience here:

For Sale: Marlin 9mm Camp Carbine. Only about a thousand rounds through it. Includes original 12-rnd magazine and 3 30-rnd magazines picked up at a gun show. Good condition, walnut stock.

I saw a new one for sale online for $495. I figure I'd take $300 plus $25 to cover the shipping/transfer fee from a local dealer to your local dealer. Don't think of it as just the value of the rifle but also as a contribution to the health of Alphecca.

To do the transfer you'll have to have your FFL dealer send a copy of his license to my FFL dealer for him to effect shipping it (unless you live locally, in which case I'll just hand the thing to you...).

Checks okay or if you want to pay by credit card, we'll work something out through email.

If you're not interested in buying the gun but still want to make a donation, please hit the Yosemite Sam button on the right.

This gun is a lot of fun, I think you'll enjoy it a lot.

And the Problem Is, What?

I have no idea what a "kite buggy" is but if you order one and instead are sent two Winchester rifles, what the hell are you complaining about? From the BBC:

A man who ordered parts for a kite buggy was shocked when he received two Winchester rifles instead.

Andy Coptcoat, from Berkshire, ordered two steel tubes through Bristol-based Atmosphere Kites, who forwarded the order to its suppliers in France.

"I thought the shape of the package looked strange and when I checked it, the two firearms were inside," he said.

A spokesman for carrier Business Post, blamed human error, saying there had been a mix-up with labels.

The article is actually kind of funny because Coptcoat went into apoplexy over the mix-up. Dude, you got more than your money's worth. Keep the rifles! You're ahead of the deal and now you can protect yourself, something England's laws frown on...

No, instead he turned them in to the police because he's a typical British sheep.

What Are The Odds?

Talk about strange bedfellows! From the Sacramento Bee:

Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, can't quite believe it himself.

His group and the National Rifle Association - two forces that typically hold their noses at each other in what Pacelle calls "barely contained hostilities" - are suddenly aligned.

Add a California Democrat to the mix, plus a Republican lawmaker from Texas, and you've got one strange political brew.

What brings them all together is a man in Texas and his bizarre Internet-based hunting business, an enterprise that fits squarely in the category of "What-will-they-think-of-next?"

[...]

John Lockwood, a 39-year-old San Antonio body shop estimator, is purveyor of a new business that allows "hunters" to stalk and kill their prey from the comfort of their homes. Operating like a video game, the Internet hunter is linked via computer to a camera and high-powered rifle that fires at the click of the mouse.

Lockwood, who created the "Live-Shot" Web site, has set up his operation on a 300-acre ranch near San Antonio, advertising such exotic game as Barbary sheep or blackbuck antelope. In January, a friend of Lockwood's made the first online kill, shooting a wild boar at the behest of a German television crew.

[...]

"There's nothing sporting about sitting at your computer in your pajamas, using your mouse to shoot at hogs or antelope or any other animal that's four states away," Bowen said in a statement.

A Republican lawmaker in Texas also wants to ban the practice, which Virginia already has done. Similar bills are pending in at least nine other states, though Pacelle and others believe that - given the interstate nature of the activity - federal legislation is needed.

NRA spokeswoman Kelly Hobbs says the group is monitoring these bills for language that might affect disabled hunters who rely on "electronic or mechanical devices" in the field.

But Hobbs is careful to emphasize in the field.

"The NRA has always maintained that fair chase, being in the field with your firearm or bow is an important element of hunting tradition," she said. "Sitting at a desk in front of your computer, clicking at a mouse, has nothing to do with hunting."

I first mentioned this repellent site last year and because I love the sound of my own voice, let me quote myself:

I've only hunted a couple times but I can tell you this from my talks with others: Hunting is much more than just sitting there pulling the trigger. It's about trekking out there in the forest, getting back to nature (to use a stupid leftist term) and sweating or freezing or just feeling the world around you as you track an animal that will put food on your table, challenge you in doing it, and force you to leave your comfortable home to do it. It's about appreciating the great outdoors.

Real hunting means getting up really early and heading out with your dad or son or mom and learning how to track an animal, the patience to wait for it to come by your stand, the skill to know your rifle, the thrill to feel the recoil as your eye and your gun reward your diligence.

I have no problem seeing this "sport" banned. At least have the guts to face your adversary. Remote shooting isn't hunting and never will be. Get off your ass and get out there.

Faster and Faster

As a child runs through the house, they say, "Look, Mom, I can go fast". Now, the world's fastest computer is running double-time. From PC World/Yahoo:

Blue Gene/L, already ranked as the fastest supercomputer on the planet, has been doubled in size, according to researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California.

Lawrence Livermore has been running a 32,000-processor system since December, but three weeks ago trucks began delivering the components that allowed it to add another 32,000-processors worth of power to the supercomputer, effectively doubling its processing power.

[...]

Blue Gene/L's made up of approximately 32,000 two-processor nodes, giving it about 64,000 processors in total, Goldstone said.

A 33,000-processor prototype of Blue Gene/L, assembled by IBM last November was ranked the fastest computer on the planet on the Top 500 list of the world's fastest supercomputers. IBM's prototype was benchmarked at 70.72 trillion calculations per second, or teraflops, using the Linpack benchmark, which puts the system through a series of mathematical calculations.

Lawrence Livermore's new system is expected to be capable of approximately twice that performance, making it nearly three times as powerful as the next system on the list, the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration's 10,240-processor Columbia supercomputer. Columbia has been benchmarked at 51.87 teraflops. Goldstone declined to comment on the Livermore system's benchmark performance.

The 32,000-node Blue Gene/L represents the second stage of a three-part build out of the $100 million supercomputer that is expected to be completed by June. When fully assembled at Lawrence Livermore, Blue Gene/L will be a 130,000-processor system with a theoretical peak performance of 360 teraflops, according to IBM.

See folks, THAT'S the kind of computer I need. Would one of you please buy me one? Maybe THEN Photoshop will open up more quickly...

Saving Medicaid in VT

Patricia Hejny proposes one possible solution to the funding of a universal healthcare system, at least here in Vermont.

I have often said that I'm opposed to "socialistic" type remedies but two areas (which I've also been vocal about) need to be "socialistic": Healthcare and education (especially college). Hate me if you will...

By the way, YOU can't use "socialism" and variations in comments because there's a medication name in there banned by MT Blacklist, so put a hyphen in it if you are commenting...

On Protecting Judges

The tragedy in Atlanta raises questions on how to protect judges (and others) in courtrooms. Craig at Lead and Gold addresses this question as well as some folk's overreaction. I have to side with Craig. An occasional incident doesn't call for compromising the rights (or perceptions) of the defendant.

What Snow Storm?

So far, this huge Nor'easter has been a dud. We've had all of about a dusting. Or am I speaking too soon?

The Latest Gun Stuff...

AnarchAngel is hosting the lastest Carnival of Cordite. So what are you waiting for?

Illegal Immigration

Glenn Reynolds shares his thoughts on the subject of immigration to America in his latest MSNBC column. He's for it, as long as it's done by legal means:

Immigration brings us the best and the brightest from all over the world. But a nation that can't control its borders is failing at one of the core tasks of nationhood. And a nation that makes the best and the brightest feel like suckers is making a big mistake. So bring us your poor, your tired, and your huddled masses. But as legal immigrants.

Notwithstanding the views of a few on the far-left who consider America to be just about the worst place in the world, most folks around the world would give their eye-tooth to live here. And many of them follow the correct procedures to do so. I welcome them as does Glenn.

My own family (on both sides) immigrated to the US at around the turn of the last century. One grandfather of mine sold pencils on the streets of New York City to put himself through law school. He went on to become a success in Milwaukee fighting for workers' rights in the budding socialist movement there in the 1920's and 30's. That's an over-simplification of all that he accomplished in his life but will suffice for now.

Legal immigrants filled our factories in the early part of the last century. They provide much of the brain-power of our current colleges, research facilities, and advanced science and medical explorations.

They also bring a unique flavor to many of our cities and towns with their neighborhoods. That's one of the special delights that still remain in places such as New York, Chicago, and L.A. They are the ones who desperately want to live here because of the boundless opportunities that America offers.

Aside from a few disgruntled Democrats who claim they're going to move to Canada or France because their presidential candidate didn't win last year, it's pretty obvious to all but the blind that for the last 200 years, people have wanted to move to America, not away from it.

It's hard work being a legal immigrant, even if you do "speak the language", because unless you are one of those courted by high-tech corporations or colleges or medical facilities, you usually have to start at the bottom. Legal immigrants pay all the same taxes that the rest of us do.

The problem is with illegal immigration. Glenn acknowledges as much (his column is a response to a Hugh Hewitt comment) regarding President Bush's plan to "normalize" millions of illegal immigrants. Hewitt:

If coupled with such a visible security initiative, the normalization of the 8 to 12 million illegal aliens already in the United States --not an amnesty, but a normalization-- could proceed without risk to the GOP majority. But ignoring the deepening sense of alarm over the perception of an "open" border is perilous both in terms of national security and political advantage.

The flow of illegals (can I just call them that for the sake of brevity?) shows how porous our borders are and if laborers seeking money for their families can easily cross into the US, so can terrorists seeking to do evil things. For the sake of this argument, let's assume that Homeland Security and increased vigilance have reduced the risk.

In my gut, I'm against the President's plan to just give them a pass. Most don't pay any taxes and yet they tax the support systems of some states (California comes to mind). My "other gut" says, wait a minute! I'll explain:

There's the usual claim that illegal immigrants rob jobs from American workers. Nonsense! American workers GAVE those jobs to the illegals because Americans would no longer labor at them. Illegals are the only ones willing to pick fruit in the orchards, wash dishes in the back of restaurants, pound post-holes in construction projects. All jobs needing doing that teens entering the job market today refuse to take.

Illegals are willing to live in "dorms" if you will, and work at the tough, thankless jobs that provide the infrastructure to many of the more desirable jobs. True, they don't pay taxes -- indeed, most of them receive free room and board from their employers and all are paid in cash.

If they were not there, available as a ready workforce, much of what we Americans consume, be it fruit and vegetables in the supermarket or dinner at the local chinese takeout would cost a whole lot more. How much are YOU willing to pay for lettuce or chicken chow mein? How many of the guys wiping down your auto at the local carwash are illegals? Probably all of them. Yes, they don't pay "their fair share" but because of that, the price of much that we enjoy is lower then it would have been. I almost think of them as inflation fighters.

So the conundrum is that we don't want them but we need them.

I think the system we have right now is about right. Tolerate them, make some occasional noises about stopping the flow of them but not really doing anything. I do not think they should be granted de facto citizenship by an administration looking to score political points with various minorities in order to win future elections and that is what I suspect is behind Bush's push.

Sometimes it's alright to give a wink and a nod. Let's not make it an open hand. Bush and his advisors would be wise to drop the issue.

Enough!

I guess I've blabbered enough for one week. I'll chill-out tomorrow (really, with the storm upon me) and I'll be back in a day or so. Have a great weekend everyone. I wish you well. Thanks so much for stopping by!

Robert J. Sawyer is Cool

I've been reading a lot of sci-fi lately. I just read Calculating God and Hominids by Robert J. Sawyer. Excellent! The first reads like a polemic in favor of the existence of a God and is truly believable which is remarkable since Sawyer is an atheist. Hominids postulates the existence of an alternate universe where neanderthals survived instead of humans. The two universes meet in an experiment and the clash of cultures shakes the human one on end.

Sawyer is an exquisite writer who takes you into other universes and bombards you with logical reasons why your beliefs are wrong or misguided. Super writer.

Maryland Anti-Gun Bias

One county in Maryland has a law that says that while public funds can be spent supporting all sorts of leftist causes, none can fund a gun show. Typical for a state that makes it so tough for the average citizen to practice the right to defend him/herself. From the Daily Press of VA:

A gun show operator lacks legal standing to challenge a Montgomery County, Md., law denying funding to public venues that display and sell firearms, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The decision by a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a ruling by U.S. District Judge Marvin J. Garbis in Baltimore.

Garbis had ruled in favor of Frank Krasner Enterprises and gun show exhibitor RSM Inc. Krasner leased space to conduct gun shows twice a year at the Montgomery County Agricultural Center in Gaithersburg until the council in 2001 barred financial aid to facilities that display and sell guns.

The Ag Center, which had received more than $500,000 from the county over the previous 10 years, informed Krasner that it could no longer allow him to conduct gun shows there because of the new law.

So here we have a new county law in Maryland that says that a publically funded venue can have all sorts of events except one protected by the Second Amendment.

""Oh. We don't like guns so you can't have a show that sells them." How quaint. How incredibly biased. "Tax payers built this space and we'll gladly lease it to antique dealers, flea-markets, home furnishings shows, and so much more but when YOU, Frank Krasner, want to rent the space for a show celebrating the rights enumerated by founding documents of our nation, well, we won't allow that. Good-bye. We won't support the Bill of Rights here in our leftist-liberal-Democratic bastion in Maryland because we don't think the Second Amendment is worth protecting and encouraging."

And in my opinion, this garbage court is anti-American for denying a legitimate show promoter the right to earn a living simply because they think that residents of the shitty-state of Maryland shouldn't be permitted to protect themselves.

I feel for my Marylander brothers and sisters. Get out of there. Move to a red state. Move somewhere in this country where you are still allowed to display the Constitution. Somewhere where you can still live our Constitution.

Thank You!

Two kind folks have hit my "tip jar" this month. Thank you so much! I run the web site for a small furniture company and while I love where I work, it just doesn't pay enough to keep me in ice cream. Your donations really help out a lot. Thanks! Contributions to the cause are always welcome and needed and if you'd like to help out here, just head over to Yosemite Sam somewhere on the right and click to tip. Thanks!

Cell Phone Gun...

Here's one from the BBC:

BBC photo

A man has been jailed for five years for firing a gun disguised as a mobile phone in a Nottingham street.

Leon Ellison, 26, from Manchester, fired the miniature device loaded with two live rounds on Upper Parliament Street following a scuffle.

Nottingham Crown Court heard he threw the weapon into the road after he was stopped by police late at night.

CCTV cameras captured him firing the weapon with a police officer standing just metres away.
[...]
Alistair Edie, defending, said Ellison, of Strepton Road, Manchester, discharged the gun out of fear following a fracas in which he was stabbed in the back.

Ellison pleaded guilty to possessing the firearm.

The judge accepted Ellison had been stabbed, but said, although he had no firearms convictions, the minimum sentence of five years would be imposed.

Five years for defending himself? They are fucking insane in England.

By the way, I first mentioned cell phone guns over a year ago in this Weekly Report and I think the one I found was much more interesting:

That's how I used to do the graphics for the report. I know what you're thinking, "Gosh, Jeff's Photoshop skills are truly impressive". I wish...

More Good Stuff...

Willis at YoungPundit is sceptical of Democrats claiming to speak for the common man while opposing oil drilling in Alaska. Maybe they're holding out for granola-powered autos...

Hey! It's mASS BACKWARDS 1st Blogoversary. Congratulations, Bruce.

Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly had a piece yesterday on the lack of linkage between blogs of different political views -- i.e. left and right. Here's the article. I'm inclined to agree with Dean Esmay that it's not as simple as that. A couple years ago I used to find and feature new, very low on the ecosystem blogs to highlight, regardless of their political philosophy. Mostly it was an exercise in my own over-inflated ego at work in thinking that I was a big deal. I got no where with it (and no thanks, either).

Truthfully, I try to read some of the "lefty" blogs but get so pissed-off so quickly that I head back to my own "clique" just to retain my sanity. I WOULD like to mention conflicting opinions about gun control from the left side of the blogosphere but it's rarely talked about and doesn't come up much in Google searches.

Your Advice Sought...

I'm off this weekend. And starting later today we're getting smacked with another storm bringing about a foot of snow through Saturday so I'll be stuck at home. There's nothing on TV so I'm going to stop by the video store on the way home. What should I rent?

I'm in the mood for a comedy and a sci-fi flick. To give you an idea of how my taste runs, here are some of the comedies I loved:

Airplane
Blazing Saddles
Take the Money and Run
Police Squad
Plan Nine From Outerspace (well, it was unintentionally funny)

And here are some SF movies I really liked:

Forbidden Planet
From the Earth to the Moon
Outland
50,000 Leagues to Earth
War of the Worlds

And all those cool old SF movies.

Let me know what you recommend for current or recent (that's all the small store has) stuff that would match stuff like that... Thanks!

Around Town

Les Jones has his Weekly Gun Links up. Always good stuff to follow.

Joe Huffman has some .50 caliber gun porn. Nothing like it on a Friday Morning...

Over at The Warren they've been putting up a series called "This Day in Military History". It's really been quite interesting. Check out the latest.

Meanwhile, Say Uncle reports that there are even odds that Illinois becomes a carry state. Folks there will feel safer if that happens.

Well that ties in nicely with what Bill at Peoria Pundit is reporting about his city trying to make it safe for prostitutes. Bill doesn't think much of that idea...

Cat Shoots Owner

No, really. From My Way News:

BATES TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) - A man cooking in his kitchen was shot after one of his cats knocked his 9mm handgun onto the floor, discharging the weapon, Michigan State Police said.

Joseph Stanton, 29, of Bates Township in Iron County, was shot in his lower torso around 6 p.m. Tuesday, the state police post in Iron River reported. He was transported to Iron County Community Hospital.

Michelle Sand, a spokeswoman at the Iron River hospital, said Stanton was treated there before being transferred to Marquette General Hospital for further treatment. But Marcie Miller, a representative of the Marquette facility, said there was no record of the hospital receiving a patient by that name.

A telephone message seeking comment was left Wednesday at Stanton's home.

State police said he was cooking at his stove when the cat knocked the loaded gun off the kitchen counter behind him.

No comment, as they say. Does this make the cat a feline felon or a felon feline?

The Intolerant Left

Once again we see that those on the left are incapable of living in civilized fashion. Via Drudge comes this ABC News story:

A Tampa man is out of jail after a possible road rage incident that gives new meaning to the term "driving left of center."

Nathan Winkler, 31, was arrested overnight and charged with aggravated stalking for allegedly terrorizing a mother and her two children.

According to police, Winkler pulled up alongside Michelle Fernandez as she was headed south on Armenia and began beeping his horn and flailing his arms, pointing at her. Fernandez, meanwhile, could not see Winkler's face because of a handmade sign in his window that read, "Never forget Bush's illegal oil war murdered thousands in Iraq."

"Apparently, this starts over political views or bumper stickers. She had a Bush/Cheney sticker on the back of her car. There's just no excuse for it to escalate to what it did," observed Tampa police spokesman Joe Durkin.

Winkler apparently grew more agitated as they continued to drive along, allegedly trying to run Fernandez's car off the road several times over the next few miles.

Trying to distract a driver or run them off the road -- for any reason -- should be considered "attempted murder" since that is a possible outcome. That is what Winkler should be charged with.

Incidentally, I consider tailgating to be in the same catagory. I have been tempted (but I never have) to stick my gun out the window and fire a shot up in the air to get tailgaters to back-off. I don't do it because it's illegal and besides, they're behind me and might have a gun too. But that's how I feel about agressive drivers.

There are lots of bad drivers all across the political spectrum. It took one from the left to threaten the life of a women and her children because of a bumper-sticker.

Buh-Bye Killington...

...But it's gonna' cost you.

Killington is a ski-resort town of about a thousand in Vermont. Most of the residents live there only part-time. Most are remarkably wealthy. The condominiums (most of them vacation homes) surrounding the ski areas start at about $375,000 dollars in price. Those are the slums! Killington residents feel they pay too much in property taxes to the state. Boo-hoo. Who doesn't? So the millionaires of Killington want to secede from the state of Vermont and join New Hampshire, 50 miles to the east. Last week at Town Meeting they voted to do so. From CNN:

Town officials said about two-thirds of the 200 to 300 people who attended the town meeting supported secession.

The main source of discontent is Vermont's new system of financing education, adopted in 1997 on orders from the state Supreme Court. It dramatically increased property taxes in wealthy communities like Killington.

Secession activists say Killington's restaurants, inns and other businesses send $20 million a year to Montpelier in sales, room and meal taxes, while the state returns just $1 million in municipal and education aid to the town of roughly 1,000 residents.

Now, I suppose it's their right in Killington to spin their wheels if they want, and even to secede if they can jump all the hurdles. I do find the argument about sales, room and meal taxes specious because those are state taxes paid by the customers, not the residents. In any event, legislation has been introduced that would make secession expensive. From the Times-Argus (VT):

Introduced by Reps. Mark Young, R-Orwell, Richard Marron, R-Stowe, and Kathleen Keenan, D-St. Albans City, House Bill 426 lays out the potential consequences of secession, including a provision that would charge towns exit fees for leaving the state.

Young, the principal author, said he proposed the bill — which would "sever all connections with, and support for, a municipality which secedes from the state" — to remind Killington residents of the consequences of their continued quest to become part of New Hampshire.

"It started out as a good gag or joke or comment or something, but it's gone too far," he said. "People need to realize the realities of what's being discussed and the huge, huge, huge implications that make the whole process absurd."
[...]
Young said Vermont would also expect to recoup its investments in Killington's infrastructure.

So in the bill Young calls for the secretary of administration to hold two public hearings to establish "exit fees for stranded assets of the state, including those relating to education, transportation, and public service" if any community secedes from the state.

Another provision of the bill would terminate any contracts and leases between the state and any seceding town, or any businesses in a seceding town. This could have an enormous effect on the Killington Resort, which leases land from the state for its ski trails.
[...]
The bill would also cut all state funds to any seceding town and revoke the Vermont citizenship of its residents. But that's only the tip of the iceberg of what would have to be considered, Young said.

"There's a long list of things that I didn't even put in the bill, like what would happen to residents with outstanding Vermont Student Assistance Corp. loans or students going to the University of Vermont and the state colleges who are paying in-state tuition," he said. "What would happen with utilities and phone service? The list goes on and on and on and on."

Here's the link to H.426.

And here's what I think. I agree completely with the bill. You know, everyone everywhere thinks their taxes are too high. I don't know anyone who breaks-out in a tap-dance when receiving their bills. I could sympathize with someone living in a state -- let's use N.J. as an example -- with 9 million residents (in otherwords, a large tax-base) griping about their tax bills. But when you live in a small state with a total population of only 600,000 people well, someone has to pay the bills.

These Killington royalty come from states with a lot of efficient services. They expect and demand the same from Vermont. People still want their roads plowed. They still want police protection (almost half of Vermont towns don't have any police; they rely on the State Police to protect and patrol). They want their roads maintained. To use a cliche, they want the trains to run on time. They expect the same infrastructure and programs they've always had. Well, that stuff costs money.

Further, the state education sharing pool evens out inequities in school districts from one municipality to another and since the state constitution requires this, wealthier towns help subsidize the poorer ones. Yes, that's socialistic but it's the only way to insure that all kids in the state have access to a good education and a chance for the future.

Lastly, while New Hampshire doesn't have a sales tax, they certainly do have high property taxes as well as rooms and meals taxes on par with Vermont.

If Killington wants to secede, fine. Buh-bye. But the State of Vermont is well within the right to recoup any investment it has, including cancelling the lease of it's mountainsides. If we were talking about a poor farming community I might feel differently. Killington is a town of outside wealth. Fuck them. Pay your taxes and be thankful for what you have (that most people in this country don't) as well as the view.

Weekly Check on the Bias

James Roszko started using drugs when he was 12 years old. At 16 he and a friend robbed a gun store. At 18 he was convicted of vandalism. At 21 he was convicted of harassment and a local newspaper actually had to take out a restraining order against him. At 25 he began molesting a 10-year-old boy for which, 17 years later he would be convicted of such and serve 2 1/2 years in prison.

In the meantime, at age 35 he was charged with unlawful confinement, pointing a firearm, assault with a weapon, impersonating a police officer and failing to comply with bail conditions. He was tried on seven of those charges in June 1996 and aquitted of all.

In 2001, while in prison, he was charged with assault with a deadly weapon stemming from an incident in 1999 when he shot one man and hog-tied another. Amazingly, charges were dismissed in 2003 when he was back out on the streets. More charges followed. In 2004 his property was searched several times for illegal weapons he was known to --bragged about-- having.

The original idea of the Canadian Gun Registry was to track and keep firearms out of the hands of mutants like Roszko. The scheme, which was initially estimated to cost Canadian taxpayers two million dollars, has ended up costing them almost $2 billion dollars.

Last Thursday Roszko gunned-down four Royal Canadian Mounted Police who were trying to execute a search warrant on him. Then, it is believed he turned the gun (mercifully, I would say) on himself.

Garry Breitkreuz, a longtime gun registry opponent from Yorkton, Sask., said James Roszko's murderous rampage with an assault rifle last Thursday in Alberta illustrates a fatal flaw in the $2-billion federal program: criminals simply ignore it.

"Incident after incident like this clearly indicate the gun registry does not prevent this kind of crime," Breitkreuz said Monday outside the House of Commons.

"It does not keep guns out of the hands of criminals. It is a paper-pushing exercise."

Breitkreuz argues Canadian citizens would be much safer if Ottawa simply invested the $2 billion spent on the registry in boosting the resources of front-line police forces.

"In this case, (Roszko) was already prohibited from owning firearms. The gun registry has no effect on this case." --Canadian Press Online

It seems strange in this "culture of safety" that the federal government has seen fit to spend billions of dollars to register the non-problem firearms of responsible target shooters and hunters, but seems to give short shrift to the very forensic facilities that could help to put irresponsible, gun-toting criminals behind bars.

Canadians have by now seen through the Canadian Firearms Act and know it for the sham that it is.

Perhaps, it is time to rejig the firearms registry as a dangerous offender registry and start registering the names of people who are not allowed to possess firearms, rather than listing the guns of people who scrupulously obey the laws. It certainly could not be any more useless than the current firearms registry and, in all likelihood, it will actually provide some benefit to the public safety. --a letter last month in the Toronto Star.

Remember that bumper-sticker you've seen at countless gun shows: Criminal Control, not Gun Control. The murder of the RCMP officers was a true tragedy but it points up the uselessness of registering firearms because the simple fact is that criminals don't obey laws and they're not going to register their guns.

Al Gore wanted to have national handgun registration here in the United States (which probably cost him five states in the 2000 election). Does anyone really think that if such legislation was passed that the Muhammads and Malvos, the Harrises and Klebolds would march down to the local police station to register their guns? That gang members would charter a bus to the local precinct to comply with the new law?

And even if they did, would that have stopped a mutant like Arroyo, Sr., down in Tyler Texas from losing his marbles?

The real problem is that criminals -- if convicted at all -- serve little or no time even when repeatedly arrested and convicted of serious crimes. From the Edmonton Sun:

Kim Connell, a 29-year RCMP veteran who spent his last 10 years in the Mayerthorpe detachment, wanted to know why Roszko was ever set free.

"They're going in and out, the violent ones, why are they letting them out?" the former Mountie asked.

"If the justice system had put him where he belonged this wouldn't have happened."

Exactly. There's quite a battle going on in Canada's media over why Roszko was -- dispite numerous parole violations -- on the streets. There's also been a lot of debate over the actions (tactics) employed that horrible day by the RCMP. I won't go into that.

[Source material for Roszko's criminal history comes from the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail.]

Unfortunately, focusing on the weapon instead of the criminal is also a pastime of gun activists meeting in Johannesburg yesterday. From the department of "World ends, women and minorities suffer most" comes this Reuters story:

Gun control activists said on Monday the world was awash in small arms, fuelling violence, and called for global cooperation and stricter limits on the trade.

"You can't control international arms proliferation, especially small arms proliferation, without international cooperation," said Brian Wood, Amnesty International's arms and security trade research manager. "We want tough action."

A human rights report by a consortium of groups highlighted the impact of guns on the lives of women, saying they were often the "silent victims" of the small arms trade.

The activists noted there were an estimated 650 million guns in circulation around the world -- almost all in the hands of men.

"Given that they are almost never the buyers, owners or users of small arms, (women) suffer disproportionately from armed violence," said Denise Searle of Amnesty International, one of the groups releasing the report.
[...]
Statistics worldwide indicate young men are the main victims of small arms, whether used in disputes, in conflict zones or in criminal activity including gang violence.

But the report issued ahead of International Women's Day on Tuesday showed women too are paying a price, often in their own homes as a result of domestic violence.

"Where guns are available, more women are likely to be killed," Searle said.

So it's alright then when men are killed but when women are killed, "We want tough action".

This is all silliness. The problem is the same as the above story. Criminals do little time in jail. And sadly, often when a woman is the victim of domestic violence, she doesn't press charges. A restraining order is not enough -- it's simply a piece of paper and that won't contain a violent spouse; a concrete cell with iron bars will.

Needless to say -- and unspoken in the article -- is the fact that whenever worldwide gun control activists say something like, "international cooperation is needed" what they really mean is that the United States must scrap it's Second Amendment and join all the sheep of the rest of the world in being defenseless against criminals.

Oddly enough, Reuters didn't ask for any contrary opinions from the NRA or other defenders of freedom.

And oddly enough, too, the New York Times didn't consult any constitutional scholars today when they released this article:

Dozens of terror suspects on federal watch lists were allowed to buy firearms legally in the United States last year, according to a Congressional investigation that points up major vulnerabilities in federal gun laws.

People suspected of being members of a terrorist group are not automatically barred from legally buying a gun, and the investigation, conducted by the Government Accountability Office, indicated that people with clear links to terrorist groups had regularly taken advantage of this gap.
Advertisement

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, law enforcement officials and gun control groups have voiced increasing concern about the prospect of a terrorist walking into a gun shop, legally buying an assault rifle or other type of weapon and using it in an attack.

I love how "gun control groups" are now considered to be as unbiased as the un-named law enforcement officials in this story. In any event, this is a report commissioned by one of the most virulently anti-gun partisans in Congress, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). Fortunately, he seems to have the solution:

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, who requested the study, plans to introduce legislation to address the problem in part by requiring federal officials to keep records of gun purchases by terror suspects for a minimum of 10 years. Such records must now be destroyed within 24 hours as a result of a change ordered by Congress last year. Mr. Lautenberg maintains that the new policy has hindered terrorism investigations by eliminating the paper trail on gun purchases.

"Destroying these records in 24 hours is senseless and will only help terrorists cover their tracks," Mr. Lautenberg said Monday. "It's an absurd policy."

He blamed what he called the Bush administration's "twisted allegiances" to the National Rifle Association for the situation.

The N.R.A. and gun rights supporters in Congress have fought - successfully, for the most part - to limit the use of the F.B.I.'s national gun-buying database as a tool for law enforcement investigators, saying the database would amount to an illegal registry of gun owners nationwide.

Notice how the writer of this screed, Eric Lightblau, once again uses his quotes AND INNUENDO to somehow try to tar the NRA and President Bush and anyone who doesn't support gun control as providing aid-and-comfort to terrorists.

Ignored is the implication stated at the start of the article: Firstly, this is a very small number of firearms purchases we're talking about. Secondly, that these purchases are only by people suspected of something. They haven't been charged. They haven't been convicted. In fact, they haven't done anything other than being investigated. Never mind that it could be someone who simply works as a janiter in a mosque or someone who donated money to an organization suspect of ties to an overseas group.

The real issue is that Lautenberg wants to create a de facto gun registry by holding onto all NICS background check requests or all firearms transactions paperwork for TEN YEARS. Folks, that's gun registration pure and simple.

If these "suspected terrorists" have done something then lock them up. In this country our judicial system is still based on being innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, if one of them does buy a gun and then uses it wrongly in some manner, well, that's unfortunate but it's also the price we pay to enjoy our freedom and liberty. Does Lightblau actually work for the Brady Bunch?

Here's what's happening by some of my friends at some other pro-2a blogs:

Say Uncle reports on some firearm related legislation in Tennessee.

The Ten Ring has a funny parody about how the Brady Bunch might view a lever-action rifle as an assault weapon.

Gullyborg has the latest Carnival of the Cordite up.

Heartless Libertarian is celebrating Buy A Gun Day a little bit early. I'm jealous.

Contertop Chronicles is joining the growing efforts of pro-2A bloggers by offering free instruction (and ammo) to those in the Washington DC area who want to learn what shooting is all about.

You can find a more comprehensive list of these generous bloggers over at Publicola. Good all to them.

Okay, my goal is to get this up by Ten AM every Tuesday so... Thanks for stopping by and don't forget to listen to me do this report live today on the Cam Edwards NRA Live Show.

NYC Gun Law Not Valid?

Anthony J. Sebok and Timothy Lytton have commentary at FindLaw about the NYC bill that would penalize gun makers and dealers all across the country for criminal misuse of firearms. Here's a quote:

We predict that GIRA [the NYC law] will only provide tort reformers in Washington, D.C. with a specious justification for their agenda: New York City is the kind of jurisdiction that the Republicans like to point toward when they try to make the case for PLCAA [Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act], and GIRA gives Republicans good reason to point toward New York City.

The rest of the lengthy piece explains why. I disagree with some of their points and even one of their examples about how a local ordinance can trump a state one (the "No Right on Red" in NYC -- the state law explicitly GAVE municipalities the right to enforce such local variences). None-the-less it is an interesting article coming from two writers who are not pro-gun.

Needless to say you should read the whole thing.

Canadian Gun Registry Failure

I'm going to let the newspaper do the talking first. From the Toronto Star:

New questions are being asked about Canada's controversial and expensive gun registry, and why it didn't keep a high-calibre assault rifle out of the hands of a man who killed four Mounties in a cold-blooded ambush.

Despite the Firearms Act and its related programs — designed to keep firearms from people who are likely to be a danger to themselves or to others — local farmer Jim Roszko managed to obtain and keep the high-powered weapon, which he used Thursday to kill RCMP constables Peter Schiemann, Leo Johnston, Anthony Gordon and Brock Myrol before turning the gun on himself.
[...]
The controversial gun control program — licensing owners and registering guns — was originally projected to have a net cost of $2 million, but after 10 years in the works, it surpassed the $1-billion mark last year. Critics have condemned it for years, saying it lacks both accountability and effectiveness.

Roszko — a convicted child molester whom family and neighbours described as aggressive and in a lot of emotional pain — was known by local residents and police to have guns hidden on his farm. In fact, he faced numerous firearms charges over the years, and in 1999 a bailiff who was to visit the Roszko farm was warned by RCMP to wear a bulletproof vest.

Critics say Roszko shouldn't have had weapons in the first place — and, if the gun registry actually worked, wouldn't have had them.
[...]
One former Mountie called the registry "totally useless" because criminals don't register their guns.

"They've wasted $2 billion on what should have gone to front-line policing," said Dennis Young, parliamentary assistant to Saskatchewan Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz, a gun-registry critic.

"They've targeted law-abiding citizens instead of the 176,000 people (with court convictions) who have been prohibited from owning guns."

Okay, my turn:

So the mutant Roszko was convicted of a felony. He was under court order not to own guns. He did anyway and the Canadian police knew it. And they even searched his home several times. He was still able to gun down four Mounties.

Over a billion dollars spent, a huge bureaucracy created, millions of law-abiding citizens aggrevated and in many cases penalized and yet Canada's Gun Registry program did nothing to prevent this tragic crime. Enforcing the pre-existing laws might have.

If Roszko was known to be a threat then he should have been locked-up again or committed or they should have bulldozed his home and property to find those guns. He was a known criminal known to illegally possess firearms. We're not talking about a law-abider or a suspect.

From Canadian Press Online:

RCMP were struggling Friday to explain how one man known for years as a violent police-hater with a short fuse and an arsenal of weapons was able to gun down four young Mounties.

James Roszko, 46, was notorious in the town and was feared by waitresses, high school students and community officials for his aggressive behaviour.

The police were there to search for a stolen car or pot, I believe. Given this creep's history and reputation I blanch at this:

Roszko was well-known to police as a violent menace who laid spike belts on his property to discourage trespassers.

RCMP spokesman Cpl. Wayne Oakes bristled at questions about the tactics the Mounties used on the fateful day.

He acknowledged the weapons the officers were armed with were no match for the "rapid-fire high-powered rifle" used by Roszko.

Oakes also said the RCMP can't get tough with someone just because of their criminal past.

"We treat people with respect. And while we have to be mindful of their past, if we see somebody walking down the street that we've had a past history with, we don't automatically take out our guns, and start pointing them at him," he said.

In this case I think they should have but I'm not going to second-guess tactics. How this happened is besides the point. The point is that the much vaunted Gun Registry did NOTHING to prevent a mutant like Roszko from having a gun.

I think Dennis Young summed it up perfectly when he said the money should have gone to policing. Yes, imagine how many more police or equipment could have resulted from a billion dollars spent, instead of wasting it on a registry scheme that did nothing to protect the poor Mounties who were murdered.

And Al "The Inventor" Gore wanted to impose such a system here in the United States. And many currently in office still do.

When you create all sorts of licenses and registries all you do is punish the good people. The mutants will never obey such requirements because they are, after all, criminals.

Mayor Daley take note. San Francisco take note.

Oh Daley, Shut-Up!

Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley just won't give up. From WBBM News Radio:

Despite resistance in passing legislation on gun control, Mayor Richard M. Daley said Saturday he would continue his pledge to reform gun licensing.

"Even though it's defeated, I'm going to come back year after year," Daley said following a Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy rally at Crane Technical High School, 2245 W. Jackson Blvd.

"It doesn't matter. If we gain another vote, we gain another a vote, and unfortunately when there's another incident, and everybody says we need it, then maybe we'll have to pass these laws," the mayor said.
[...]
"Lot of people run away from this. They are afraid of the issue," he said.

Without common sense gun laws, Daley said the gun population would remain rampant.

"You'll have guns in your back yard, guns on your block, along your school," Daley said.

Daley suggested one way of reducing unlicensed gun owners would be through the elimination of suburban gun shows, where the mayor said anybody could purchase any amount of guns and walk away.

With current laws, there is no way to license gun owners at these gun shows, and then there is no way of following the life of the guns, Daley said.

"We license everybody else. We license barbers and beauticians. Why can't we license gun owners?" the mayor said.

Haircuts aren't a guaranteed right. Bearing arms is.

Furthermore, if there are unlicensed gun owners around it's because you and the city of Chicago refuse to issue any licenses or permits for handguns. Do you really think that eliminating gun shows in Illinois will prevent criminals from obtaining handguns? Most never see a gun show. They steal or buy on the black market. All you will do is make it that much harder for the law-abiding to own guns but then you've already done that by banning them from your crime-ridden city, right?

Fool.

I've Become Antisocial

After long and hard thought and research and cleaning-out another wave of trackback spam (the second attack in two days) I've decided to eliminate trackbacks. Sorry about that but while the controls I have on comments are pretty good -- closing comments after two weeks, MT Blacklist -- it isn't enough to help the trackback spam. They (the bastard spammers) are able to find old posts and load them up with spam pings.

Rather than have to keep dealing with it, it's easier just to eliminate them. Please don't think of me as antisocial, just pressed for time and patience...

Movable Type is a wonderful system but this one vulnerability is a tough nut to fight. I've also removed any trackback code from both the main index and the individual archive template so old trackbacks don't show up. I'll probably sanitize the monthly archives, too. Note that my trackbacks to your blogs will probably still be on but if you're plagued the way I am you might consider going this route too. Changing the name of the tb.cgi file just wasn't enough...

Great News!!!

I knew something would finally cheer me up and a hat-tip to John Lott for making it happen.

The entire run of my favorite comic strip in the whole world is now online for free:

Calvin and Hobbes

Here's an example why:

Have a great weekend. Thanks for stopping by!

More Sickness From the Left

I had seen a link on Drudge a few days ago about a feature story from a rag published in New York ridiculing the Pope. I'm not a fan of the Pope but when the page finially came available on the web (Drudge's link had crashed it) I realized just how sick the left of this country have become. For illustrative purposes only, here is a quote from the article, "The 52 Funniest Things About The Upcoming Death of The Pope" by Matt Taibbi from the New York Press:

52.Pope pisses himself just before the end; gets all over nurse.

51.After death, saggy, furry tits of dead Pope begin inexorable process of melting away into nothingness, like coldest of Sno-cones under faintest of suns.

Folks, this is just about the foulest garbage I've ever read. While I might like to compose a list of the 52 ways I would like to see Taibbi lose his life, I'll restrain myself.

What really bothers me though is that a casual google through the left side of the blogosphere shows almost no condemnation of this repellent article. I realize it's just a juvenile attempt at humor but doesn't anyone on the liberal side of the aisle find this to be over the line?

Imagine if someone in a newspaper had written something like this about, oh say, a Muslem leader. How would the leftists have reacted then? Imagine if it happened at a college? Imagine if someone had written such a list for Jesse Jackson?

Catholics deserve to be outraged by this but frankly, everyone should be outraged.

Update 3/7/05: Besides the resignation spoken about in the comments by Alan Cabel who did it on principle, another editor has resigned because, unlike Cabel, he thought there was nothing wrong with the post. From Editor and Publisher:

Jeff Koyen, editor of the alt-weekly New York Press, quit today after refusing to accept a two-week suspension in the aftermath of the paper’s controversial “52 Funniest Things About the Upcoming Death of the Pope” cover story, Koyen said.

The article by Matt Taibbi had drawn heated denunciations from the likes of Sen. Chuck Schumer (“The most disgusting thing I've seen in 30 years of public life") and a spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg ("As disgusting as this is, it's sadly par for the course for this publication").

The left will cry "censrship" but his suspension came from the head-honchos of the leftist paper itself, not from some "right-wing conspiracy". He couldn't accept a suspension and so he took his ball and went home. He just doesn't get it: If you have a problem with some public person's opinions or positions, fine; discuss it and explain why your principles are different. But to allow one of your contributors to trash and make light of someone who is dying because he held to his principles, well... Sorry Koyen, but just like a football team, you as coach are held responsible for the performance of your team and when they fuck-up, your head rolls. In this case, I'm glad.

Meanwhile in London...

Here's a fine op-ed by Gerald Baker in the London Times that starts:

ONE OF MY favourite cinematic moments is the scene in Monty Python’s Life of Brian when Reg, aka John Cleese, the leader of the People’s Front of Judea, is trying to whip up anti-Roman sentiment among his team of slightly hesitant commandos.

“What have the Romans ever done for us?” he asks.

“Well, there’s the aqueduct,” somebody says, thoughtfully. “The sanitation,” says another. “Public order,” offers a third. Reg reluctantly acknowledges that there may have been a couple of benefits. But then steadily, and with increasing enthusiasm, his men reel off a litany of the good things the Romans have wrought with their occupation of the Holy Land.

By the time they’re finished they’re not so sure about the whole insurgency idea after all and an exasperated Reg tries to rally them: “All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?”

I can’t help but think of that scene as I watch the contortions of the anti-American hordes in Britain, Europe and even in the US itself in response to the remarkable events that are unfolding in the real Middle East today.

He then proceeds to list what America is accomplishing in that region now. Read the whole thing.

Snarky Me

Reading back the last few posts makes me realize that I'm in a Really Bad Mood today. It's too nice out and I'm stuck at work. Grrr...

And now, besides, I'm hungry.

Dave Tepper is angry for other reasons.

Speaking of the Left...

The leftist bias of liberals in the media is never more obvious than in this Hollywood Reporter story:

Oscar winner Geena Davis will star as the first female president of the United States in ABC's drama pilot "Commander in Chief."

Kyle Secor was previously cast as her husband, and Ever Carradine as her press secretary. Also on board is Harry J. Lennix as the outgoing president's chief of staff.

Okay, big deal right? Just ABC trying to cash-in on NBC's West Wing success. But, in anticipation of a run by Hillary Clinton, ABC will have a Democratic activist, Davis, star as --GUESS WHAT?-- a Democratic president.

Just once I'd like to see the crap who control the big three networks show some balance (not to mention imagination) by featuring a show with principled Republicans. That will never happen because Hollywood writers and producers cannot even conceive of any worldview other than their own.

Maybe that's why I average only four hours a week watching anything on TV and that's usually just the news and Meet the Press.

Fuck China

The previous post reminded me of a story I saw the other day on Drudge about how China thinks the U.S. has too much control over the internet.

China is that mutant communist-ruled nation where anyone who thinks other than "party thoughts" is jailed. They also regulate all media including the internet. Now, head-turd Chinese Ambassador to the UN (speaking of worthless crap) thinks this:

China's ambassador to the United Nations last week called for international controls on the Internet.

Chinese Ambassador Sha Zukang told a UN conference that controls should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations.

"It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning," he said at the conference on Internet governance.

Sha said China opposes the "monopolization" of the Internet by one state, a reference to the Untied States, which ultimately controls the digital medium.

"It is of crucial importance to conduct research on establishing a multilateral governance mechanism that is more rational and just and more conducive to the Internet development in a direction of stable, secure and responsible functioning and more conducive to the continuous technological innovation," he said.

China's communist government fears the Internet would dilute Beijing's control over its population, as information passes unfiltered throughout the country and outside of strict government censorship.

China strictly prohibits any public criticism of the ruling communist party and closely monitors and censors Internet usage. Periodically, Chinese security forces raid Internet cafes and arrest people who violate Chinese rules.

So because the turdese of China censor their internet, those assholes think all countries should?

The internet is a product of the United States -- that is, the first universities that designed it (with Al "The Inventor" Gore's help, of course) were in America. The basic engines that powered it were here in the US. Almost all of the protocols used on it (such as HTML) were American creations. The Turdese of China contributed NOTHING to it except in recent years, cheap (and cheaply made) chips.

I can understand why a shit-governed nation like China, which forces the murder of unborn children on its subjects, would want to stop the flow of information. Alas, there are plenty of other shit-can nations around the world that would agree.

In fact, you can see stirrings of such as some countries (Australia comes to mind) decide that they will prosecute residents of other nations who use "hate speech" on their web sites. Can the leftist assholes of Europe be far behind? For that matter, can the leftist assholes here in the US be far behind? They already try to regulate any thoughts that don't agree with their own on college campuses. Is it such a reach to imagine them trying to force such standards on the internet? Naturally they would be exempt as they continue to vilify the right, Christians, Jews, Bush, etc. That's their modus operandum.

China and it's turd-ambassador can go fuck themselves. Regulate this you assholes.

I will use my Second Amendment to protect my First.

Sorry for the cursing but I'm PISSED at all these fucking third-world nations trying to tell us here in the US how we should live, what we should think, and what we should read.

Speech is Not Free?

Individ is calling for a boycott of the ACLU. Good post but alas, I suspect that he's preaching to the choir.

That leads us to Benjamin at Reasonablenut who thinks the internet should be taxed. Well, not really. He's responding to the whole McCain-Fiengold mess about regulating blogs.

Me? I'm with Geek With A 45 who calls for total defiance. I've always said that the Second Amendment protects the First, and all the others. That's my plan.

Heh!

(Via Say Uncle) The blog No Quarters is reporting on a proposed bill in Montana that in essence would allow sheriffs in Montana to tell the Feds to go pound salt. I could live in a state like that...

Justified Anger in UK

In the case that seems to never go away, the mutant who was shot by the farmer Tony Martin was paid big bucks by the BBC to give "his side of the story" and many in Britain are furious:

The BBC is under renewed fire over the decision to pay thousands of pounds to the burglar shot by Norfolk farmer Tony Martin.The Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, condemned the decision as "disgusting", while a crime campaigner called for BBC bosses to pay the money back personally.Pc Norman Brennan, director of the Victims of Crime Trust, said licence fee payers would not want their money to go to a "career criminal".

Lord Falconer said it was awful for the victims of crime to see those responsible profiting from their actions.

He added: "I can recognise that there might be some very, very, very exceptional cases where it might be permissible, but the Fearon case is most certainly not one of them.

"What happened in relation to Mr Martin was investigated in a trial, there was an appeal. We didn't need the BBC to pay Mr Fearon to find out what happened.

"It might make good programming, but it is a disgusting warping of values, in my view."

In mine, too. The money should have gone to Martin for helping rid the world of one creep and injuring another and then suffering the indignity of being the one jailed. But then, that's the "warping of values" by the leftists who control England these days.

Fabrique Nationale Five-SeveN

Another gun they want to ban:

Gun grabbers think that by labeling a firearm a "cop killing gun" it necessarily makes it so and that lawmakers will rush to ban it from civilian ownership. From an apparently not-proofread story in Crosswalk.com:

Democrats in Congress have introduced a bill to outlaw a specific gun, which a leading gun control group describes as "a clear and present threat to police officers" and "a tragedy waiting to happen."

The bills introduced in the House and Senate on Thursday (H.R. 800/S. 397) would make it illegal for anyone except a police officer or military official to possess a Fabrique Nationale (FN) Five-seveN pistol, which can shoot armor-piercing bullets.

Gun control activists call the Five-seveN a "cop-killing gun," and they have enlisted the support of several law enforcement organizations in their effort to outlaw it. Steve Lenkart, the legislative director of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, a labor union, has called the handgun "an assault weapon that fits in your pocket."

"We are very grateful to Senators [Frank] Lautenberg (D-N.J.), [Jon] Corzine (D-N.J.) and [Chuck] Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Congressman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) for introducing legislation in the Senate and the House of Representatives to outlaw this weapon," said Michael Barnes, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March.

As you can see, it's the usual suspects supporting the measure. I'm sure DiFi is on it too. You know, if they can't get their AWB reinstated, they go after guns one at a time, first with the .50 caliber Barretts and now the FN Five-SeveN. Trust me, if they have their way, they will eventually work their way down the list to the common .22 long rifle and ammo.

Then there's this:

The Brady Campaign says it bought a Five-seveN from a Virginia gun dealer in January, and it says ammunition purchased with the gun was able to penetrate a protective vest. (Virtually all rifle ammunition will penetrate the most common types of body armor worn by police.)

I found the parenthetical remark interesting because while not entirely true, it showed a presumed attempt by the writer of the story to provide some balance or to at least highlight the hypocrisy of the Brady Bunch.

I might also point out that if the ammo for the five7 did as claimed, then an ordinary law-abiding citizen SHOULD be encouraged to own it. Think of the hero Mark Wilson in Tyler, Texas. If he had had one he might still be alive and been able to stop the mutant Arroyo in his tracks. Arroyo was wearing body armor.

Also to the article writer's (Susan Jones) credit, she included a reply from the gun maker itself:

-- The Five-seveN handgun is a full-size pistol and is not easily concealable. In fact, it is larger than most current-issue sidearms carried by law enforcement agencies throughout the U.S.

-- The maximum effective range of the Five-seveN handgun is 35 to 50 meters, which is comparable to other commercially available sporting pistols in its range and effectiveness.

-- The only ammunition available to the public are the cartridges defined by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms Explosives (BATFE) as suitable for sporting use.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearmstech/fabriquen.htm

-- All 5.7 x 28 restricted ammunition (armor piercing) is sold only to law enforcement and military agencies. This ammunition is released and shipped from a U.S. Customs controlled custom bonded warehouse, only with approval from the BATFE and U.S. Customs.

I have to say that on the whole I found this story balanced and that's all I can ask of a journalist. Me? I'm a pajama wearing blogger and I don't have to be fair...

By the way, my comment about proofreading referred to a couple quotes near the end of the article that were switched so it appeared that the NRA supported the bill and the Brady Bunch didn't. Heh, what a strange alternate world THAT would be.

Little by little the gun grabbers keep trying to nibble away at our freedoms.

Spam Pings

My other blog was hit with 125 spam pings last night. Ghod!

Around Town...

Zendo Deb reports on some good news about a shooting finally being ruled "justified".

Say Uncle reports on something so stupid that all I can do is wince.

And over at Hell in a Handbasket: Heh!

And at It Comes in Pints: This is interesting.

Where Were The Parents?

I hate this shit: A mutant kid shoots the driver of his school bus because the driver (after warning him previously) turned him in for using tobacco. From AP/Yahoo:

CUMBERLAND CITY, Tenn. - A 14-year-old boy was charged with shooting a school bus driver to death as she drove her morning route Wednesday. A relative of the driver said she had reported the boy a day earlier for using smokeless tobacco on the bus.

None of the 24 students on the bus, ranging from kindergarten to the 12th grade, was hurt, even though the bus crashed into a utility pole after driver Joyce Gregory was shot.

Authorities declined to comment on a motive for the shooting or identify the high school freshman accused of killing Gregory, but neighbors said his name is Jason Clinard.

Public defender Jack Lockert, who met with the suspect for about 45 minutes, said he was in shock.

"We obviously feel like he has severe mental issues," Lockert said. "He's an A and B student and had never been in trouble before."

"Severe mental issues". Gee, yuh think?

Once again the media will focus on the gun when they should be focusing on the lack of parenting. Parents are so disconnected from their children these days that they can't spot simple signs of mental illness, of using chewing tobacco, and they don't even think to keep their guns locked-up.

"Oh, the kid's doing alright in school, why should we try to talk to him?" Yah, better to just let him run wild, sit in front of the computer every waking hour, not teach him respect for guns AND FOR LIFE in general.

Everyday we read about kids bringing guns to school and while many were bought on the street, many were also lifted from their parent's closets or drawers.

But this is really about lack of supervision, both of the kid and the handgun he used. The press will focus on only one of those issues and then we all look bad.

Ah, Those Wacky Athletes!

I think we can all agree that Tampa Bay Buccaneer Dwight Smith is an idiot and deserves to be arrested for pointing a pellet gun on a couple fans who approached him as he waited in line at a fast-food drive-through.

It doesn't surprise me that it could draw a reaction like this:

Isn't the United States a beautiful place? Ah, America, land of jacked-up, gun-totin' athletes with attitudes that say the world owes them ... big-time.

Being a star of any sport (or of Hollywood, etc.) means that instead of being angry about fans, you should be grateful you have any. Smith is a true bonehead.

Range Under Fire in VT

A rifle range that has been in continuous operation since 1947 has been forced to apply for Vermont's odorous Act 250 (which has not been around nearly that long) permission to continue (something unlikely to be granted). The complaint, naturally, comes from recent arrivals to the state who -- horrors -- found the club becoming more popular. From the Bennington Banner:

Club supporters packed half of a conference room at the Holiday Inn in Rutland, with some of its charter members testifying to activities at the club over the years.

"The only issue is whether the club has undergone substantial change. After you review the evidence, you will see that an Act 250 jurisdiction does not exist," said the club's attorney, James Goss.

The club opened in 1947 and has always been active, he said, with a mix of rifle, pistol and trap shooting taking place there.

But neighbors on Rod and Gun Club Road say the club should be held to Act 250's 10 criteria because of substantial changes, including increased shooting noise and adverse environmental effects. Those neighbors also appeared before the Environmental Board.

In July, District 8 Environmental Coordinator Warren Foster ruled that the club needed to apply for an Act 250 permit. The club appealed that decision and neighbors cross-appealed, prompting Wednesday's hearing.

Neighbors hope that when the board makes its decision in two months, it will uphold Foster's ruling.

Representing herself, neighbor Ann Dailey said her family purchased their home in 1980 for its secluded, peaceful environment.

"As time passed, things have changed and those changes are why we're here today," she said.

Anyone stupid enough to buy or build near an existing range has NO right to complain about anything but time and again we see this happening all over the country. And it's not just with ranges but is also with people moving next to airports, and (I seem to remember) even new arrivals to Englishtown, N.J. complaining about Raceway Park (once a premier NHRA drag-racing venue). And so it goes...

Weekly Check on the Bias

Question: What do you get when you cross a monster hell-bent on killing his ex-wife with a news media hell-bent on demonizing firearms?

Mutant fires on police.

Answer: Unfortunately, you get a whole lot of biased reporting that does no one any good accept to provide fuel for the anti-gun crowd's fire.

Mutant dead.

A typical example would be the opening paragraph from the Tyler Morning Telegraph:

Law enforcement officers who were outgunned in last week's downtown shootout with a man armed with a semi-automatic rifle and clad in body armor said the incident is a nightmare they hope to never relive.

David Hernandez Arroyo Sr., 43, gunned down his ex-wife and another man Thursday as he fired on the Spring Avenue side of Smith County Courthouse.

Arroyo, who police believe was distraught over child custody issues with his ex-wife, Maribel Estrada, 41, fired multiple rounds with a Mac-90 semi-automatic rifle, killing Ms. Estrada and Mark Alan Wilson, 52, a registered concealed handgun carrier who intervened to save lives.

Several others, including three local lawmen, were injured by the gunfire.

Now, a surprising thing happens in this article. For the next third of the story, police bemoan the fact that the guy was wearing body armor and had a "high powered rifle" which, after the usual quotes, turns out not to be banned in any way. The last third of the story focuses entirely on the gun itself; as if quoting from a catalog.

The mention above of the mutant Arroyo, Sr., is pretty much all we ever learn about him from this particular report. You'd almost think he was just an actor on stage and the writer was more interested in the props. Imagine if reporters covering the BTK killer focused more on the ropes he used to bind his victims than who, what or why he did.

No elaboration is made, either, of Mark Alan Wilson, a licensed CCW permit holder who gave his life up trying to protect others from Arroyo, Sr.

Now, it is true that in another article from the previous day, Arroyo Sr. is portrayed as a victim of the Texas child-support system (!) and he was "frustrated". Oh please... Lots of things frustrate lots of people and you don't read about them going on shooting sprees.

The Ten Ring blog has more extensive coverage as do many others.

Fortunately, this San Diego Union-Tribune/AP story does give Mark Wilson some credit:

The other victim, Mark Alan Wilson, 52, was credited by authorities with saving the life of David Hernandez Arroyo Jr., who was listed in fair condition at a hospital with leg wounds. A sheriff's deputy, Sherman Dollison, 28, was in critical condition after being shot in the liver, lungs and legs; a sheriff's lieutenant and a Tyler police detective were treated and released.

"One of the deputies at the scene said if it hadn't been for Mr. Wilson," said Sheriff J.B. Smith, "the son would be dead."

The local and national TV networks have minimized Wilson's heroic deed, focusing instead -- as always -- on the gun.

So how long did it take the Brady Bunch to use Arroyo Sr.'s shooting spree and Wilson's death as propaganda? Oh, not very long at all as we see from this AP story:

Wilson's actions have drawn hearty praise from gun advocates who say he probably saved more lives than just Arroyo's son. But gun control groups say Wilson's death proves that carrying a gun increases a person's chances of getting killed.
[...]
Kristen Rand, legislative director for the pro-gun control Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C., said the Tyler shooting last Thursday shows that criminals are undeterred by people potentially carrying concealed weapons. All but four states allow permits for carrying concealed handguns.

Wilson, a Navy veteran with years of weapons training, had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. But it wasn't clear whether Wilson was in his apartment at the time the shooting began or if he ran up to get his gun and returned.

State Rep. Suzanna Hupp, a supporter of Texas' concealed carry law, said Wilson's access to a gun improved the odds of Arroyo being taken down before more people were killed.

"That gentleman did precisely what I would like to think most good people would do in that scenario, which is to risk their own lives to save others," Hupp said.

The Tyler shooting has also reignited a debate over whether semiautomatic assault weapons should be banned.
[...]
Eric Howard, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence, said guns like Arroyo's are the weapons of choice for many criminals.

"These are military-style weapons that pose a significant risk to civilians and the police officers trying to protect the public," he said.

I will credit AP writer Liz Austin with, firstly quoting TX Representative Suzanna Hupp, and also for quoting others on our side to counter-balance the anti-gun spin coming from the usual suspects. An op-ed by John Lott has more:

Lorraine Childress, a sales assistant for Merill Lynch, watched the shootout from her 16th-floor office overlooking downtown Tyler. Little did she know that her friend Mark Wilson was trying to stop the rampage. "We are so proud of our friend," Childress said. "We know Mark saved this young man's life by doing what he did."

Word of Wilson's courageous act quickly spread through this community of 86,000 about 125 miles east of Fort Worth, and no one seemed surprised that Wilson jumped into the middle of the shootout.

But that's an op-ed, not a "story". It would be nice if someone in the MSM (Main Stream Media) had spent more time on Wilson.

Meanwhile, from the Dept. of Feet of Clay comes news that the president of the Springfield chapter of the Million Moms March was arrested for illegal gun possession. From the State Journal-Register (IL):

A Springfield woman who began lobbying against gun violence after her son was shot to death in 2002 was arrested last week when police allegedly found an illegal gun and drugs in her home.

Annette "Flirty" Stevens, however, said Monday she's innocent, and the arrest is an attempt by police to get her to give up information about unsolved crime in the city.

The handgun, which had a scratched-off serial number, and drugs allegedly were discovered Friday morning inside Stevens' home in the 2500 block of South 15th Street. Authorities said they obtained a search warrant for the residence as part of an ongoing investigation of a recent series of drive-by shootings. No one has been hurt in the gunplay.

Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives assisted in the search.

Although police declined to get into specifics, Stevens has a "close connection" with one of two feuding groups involved in the shootings, Lt. Rickey Davis said Monday.

This is a curious story because if you read the whole thing, it almost sounds (in my opinion) as if she knows who is doing the random drive-by shootings and is refusing to turn them in because she wants to bolster the case for more gun control! If true, that could turn into a major scandle for the MMM. Hmmm... Anyway, she claims the gun belonged to her late son and she "didn't know what to do with it". Gosh, Flirty, you could have just turned it in to the police!

Here's a story of a target shooter who takes a Barrett M82AI .50-caliber rifle for a spin, from the Stamford Advocate (CT):

She soon wanted a greater challenge -- Martha Rendeiro began her career in target shooting six years ago with a Walther .22-caliber pistol, a lightweight beginner gun, and worked her way up to the .32-caliber handgun.

a semi-automatic .50-caliber rifle. Used mostly by the military, it is almost 5 feet long and weighs nearly 30 pounds -- so powerful that it is allowed only at certain shooting ranges, most of them upstate.

"This is the Harley-Davidson of rifles," said Rendeiro, 50, a mother of three from Wilton who has shot the rifle several times at ranges in Connecticut, Vermont and Kentucky. "This is a semi-automatic and it is exotic, just the same way for people who have private planes."

The story does point out that there is a proposed bill in Connecticut to ban .50 rifles (by State Rep. Looney -- talk about an apt name) but his quotes are just the usual blather from anti-gun folks. I found THIS much more interesting:

The rifle is valued by gun enthusiasts, including Carl Guffree, a police officer in Hartford who owns a Barrett M82AI .50-caliber rifle.

"People get involved with shooting and they want bigger, faster and better," Guffree said. "This is the culmination of that."

Guffree lent his Barrett to Rendeiro for a few hours Wednesday, meeting her at a gun club in Simsbury. Guffree propped the gun on a wooden table and loaded the chamber with the lipstick-size cartridges.

Not all police want to ban guns from civilians. All in all, a good (and interesting) story. My kudos to the Stamford Advocate for balance and for high-lighting the fact that target shooters DO use these guns and further, that these are the least likely rifles to be desired by terrorists because of their size, weight, and cost.

Maybe terrorists would prefer to use crossbows? One was used criminally, so we better ban all of them. From KATU 2 TV (OR):

Salem, Ore. - A man accused of using a crossbow to hold three people hostage pleaded not guilty Monday morning.

Joaquin Sierra is charged with assault, kidnapping and using a dangerous weapon.

The charges surround an incident last month at the Pilot Travel Center off Interstate-5 in Brooks.

Deputies say they found Sierra holding two employees and a customer hostage with a loaded crossbow.

Sierra refused to drop the crossbow and was shot by police.

Or should we ban cars? From KFOX TV (TX):

An El Paso man faces aggravated assault charges, his alleged weapon is a car.

26 Year Old Andres Arellano allegedly struck another vehicle with his car in the Lower Valley Thursday afternoon.

He's also accused of using his vehicle to try and strike the two men in the other car, when they got out.

Well, you get the idea...

I'd better get this posted. Thanks for stopping by!