Saturday, July 14, 2007

Update on Haditha

Or, as I should say, the Haditha railroad some troops for fun and profit travesty of justice. I wrote about this a couple of times, the last here. The other day I found something which led to Blackfive(here and here), to Pundit Review(here), to Let Freedom Ring(here) and to Michelle Malkin(here).

Short version, as PR put it, "Murtha’s guilty verdict in Haditha case overturned by actual evidence". The case(such as it was) seems to have pretty much fallen apart, leaving a lot of people with questions for that slimy little politician Murtha(Pond Scum/PA). And the little bastard ducking and hiding.

I don't know if it's possible for the Marines he called murderers to take him to court for it; I hope they can. Because with Pelosi in charge of the house, the chances of the censure he deserves(at a minimum) are just about zero.

As to that personal business,

my son was home on leave, and took care of some business while here. Meet the daughter-in-law

and son in his dress uniform.

Nice ceremony, family & friends from around the state and a sister(she has several) from out of state.

I've got one more thing to post tonight, then I'm done. It's been a busy day.

Been a bit busy

with a personal matter, so not much to write the past while. Should have something to put up either later today or tomorrow, but for now:
Dumbass union people, sucking up to Hillary Clinton.

Traitor convicted for trying to get al Qaeda help to attack this country. Wasn't convicted of treason, unfortunately, though what he was doing damn well qualifies as such.

It's discovered that if you look around you can find all kinds of useful things right on the shelf. And if you tell people "We need this", they can build it. Without spending a few billion on committees and so forth.

Kucinich proves he's a friggin' idiot(as if further proof was needed) by trusting Edwards.

Drug gangs threaten journalists. But of COURSE these people will be stopped by a 'virtual' fence.

The Brits just can't seem to help themselves about flushing their country down the toilet.

Speaking of flushing, demonstration of why Kim calls Republicans the 'Stupid Party'.

Tim Blair notes some things about Globular Warmering:
But climate change is like Michael Moore's tracksuit - it can fit anyone. In 2005, Greenpeace rep Steven Guilbeault helpfully explained: "Global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter, that's what we're dealing with."

What we're dealing with, apparently, is weather.

Ah, but what weather it is!

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

If you remember the Los Angeles riot in 1992,

you'll be familiar with a lot of the crap that happened. If you're not, you especially need to read these three posts about My Hollywood Gun:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

And to those who say 'the police can/will protect you', I suggest you point them to this line in Part 3:
We have learned that the Los Angeles Police Department has been "pulled back for their own safety."

It notes the point made time after time: it doesn't matter how good your local LE agency is, or how hard they work, it's just not possible for them to be there all the time to protect you. Which means, especially when things go completely to hell like in LA, you're on your own.

It's not a fun thing, but it's fact.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Canada's gun registry is both expensive

and a flop.
Canada's homicide rate and number of
gang-related murders has increased since the federal government's firearms
registry and licensing program was implemented, an indication that the program has failed to improve public safety, according to Hubris in the North, The Canadian Firearms Registry, a new report from independent research organization The Fraser Institute.

Gee, ya think?

"In 1995, the government promised Canadians that the gun registry would reduce total criminal violence, suicide and domestic abuse, not just gun violence," said Gary Mauser, author of the report, senior fellow with The Fraser Institute, and a professor at Simon Fraser University. "But the legislation has failed to do that, primarily because it relies upon public-health research to justify a moralistic approach to firearms that exaggerates the danger of citizens owning firearms through pseudoscientific research methods."

Tell me more!

The gun registry and its supporting legislation were introduced in 1995 by the Liberal government. Justice Minister Allan Rock said at the time that registering guns and licensing their owners would save lives by reducing criminal violence, domestic violence, suicide, and firearm accidents.

But Mauser's analysis shows that public safety has not improved. He finds that overall criminal violence and suicide rates have continued their long-term decline with the violent crime rate falling by about four per cent. Yet the homicide rate has actually increased by nine per cent since the registry was implemented. No persuasive link could be found between the firearm registry and these changes.(bold mine)

Doesn't look good for the program.

"I don't think you can credit the gun registry for the decline in criminal violence because the data indicate the drop began well before firearms registration was introduced," Mauser said. "Moreover, homicide and criminal violence in general have fallen more in the United States during the same time period than in Canada, so it's hard to imagine the gun registry having a measurable impact in this environment."(bold mine)

No! Do tell!

One of the most striking findings is that gang-related homicides and homicides involving handguns have increased substantially.

"Gang violence typically involves handguns and although handguns have been registered since the 1930s, this has not reduced the level of their criminal misuse," Mauser said. "The gun registry had no effect on homicide rates and was particularly ineffective against gang activity."

Hmmm, gangs don't obey the law... Whoda thunk it? Which brings up, just how did this piece of expensive crap get passed? Pay attention now:
The report suggests that the rational for the registry program is based on faulty research.

"The government's approach to public safety relied on an analysis of firearms and violence that greatly exaggerated the dangers of firearm ownership," Mauser said.

"This misrepresentation stemmed from public-health researchers who ignored basic scientific principles in favour of advocacy. These activists drew conclusions that were not supported by their research studies and they compounded their errors by recommending legislative solutions that fell outside the boundaries of their research. Such studies are not properly
scientific but use the scientific trappings of research to prove claims rather than testing hypotheses."

Invalid conclusions, junk science, done by advocates instead of researchers. As Jamie says on Mythbusters, "Well, THERE'S your problem!"

And a key bit that relates to firearms and a whole lot of other things:
"We lose much of our inherited democratic freedoms if we treat mature citizens as if they were helpless patients rather than responsible adults," Mauser said.
And that's a key to the problem with a lot of the nanny-state crap we're putting up with.

Their final conclusion:
Despite its estimated $2 billion cost to date, the firearms registry remains notably incomplete and has an error rate that remains embarrassingly high. As a result of its many failures, particularly its failure to reduce gang violence or stop senseless killings such as the recent occurrences at Dawson College and Mayerthorpe, Alberta, the firearms registry has not been
able to win the trust of either the public or the police.

Mauser pointed out that Auditor General Sheila Fraser complained that she could not get all of the necessary financial information during an audit of the registry and summarized her review of the books by saying the registry had one of the largest cost overruns her office had ever seen.

"Clearly, the evidence shows that the registry has failed Canadians. It has failed to reduce gang violence or stop senseless killings. So why then, should we trust it, and why should we continue to fund it?" Mauser said.

Why indeed? Directly relating to the efforts by the GFW gun banners here("This database will be complete, accurate and secure", etc.) are the bits about being 'notably incomplete' and 'an error rate that remains embarrassingly high. Also note that the freakin' Auditor General was not able to get all the costs information from the people running this mess(can you say 'bureaucrats hiding their mess/incompetence/corruption?') Which would be exactly what would happen here. Uncle has noted in the past that the NFA database is horribly incomplete and inaccurate, and that's on guns and other pieces that you have to go through a background check and pay transfer tax, etc., before you can take possession, run by a federal agency that's not exactly been shy of support and money. The only way these people can actually believe that any system in the future would be wonderful would be the 'magical thinking' Kevin writes of. Which is not exactly something you should base a government on.

Article found at RNS

Monday, July 09, 2007

It's hard to believe we actually have these clowns in our government

People like Sen. Reid(SurrenderMonkey/NV) who say things like

Problem being, the 'intended result' for him and his buttmonkeys is us losing. Whereas the surge appears to be having real effect.

I guess I'm still a bit naive about this crap, because it's really hard to understand why someone in our own government would want us to LOSE a war. Pretty damned disgusting, it is.

Picture stolenborrowed from Hugh Hewitt