Saturday, April 20, 2013

Some thoughts on the current mess

And for me this is a long one.

I was thinking about what was done to Luty in what used to be Great Britain, and I realized that it being a select-fire/auto firearm really only added to the “How dare you!” from officialdom; had it been a single-shot they’d still have thrown him in prison for it; can’t have the subjects getting above themselves, y’know.  Arms are for the GOVERNMENT, not commoners.

It speaks of- well, I’m not sure what all, this fear of people making things.  We’ve got control freaks wanting to license/restrict/whatever not just the printers for making your own magazine or receiver, but- ESPECIALLY- the information itself, the program.  Read that clown Israel’s words:
`(C) any ammunition magazine, manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer--
As noted, if he were actually worried about ‘plastic magazines’ he’d be going after companies that make them, but- for now- he’s not; it’s the idea of some commoner making them himself that troubles him.

And did he really think there had to be a license to make a magazine?  Entirely possible; we’re talking about people generally very ignorant of the subject of firearms yet wanting to make laws on the subject, without even bothering to find out what laws are ALREADY in effect.  Or bothering to learn what the hell they’re talking about before they head out with a head of steam and a handful of bill.

Connected: a while back, in the comments of some news article on the idiot laws Howler & Co. shoved through in New York, when someone wrote a fairly detailed comment on the problems with the magazine restrictions and just what calling them the wrong thing can mean, one hoplophobe sneeringly wrote “Just because ‘X’ isn’t as familiar with the inconsequential details as you gun nuts doesn’t mean he didn’t write a good bill”.  My first thought was ‘Getting those details wrong can put people in PRISON, you fucking idiot!  Don’t you think that makes them ‘consequential’?”

It doesn’t; not to them.  They don’t care if someone goes to prison because a bill was written in haste and ignorance, as long as they feel like it’s doing something they consider good.  Call honest citizens behind bars for such bullshit their version of collateral damage; and since they seem to consider anyone who doesn’t share their bigotry either deserving of prison(for something, details don’t really matter) or actually somewhat subhuman…

And make no mistake: some of them DO see us as subhuman.  A lot of the “These people won’t go along with commonsense reforms even to save children” crap is purely trying to shame us into caving.  They know damn well we care about kids, but they’re willing to say anything to push their programs on us.


There is a percentage of them who actually believe it.  You won’t go along with what they’ve decided is ‘common-sense reforms’, it means you don’t care about murdered children,  or whoever/whatever the particular matter in hand is.  And if you’re not really human, your thoughts, your beliefs, you lives, don’t concern them.  Add that to the socialist mindset a lot of them have, and you have a very dangerous mix.

Connected: this over at Volokh from the EUnuchs:
Remind me: How are German citizens to make democratic decisions about immigration policy (either German policy or European Union policy) if people can’t argue that certain immigrant groups are bad for the country? How can they make democratic decisions about whether to support any proposed EU admission of Turkey? After all, admitting Turkey might well substantially increase Turkish immigration into Germany, so citizens who want to think about the admission question might reasonably want to consider the consequences of such increased immigration.

Indeed, how can German and European citizens even criticize restrictions on these arguments — such as the restriction that the U.N. Committee says the law must impose — if they can’t explain why they think that the arguments being restricted are correct? Or is the point that these decisions are forever supposed to be out of the hands of the citizens, with political debate left to the supervision of U.N. Committees?
Three guesses; if you need more than one you're not paying attention.

They want people tried and jailed because someone is offended/might-be-offended by those words.  Which, as noted, is not simply standard PC idiocy; it would make it impossible to even discuss the matter.  Which is exactly what the control freaks want: not the caring-face “Why do you want to hurt the feelings of others?” they pretend(being honest, some of the idiots actually feel that way), but Goldberg’s smiley-face fascism.  Control of speech, of words, of anything the authorities deem hurtful, harmful.  And they’re the only ones who get to decide what fits.  Which leads to some really nasty stuff.  “How can we make sure children learn the right things if they hear unapproved words/see unapproved thoughts/read unapproved books?  There must be proper control of education so they think the right things.”  Because serfs who don’t think the right things are harder to control.

Especially in a place where arms are legal.

And if you don’t think this is all connected, well, I do think you’re wrong.

Look at the upset- sometimes nearly hysterical- from both the socialists here and the UN and Eunuchs at our refusal to go along with the Small Arms Treaty.  That is intended to give more government- in particular UN- control over what we own, how much we own.  And that requires lists.  Those tyrants want registration here just as bad as Obama and Schumer, they want anything they can label a ‘assault weapon’ banned just as badly as Feinstein and Obama.  And for the same reasons.

Ever read any of the Man-Kzin War books?  Very short version: sci-fi, there’s one world government controlled by the UN.  And, in order to keep people all peaceful, not only are arms banned but education has been twisted, history rewritten.  Being found in possession of an old history book can put you in a camp; being seen in any way a problem to the proper way you should think, will put you in a camp.  People have been trained to think of any kind of violence, even in self-defense, as disgusting and criminal.    In the first book there are some chapter headings noting some then-current news stories that make this shit seem scarily possible.  I can't find my copy right now, when I can I'll add in full wording.  Teenagers and 20-somethings with no knowledge of fairly important chunks of history, from not that long ago; the only way to explain it is that they were never taught about it.  I wonder why...

Don’t doubt that the UN drools at the thought of carrying out this kind of control, having the power to rewrite history to reinforce that control.  And having a US that has lots of  people not only objecting to it but who still own arms and have demonstrated a to-them-horrible attitude toward the idea of UN dominance(posters of blue helmets with small round holes in them get the idea across) is both horrifying to them and seen as a problem  to be dealt with; the US has too much reach, too much ability to make noise, still too much freedom for them to ignore us.  Plus the simple fact that they cannot stand the idea of a nation not being part of their program.  And one of the things that they see as essential- they and the willing idiots here- is disarming the US citizen.  Not only because of the arms themselves, but because of the attitudes connected with them.  You know, the ones that have Biden making snide comments about the ‘black-helicopter crowd’?  That has Holder saying snotty things about ‘people actually believing there might be reason to resist the government’.  The attitude that the right of self-defense is about the most basic human right; that a government that tries to take that away is worthy only of contempt and resistance.  That the right to arms, whether for self-defense*, sport, collecting or to warn the government that there are lines best not approached, let alone crossed, is a basic right of a free people.  Those attitudes.  The statists denounce them, laugh at them, and I think are scared to death of them.

I’ve been thinking this last few days about the attitudes I’ve run into in a couple of threads:
“You people are being fooled by the NRA and their bosses in the gun industry, nobody wants to take your guns!”
“You’re being manipulated, why else would you be against simple common-sense reforms?”
And the real killer: “If we pass THIS law, then it will take some time but it will improve things greatly; reduce gun crime, reduce accidents; THIS one will do it!”

The first two… point out that the NRA(they NEVER want to talk about other groups, or about people who don’t belong to a group, just pay attention and yell at politicians when needed) gets most of its funding from members, doesn’t matter.  They point to Busch whining about ‘what’s wrong with background checks’ to ‘prove’ we’re being unreasonable; when the attitude toward Busch is “Don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out”, that does not go over well.  Point out all the holes and traps in Toomey-Manchin, and the crap Schumer wanted to shove in, doesn’t matter.

Point out the words of Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, Biden and a host of others; doesn’t matter, they’ll still parrot “Nobody is actually wanting to take your guns!”  Point out what’s happened in Californicated, and New York, Maryland, on and on, they either dismiss it, ignore it or- the more  honest ones- “They’re only banning assault weapons, and nobody should have those anyway.”

No, I haven’t figured out how they combine, ‘nobody is after your guns’ with ‘except those’, either.

Magazine bans?  “Nobody needs more than 7-8-10(whatever the current decision from their lords is) bullets anyway.”  Listing something as a assault weapon because of a cosmetic feature?  “Why does anyone need that on a gun?”  “It makes it more deadly.”  Etc.  Both ignorance and evasion dance around in herds because they either cannot or will not deal with the basic fact that none of those things make a gun ‘more lethal’.

Few days ago I wrote a bit about an argument in which I was informed that ‘by the 2nd Amendment you’re granted the right to a musket or blunderbuss, nothing more.’
Ah, you could walk into the store and buy a rifle that in range and accuracy was superior to anything issued to any army in the world.  That was ignored.
‘You should have to get X level of training to own a rifle, X level for a shotgun, X level for a handgun; no training?  You get a musket.’
Who sets the standards?  Who carries the testing out?  I’m expected to pay for this to be allowed to exercise a basic enumerated right?  ‘Yes!’ on the last, not a word on the former two.
‘Why should people harmed by gun violence have to pay?  There must be insurance on all guns!”
How’re you going to make the bad guys buy insurance?
‘Every uninsured gun goes into the grinder; after a while uninsured guns will be too rare and valuable for them to be used by criminals.’
I should be forced to buy insurance for a basic right?  ‘YES!’
Assuming you could actually start destroying private property for not paying this danegeld, what makes you think the bad guys won’t smuggle in guns?  Like Britain, it’s a bloody ISLAND and they can’t keep the bad guys from getting everything from pistols to hand grenades!
She went back to the ‘any uninsured gun goes in the grinder, and they’ll become too rare to use’.  NO response to the smuggling question, just that blind worship at the altar of “Just ONE MORE LAW and there will be peace and happiness.”

No, I did not point out homemade firearms, what can be made in a garage with basic tools.  Let alone point out the black market she’s talking about creating for anyone with machining skills and some tooling.  Some people… YOU JUST CANNOT TALK TO.

Right now the forces of evil are arguing about their next step.  Obama has been demonizing and insulting anyone who disagrees with him since Sandy Hook; that he didn’t get what he wanted, oh boy did that piss him off.  Thus causing more insults and belittling and lies, which didn’t exactly help convince anyone on the other side to change their minds(don’t know about you, but when someone calls me evil and/or stupid and uncaring, it doesn’t incline me to charitable thoughts toward them).  Biden practically broke into tears and then went into threatening.  Feinstein just about crapped her panties on the Senate floor even BEFORE the vote at the very idea she might not get what she wanted.
About that: I realize that they’ve gotten into the bad habit of voting on bills when they don’t have any idea what’s in them(which ought to be cause for firing), but to whine for a vote on a PROSPECTIVE ban?  Really?  That’s so effing stupid its….

And that's ignoring something else: the reason they needed 60 votes on Toomey-Manchin was to try to hide what was in it until after the vote:
But under Senate rules, a simple majority vote would have opened the measure to up to 30 hours of debate, which would have meant inspecting the details. The White House demanded, and Mr. Reid agreed, that Congress should try to pass the amendment without such a debate.
There is something truly disgusting about a President and President of the Senate wanting so badly to hide what's in a bill before a vote; the dishonesty is... 'disturbing' isn't the right word, but it'll do for now. 

Back to the forces of evil in general.  The major media had aneurisms all over their newsrooms over the loss.  If anyone still them honest reporters of information, that should have disabused them of the notion; it was just amazing

By the way, has that asshat Morgan bought his ticket back to Britain yet?

A lot of politicians are seriously nervous right now.  Obama was threatening, but it’s the people back home who cast the votes, and(to the eternal fury of  the Obamites) they made it quite clear that if Sen. Foghorn voted for that, his ass would be out of that taxpayer-supplied office as soon as conditions allowed, and enough listened to them to kill the amendment.

Notice how many people passed bricks because elected representatives actually listened to the voters?  That’s called ‘cowardice’ by the hoplophobes when it prevents their getting what they want.

Bloomberg is a dangerous bastard: a control freak with lots of money to spend.
(ever notice how people who howl about the Koch brothers don’t want to talk about him?)  He blew a gasket; my personal translation was “Don’t you know how much money I spent to buy this?  Why didn’t I get what I demanded?”

I'll throw in something from Ace that rings true:
Go watch Obama's statement again - the utter contempt he displayed for those who have the audacity to claim a right protected by the constitution is breathtaking in its nakedness. It's tempting to believe liberal lawmakers don't like us having the ability to own guns because they don't think we can be trusted with them. That is part of it, but based on what we saw yesterday, that might be giving them too much credit.

When the left talks about gun owners, one of their favorite tactics is to make them seem like a strange species - an 'other.' Well, Obama 'otherized' the hell out of gun owners and second amendment advocates yesterday, refusing to even acknowledge their ability to make an argument in good faith and sneering at members of Congress for the earnest belief in the second amendment that influenced their votes against the gun control amendments.

Still, the president wasn't just angry because he lost. He was angry because he lost to people who hold an opinion he's unable and unwilling to understand and who he seems to regard as beneath him. Last night, Obama showed us the anger that lurks under the no-drama exterior and revealed what we on the right have known for years - he's thoroughly a man of the left, and shares the left's contempt for those who believe that the second amendment is not a collective right, but an individual right for a collective purpose - ultimately, the preservation of a "free state."
Sounds about right.

So we’re still in a fight, will be for some time to come.  That miserable little bastard Lautenberg now wants background checks/lists/ whatever all he can stuff into the bill for anyone buying black powder or smokeless propellant, for one(great, reloading stuff gets even harder to find).  Plus Obama’s undoubtedly trying to get someone to tell him he can use a executive order to cancel part of the Constitution.  Feinstein and Schumer and McCarthy are standing around their cauldron chanting curses, and Clinton is trying to figure how to make her flying monkeys throw flaming crap at us.

Toomey and Manchin had their ass handed to them, and I think they’re worried about their future; along with the background-check morass they tried to push through, I doubt the information about the parties on Manchins’ yacht did him much good back home.  A lot of Democrats caught hell from the voters; I think a lot of those who voted for T-M are going to keep catching hell for some time to come.  Especially since a lot of them also voted for Obamacare, and the bite from that is really starting to hit a lot of people, and they are NOT happy about it.

About those two; I don’t know if they were actually shocked they lost the vote and their support from CCRKBA or were just playing the words to back up Obama.  I’m certain losing the support wasn’t surprise, not when Schumer jumped in at the last minute and screwed at least one of the particular points CCRKBA had been trumpeting; I doubt they’re actually stupid enough to think they’d keep the support after that.  Especially with the crapstorm landing on that group for playing ball in the first place.

The Stupid Party leadership… well, we don’t call them that for nothing.  And some of them really are on the other side on this.  But they were caught out in a serious shitstorm, too;  I know of a lot of people telling that party flatly that if they betrayed us on this, ‘You can kiss my ass forevermore.’ Said with great feeling, and every damn word meant.  The RINOs who voted for T-M are catching hell, too, I don’t doubt; we’ll see how much good it does.

Add to that that a bunch of people are apparently forcing Boehner’s hand on Benghazi; he doesn’t really want to investigate, but a bunch of people are NOT backing off on demanding it; how much more does he want to piss people off?

The idiots who actually believe we’re manipulated by the NRA?  They’re hopeless, barring a Road to Damascus moment they’ll never believe we’re standing on principles we truly believe in.  The others?  Some can be reached, reasoned with, others are like the insurance idiot: trying to argue with them is like trying to argue with a fundamentalist muslim about their god, which brings to mind the ‘teaching a pig to whistle’ line(is mentioning a pig in that context offensive?  Good.)

So, for what it's worth, that's some of what's been running in circles through my brain the last few days.

Mr. Correia clubs a couple of baby sealssocialists

with inconvenient facts.  Believe it or not, the Nazis really WERE socialists.

With a capital 'S'.

Unfortunately, this seems to fit things nicely

Bad guy #2 was bleeding for 20 hours outside the perimeter the cops and FBI had set. That was a miscalculation I wouldn’t dream of second guessing, but luckily for all of us, a regular guy noticed the torn and bloody tarp on the boat parked out back and called it in. They answered the 911 call and did what was required–excellent! But if Average Joe hadn’t noticed, how long would the officials have kept the city locked down? But I expect we’ll hear how important it is that they have more domestic P.D. paramilitary, oh yeah, and that CISPA that just passed under the radar was a must.
Major city shut down during all this by the search for one guy; all kinds of things to be said about that.

For now,
David Henneberry, an avid boater and member of the Watertown Yacht Club, walked outside to smoke a cigarette just after Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick lifted the curfew on Boston residents at 6 p.m. Friday.

Puffing away, Henneberry noticed the tarp that covered his rare, 22-foot pleasure cruiser...wasn't on correctly.
Which led to finding the bad guy hiding inside.  AFTER the city had been shut down for a day, etc.

Pass on to people you know who're whining about the vote the other day: they had to have 60 votes because Obama and Reid wanted a vote WITHOUT ANYONE GETTING THE DETAILS ON THE BILL BEFORE VOTING.
But under Senate rules, a simple majority vote would have opened the measure to up to 30 hours of debate, which would have meant inspecting the details. The White House demanded, and Mr. Reid agreed, that Congress should try to pass the amendment without such a debate.

Majority rules would have also opened the bill to pro-gun amendments that were likely to pass. That would have boxed Mr. Reid into the embarrassing spectacle of having to later scotch a final bill because it also contained provisions that the White House loathes. So Mr. Reid moved under “unanimous consent” to allow nine amendments, each with a 60-vote threshold. . . .

Manchin-Toomey was rushed together on a political timetable, and a thorough scrub would have revealed that its finer legal points aren’t as modest as liberals claim. Tellingly, the White House blew up earlier negotiations with Tom Coburn on background checks. The Oklahoma Republican favored more and better checks across secondary firearms markets like gun shows and online, but liberals insisted that federally licensed dealers had to keep records.

In other words, keeping guns away from dangerous or unstable people was less important than defeating the NRA.
There should be a rule: any time a politician wants a vote without all the details being available first, he should receive twenty lashes.  Delivered by a Marine DI.

The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising began yesterday

"I, myself, remained on the balcony and fired at the confused and embarrassed Germans with my Mauser. From my balcony, I could see them in all their helplessness and their loss of control. The air was full of wails and shouts. Many of them tried to run to the walls of the houses for cover but everything was barred and beyond that, death was pursuing them. In the noise, the fluster, and the cries of the wounded, we heard the astonished outcry of one of the Germans: 'Juden haben waffen! Juden haben waffen!' ('The Jews have arms!') . . .

The battle lasted for about a half an hour. The Germans withdrew and there were many corpses and wounded in the street."

Definitely a day to remember, and honor those who rose up.

And, connected with the 'have arms', something on strippers and bandoliers here, as well.

Friday, April 19, 2013

About that idiot wanting to ban print-your-own magazines, Updated

I was reminded in comments of something.  For years this gentleman caused serious heartburn to the Brit authorities.  Not because he actually built anything illegal; because he put plans together and ran this site.

Update: received this:
He did actually build and test fire his first one - to prove it could be done
He'd also written it up, and got a photographer "friend" to take some pictures of it.
According to one of the American guys whom he was in email contact with, it was the photographer who snitched.
For the victimless activity of building, testing and writing up, he got 5 years in a high security prison with a bunch of murderers and other hardened criminals.

After his second period of custody, and at the stage where he was dying from cancer, I gather he was even banned from having access to the internet.

A quick search of his name (use "duck duck go" or "startpage" search engines) will bring up news paper reports which show that those with "authoriteh" certainly applied the principle of sippenhaft (blood guilt) to his family

For which they harassed the hell out of he and his family, including putting him in jail at least once.  Again, not for actually doing anything, except for daring to put this stuff in the public eye.  One of the things the last years that have soured me on that place where Great Britain used to be.

I'm putting the whole comment here(bold mine):
The late Papa. Mike. Lima Uniform Tango Yankee, and his "expedient" and "BSP" (Britrish Standard Pipe fitting) series of designs and the books covering them, made DIY a possibility for everyone.

His intention was to demonstrate the futility of bans, and to demonstrate to those who doubted his claims of just how easy DIY could be.

I've seen comments in several places by people claiming that they were approached by British bureaucrats for their views on how home workshops could be licensed.

very much a case of bolting the stable door after the horse had escaped - the designs required only a few everyday hand tools to make, hand tools which are everywhere

That the bureaucrats even thought of licensing home workshops, in order to ensure the licensing and control of who has guns - shows a degree of fear

fear of ordinary people - what reason do they have to fear ordinary people so much? they clearly have some reason...

Their treatment of the author and of his family friends and e book customers also speaks of fear and vindictiveness.

Those 3d printing guys just stoked that to a new level

even if 3d printers and their consumables were to be registered, the idea and the designs are out there - and the bureaucrats fear and hate that

Was listening to the news as murderer #2 was captured,

and the station being a Fox affiliate, I discovered
O'Reilly really is a pain in the ass, and
Geraldo is even more of a jerk than I'd remembered.  Statist bastard, too: he wants to see cameras on every corner of every street of every 'major' city.  Screw that.

The bastards just cannot STAND the idea of having no control

over something.
Despite Rep. Israel's claim of concern about "undetectable" firearms and magazines, it has become increasingly clear that his real concern is the government's impending loss of control of the people's acquisition of firearms, because 3-D printing and other technologies are quickly putting home manufacture of guns within reach of people with neither gunsmithing skills or the money for major industrial equipment. The "Undetectable Firearms Act" is merely the vehicle for his ban, and has the added advantage of sounding to an ill-informed public as if this law is the only thing standing between them and terrorists sneaking so-called "assault weapons" onto air liners.

Y'know, there's probably a bunch of people in Boston, wondering if a guy with a suicide vest might kick in the door, thinking "I wish I had a gun."

"At the direction of authorities, select Dunkin' Donuts restaurants in the Boston area are open to take care of needs of law enforcement and first responders," Raskopf told The Huffington Post in an emailed statement.
So they tell everyone to stay in and lock the doors, but by DEITY!! there must be someplace for the authorities to get coffee and snacks!

From a much-different April 19: (Brigadier General)Percy wrote of the colonial tactics, "The rebels attacked us in a very scattered, irregular manner, but with perseverance and resolution, nor did they ever dare to form into any regular body. Indeed, they knew too well what was proper, to do so. Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob, will find himself very much mistaken."

The possibilities are almost endless

They gave in; 5.11

is making the Tactical Kilt again.

This guy thinks the gun bigots and hoplophobes are playing chess, of a sort

Insty had a link to a post on how and why many of the gunbigots and hoplophobes think. Couple of excerpts, with my comments thrown in:
...The problem is this view assumes people are foolishly naive. I know some of these people and they are no fools. So we must credit that their calculation is rational and thus a bit more complicated and less transparent. The alternative assessment is that the intelligent and fully rational hopolophobe is deeply disappointed with modern American gun culture and committed to an agenda of profound change.
Whether it's because they simply think that nobody except .gov minions should be allowed access to arms, or believes that firearms are so dangerous that no private citizen should have them doesn't really matter here; the factor we have to worry about is the 'no private citizen should be allowed to own arms'.  
He realizes that nothing currently on the table pushes supply controls far enough to have any measurable impact on mass shooting or ordinary gun crime. He also appreciates that things can change. This must be his hope. So what kind of regulatory agenda would it take to satisfy someone whose private security calculation is to abhor guns and hope that no one else (except government) has them either?

The answer was evident a generation ago when Howard Metzenbaum acknowledged the basic reality about gun bans, unless you ban all of them, you might as well ban none of them. And that simple statement of the basic demands of supply control theory is at the heart of the objections to universal background checks.  This may seem like a big leap, but it is really just a few simple steps.
Which brings us to their basic desire: ban the private ownership of firearms. All of them.  Which we know from their words(some of them found here, more here) and actions.  They- most of them- lie about it to the general public, but in friendly audiences they speak it plainly; happily, thanks to this here interwebs, it's easy to find their words and put them up for everyone to see(another note on this later).
And registration is a required step:
So it turns out that the inventory of unrecorded, “no paper” guns, is a far stronger barrier against sweeping gun bans than any pronouncement of the Supreme Court or other such parchment limits. It is in fact a hard practical block that renders gun confiscation in America a pipe dream.  But this barrier is not insurmountable.
If you actually knew where the guns were, managed to get sweeping bans through congress, and got a slightly differently configured Supreme Court to nod yes, gun confiscation goes from impossible to at least plausible. And while that scenario seems unlikely today, not so long ago, it was the openly articulated agenda of many of the people and organizations in the vanguard of the current battle.  And that helps explain the “bewildering” opposition to universal background checks.
Yeah: we know what they want, and are determined not to let them have it.  So they throw out bogus '90% of the people want this!' polls, and use emotional blackmail. And surround themselves with children

while demanding 'something be done'.  Doesn't matter that even Feinstein admits the universal background check law they want now wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook or other multiple-murders(and how dare you bring that up, don't you care about the VICTIMS?), they want it.  And we know why.

Which is why, when Coburn offered support for UBC if no records were kept, Schumer  turned him down: the ultimate aim of this was to have those records.  Those lists of who owns what. 

Mandatory checks on all secondary sales, supplemented by some type of data recording (either open or surreptitious) means that within the life span of those alive today, the inventory of “no paper guns” (which again forms the hard practical barrier against sweeping gun confiscation in America) would evaporate.  So the objection to universal background checks, which in isolation many find unobjectionable, is really rooted in a fear of gun registration. And the objection to registration is really an objection to the grand ambition of sweeping supply controls.
Short version: The simple fact of not knowing what you own, or who owns what, is a serious impediment to their desires.  And it really pisses them off.  "How dare you own such a thing without being on our list?"  Etc.

Which does bring up an idea: "Owning firearms that are not on any list is helping protect the 2nd Amendment!"  Tempted to throw that out on the book of face and see how many heads explode.

And it's that 'surreptitious' that scares hell out of people.  The rule in Manchin-Toomey saying 'It's illegal to make a registration list' is seen as bullshit because the EffingBI and ATF have already violated law in that regard, and nothing has been done.  Violating international borders and perjury and lying to Congress are illegal, too; how many people in Fast & Furious have been charged with those, let along prosecuted?  So we're supposed to trust them?

And that's what this really boils down to: trust.  We don't trust the clowns demanding these laws NOT to abuse them, not to try to register and later confiscate.  With good reason.  So when they demand we trust them, we say something rude, followed by "Hell NO!"  Sometimes phrased less politely.

According to the news, one bomber is dead

and the other running.  No links, just check Drudge.  Very short version:
Two brothers from Chechnya.
One dead in the pursuit, one being chased.
Possible suicide vests involved.

Two muslim terrorists?  Who could've thought such a thing?  Tingles Matthews and other 'news' weenies hardest hit.

Ace is saying the massive ammo purchase and number of MRAPs for DHS is all crap.  Judge for yourself.
One question: If it is, why didn't the appropriate people just say so when politicians asked, instead of dodging?  Possibly they're just too arrogant or something to answer; or would it serve them some way(in their minds at least) to not answer?

Why a lot of these journalists are considered just Democrat party advocates.
Even by the standards of today’s partisan media environment, the response has been noteworthy. Television hosts, editorial boards, and even some reporters have aggressively criticized and shamed the 46 Senators who opposed the plan, while some have even taken to actively soliciting the public to contact them directly.

Not surprising, the Brit media completely bought the '90% of the people want this law' crap.  Also not surprising, considering how he's pissed them off, Truly, he is a lame-duck President.
They left of 'lying' and 'hoplophobic', but it's a start.

Sen. Tommy Tucker of Waxhaw is exactly the kind of clown who should be removed from office.  Preferably involving tar & feathers.  This clown said a mouthful with just 13 words on Tuesday.
“I am the senator. You are the citizen. You need to be quiet.”
It was no coincidence that Tucker’s silencing of an N.C. newspaper publisher – heard by at least three people who were there – came just after he railroaded a bill through his committee that would let government operate in more secrecy.
A: Any politician who wants to be able to hide more of what he does should be summarily thrown out a window on the general principle.
B: One who says something like that, make sure there's a nice bed of broken glass for them to land on.

Well, Deity knows Schumer really doesn't want questions like his, or from someone like him:
Chris Crane, head of the immigration officers union, was pulled out of a Senate press conference today when he tried to question Sen. Chuck Schumer the during the televised roll-out of the 844-page immigration rewrite.

And in Illinois, something significant:
Democrats enjoy a supermajority in the Illinois House of Representatives, holding 71 seats to the GOP's 47. On Wednesday, the same day the US Senate voted down gun control legislation, powerful Democrat Speaker Michael Madigan tried to push a restrictive gun control measure through his chamber. The result was an open revolt by downstate Democrats, with almost half the Democrat caucus joining the GOP to kill the measure. The bill went down 31-76, a rare defeat for the legendary Madigan.

If correct, then yes, the CIA head and the President left those people in Benghazi to die.  Question is, what did they figure to gain by doing so?

And on the Obamacare front,
Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) was not impressed with Sen. Max Baucus's (D-Mont.) criticism of how the Obama administration has implemented its signature healthcare law.
If it's a train wreck, Pompeo said, Baucus has no one to blame but himself. "No one in the country bears more responsibility for the complexity of this law than you," Pompeo wrote in a letter to Baucus on Thursday.

Now I think I'll go pull the covers off the garden; it was supposed to be right at or just below freezing for the low so all those young plants needed protection. 
This is late for a freeze around here; global warming my ass.

Thursday, April 18, 2013

Have a friend who's a nurse in Waco,

less than ten miles from West; let's say she's had a very busy past day.

Why I said the vote was a victory, not the end:
“We’re just not taking no for an answer,” she vowed.
Think about that: she doesn't care what the people actually think; she only cares what she and her  nasty little statist friends demand.

Ignore anything else, what kind of idiot goes into the wilds of Idaho in March to live off the land?

Ok, this mess with the Saudi national gets even more screwy.  If this thing isn't fully and publicly cleared up, the Obamites are going to screw trust even more.  Which is something they really don't want to do.
Assuming they care, of course.

The squirrel with the insurance fetish?  Is insisting that there is not and never has been any real effort to ban any guns, that's all the NRA lying and screwing with the democratic process.  How the hell do you even attempt to get through to someone like that?

"I'm a feminist, but this crap I helped create

is completely out of hand!"  Well, yeah.

If this stuff is correct, then there's some people playing nasty games in this bombing, and they need to be dealt with:
1. One source at the FBI and another at the Saudi Embassy referred to the student as connected to an important Saudi family.
2. An “event” was created on this guy three days ago. An event is a file. The file contains his deportation record and the reason he is being deported. According to ICE the reason is under section 212 3B — “Security and related grounds” — “Terrorist activities”
3. His visa has been revoked.
4. The FBI said a file was started “just in case he was found to be connected to the crime,” however, the file shows he was scheduled to be deported. This was not a precaution, it was in “orders.”

Roundup of reactions by the hoplophobes and bigots.
And something more on how they think:
“Bribery isn’t what it once was,” said an official with one of the major gun-control groups. “The government has no money. Once upon a time you would throw somebody a post office or a research facility in times like this. Frankly, there’s not a lot of leverage.”

Meanwhile, back in Missouri,
MO Sen. Kurt Schaefer explained on my program today that officials in last week’s public hearings failed to disclose that the ATF was the federal entity who made the request for the CCW list, alongside the Department of Social Security. The ATF has not explained why they wanted this information, which by Missouri law, is illegal to share.
The ATF was never mentioned by the heads of the Department of Revenue (who resigned over this scandal), or the head of the Missouri Highway Patrol, or the DMV. It was only discovered by digging through documents Schaefer subpoenaed. “We were never told that the ATF was part of this request. Why does the ATF need a list of Missouri gun owners except to have a list of Missouri gun owners?” said Schaefer. “This isn’t even a backdoor list, this is a front door list. There is a magical database and the taxpayers paid for it.”
A: the Highway Patrol chief needs to be fired.  No ifs, ands or buts.
B: Whoever at DMV approved/did this, the same. 
Both not only for doing it, but for basically lying to the committee.
And this is one more case of ATF playing games they've got no business playing.  And we're supposed to trust them?

I need a better lamp

Battery-powered, that is.  Storms moved through, and spent about an hour without power.  The little one I have for general 'don't fall over the range bag' use is fine for that, but not good to read by.

Guess I need to check out the ones Carteach0 wrote about a while back.

Awww, the celebritutes are outraged

that some Senators listened to the voters; Jennifer still has the best response:

And now, more stuff coming out about Benghazi; unfortunately, my first thought is "What will the White House try to distract us with now?"

The Temple, TX PD responds to the problems caused by an officer pulling an ordinance out of his ass: "We're not talking."

Apparently Schumer is running around saying 'Buying a gun over the internet bypasses the NICS check.'  He damn well knows better, but it's a lie he really wants to push.

I've got to borrow this from Tam:
Barry's so cute when he's angry. 

I would have given my right arm for press credentials and the first question, just so I could have asked: "Mr. President! Mr. President! Who's the sad clown? Awww, who's the sad clown?" 

Team Gun Control is positively frothing on Facebook. If I had a car that ran on hippie tears, I'd be set for years.

Lots of other noise out there, but I have laundry to do.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Just looked at this Hill article Insty linked to,

and it's a statement of what a disaster for Obama this vote is, followed by
Blame the gun lobby. Blame Republicans. Blame a handful of skittish Democrats who gave the GOP cover. Blame the entire band of demagogues who killed the modest attempt to close loopholes in a law requiring background checks for guns.

Blame them, too, for jeopardizing President Obama’s entire legislative agenda. That was the point, anyhow, right?
From which they proceed to push every 'The NRA lied, Paul lied, most people wanted this' talking point.  And near the end there's this:
What if voters who support the Second Amendment and commonsense gun regulation get angry at Congress for ignoring them?
They really, really push that 'whatever Obama wanted was commonsense, it's just all those rednecks and racists and obstructionists lying about it!' crap.

Like I asked someone the other day, "If 90% of the people WANT this background check/registration system, why would Congress have a problem voting for it?  They're not that scared of the NRA and the other groups."
I think what really pisses them off is the number of Democrats and RINOs who are not scared/respectful/kiss-ass enough of Obama to go against all the voters telling them "I don't care what Obama promised you, we will throw your ass out of that office if you vote for this."


The Senate delivered a devastating blow to President Obama’s agenda to regulate guns Wednesday by defeating a bipartisan proposal to expand background checks.
It failed by a vote of 54 to 46, with 5 Democrats voting against it. Only 4 Republicans supported it.
Who're the RINOs?
GOP Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Susan Collins (Maine), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Mark Kirk (Ill.) voted yes.

And Manchin is all upset:
Manchin also criticized the NRA, who had given him an A rating, for distorting the substance of his amendment.

“I was surprised when the latest alerts from the NRA was filled with so much misinformation about the firearms background check legislation,” he said. 

Manchin said the gun-owners rights’ group told members the bill would criminalize the private transfer of firearms. 

“I don’t know how to put the words any plainer than this: that is a lie,” he said. 

Manchin and Toomey are likely to see their NRA rating downgraded as a result of leading the charge to expand background checks. 
 Translation: "How dare they!  I'm Senator MANCHIN, and they were supposed to do what I wanted!?"

Added: ran across this from Obama throwing his fit:
He looks pissed, and Sheriff Joe looks like Walter after someone put a habanero on the end of the stick up his ass.

From SNBQ earlier:
The Democrats have pulled the amendment that would restore gun rights non-violent felons, so CCRBKA has pulled their support for Toomey-Manchin. They never should have done this in the first place. You don’t give up something concrete for a promise. 
And on the vote itself:
4:12PM: Voting is proceeding. Lautenberg is on the floor and voted. He was not expected to return to the Senate.
4:27PM: Manchin-Toomey goes down 54-46. It failed to achieve cloture.
4:29PM: The Grassley-Cruz-Graham substitute is up for a vote.
4:45PM: The Grassley-Cruz-Graham substitute fails 52-48.
4:46PM: The Leahy-Collins amendment is up for a vote. Cruz asks people to vote against, because it could ensnare honest citizens. This is the trafficking bill.
5:00PM: The Leahy-Collins Amendment fails 58-42.
5:03PM: Here we go with the National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Amendment.
5:04PM: Cornyn’s is speaking on behalf of his amendment, noting that it would be like a drivers’ license.
5:04PM: Schumer notes that every single police officer in America will tell you concealed carry would be a disaster. Really? He notes it’ll be mass chaos. Dogs and cats living together! It’s offensive to the New York way of life. Schumer should realize the Bill of Rights is a “way of life” for all Americans.

The fight ain't over, but this IS a defeat for the gun bigots and hoplophobes.

Added: the section on Drudge:

Bloomberg RAGES...

Feinstein Fumes...

Biden Wipes Away Tears...

Cuomo Complains...

GALLUP: Only 4% of Americans Think Gun Control Important Problem...

Just a point about one of the Presidents' advisors and friends:

Reports coming in from Boston are describing the deadly bombs as devices similar to the Weather Underground nail bomb that exploded prematurely in 1970, killing three of Ayers' terrorist friends. That device was intended to be detonated at a soldiers' dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey.

I have now been informed by the hoplophobe from the other day that the NYEffingTimes and Daily Kos demanding the 2nd Amendment either be dumped or rewritten proves that 'All the good people demand it!'
Add that to the odd use of capitals, remotely diagnosing people and so forth, and I'm concerned she's off her meds.

Stolen from here.  Along with this:
Note: some posts probably NSFW

The crap an honest citizen in Australia has to go through in order to buy a rifle.  Stage 1, Stage 2.

Who the hell is Jay Mohr, and why and I supposed to give a rats ass what he thinks?
'2nd Amendment must go'? Fuck you, Mohr.

Boehner doesn't like the idea of actually digging into Benghazi; We don't like the idea of this clown being in the position he is.

From across the pond, in response to my post on gun bigots

and hoplophobes(the one yesterday):
I've lived through three doses of gun confiscation in the country thats legal system spawned that of the united state.

1987 1998 1999
Semi auto centrefire rifles
centrefire pistols
rimfire pistols

amongst my neighbours, one had his guns confiscated a couple of weeks back - firing a gun within 50 feet of the centre of a road

another had the cops armed response unit visit him last summer - a neighbour's cat had been hit with an airgun pellet.

a few years back, another neighbour fell through a shed roof, breaking both his legs, so the cops arrived and confiscated his guns

also a few years back, another neighbour returned from visiting his quack to find an armed response unit waiting for him - to take his guns away.

I had a cops at the door a few weeks back, checking up on me, and seeing that all my guns are safely locked away. - but I'm stupid enough to be on their lists, so they know where to come.

expect to get the same with knobs on it if the legislation goes through. if, like me, you're stupid enough to be on a list.

And never forget, they really, BADLY want that list made.  So they can use it just this way.

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

I'm not sure if they'd class as a gun bigot or hoplophobe, maybe a combination thereof:

I have now been informed that
If I believe politicians when they say they want to confiscate guns, I'm paranoid.

If I object to 'universal background checks', I should be first in line for mental testing.

Insurance should be required on each gun: Yes, Insurance WiLL Cut down on Criminal use. If proof of Insurance is Mandatory for a Weapon to be in Public, with ALL Uninsured Weapons going into the Grinder, soon, they'll be too precious to Lose 0r lose track of. Might take a decade or two. But it will work.
Because bad guys A: Obey the law and B: would NEVER think of smuggling guns in, that being illegal and all...

Been interesting.  Appeals to authority(I WORK in mental health, I know what paranoid is!), appeals to I'm descended from some of the first settlers in America!, etc. ad Bullshit.
Oh, and all you have a right to is a musket or blunderbuss, 'cause there were no rifles or pistols or shotguns back then, and...  At this point I have to go with hoplophobia and gun bigotry really being mental disorders. Nasty ones.

Hey, Chief Gary Smith, Temple Texas PD: what the hell is wrong

with the clowns you're the boss of?
This is the kind of idiocy that should, at the least, cause that clown-with-a-badge to go back to school; at most be fired.

Of course, if this is indeed something Temple PD has done before, then Chief Smith needs to be told to find another job, and that slot filled by someone who actually meets the definition of 'Peace Officer'.

And one of the other threats in the mental-health aspect:

They can change the definitions.  Expand them.
Biden called adjudication “a very high standard, basically being involuntarily committed to a mental institution.”

“We’re going to introduce legislation next week that says that if you are believed to be a risk to yourself or to others by your health care professional(no definition given, or standards), that that health care professional would have an obligation to report that fact to a police agency who then would initiate a process to — to make sure that you do not possess a firearm,” said the vice president’s son.

“You would have due process rights and you have a judicial proceeding(for now). But to make sure that those people who are mentally ill, that doctors believe shouldn’t be in possession of a weapon, don’t have them,” Biden continued. “Only 1300 people in 2010, for instance, were prohibited from possessing firearms because they were adjudicated mentally ill. This will broaden that category of people. We’ll have due process built into it. It will be constitutional and I think save lives, ultimately.”
Because we need LOTS of people banned from arms for this excus-ah, reason. Because it makes it so easy to disarm people, especially the way they'll decide things...

Apparently this crap runs in the Biden family.

Odd definition of the word...

I was just informed on the book of face that, with the President and a bunch of others speaking openly of registration and confiscation, that we're paranoid for- well, I guess for believing they mean it.

Also, we should be forced to buy insurance because Why should Innocent bystanders risk Injury/Death/Poverty because Someone Else didn't take gun safety seriously.
Buying insurance prevents...  I just can't follow that.

So, Missouri, is he just not wanting to deal with the heat,

or is Long the sacrifice they hope will take the heat off?
Gov. Jay Nixon today announced that Missouri Department of Revenue Director Brian Long has resigned. The resignation is effective immediately. The Governor has named Deputy Director of Revenue John Mollenkamp as acting director of the department.

Among the links, from a few days ago
A federal agent who received information on all of Missouri’s concealed carry permit holders decided not to pursue his investigation after obtaining a readable disc earlier this year, a federal official said Friday.
Got that?  Now the update:
On Monday, the Office of the Inspector General for the Social Security Administration emailed the Post-Dispatch to reverse its position. The agency now says the disc was not readable.
Now, I'm familiar with bureaucracy, a bit, and not getting their crap together before saying something isn't unusual, but not getting something like this right?  When there's this much noise and trouble?  Seems iffy, at the least.

From the new article:
U.S. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-St. Elizabeth, also was told Friday that the second list was readable. He held a news conference in Jefferson City this morning, discussing his own effort to look into the request for lists of all Missourians permitted to carry concealed weapons. The news conference was held before the office reversed its earlier position.
“I am absolutely furious that the (Social Security Administration) would put out false information like this," Luetkemeyer said after hearing of change in information. "They are an investigatory body and should know better than to provide information unless it is verified. I am now more determined than ever to meet with the (inspector general) in person and get to the bottom of this. This just can't happen. We are really going to go after this now.”
Which is good.  Real good.  Because
According to testimony from various hearings, Schilb was investigating Social Security fraud. He planned to compare the list of permit holders with a list of Social Security recipients to see whether anyone who had met the mental health qualifications for a concealed carry permit had also sought benefits for a mental disability.
Gee, I wonder where he got that idea?

And on the state side,
Speaking to the House Government Oversight Committee today, Replogle(MO HP) defended the legality of the release, while also promising more scrutiny and formal process in the future. His office is working to implement new policies on how to deal with such requests. He said he would be willing to work with lawmakers on adjusting state laws, as well.
Awww, isn't that nice?  He's 'willing to work with lawmakers'...

Monday, April 15, 2013

On to something a little less depressing

Remember the Saturn V rocket?
Some engineers found out they could learn a lot from the engines.  Like, since they didn't have a lot of the manufacturing tech we do now,
"Oh, the welds!" interrupted Case. "The welds on this engine are just a work of art, and everything on here was welded." The admiration in his voice was obvious. "Today, we look at ways of reducing that, but that was something I picked up on from this engine: just how many welds there were, and how great they looked."

And read this, and think about it:
As with everything else about the F-1, even the gas generator boasts impressive specs. It churns out about 31,000 pounds of thrust (138 kilonewtons), more than an F-16 fighter's engine running at full afterburner, and it was used to drive a turbine that produced 55,000 shaft horsepower. (That's 55,000 horsepower just to run the F-1's fuel and oxidizer pumps—the F-1 itself produced the equivalent of something like 32 million horsepower, though accurately measuring a rocket's thrust at that scale is complicated.)

Since the usual suspects are blaming 'The Right'

for the bombs in Boston, this from last year ought to be copied onto a bat and then used on Tingles' head.

Oh, you hadn't heard?
Before any information was available that might indicate who is responsible for the horrific Boston Marathon bombings, Esquire’s Charles P. Pierce cautioned readers against “jumping to conclusions” and blaming the attack on “foreign terrorism.”
However, he was compelled to remind people that Monday is the “official Patriots Day holiday” in Massachusetts, celebrating the Battles at Lexington and Concord. He also pointed out that April 19, the actual date of the battles, is connected to Oklahoma City bomber Tim McVeigh, who apparently considered himself a “waterer of the tree of liberty and the like,” according to Pierce.
Yep.  Don't jump to conclusions unless it's to blame those right-wingers.
“I’ll bet good money it’s a right-wing nutjob. Today is April 15, Boston Harbor was where the original Tea Party took place and the on-going gun-safety legislation makes it the mostly likely culprit,” commenter Linda Ginsburg wrote.
Yes, because blowing up a bunch of people at a race would be SO helpful...

The aforementioned Tingles.
Ace put it Fat, drunk and Matthews is no way to go through life, son.  I started to change that to 'Fat, stupid and Matthews' but realized the either the middle or the last  would be redundant.

Just look around; there's plenty of this crap to find.

Well, crap

Multiple bombs during the Boston Marathon.

Toomey and Manchin suck on a Hoover On Steroids level,

and Gottlieb is either a fool or a sucker.  Two of the piles of steaming crap in this:
1. The provision which claims to outlaw national gun registration in fact authorizes a national gun registry.
2. The provision which is supposed to strengthen existing federal law protecting the interstate transportation of personal firearms in fact cripples that protection.

Lamppost, rope, politician.  Etc.

Yes, it's the day to pay off the extortionists in DC

And also Buy A Gun Day.   Which, unfortunately, can't do right now.  Normally I'd buy ammo, but...

Sunday, April 14, 2013

If true, a bunch of officials in New York need to be fired,

and charged, and prosecuted:
Claiming information from multiple sources that ought to require the resignations of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and State Police Superintendent Joe D’Amico, WBEN Buffalo radio host Tom Bauerle yesterday told listeners he’s had it confirmed that New York State Police are lying when they say they made a mistake when they confiscated an Erie County resident’s guns. Instead, Bauerle charges, there is a high-level conspiracy to violate the Fourth Amendment rights of New Yorkers that reaches up to the Obama administration’s Department of Homeland Security.
Yeah, might sound like conspiracy-theory stuff; then you remember what's come out in Missouri...