NEVER BEEN SHOOTING? Would you like to try it?
An offer for Louisville Metro area residents.

If you have never been shooting, are 21 years old or older and not otherwise barred by state or federal law from purchasing or possessing a firearm, I'd like to invite you to the range. I will provide firearms, ammunition, range fees, eye and hearing protection and basic instruction.

(Benefactor Member of the NRA, member of KC3, former NRA firearms instructor, former Ky CCDW instructor)

Email me if you are interested in taking me up on this offer. Five (5) people already have.

December 31, 2007

Knoxville police taking more "assault weapons" off the streets

Posted: Dec 28, 2007 10:13 PM EST

6 News Reporter

KNOXVILLE (WATE) -- Knoxville police say they are coming across more high-capacity weapons.

Lt. Greg Hoskins says one find last week was particularly disturbing. 

"On December 23rd we stopped a car with four teens inside, one just 15 years old. They had a semi-automatic assault rifle. They had several handguns and magazines for those handguns," said Hoskins.

He says there have been several similar situations. "We have traffic stops and find rounds or magazines or weapons in cars where there is a group of people in the car."

In the past, he says police would find someone with a handgun that might hold 8 to 10 rounds. Now they are facing assault weapons capable of holding 100 rounds in a single magazine.

"The guys that shoot these high capacity weapons just spray them in all directions, and that is obviously an extreme danger wherever this happens," said Hoskins.

Hoskins says people who carry such weapons are a major threat to police and the public.

"These people are normally hard core criminals and they carry these weapons for the wrong reasons, in some cases personal protection," Hoskins said. "But if they get out in a neighborhood and get in an altercation, who knows who else will be hurt."

Semi-automatic assault rifle? Probably a Remington 742. Oh, wait. I forgot it was high capacity. May have been a Ruger 10-22 with an extended mag.

Someone in Knoxville should have lunch with Lt. Greg Hoskins and Shelby Backer and teach them the definition of assault rifle. The ignorance continues to flow from the Knoxville PD and press. Or maybe Lt. Hoskins is hoping to work his way up to Chief and is maintaining the required PC attitude of political hacks.

Who is more partisan, McConnell or Yarmuth?

I'm sure this will surprise many people (mostly Democrats), but according to the Washington Post, but Mr McConnell doesn't even come close. John Yarmuth is the most partisan member of Kentucky's Congressional delegation. Mr. Yarmuth is a liberal's liberal, and proudly proclaims it. It's really the other members that surprised me.

SenateName, PartyVotes MissedVotes with Party
Jim Bunning

Jim Bunning


Next election: 2010


Mitch McConnell

Mitch McConnell


Next election: 2008


HouseName, PartyVotes Missed
Votes with Party
Ed Whitfield

Ed Whitfield

Republican, District 1


Ron Lewis

Ron Lewis

Republican, District 2


John Yarmuth

John Yarmuth

Democratic, District 3



Geoff Davis

Geoff Davis

Republican, District 4

Hal Rogers

Hal Rogers

Republican, District 5

Ben Chandler

Ben Chandler

Democratic, District 6



Quick recap: Partisanship of Kentucky delegation by party line votes.

  1. Yarmuth
  2. Chandler
  3. Lewis
  4. Rogers
  5. Davis
  6. McConnell
  7. Bunning
  8. Whitfield

Oldies but goodies

  • Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.
  • If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.
  • Why carry a gun? Because a cop is too heavy.
  • America is not at war. The U.S. Military is at war. America is at the Mall.
  • When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.
  • A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him why he carried a .45, the Ranger responded with, "Because they don't make a .46."
  • An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.
  • The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. “Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?” “No Ma'am”, said the Sheriff, “If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle.”
  • Beware the man who only has one gun. He probably knows how to use it!
  • A man was once asked by a lady visiting if he had a gun in the house, to which he answered that he did. She said, “Well, I certainly hope it isn't loaded!” To which he said, “Of course it is loaded.” She then asked, “Are you that afraid of someone evil coming into your house?” His reply was, “No not at all. I am not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and THEY ARE ALL LOADED.”
  • The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.

Murder: The Weapon Isn't the Question

Here is a fine article I found on Though first published in the Christian Science Monitor in 1997, this could have been written yesterday.

by Dr. Helen Smith

Murderers have their own code of ethics, and it's radically different from yours and mine.

Let me give you an example. I saw a patient referred to me by the state disability office recently for a psychological evaluation to determine if this young man was mentally able to work. Alarm bells immediately went off in my head as I noted the glazed eyes and withdrawn stance.

I was right to be worried. During the psychological testing, it became obvious that this teenager was not only violent but homicidal. I couldn't call the police because psychologists and psychiatrists aren't allowed to unless a patient names a specific victim or victims. And you can forget about referring him for mental health treatment - with no health insurance, that's not usually an option until after someone has committed a crime.

During the evaluation, I noted the patient's long list of felonies, for which he had only spent days or weeks in detention. The young man described his own views of the rights of others: Mainly they had none. People were instruments important only for their ability to provide him with what he needed. The apathetic tone in his voice described not only his lack of reverence for others' lives, but for his own.

As I watched the young man leave my office, I cringed at the thought of this loose cannon out in society. I knew it was only a matter of time before his short fuse would dangerously ignite.

Two weeks later, I got the news that my patient had fulfilled my premonition: He shot and killed a man with .38-special.

Stunned, I turned to a colleague to discuss my experience, but her only response was, "Where did he get the gun?"

I was stunned again: Her reaction seemed to miss the point. Her question is typical of those good-hearted but wrongheaded people who believe that owning a gun is dangerous.

My colleague, like so many others, believes that it is not criminals but ordinary people acting out a moment of rage who are the perpetrators of most murders. In my colleague's mind, had my patient not had a gun, no murder would have been committed. She couldn't have been more wrong.

An examination of homicide studies shows the truth: It is not ordinary citizens who commit murder. My patient epitomizes the characteristic murderer. He did not simply lose his temper in a heated moment and commit murder because he had a firearm available at the time of ungovernable anger.

Research on juvenile murderers shows they generally have a history of committing personal violence against other children, siblings, and small animals. A 1996 Harvard study of guns and gang murders shows juvenile murderers often have a long list of prior felonies.

Substance abusers, those with sub-par intelligence, and those with major mental disorders are several times more likely to commit a violent crime than are ordinary citizens. Ordinary, law-abiding citizens are not usually the cause of murder. On the contrary, murders are committed by a relatively small number of very scary aberrants.

This is a difficult concept for people to accept. It is much easier to focus on gun-control laws because it provides a false sense of security. My patient committed murder with an already illegal gun that would have been unavailable to him if gun laws could really stop killing. It should be - and already is - illegal for felons, the insane, drug addicts, and juveniles to have handguns.

The problem is, sensible though such laws are, it is unrealistic to think that people with no compunction against murder, rape, etc., will obey gun laws.

As was recently pointed out by criminologist James Q. Wilson, people on the fringes of society are unlikely to be affected by gun-control laws. If murderers have different characteristics than you and I - and research shows they do - then juvenile murder will not be affected by gun control.

So, if gun control is not the answer to juvenile murder, what is?

As a psychologist, I have learned through experience that often the way to find a solution to a problem is to ask the right question. In the case of my teenage patient, the right question is not "Where did he get the gun?", but rather, "What are the characteristics of this teenager that made him kill in the first place?"

There are no easy solutions to the social pathologies that turn juveniles into murderers. But if we as a nation continue to divert our attention away from the true issue at hand - that murderers typically have mental problems that make them very different from the rest of us - then we will never be on our way to solving the problem posed by the thousands of lethal youths like my patient.

Unfortunately, the ongoing dismantling of our nation's mental health infrastructure and the rise of Jiffy-Pop HMO approaches to serious mental illness mean we are likely to see more walking time bombs like my client among us, not fewer.

Christian Science Monitor Friday, October 10, 1997

December 30, 2007

"the holidays bring out desperate times..."

from Oakland, California

A masked man with a gun gets out of an accomplice's stolen Camaro, pulls on a mask, brandishes a pistol with that silly sideways presentation, taps on the window of a California state senator's state leased 2006 Dodge Charger with 22 in. wheels, and tells him to, "Get out of the m- car."

And what did the senators spokeswoman say?

"Sometimes the holidays bring out desperate times for people, and he did the safe thing and just gave up the car," said Perata spokeswoman Alicia Trost. "It's just unfortunate, but we're very happy that he's uninjured."

There must be some kind of dimensional shift at the California state line. Or maybe it's in the water.

Oh, and Senator Perata sponsored the the 1999 assault weapons ban in California. I wonder, what will be on his legislative agenda this year?

December 28, 2007

Music studios: Love Amazon, hate Apple

A bit off my usual topic, here's a blog from ZDNet about music studios moving to Amazon with DRM-free (Digital Rights Management) downloads and moving away from the Apple/iTunes paradigm.

It’s interesting to read the announcement that Warner Music Group has become the next major studio to offer its complete catalog DRM-free through Amazon’s new music download store.  With only Sony BMG left still embracing DRM, this is shows clearly how music executive have grown to hate Apple more than they do customers.

Like Adrian, I am glad to see it.

Consistently inconsistent

An open letter from Bill Akins on the Red's Trading Post blog. Mr. Akins is the inventor and manufacturer of the "Akins Accelerator", a device the BATFE said was legal, then changed their mind years later after Mr. Akins invested a fortune. If you don't know what it is, Google it. Like I've always said, if a shoestring can be a machine gun...

Before I go into it, I would like to mention that if you read the illegal BATFE 2006-02 ruling that bans my accelerator device, that same ruling actually bans the process of bump firing and therefore any semi automatic capable of bump firing. Read the 2006-02 ruling at the BATFE website, then come back here and look at what I am about to show you.

Emphasis mine.

Peace, love, and cluelessness...

from the Kansas City Star.

“The Mod Squad” just came out on DVD, and Michael Cole told Newsday he still thinks the show about a youth-culture undercover team was remarkable for its time.

“We did an episode on abortion,” Cole says. “Another on anti-Semitism. And, of course, we also addressed the Vietnam War and racism. It was pop culture-ish, but we were dealing with very serious situations. And Aaron (Spelling) had to fight to get some of those shows on.”

He also recalled the actors took an anti-gun stance that he started.

“On the second or third day (of production), I went to Aaron’s office. I told him we’re about peace and love, so let’s not have the Mod Squad ever carry a gun. And we didn’t. We made a point of, when the bad guy dropped his gun, to take that weapon and throw it away. It was symbolic, a way of saying, ‘We don’t need that.’ ”

December 27, 2007

Legislation to Improve and Modernize BATFE is Introduced

From the NRA/ILA

Two bills, considered in the last Congress as H.R. 5005 & H.R. 5092, have been combined, improved, and re-introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives as H.R. 4900-the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007.” H.R. 4900 is sponsored by Representatives Steve King (R-Iowa) and Zack Space (D-Ohio).

The combining of these two bills into the improved H.R. 4900 represents NRA’s latest efforts to pass legislation that will make it easier for lawful gun owners and dealers to comply with federal law and regulations, while ensuring those who break the law are punished accordingly. This bipartisan bill also serves as a vital step toward modernizing and improving BATFE’s overall operations. The bill would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena, and is a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations. 

Of highest importance, H.R. 4900 totally rewrites the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Today, for most violations, BATFE can only give a federal firearms license (FFL) holder a warning, or totally revoke his license. 

During the 109th Congress, HR 5092 passed the U.S. House of Representatives by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of 277-131, but time ran out before it could be considered by the Senate. 

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 4900, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007.”

For detailed information on H.R. 4900, please click here.

Maybe Red's will get some well-deserved relief.

Kentucky Gun Laws

GBW has received several recent hits for "Kentucky gun laws" searches. To ease the hunt, I've included links to Ky. gun laws over in the left column. These come from the KC3 web site (Because the right to protect yourself shouldn’t stop at your front door™), which I highly recommend. The gun laws page, which also includes some case law and Attorney General opinions, can be found here.

With the NRA convention coming up here in Louisville this spring, I hope this is helpful.

...a beautiful thing.

Crystal goes to a Trans-Siberian Orchestra concert (you know, the ones that did the music for that massive Christmas light show on that house down in Florida) and lists 14 things about it. I liked this one best.

13. They broke into, "Proud Mary", and geriatrics everywhere went ballistic. No one broke a hip and it was a beautiful thing.

Sadly, I'm almost old enough to resent it. But not yet!

Again, Marko is spot on

the tiger does not relish the peach

Next time you're at the zoo and a large predatory cat escapes, follow these steps:

  • --Call authorities at once.  911 will summon a policeman, who will arrive in mere minutes.
  • --Give the attacker what he/she wants.  They'll most likely leave you alone afterwards.  Don't resist, you may get hurt.
  • --If possible, try to reason with the attacker.  Everybody wants to be valued and respected.
  • --Do not carry a gun for self-defense.  You may get hurt worse, because it may be used against you.  Also, you may suffer from intense regret and remorse if you kill your attacker.

Make sense?  No? 

Then keep in mind that people who prey on other humans have exactly as much conscience and compassion as that tiger.  Tigers kill to eat and live without concern for the feelings of their prey...same with predatory humans. 

The only thing that will keep you alive when a predator mistakes you for food is to whip out larger claws and teeth.

December 26, 2007

Common sense from two hundred years ago...

is still common sense now.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . .Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson

Public Bathrooms and Concealed Carry

James Rummel, a professional self-defense instructor in Ohio has an interesting post on Hell in a Handbasket about, you guessed it, public bathrooms and concealed carry. He says,

The majority of my students have never touched a gun before in their lives, so it is essential to go over the basics. But it is surprising how practical some of their questions are. For example, a student was wondering what they should do if they have to use the toilet in a public restroom. Where do they put the gun so the rest of the patrons don't freak out, or so a thief won't make a grab for the valuable and expensive weapon while the owner is in a delicate position?

The image of some punk kneeling on the floor outside of a bathroom stall so they can snake their hand in and grab a gun that is puddled around someone's ankles might seem ludicrous, but consider the amount of cash involved. Even reasonably priced yet reliable handguns sell for somewhere around the $400.00 USD range, and thieves will take greater risks for less reward. Why take the chance?

Click on the link above for the rest.

December 24, 2007

Welcome, Cyberhillbilly

I have added Cyberhillbilly to my Kentucky links today. He's a voice from east of I-75.

Take a look.

Are you a science fiction geek?

I'm ashamed. I should have done better. (HTto Anarchangel)

Take the Sci fi sounds quiz I received 93 credits on
The Sci Fi Sounds Quiz

How much of a Sci-Fi geek are you?
Take the Sci-Fi Movie Quiz canon s5 is

Westroads Mall management didn't learn much.

Over on Joe's Crabby Shack, we see that Westroads Mall has re-posted their no weapons policy. I wonder when the first lawsuits will be filed.

No word on the installation of metal detectors and searches as shoppers enter the mall. That's the only way their policy will work.

Maybe they're counting on don't ask, don't tell.

I never thought of popcorn as a religious experience...

but in this post, Robb seems to have had continues to have one.

I would have taken them up on their free popcorn offer months ago, but had the same reservations Robb expressed. Of course, it has expired now.

I'll just have to order some.

December 21, 2007

Quasi-Christmas Break

Little or no blogging from now until at least Monday. I see a journey today to the hinterlands where almost all access is via dial-up (shudder). On the other hand, there I can step out on the back porch and exercise my trigger finger at will. Not a bad trade off.

Harry Reid must not be all bad

Someone over at DailyKos sure doesn't like him.

The religion of peace strikes again

In Pakistan


Absolutely useless...

Vowing never again to use the Virginia Tech classroom wing where a student gunman killed 30 people and himself for general classes, school officials said the space would be used to study peace.

I guess the evil guns desecrated Norris Hall, so now it must be exorcised over time by studying peace. These people are clueless.

December 20, 2007

Are these reasonable questions?

1. Do you have the right to defend you and your family from a malicious, life threatening, unprovoked attack by a criminal:

a. in your home?
b. in your vehicle?
c. in a public place?
d. at your place of employment?

2. If you answered no to any of the above, upon what legal or moral grounds do you support your position that your life is less valuable at that particular location than it is at one of the locations where you answered yes? The Supreme Court and other Federal case law has found no government entity, Federal, state, or local has a general legal duty, obligation or responsibility to protect people in their jurisdiction from any criminal activity, including violent crimes such as rape, armed robbery, assault, and murder. (see here for case citations) If you answered no to any part of question 1 does this information change your view?

3. Since no government entity, Federal, state, or local has a general legal duty, obligation or responsibility to protect you from any criminal activity including violent crimes such as rape, armed robbery, assault, and murder, with who does the responsibility for your protection lie?

4. If you have the right and responsibility to defend yourself from a malicious, life threatening, unprovoked attack (since no government entity has any responsibility to protect you from any criminal activity including violent crimes such as rape, armed robbery, assault, and murder), should any government entity which has no responsibility to protect you limit your ability to defend yourself and/or your family from violent criminal activity?

5. If you answered yes to question 4, upon what legal or moral grounds do you support your position that a government entity, which has no responsibility to protect you, may limit the means you may use to defend yourself and/or your family from violent crimes such as rape, armed robbery, assault, and murder?

6. If property owners of public places (stores, parks, restaurants, public buildings) limit the means you may use to defend yourself by posting signs which disarm you on their premises(gun free zones, no weapons, etc.), should they be held liable for injuries or death caused by attacks on your person while disarmed on those premises because you complied with their posted limitations?

December 19, 2007

No news here...

Doyle knew about it over 100 years ago. He just used Sumatra to confuse people.

I'm glad Steyn is on our side...

“This is the time of year, as Hillary Clinton once put it, when Christians celebrate ‘the birth of a homeless child’ —or, in Al Gore’s words, ‘a homeless woman gave birth to a homeless child.’ Just for the record, Jesus wasn’t ‘homeless.’ He had a perfectly nice home back in Nazareth. But he happened to be born in Bethlehem. It was census time and Joseph was obliged to schlep halfway across the country to register in the town of his birth. Which is such an absurdly bureaucratic over-regulatory cockamamie Big Government nightmare it’s surely only a matter of time before Massachusetts or California reintroduce it.” —Mark Steyn

Virginia AG files amicus brief supporting Heller

from All American Patriots

December 18, 2007 -- Richmond- Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell announced today that Virginia will join an amicus brief supporting the individual rights interpretation of the right to bear arms confirmed in the Second Amendment.

The amicus will be filed in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, which arises from a challenge to the District of Columbia’s prohibition of personal ownership of handguns, and additional restrictions on personal ownership of shotguns and rifles. The case will provide the most significant review of the original intent and interpretation of the Second Amendment in almost 70 years.

At issue is a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which ruled that the gun policies of Washington D.C. violated the Second Amendment. The court found that the right to bear arms is an individual right guaranteed by the framers.

Speaking about his decision to join an amicus brief supporting the individual right to bear arms, Attorney General McDonnell noted, “The right to bear arms secured in the Bill of Rights is a right “of the people.” We believe that our founders declared, in the Second Amendment, that American citizens have the personal right to bear arms as individuals.”

McDonnell continued noting, “Attorney General Greg Abbott of Texas will file the lead brief with the Supreme Court in defense of this position. I have informed him that Virginia will join the multi-state amicus brief in support. The Heller case will likely be the most important Second Amendment case in American history. The result will have significant implications on individual liberty and the power of government. For this reason it is imperative that Virginia’s position on the fundamental individual right to bear arms is clearly articulated.”

The amicus brief is currently being drafted. Heller v. District of Columbia will most likely be heard by the United States Supreme Court in March 2008, with a decision anticipated in June.

December 17, 2007

What's next for Paul-ites?

Listening to the radio this morning, I heard a couple of folks who support Dr. Paul. I didn't hear anything I haven't heard before, but this thought came to me while listening.

What will these people do if Dr. Paul doesn't win the Republican nomination? Will they rally behind the nominee and work just as hard, switch to a Dem, or sit out the general election?

I'm not sure, and certainly there will be exceptions, but I think they will stay home on election day. Most I have spoken with are too emotionally invested in his candidacy to support anyone else. How about you?

Clause and Effect well done, but reaches wrong conclusion

from a NY Times article, Clause and Effect, by Adam Freedman

Likewise, when the justices finish diagramming the Second Amendment, they should end up with something that expresses a causal link, like: “Because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” In other words, the amendment is really about protecting militias, notwithstanding the originalist arguments to the contrary.

Not only originalists, Mr. Freedman, hold the contrary view. The Unabridged Second Amendment reaches a somewhat different conclusion.

[Schulman:] "(3) Is the right of the people to keep and bear arms conditioned upon whether or not a well regulated militia, is, in fact necessary to the security of a free State, and if that condition is not existing, is the statement 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed' null and void?"

[Copperud:] "(3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as a requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence.

December 16, 2007


Breda links to this article. Here's a quote.

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which favors tighter firearms controls, said he saw the logic in allowing security officers to have the same firepower as a potential assailant. "We allow ordinary citizens to carry these things around. Why we do that, I don't know. But if we're going to allow that, we're probably forcing the hand of security guards to do the same," he said.

Huh? Saw the logic? It's logical for security guards to have the same firepower as an assailant, but it isn't logical for us to have the same firepower as someone who might assault us?

Of course, trying to make sense of what Mr. Helmke and his ilk say would be a full-time job for a number of people.

December 13, 2007

Colorado hero shows gun law must change

(an editorial from The Daily Telegram, a Michigan paper)

At issue: A woman using a handgun to stop a killer in a “soft target,” a church.

Our view: The case shows why Michigan school staff need an option for training and concealed carry, not “gun-free zones.”

Another month has brought more shooting sprees in what commonly are “gun-free zones.” Four died in two separate shootings Sunday in Colorado. Eight were murdered last Wednesday in an Omaha, Neb., shopping mall. Seven students were slain recently in Finland. That followed a Cleveland school shooting in October.

Only in the latest attack did an adult have a right to a gun to defend herself and others. And that attack Sunday at a crowded Colorado church ended abruptly when citizen volunteer Jeanne Assam used her handgun to stop the killer before he could murder dozens of other innocent people.

“When the shots were fired, she rushed toward the scene and encountered the attacker there in a hallway. He never got more than 50 feet inside our building,” senior pastor Brady Boyd told reporters. “There could have been a great loss of life yesterday, and she probably saved over 100 lives.”

But if a similar killer entered a Michigan school, even a former police officer such as Assam could not legally protect students with her firearm. That’s because Michigan unwisely made schools gun-free zones except for active-duty law enforcement, which basically means that mass murderers can rest assured law-abiding staff are unarmed. Time and again we see how intermediate steps such as counseling or unarmed guards fail to stop killers such as Cho Seung-hui (Virginia Tech), Jeff Weise (Red Lake, Minn.) or others. Rather than discourage psychopaths, gun-free zones assist their quests for high body counts and ill-deserved fame.

Michigan House Bill 5162 would give law-abiding adults who pass background checks and concealed weapons training a choice to protect their students, if their district approves. Private citizens saving lives by using firearms to stop killers have been documented in case after case — a high school in Pearl, Miss., a college at Appalachian School of Law and now a church in Colorado. In each case, the arguments raised by opponents against concealed carry laws were shown to be hollow. The citizen’s firearm was not taken away by an attacker, the scene did not become a free-fire zone and the citizen did not accidentally hit innocent bystanders.

Survivors are asking how many victims might have been saved if the Omaha shopping mall had not banned firearms, which are legal elsewhere in Nebraska. If officials cannot keep victims safe — and will not allow them to protect themselves — then some believe those officials ought to be held liable in lawsuits for violating the victims’ true “equal protection” rights. Gun-free zone liability acts have been introduced in Georgia and Arizona, and are being considered in other states.

Must a score of Michigan school children end up victims before House Bill 5162 receives a House Judiciary Committee hearing? We would much prefer to see the headline “Hero saves 100,” than “Lawmaker: ‘I never thought it could happen here.’ ”

Copyright © 2006 GateHouse Media, Inc. Some Rights Reserved.

The Daily Telegram DAILY :: 133 N. Winter St., Adrian, MI 49221
Phone: (517) 265-5111 | Email:

Original content available for non-commercial use
under a Creative Commons license

Idaho Senators block ATF Director confirmation...

(from the AP via Red's)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Idaho's senators are blocking President Bush's nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, saying the agency has become overly aggressive in enforcing gun laws.

Republican Sens. Larry Craig and Mike Crapo placed separate holds on the nomination of federal prosecutor Michael Sullivan, the acting ATF director for more than a year.

Crapo's spokesman, Lindsay Nothern, said the senator's office has heard from a number of gun dealers, gun owners and others in Idaho who "have concerns about ATF policies regarding gun sales and even (gun) ownership. Maybe the federal government is getting a little too aggressive with people who haven't done anything wrong."

Sullivan, who also serves as U.S. attorney in Massachusetts, was nominated by Bush in March. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved his nomination last month.

Under Senate rules, a single senator, sometimes anonymously, can put a hold on legislative action for months.

Sullivan, who also serves as U.S. attorney in Massachusetts, was nominated by Bush in March. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved his nomination last month.

Under Senate rules, a single senator, sometimes anonymously, can put a hold on legislative action for months.

The ATF had no immediate comment Wednesday.

Crapo met with Sullivan last week and "had some pointed questions," Nothern said. The senator is still waiting for answers, Nothern said.

Of course, if they confirm Sullivan and a Dem wins the White House, the new President wouldn't have to appoint a new ATF Director...

December 12, 2007

What law would have stopped this guy?

I have previously posted this quote attributed to Paine, and it's worthwhile to look at part of it again.

"I am thus far a Quaker, that I would gladly agree with all the world to lay aside the use of arms, and settle matters by negotiation: but unless the whole will, the matter ends, and I take up my musket and thank heaven he has put it in my power."


"Kill a few and take the whole. thus the peaceable part of mankind will be continually over-run by the vile and abandoned. while they neglect the means of self defence."

Even Paul the Apostle tells us in Romans 12:18, "If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men." Of course, the problem remains the other guy.

In his post titled "What law would have stopped this guy?", Rob has a good example of this over on Sharp as a Marble. Why don't people get this? The only answer is that they don't want to get it.

Stuff from The Patriot

And I thought it was good news. I'm glad the Times is there to correct me.

“Slowing Job Growth Seen as Ominous Sign for Economy” —The New York Times headline reporting 94,000 new jobs in the economy in November and a 4.7-percent unemployment rate

HAS to be Global Warming...

“Snow Sets More Records in Grand Forks, Fargo” —Associated Press

“Portland Ties 1890 Snow Record” —Portland (ME) Press Herald

“Coldest Winter in Years, Environment Canada Warns” —

I probably won't vote for Mr. Romney, but it won't be because he's a Mormon.

“Five members of the Senate are Mormon. Are there any intimations that the Mormonism of Harry Reid, Orrin Hatch, Gordon Smith, Michael Crapo or Robert Bennett corrupts, distorts or in any way diminishes their ability to perform their constitutional duties? Mormonism should be a total irrelevancy in any political campaign. It is not. Which is why Mitt Romney had to deliver his JFK ‘religion speech’.” —Charles Krauthammer

What if?

My question is, would the PSH Media even have covered it?

Omaha Mall Shooter Stopped by Armed Shoppers

by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace · 49 Comments

(2007-12-07) — When 19-year-old Robert Hawkins entered the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, carrying an AK-47 assault rifle wrapped in a sweater, he intended to become famous by shooting as many people as possible and then turning the gun on himself.

The mentally-troubled teen left a suicide note, and a trail of evidence on his computer and elsewhere that he knew the police would spend months investigating. He had done everything possible to ensure that his name would be mentioned along with other mass killers at Virginia Tech, Columbine High School and the like.

He knew that the Westroads Mall was a gun-free zone, with signs on the entrances warning people with conceal-carry permits that they may not bring their firearms into the mall. He took comfort from those signs, as he pushed through the doors carrying the stolen assault rifle.

As he ascended to the upper deck, Mr. Hawkins could almost hear the screams of the shoppers as they tried to flee the sound of his shots, but due to the echo couldn’t discern the shooter’s position. He pictured the confused mall security guards talking over each other on the two-way radios. He rehearsed in his mind the final trigger pull that would end his mortal pain, and imagined the silence that would follow, punctuated only by the groaning of his dying victims.

That was the plan — careful, premeditated and nearly perfect.

There was only one problem: some people don’t read signs, and others ignore them.

As Mr. Hawkins moved into the ideal sniper position on the upper deck, an unnamed middle-aged man emerging from the nearby Von Maur department store noticed his odd behavior and glimpsed the muzzle of the rifle peeking out from the sweater. Almost instinctively the man moved toward Mr. Hawkins, reaching to his belt to draw out a Springfield EMP, a small, 9mm semi-automatic handgun.

As the would-be famous mass killer raised the rifle to his shoulder, the unnamed shopper commanded him to stop. Mr. Hawkins turned the muzzle of the AK-47 toward the commanding voice, a single shot rang out and Mr. Hawkins staggered, dropped his weapon and fell against the railing.

By this time, two other shoppers were aiming their pistols at Mr. Hawkins — a young, single woman pulled a .40 caliber Glock 27 from her purse, and a retired farmer drew his 9mm Ruger SR9 (an early Christmas gift from his wife). Together with the first man they moved in to separate Mr. Hawkins from his gun, search him for other weapons and restrain him until law enforcement arrived.

Robert Hawkins is recovering from his gunshot wound as he awaits trial for attempted murder and other charges. He faces the prospect of 15-to-25 years in prison, where police say he will be famous as “the guy who was almost famous.”

Westroads Mall officials said they had not decided yet whether to press charges against the three who interrupted Mr. Hawkins’ plan by violating the mall’s gun-free zone policy.

Republicans Retain 2 Vacant House Seats

Good news from Virginia and Ohio.

This doesn't help; Another Victim Disarmament Zone is created.

WV K-Mart Posts No-Gun Order

ST. CLAIRSVILLE — Signs prohibiting firearms were posted Tuesday at Kmart after a man accidentally discharged his weapon inside the store.

A single shot from a .32-caliber handgun was fired at 7:30 p.m. Monday near the Kmart pharmacy at the Ohio Valley Mall when a gun fell from 44-year-old Bridgeport resident Paul Manukin’s pocket.

Because of this yahoo, every responsible, law abiding citizen who might have carried in this formerly carry-friendly store will have to choose between personal safety and breaking the law.

December 11, 2007

You'd think that would tell them something...

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Once again there has been a mass shooting in the United States, this time in a Nebraska shopping mall. Once again there is no national outcry for gun control.

I believe the tide may be turning. It's more obvious every day that if one wants personal security, one must be personally responsible for it.

$265,000 spent on treating mall killer


STATE authorities spent $265,000 ... attempting to treat he who shall not be named*, the teenage gunman who killed eight people in a shooting rampage at a department store in Nebraska on Wednesday.

*I may talk about it, but I won't put him name here.

"Gun Free Zones and the Ketchup Bottle"

On The All American Blogger, Duane Lester has an excellent piece about changing the paradigm. Thanks to Dustin for the link.

What does this have to do with gun-free zones? I am looking for a paradigm shift. The current paradigm is that guns are bad, they kill people and they should not be allowed in certain places like schools and malls. I not only want gun-free zones abolished, but I want gun ownership and concealed carry encouraged. Heck, let’s pass legislation that requires people to carry a weapon. Your mind swimming yet? Well, consider this: it’s already happened.

Go over and take a look. Be sure to look at the statistics from Kennesaw, GA. Remember them?

The grave danger of 'gun-free zones'

from World Net Daily

Posted: April 18, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Charl van Wyk

The murder of innocent victims is a disgrace, and our condolences go out to those who have lost loved ones in the shooting rampage at Virginia Tech.

More than one year before Monday's unprecedented shooting rampage at Virginia Tech, the state's General Assembly quashed a bill that would have given qualified college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus. Could one legally armed citizen have made a difference at this tragic event?

We also need to ask the question: Do laws prohibiting firearms in certain places really prevent homicidal tragedies?

There is a striking paradox associated with mass murders. They are far more likely to occur in areas that have been designated as gun-free zones.

Worldwide, office buildings, hospitals, convenience stores, TV studios, chain restaurants and day-care centers have all been targets of homicidal maniacs. Mass murders have taken place in such places after they have been declared gun-free zones.

In 1999, John Lott and William Landes published a U.S. study of multiple shooting incidents. They showed that mass shootings occur less often in areas where responsible citizens may carry weapons.

Do mass shootings ever occur in police stations, shooting ranges or at gun shows? Mass murderers select soft targets for their acts of violence. Expecting a suicidal individual to honor a law prohibiting firearms is sheer utopian fantasy.

In Europe, 16 people were killed in a public school shooting in Germany in April 2002. Another two public shootings were the killing of 14 regional legislators in Zug, a Swiss Canton (September 2001) and the massacre of eight city council members in a Paris suburb in March 2002.

According to John R. Lott Jr., all three of these European killing sprees had one thing in common: They took place in gun-free zones. Firearms surely make it easier to kill people, but firearms also make it easier for people to defend themselves.

Declaring gun-free zones risks leaving potential victims defenseless.

In the U.S., thugs using firearms at elementary or secondary schools between 1997 and 2002 killed 32 students. The total includes gang fights, robberies, accidents and the so-called "school shootings." All these attacks took place in gun-free zones.

In Israel, however, teachers and parents serving as school aids are armed at all times on school grounds with semi-automatic weapons. Since this policy was adopted in the 1970s, attacks by gunmen at schools in Israel have ceased.

Government officials must be aware that if they create a gun-free zone, they are liable for any harm it causes. Why would those in authority rather see law-abiding, disarmed citizens die than risk armed citizens harming a criminal?

With lives lost in Germany and the United States in schools that are gun-free zones, and no attacks by armed gunmen in Israel since teachers and parents serving as school aids have been armed, why would we want any area declared a gun-free zone?

History and common sense prove that gun-free zones are dangerous.

Order van Wyk's book, "Shooting Back," which tells the story of his defending his church family with a firearm after terrorists invaded.

Charl van Wyk is the author of "Shooting Back" and national coordinator for Gun Owners of South Africa.

What can you do?

Over on Joe's Crabby Shack, where you'll find the latest on the Nebraska Mall shooting, Joe gives a list of things you can do in the aftermath of yet another gun-free zone shooting.

"In the meantime, there are things you can do to help.

   1) Contact your local businesses with "no guns" signs. Encourage them politely to rethink them.
   2) Contact your lawmakers. Ask them to help you protect yourself by either passing CCW or easing off some of the more Draconian restrictions.
   3) Get some training. Slow fire at paper while standing still is not good enough.
   4) Think about what you will do if this happens to you.
   5) Talk about this with your significant other and family, including children. Work out a plan of what to do, when to do it, and how to do it. Take it seriously.
   6) Keep this in mind when you go to vote. There are candidates at all levels who want the entire world to be a victim-zone. Find out which candidate will protect your rights and vote for him or her.
   7) When you talk about this with others, keep the "I am Rambo" rhetoric out of it. If they want to blame the gun, explain that the tool cannot change or choose who who wields it. Explain the difference in automatic vs. semi-automatic, explain how this was not an assault rifle.
   8) Help the cause. Donate to the NRA, GOA, SAF, CCRKBA. Volunteer for a pro-gun candidate. Lobby your lawmakers on gun rights. Take someone shooting. Educate one person.
   9) Play "what if." Pretend you are attacked RIGHT NOW!!! What would you do? Be realistic.
   10) Do something. Don't shake your head and go, 'What a punk.' Pick an action off this list (or several) and do something to help."

Pro-Gun Groups Urge Senate to Reject Sullivan as BATFE Head

( - Two Second Amendment organizations are calling on the Senate to reject the nomination of Michael Sullivan as permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) because the agency "has gone berserk" while the "anti-gun cop from Massachusetts" has been its acting head.

University of Utah students challenge civil rights restrictions

(from the Salt Lake Tribune)

A pro-gun student group is gearing up to again challenge the University of Utah on its weapons policies, this time seeking approval for what they view as their right to openly carry weapons on campus.

U. administrators are "circumventing the Legislature" and creating their own laws, allege members of Second Amendment Students of Utah, who want to meet with U. officials to hash out their diametrically opposed positions on Utah gun laws.

"Guns have been vilified. We are lucky we live in a state where open carry is still legal," said group member Thomas McCrory, a U. accounting major. "It's a rare thing and it should be preserved."

McCrory's concealed weapons permit allows him to be armed on campus, but he risks expulsion if he were to wear his handgun openly under the university's interpretation of a statute that specifically bars firearms on school campuses.

You would think the University would be eager to follow the law.

Hopefully Kentucky legislators will see the light this upcoming session. A responsible, law-abiding citizen should be able to carry a weapon any place the citizen has a right to be.

December 10, 2007

The safety of gun-free zones...

(stolen directly from The Breda Fallacy)

the victims: unarmed
12/5/07 mall, Omaha NE (8 dead)
2/12/07 mall, Salt Lake City UT (5 dead)
4/16/07 Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA (32 dead)
4/29/07 mall, Kansas City MO (3 dead)
10/2/06 Amish school, Lancaster County PA (5 dead)
3/12/05 church, Brookfield WI (7 dead)
3/21/05 high school, Red Lake MN (9 dead)
4/20/99 high school, Columbine CO (13 dead)
8/10/99 Jewish Community Center, Los Angeles CA (1 dead)
9/15/99 teen prayer rally, Fort Worth TX (7 dead)
12/6/89 École Polytechnique, Montréal QC (14 dead)...etc...
the murderers: cowards.

Yup. Makes me want to take my all my evil firearms straight to a gun buy-back.

I don't think it's quite so high...

Free IQ Test Score - Free IQ Test

Obviously biased to make us feel better about ourselves, a good reason to slant any test result. Right?

Armed response saves "100 lives" says Pastor.

From USA Today.

"Also Monday at a press conference in Colorado Springs, pastor Brady Boyd of the New Life Church said the security guard who shot the gunman was purposely stationed in the lobby of the church after hearing about the earlier shooting.

When the shots were fired "she rushed toward the attacker and took him down in the hallway," he said.

The attacker never got more than 50 feet inside the building.

"She probably saved over 100 lives," Boyd said.

He described her as a highly trained volunteer member of the church with a law enforcement background whose role was to provide security.He said she was not wearing a uniform and is licensed to carry a gun.

Boyd said the shooting was random and that the gunman had no connection to the church." (emphasis mine. gbw)

Not that it does any good...

Within gun-control circles, assault weapon and assault rifle are derogatory terms of art, specific to the context of "evil weapons" as determined by those gun-control advocates. It is a dishonest use of established terms with specific definitions and intended to be pejorative and inflammatory. I have seen these terms justified as, because the firearms were used in assaults, the firearms are assault weapons. Of course, using this "logic", so are baseball bats, steak knives, rocks, clubs, and automobiles. The links below take you to Wikipedia for the actual meanings of assault weapon and assault rifle.

Rifles used in most mass shootings are not assault anything. The rifles, usually semi-automatic, fire one cartridge each time the trigger is pulled. Functionally, they are no different from any semi-automatic firearm traditionally used for hunting.

For centuries, the line between personal weapons and military weapons has been essentially nonexistent. Were it not for hoplophobes, today's distinctions would be as difficult to discern as they have ever been. Military personal sidearms are virtually identical to their civilian counterparts. Civilian versions of military assault rifles are nearly identical with the exception of being semi-automatic fire only.

Though often described as unsuitable for hunting, martial weapons and weapons styled after them have often found their way into the fields and used for harvesting game. Hunters have used many older bolt action battle rifles through the years, and will continue to do so, some using rifles essentially the same as those carried by German troops in WWII. Remington has introduced an AR-15 variant, the Model R-15 VTR™ Modular Repeating Rifles, as a predator rifle. The semi-automatic version of the M-16/M4 rifles used by our service branches is also available in calibers sufficient for much larger game. Likewise, bolt-action rifles most often found taking deer and other game here at home are being used to good effect in the hands of snipers on the battlefront, again blurring the lines between personal and military arms.

None so blind...

Jim Thompson, columnist for the Athens (GA) Banner-Herald, believes that shouldn't insist on challenging the state preemption laws which, like Kentucky's, ensure responsible, law-abiding citizens are not subject to a mish-mash patchwork of local regulations. His article, "Looking at the world through a gun sight", would be better titled, "The view through my rose-colored glasses".

Here are a couple of excerpts. The first shows Mr. Thompson's casual disregard for the law. Apparently he only wants us to obey the laws he believes worthwhile or worthy. The second shows a degree of naiveté that is hard to credit to a reporter who should surely know that bad things always happen to someone else - until they happen to you. Has there never been a single mugging or other attack in a Georgia park? I doubt it.

In truth, it may not make sense. The appeals court's reading of the statute seems reasonable. The law does, in fact, say that local governments can't regulate the "carrying" of firearms, and as far as Athens-Clarke County is concerned, it seems clear that keeping guns out of public parks is regulating where guns can be carried.

Never mind that it's likely that if wasn't pressing this case, 16-11-173 (2)(b)(1), at least as it relates to carrying a firearm, would be a little-noticed provision of state law that would, as is apparently the case in Athens-Clarke County, be breached to no ill effect. (my emphasis-gbw)


Of course, the immediate answer to that question from gun rights advocates is that an unarmed populace is at the mercy of anyone who might decide to turn a public place into a shooting gallery. And in this day of the 24-hour news cycle, that can seem like a real danger. Just last week, a troubled young man walked in to an Omaha mall and gunned down eight people before turning his gun on himself. Almost before the last shot was fired, network news anchors and reporters were in place at the mall, giving non-stop attention to the incident.

But when was the last time anyone was gunned down in an Athens-Clarke County park? Yeah, I know - it could happen tomorrow. But I'll bet that it won't. And I'll bet that it won't happen the next day, or the next, or the next. (my emphasis-gbw)

Mr. Thompson is free to believe what he wants to believe. Many who held this view have changed their minds after they were raped, robbed, or beaten. While I hope Mr. Thompson might come to see the light, I pray his personal wake-up call isn't as traumatic.

December 7, 2007

A day which will live in infamy...

Let us not forget what happened on this day, and the lives sacrificed for us on the altar of Freedom. 1100 lives were lost on the Arizona that December morning, a harbinger of the storm to come. They knew not they would be called that day for sacrifice on the altar of Freedom. Our brave men and women in uniform serve today knowing that call may come, and serve on.
God bless them all, and God bless the United States of America!

I have only four things to say about the Westroads Mall shootings:

1. My sincere condolences to the families.

2. Another mass murder in a gun-free zone.

3. Get your concealed carry permit, practice and carry.

4. Work toward more liberalized carry laws with fewer restrictions. A responsible, law-abiding adult should be able to carry anywhere he has a right to be.

Lessons From a Bird Feeder

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it is, as I filled it lovingly with seed. Within a week, we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

Then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue. Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table ... everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. Other birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder, squawked, and screamed at all hours of the day and night, and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio. Soon, the back yard was like it used to be quiet, serene and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.

Now let's see. Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, and free education and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen. Then the illegal's came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor; your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English.

Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to "press one" to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than "Old Glory" are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Just my opinion, but maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder. If you agree, pass it on; if not, continue cleaning up the poop!

(thanks, Tony)

December 6, 2007

No news here, move on.

What American accent do you have?
Your Result: The South

That's a Southern accent you've got there. You may love it, you may hate it, you may swear you don't have it, but whatever the case, we can hear it.

The Midland
The Northeast
The Inland North
The West
North Central
What American accent do you have?
Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

Nebraska Mall Shooting Info

Go over to Joe's Crabby Shack for up-to-date info.
Remember, this can happen here, too.
Yes, here.
Are you ready?

Gotta love it

The seven dwarfs always left to go work in the mine early each morning. As always, Snow White stayed home doing her domestic chores. As lunchtime approached, she would prepare their lunch and carry it to the mine.

One day as she arrived at the mine with the lunch, she saw that there had been a terrible cave-in. Tearfully, and fearing the worst, Snow White began calling out, hoping against hope that the dwarfs had somehow survived.

Hello, hello!" she shouted. "Can anyone hear me? Hello!"

For a long while, there was no answer. Losing hope, Snow White again shouted, "Hello! Is anyone down there?"

Just as she was about to give up all hope, there came a faint voice from deep within the mine. "Vote for Hillary, Vote for Hillary."

Snow White fell to her knees, crossed herself and prayed, "Oh, thank you, God! At least Dopey is still alive."

(HT to ConservaChick)

The Golden Compass - Why I won't see it.

I enjoyed the trailers for "The Golden Compass", and though initially eager to see it, I won't be. This may surprise my friends who know my affinity for fantasy, but the reason is simple. I try not to help those who seek to do me harm. I don't have to help them hurt me.

How so? Though toned down from the books upon which it is based, The Golden Compass is, by the author's design, propaganda about killing God (at least what he perceives to be God) and removing the influence of Christianity from public life. He likens it to an anti-Chronicles of Narnia. Now, the author had every right to pen his tale. The publisher had every right to print and distribute it. The producers and stars had every right to make the movie. The public has the right to purchase these products. Or not.

The price of my ticket and the fact of my presence in the theater would encourage the producers to move forward with plans to turn the remaining books in the trilogy into films. If I patronize this film, I directly participate in the authors stated purpose, to marginalize people of faith and "kill" God. This is not in my interest as a person of faith.

Though I won't be protesting and waving signs with "objectionable" slogans, my attitude and actions will still be vilified by some. I'll be called names and my intelligence will be questioned. People will make other negative assumptions about me because of what they perceive to be my intolerance and arrogance, that I'm trying to push my religion, or any for that matter, down their throats. (even though that's exactly what they are trying to do to me) And that is what I am talking about. I don't have to help them hurt me.

There are plenty of films which affirm people of faith. I prefer to spend my money there. For example, my sweet wife and I saw "Bella" a few evenings ago. I highly recommend it. (And if you go to Tinseltown on Tuesday evenings, admission is only $5!!) Movies like "Bella" seem trite and melodramatic to "sophisticates", but my observation shows me that's how much of life really is. Most of us are drama queens in the right (or wrong) circumstances.

I hope my $10 spent to see "Bella" will encourage the producers of that fine little independent film to produce more of the same. One thing is certain. The $10 I didn't spend on "The Golden Compass" can't do the same.

Religion of Peace. Yeah, that's the ticket.

A rehash, I know, but sometimes we need to be reminded...

"...the deadly consequences of carrying weapons."

Or at least that's what they think. A local government council is erecting bluetooth masts to broadcast a 60-second anti-gun broadcast to local students.

Yes, let's keep them brainwashed and unarmed. Otherwise the criminals might have a hostile work environment, and we wouldn't want that, would we?

(update) Took a spin over to read AnarchAngel, and lo and behold, what do I see?

SCHOOL 1977 vs. SCHOOL 2007

(received this via email)

Scenario: Jack goes duck hunting before school, pulls into school parking lot with shotgun in gun rack.

1977 - Vice principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his own shotgun to show Jack.

2007 - School goes into lock-down, the Feds and ATF are called, Jack is hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors are called in to assist traumatized students and teachers.

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.

1977 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies

2007- Police are called, SWAT team arrives and arrests Johnny and Mark. They are charged with assault and both are expelled even though Johnny started it.

Scenario: Jeffrey won't sit still in class, disrupts other students.

1977 - Jeffrey is sent to the principal's office and given a good paddling. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADD. School gets extra district funding because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1977 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. State psychologist tells Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some Aspirin to school.

1977 - Mark shares Aspirin with the school principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - Police are called and Mark is expelled from school for drug violations. His car is searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario: Pedro fails high-school English.

1977 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.

2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by local human rights group. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that making English a requirement for graduation is racist. Lawyers file class action lawsuit against the public school system and Pedro's English teacher. English is banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover 4th of July firecrackers, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up an anthill.

1977 - Ants die.

2007 -  FBI are called and Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism.  They investigate his parents, siblings are removed from the home, computers are confiscated, and Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario: Johnny falls during recess and scrapes his knee. His teacher, Mary, finds him crying, and gives him a hug to comfort him.

1977 - Johnny soon feels better and goes back to playing

2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in federal prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy.

December 5, 2007

Disappearing car door. I'm amazed.

See it here.

I don't think I can get this one by Accounting, though.

Thank you sir, may I have another?

Stiff Prison Term Upheld for Repeat Offender

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court unanimously upheld a stiff prison term Tuesday for a repeat offender who argued that some earlier convictions shouldn't count in calculating his sentence.

The ruling in the case of James Logan of Wisconsin is the latest effort by the court to clarify the Armed Career Criminal Act, most recently amended in 2004. The law allows longer sentences for "career criminals."

Logan pleaded guilty to possessing a gun after having been convicted of a felony. Federal law bars felons from having guns.

He received a term of 15 years because he also had three prior misdemeanor convictions in Wisconsin, punishable by up to three years in prison.

The Armed Career Criminal Act makes defendants eligible for longer prison terms if they have three prior criminal convictions for crimes that are either violent felonies or serious drug offenses. Misdemeanors also qualify if they have maximum prison terms of more than two years.

But Logan argued the misdemeanors should not have been considered because the law also says those convictions shouldn't count when an individual has his civil rights, which normally includes the right to vote, restored. In Wisconsin, misdemeanors do not result in the loss of civil rights, so Logan argued the convictions shouldn't be counted.

The court, however, was unpersuaded. "We hold that the words 'civil rights restored' do not cover the case of an offender who lost no civil rights," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.

The case is Logan v. U.S., 06-6911.

And I thought I'd never have a good thing to say about Justice Ginsburg.

Makes more sense than the Dept. of Education...

Instead of giving money to found colleges to promote learning, why don't they pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting anybody from learning anything? If it works as good as the Prohibition one did, why, in five years we would have the smartest race of people on earth.  -Will Rogers

5,600 Web sites spreading al-Qaida ideology...

Full story here.

There are now about 5,600 Web sites spreading al-Qaida ideology worldwide, and 900 more are appearing each year, a Saudi researcher told a national security conference on Tuesday.

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter, has identified the Internet as a key battlefield with militants who launched a campaign to topple the U.S.-allied ruling royal family in 2003.

"Research shows there are more than 5,600 sites on the Internet promoting the ideology of al-Qaida," Khaled al-Faram told the Information Technology and National Security conference in the Saudi capital of Riyadh.

"There are some 900 news sites appearing every year, and despite the retreat of some media outlets specifically run by al-Qaida, extremist Web sites are constantly on the rise."

He said it was difficult to track most of the sites, though hard-core al-Qaida sites often change addresses to avoid detection or start up again elsewhere once infiltrated.

Another gem from Ms. Washington...

Read it here.

I love the last line.

It's probably naive to think that Republican-Roberts-dominated Supremes will rule in favor of gun control. But then I still believe in Santa Claus.

That would explain a lot.

December 4, 2007

Qualifications for President

Much has been made of the qualifications, or lack thereof, the current crop of candidates for President bring to the table. Here's my take.

  1. They must be a natural born citizen of United States, having lived here for at least 14 years.
  2. They must have attained the age of 35 years by their inauguration.
  3. They must be able to take the oath of office.
  4. They must be able to persuade enough people to vote for them.

Anyway, that's all the Constitution demands.

Married to the State?

The entire article is here.

“There is an ominous change taking place in American culture that could revolutionize our politics, making it more difficult to sustain our free-market system and our tradition of self-reliance, driving more people into government dependency. This change is the decline in marriage and traditional family life. Democrats sense an opportunity in this decline. It could boost their political prospects tremendously... Increasing turnout among these unmarried women could help cinch 2008 and other future elections for the Democrats... Unmarried women, it turned out, were more likely than respondents in general to want the President and Congress to pay attention to health care, the economy and jobs, and Social Security and Medicare. They were less likely to want the President and Congress to pay attention to terrorism and national security, illegal immigration, energy and gas prices, taxes and spending, and moral values... What unmarried women seem to want in greater proportion than the overall population is a government that will take care of them. As marriage and family decline in America, the political pressure will mount for government to expand. When government grows, freedom shrinks. Baby boom liberals may forever deny it, but freedom depends on the bonds of marriage.” —Terence Jeffrey

This demographic isn't looking for a Nanny, they are looking for a Husband!!

"of ordinary understanding"

An interesting Founders' Quote Daily from The Patriot Post.

"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense.

Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure."

-- Thomas Jefferson (letter to William Johnson, 1823)

Are you listening, Congress? Kentucky legislators have done a pretty good job with this. I have yet to see anything in the Kentucky Revised Statutes that required a lawyer to interpret. I've seen some bad laws, but they were easily understood.

Though many laws are simple enough, the regulations which sprout from them... Oy! Can you say, "Tax code?" There really is no excuse for it, except we have allowed it to happen.