A government is a body of people -- usually notably ungoverned. -- Shepherd Book, Firefly
This seems highly applicable in a week when the U.S. Attorney General who, in all likelihood, enabled the running of guns to Mexican drug cartels, stated that using drone strikes against U.S. citizens on American soil was acceptable. He only "clarified" and corrected his remarks in the aftermath of a Senate filibuster that drew unwanted attention to the administration's low view of the Bill of Rights.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
The Propaganda Continues: Gun Laws Equal Fewer Gun Deaths
Link to Yahoo -- I know there's another better report on this out there that goes into more detail. I'll add that if and when I have time to look for it.
The bottom line on this is that the study includes suicides. People who want to commit suicide and have firearms tend to use firearms for the attempt, especially males. People who don't have easy access to firearms and want to commit suicide use carbon monoxide, hemp, gravity, etc.
Also, the whole concept of a "gun death rate" can be extremely misleading. How many of those deaths are the result of self-defense shooting? How many are accidental? We would certainly expect a higher rate of accidents where there is a higher rate of access and ownership.
Compare the murder rate in New Jersey to the murder rate in Oklahoma. That's really the issue.
The bottom line on this is that the study includes suicides. People who want to commit suicide and have firearms tend to use firearms for the attempt, especially males. People who don't have easy access to firearms and want to commit suicide use carbon monoxide, hemp, gravity, etc.
Also, the whole concept of a "gun death rate" can be extremely misleading. How many of those deaths are the result of self-defense shooting? How many are accidental? We would certainly expect a higher rate of accidents where there is a higher rate of access and ownership.
Compare the murder rate in New Jersey to the murder rate in Oklahoma. That's really the issue.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Another Sign of the End: Common Sense at the TSA
A little good news we can use. Via Fox News, the TSA will allow small knives in passenger carry-on bags. The Stew Union is not happy, but I think passengers know how to deal with someone who threatens an attendant or another passenger with a Swiss Army Knife these days. They should require duct tape in carry-ons.
This is for "Swiss Army-type knives -- specifically, ones with blades no longer than 2.36 inches". If you are wondering where they came up with that number, I think it would translate to 6 centimeters. The bigger blade on my favorite Victorinox is exactly 6 cm, while the one on my favorite Wenger is 5.3 cm. I think I'd take the Wenger, because the blade is going to be well under the limit. And I wouldn't feel as bad if they confiscated it -- not that I wouldn't be mad, I just probably wouldn't start a fight and need to be duct-taped.
But don't try to take your favorite box-cutter:
Also newly non-prohibited are "... lacrosse sticks, ski poles and small, souvenir baseball bats." Personally I think the lacrosse-stick exemption is very close to profiling -- which is a good thing.
This is for "Swiss Army-type knives -- specifically, ones with blades no longer than 2.36 inches". If you are wondering where they came up with that number, I think it would translate to 6 centimeters. The bigger blade on my favorite Victorinox is exactly 6 cm, while the one on my favorite Wenger is 5.3 cm. I think I'd take the Wenger, because the blade is going to be well under the limit. And I wouldn't feel as bad if they confiscated it -- not that I wouldn't be mad, I just probably wouldn't start a fight and need to be duct-taped.
But don't try to take your favorite box-cutter:
Under the TSA decision, however, box-cutter type knives used by the 9/11 hijackers are still prohibited. Razors as well as knives with molded grips also are still banned.I guess those are assault-type box-cutters, and "molded grips" are practically pistol-grips which are only used on weapons of mass retention. At least it is a step away from total insanity.
Also newly non-prohibited are "... lacrosse sticks, ski poles and small, souvenir baseball bats." Personally I think the lacrosse-stick exemption is very close to profiling -- which is a good thing.
Just a Quick Follow-Up on the LaserLyte
My initial review is here.
This is still working well. I'm very happy with it. What I would add is that I have found the cartridge alone, apart from the target to be a very beneficial dry-fire tool. During the day, I keep my XDM on my desk with the LaserLyte cartridge in the chamber and practice firing at various objects around the room when I'm not busy.
I will warn of one bad habit I have picked up because of practicing with this device. Last night I was down in the holler shooting live ammo from 25 yards. I holstered my handgun to go over and check my target. When I returned to the firing line and drew the XDM, I automatically racked the slide and ejected a live round into my hand. It has just become second nature to cycle the action manually when dry-firing, but I have been cooped up saving ammunition the last few weeks. Once the weather warms up and Bass Pro or Academy or Midway gets in some more cheap FMJs, I'll get my context cues reset and be all right.
The only difference in POI accuracy that I notice is that live ammunition prints higher. The Springfield is not comped so I get a little muzzle flip. But I can still plug the center a lot more regularly than I could a month or two ago.
This is still working well. I'm very happy with it. What I would add is that I have found the cartridge alone, apart from the target to be a very beneficial dry-fire tool. During the day, I keep my XDM on my desk with the LaserLyte cartridge in the chamber and practice firing at various objects around the room when I'm not busy.
I will warn of one bad habit I have picked up because of practicing with this device. Last night I was down in the holler shooting live ammo from 25 yards. I holstered my handgun to go over and check my target. When I returned to the firing line and drew the XDM, I automatically racked the slide and ejected a live round into my hand. It has just become second nature to cycle the action manually when dry-firing, but I have been cooped up saving ammunition the last few weeks. Once the weather warms up and Bass Pro or Academy or Midway gets in some more cheap FMJs, I'll get my context cues reset and be all right.
The only difference in POI accuracy that I notice is that live ammunition prints higher. The Springfield is not comped so I get a little muzzle flip. But I can still plug the center a lot more regularly than I could a month or two ago.
Bad Laws
Something to ponder: one of the ways the federal government has accrued such extensive, far-reaching, intrusive power -- in fact, maybe the primary way, has been intervening in state and local situations where it was perceived that "bad" laws prevailed. The old Jim Crow laws of the South that made segregation not just acceptable but legally required were bad. The federal government stepped in with the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.
Bad laws forced black children to be schooled separately from white children. Then, even in the north, where there were no such laws, the federal courts ordered "forced busing to achieve racial integration" -- overriding, not legal discrimination but geographical and community preferences.
I think there was some legitimacy to the federal government acting as an umpire to make the states play by the rules -- the Constitution -- with regard to freedom and equal treatment. But this has led to the federal government piling bad law on top of bad law, shredding the spirit of the Constitution, often even trampling on the letter. When the state and local governments legislated against "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness", the aggrieved could appeal to the federal courts and the federal system. Now that it is the federal government acting as the oppressor and tyrant, where do we go to get rid of our bad laws?
The bad law issue is a double-edged sword. Certainly it has played into the hands of those who desire to centralize power and control. However, it has also established a precedent if we can communicate it. There is such a thing as bad law. The oppressed were correct in acting contrary to the laws of states. It is no different if we need to act contrary to the laws today. If it was acceptable for minorities to resist the immoral and unfair, though legal restrictions they faced in the past, it is acceptable for us today.
The Constitution does not allow for the suppression of offensive speech or for suppression of religious expression in any context. I am allowed to express my understanding of the truth even if -- especially if it offends or hurts the feelings of others. Inoffensive speech needs no Constitutional protection.
So, too, with the other natural human rights enumerated by the founding documents. These are our rights. Yes, we accept some limitations, some balancing of my rights against my neighbors in order for us to live in peace and harmony and not damage one another unnecessarily. But these limitations should apply only with regard to those things that cross the boundary and physically or materially impact our neighbors in a negative way. We can't dump our raw sewage on the ground or run it onto our neighbor's property, for example, so we all work cooperatively to build sewage systems -- or we agree to comply with the necessary and reasonable requirements of disposal. In any case, the adverse effects must be material and the restrictions minimal.
Bad laws forced black children to be schooled separately from white children. Then, even in the north, where there were no such laws, the federal courts ordered "forced busing to achieve racial integration" -- overriding, not legal discrimination but geographical and community preferences.
I think there was some legitimacy to the federal government acting as an umpire to make the states play by the rules -- the Constitution -- with regard to freedom and equal treatment. But this has led to the federal government piling bad law on top of bad law, shredding the spirit of the Constitution, often even trampling on the letter. When the state and local governments legislated against "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness", the aggrieved could appeal to the federal courts and the federal system. Now that it is the federal government acting as the oppressor and tyrant, where do we go to get rid of our bad laws?
The bad law issue is a double-edged sword. Certainly it has played into the hands of those who desire to centralize power and control. However, it has also established a precedent if we can communicate it. There is such a thing as bad law. The oppressed were correct in acting contrary to the laws of states. It is no different if we need to act contrary to the laws today. If it was acceptable for minorities to resist the immoral and unfair, though legal restrictions they faced in the past, it is acceptable for us today.
The Constitution does not allow for the suppression of offensive speech or for suppression of religious expression in any context. I am allowed to express my understanding of the truth even if -- especially if it offends or hurts the feelings of others. Inoffensive speech needs no Constitutional protection.
So, too, with the other natural human rights enumerated by the founding documents. These are our rights. Yes, we accept some limitations, some balancing of my rights against my neighbors in order for us to live in peace and harmony and not damage one another unnecessarily. But these limitations should apply only with regard to those things that cross the boundary and physically or materially impact our neighbors in a negative way. We can't dump our raw sewage on the ground or run it onto our neighbor's property, for example, so we all work cooperatively to build sewage systems -- or we agree to comply with the necessary and reasonable requirements of disposal. In any case, the adverse effects must be material and the restrictions minimal.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Bull Run or just Bull
Stock market could be starting a big three year run.
The analysis is based on P/E ratios versus interest rates, and it makes sense in a way. If the Fed continues money-printing and ZIRP, it's quite possible that the Dow and the S&P could continue to climb -- not unlike the way the price of a donkey's head and doves' dung escalated during the siege of Samaria. When every other investment is losing principal to inflation, even a bogus, inflated market starts to look good.
My guess it that this is more happy talk trying to get individual investors sucked back in. The fundamentals do not support the current level, let alone a massive run upward. All it takes is one pinprick of an external event to turn exuberance to panic, and the crash hits big-time.
I don't give investment advice.
The analysis is based on P/E ratios versus interest rates, and it makes sense in a way. If the Fed continues money-printing and ZIRP, it's quite possible that the Dow and the S&P could continue to climb -- not unlike the way the price of a donkey's head and doves' dung escalated during the siege of Samaria. When every other investment is losing principal to inflation, even a bogus, inflated market starts to look good.
My guess it that this is more happy talk trying to get individual investors sucked back in. The fundamentals do not support the current level, let alone a massive run upward. All it takes is one pinprick of an external event to turn exuberance to panic, and the crash hits big-time.
I don't give investment advice.
Homeland Security is Making Me Feel Insecure
This is reported on Gateway Pundit: DHS is purchasing 2700 Light-Armored Vehicles.
I am going to be perfectly honest. I doubt the veracity of this story. DHS is a the freaking Gestapo, but I cannot imagine the department justifying the purchase of mine-resistant vehicles. So until I see something not from a blog and not based on something from a blog, I'm going to assume someone got their wires crossed.
I would be less skeptical if the number were 27 or even 270, not 2700. That's just too much. That's warfare.
Maybe I am too optimistic. Maybe I doubt that they can afford to buy and outfit 2700 street sweepers. If they can and have, we can easily cut billions from the DHS budget and reduce the deficit.
But check the wheelbase length and weight on those babies and dig your trenches accordingly. It doesn't hurt to be a little ahead of the curve.
I am going to be perfectly honest. I doubt the veracity of this story. DHS is a the freaking Gestapo, but I cannot imagine the department justifying the purchase of mine-resistant vehicles. So until I see something not from a blog and not based on something from a blog, I'm going to assume someone got their wires crossed.
I would be less skeptical if the number were 27 or even 270, not 2700. That's just too much. That's warfare.
Maybe I am too optimistic. Maybe I doubt that they can afford to buy and outfit 2700 street sweepers. If they can and have, we can easily cut billions from the DHS budget and reduce the deficit.
But check the wheelbase length and weight on those babies and dig your trenches accordingly. It doesn't hurt to be a little ahead of the curve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)