Quote of the Day-Michael Roberts(01272011)

To reiterate, people are compelled to comply with the violation of their personhood, and even the degradation of passenger safety, because they are afraid of what will happen if they refuse. And coercion by fear, called by any other name, is nevertheless the very epitome of terrorism. Whereas politicians make promises in exchange for power, the leveraging of fear to control the actions and decisions of others in society is the work of tyrants.” –Michael Roberts

[Michael Roberts is the pilot who refused the whole body scanners and started the public awareness campaign.  I highly suggest reading his speech given at the The Stripping of Freedom conference.

There is no question that the TSA is illegal and should be annihilated out of existence.  Their abuse of law abiding citizens in unforgivable yet many consider it necessary.  I am given no option in this, and people have vacated my rights for me that weren’t their rights to vacate to begin with. I am astonished when I hear someone say that is the cost for wanting to travel.  This is beyond what was done in Soviet Russia, how is this acceptable?  To be willing to vacate your rights out of fear means you weren’t worthy of them to begin with.

As Mr. Roberts says many are still traveling because they have to.  They put up with it out of fear.  Fear that if they refuse to travel they may loose their job, and on the other side fear of jail should they speak out against the screenings, there by still loosing their employment.  I would rather have an airline check luggage for bombs, even this is futile for the most part, and allow anyone with a concealed weapon permit to carry on board an aircraft.  I flew numerous times prior to September 11th with a knife in my pocket.  America did change on September 11th, it changed because of a bunch of intellectual cowards in congress created the DHS and flushed our rights down the drain. –B]

Come to bed honey…

I can’t someone’s wrong on the internet.

So a forum linked to one of my posts yesterday.  Before going to bed I went to look at the forum thread I am greeted with this wonderful blast of idiocy at the end:

Maybee i read this wrong but wont this also make assisted opening knifes illeagal?

(Spelling errors are left in place.)

Well, at least he admits that he possibly read it wrong.  The text of the bill can be seen here.  But suffice it to say that RCW 9.41.250 will be amended to add the following:

unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in accordance with federal law

When laws are amended, they underline additions, strike out removals. Section 9.41.250 currently reads:

(1) Every person who:
     (a) Manufactures, sells, or disposes of or possesses any instrument or weapon of the kind usually known as slung shot, sand club, or metal knuckles, or spring blade knife, or any knife the blade of which is automatically released by a spring mechanism or other mechanical device, or any knife having a blade which opens, or falls, or is ejected into position by the force of gravity, or by an outward, downward, or centrifugal thrust or movement;
     (b) Furtively carries with intent to conceal any dagger, dirk, pistol, or other dangerous weapon; or
     (c) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm,
is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW.
     (2) Subsection (1)(a) of this section does not apply to:
     (a) The possession of a spring blade knife by a law enforcement officer while the officer:
     (i) Is on official duty; or
     (ii) Is transporting the knife to or from the place where the knife is stored when the officer is not on official duty; or
     (b) The storage of a spring blade knife by a law enforcement officer.

This legislation is attempting to correct one of many wrongs in this horrible piece of crap that the state of Washington has laid upon it’s citizens.  To the person that wrote the comment above, don’t take this the wrong way, but there is a reason I’m being brash.  Coming out and saying something like that can get people to pull support because of your misinformation.  I would like to point out though, pretty much every locking blade I have ever had, I have figured out how to open it with an “outward, downward, or centrifugal thrust or movement.”  It’s next on my list of things to attack in this law, but it’s better to do things one step at a time.  It has been extremely difficult getting just the suppressor change this far. I wanted to post a kind statement, but since I got stuck waiting for admin approval to point out the inaccuracy I decided to be a little more forward.

Another TSA Lawsuit

This time from Jesse Ventura.

Jesse Ventura filed the lawsuit Monday in a Minnesota federal court against the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA, claiming that his right to not be subject to unwarranted searches and seizures is consistently violated when he flies.

The article then goes on to say that one of the key motivations is that Jesse Ventura is often stopped because he had hip replacement surgery.  Medical hardware of any kind makes flying a complete nightmare.  Seriously, as someone with hardware I refuse to fly.  Having a metal rod in each leg, one of which is in my femur has guaranteed a intimate visit behind the curtain since 2005.

My father in law has a prosthetic leg, the TSA wanted him to fully disassemble it.  We’re talking about every nut and bolt here where there was just bare metal for the flexing ankle.  What we have is people who barely have a high school education on a power trip, because someone felt that this would make us feel safer.  The TSA is A Security Theater, it makes the idiots think their safe while the rest of us get screwed.

Mr. Ventura is attacking on the grounds that they are warrantless searches, and a violation of the 4th amendment.  This also ignores the fact that they are trampling on rights that people cannot voluntarily surrender.  It’s good to see this happening in conjunction with the others currently in the works. 

Quote of the Day–Tamara (01/26/2011)

“At some point in American history, the first clause of Section 3 of our CEO’s job description,

“He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient…”

came to be interpreted as “Our Dear Leader shall, once per year, commandeer all our airwaves so that He might make the Divine Will known to us all. And then all the networks shall read the entrails of a goat. And there will be much rejoicing.”” – Tamara K. (Something I don’t Understand)

[I no longer have TV service and am instead just watching things occasionally on Netflix.  Even when I still had TV I never really watched the SOTU, instead I would read it.  It is considerably quicker to read without the long pauses for the praises clapping from the congregation congress.  His domination of the airwaves though is quite annoying, especially since all he does is read a damn teleprompter.  I can read on my own and don’t need the teacher to read it too me.  After the 10 minutes of reading, unlike the stooges that sit around watching the damn thing I can go back to being productive.  Some one has to be productive to fund the governments spending. Though now that I just discovered this, that could have been fun! –B]

Quote of the Day–Samuel Adams(01/25/2011)

“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first a right to life, secondly, to liberty; thirdly to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can.  Those are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.” –Samuel Adams, The Rights of the Colonists

[This used to be commonly held and beloved by the people in this country.  Now we have a government that is spending every penny it doesn’t have.  It has created government agencies who’s sole purpose is to abuse the American people using that borrowed money.  Some would like to increase the tax burden on the public to help cover the cost of those new agencies.  Agencies who’s sole purpose is the destruction of liberty.  Stealing our property, to destroy our liberty, I wonder how long until they start destroying people’s lives.  Mr. Obama, you and the rest of Washington do have a debt of trust, but trust like integrity, once lost can never be regained.  –B]

Cops are being targeted?

I stumbled across an article today and here’s the headline:

Authorities Fear Cops Being Targeted After at Least 11 Officers Shot in 24 Hours

When the word targeted is used, one expects some sort of evidence of collusion or a string of incidents where no motive can be clearly identified.

Digging into the different events we see that many of these incidents center around known criminals.  For instance the Shooting in Port Orchard (emphasis mine):

The man, Anthony A. Martinez, who was killed by a Kitsap County sheriff’s deputy during the shootout outside a Walmart store, already was facing felony charges of kidnapping the girl last year in Utah when they apparently again took off together last week.

Or the shooting in St. Petersburg (emphasis mine):

The most recent incident at a fugitive’s house in St. Petersburg, Fla., left two officers dead and a U.S. marshal wounded Monday.

Or the shooting in Indiana(emphasis mine):

Indianapolis Police Chief Paul Ciesielski says he believes 60-year-old Thomas Hardy is the man who shot officer David Moore twice in the face and in his chest and leg during a traffic stop Sunday, critically wounding Moore.

The Indiana Department of Correction says Hardy had a criminal history dating back to at least 1984, when he was sentenced to 13 years in prison on a burglary conviction. He was released on parole in 1990, but has been in and out of prison since then on various charges, including seven sentences for theft, one for cocaine possession and one for misdemeanor battery.

The only incident that really leaves any lingering questions is the shooting in Detroit.  Currently it appears the shooter was possibly upset at the conviction and sentencing of his brother Monday.  At the end of the article the Detroit Police Chief states the following:

“We don’t have any data, but there seems to be a type of criminal out there looking to thwart authority,” he told the station.

Thank you captain obvious.  Criminals do not care about the law and authority.  How egotistical do you have to be to think that people are hunting you just because you’re a cop.  About the only shooting that fits that description is the incident in Detroit, and that appears to be an isolated incident.  The rest were instances where the police were on the offensive and, surprise, the criminal shot back.  Note, I do not support the actions of criminals, however I do NOT find it surprising that they shot back.  To them they are fighting for survival, that’s what makes traffic stops and arrests so dangerous.  The criminal is about to get caught and from his point of view he has to fight to survive.

If the recent events are causing some police officers to believe they are being targeted, they might want to start investigating their behavior towards the public and remember that criminals do not obey the law.  I have dealt with some officers who definitely should not be wearing a uniform.  I am glad to say though most of my encounters with law enforcement have been very positive.  In talking to one of the officers I do see often, the reason they make sure that it’s positive is because of the help they get from the community because of it.  A few officers I know also like having citizens who carry because they know if it came to it we could and would help.  It boils down to knowing the officer though.  He likes the thought of a citizen being able to help should he require it, where I live a back up officer can take 20 minutes easily.  At the same time, I would be willing to help because his behavior towards me presents the likelihood that the officer is in the right in this instance. 

If you are an LEO and the events above make you feel like you’re being targeted, look at how you’re treating the public when you interact with them.  While it is understood you must be cautious, that gives you no reason to not be personable, approachable, or generally courteous.  Just because you wear the badge, doesn’t mean you’re exempt from laws or respectable behavior.  If you’re upset at the idea of the public video taping you while doing your job, you need to ask yourself why.  If it’s a public place, they certainly have every right.  There has been more than one incident where things occurred out of view of their dash camera and their microphone was off.

For those who think that officers can’t be personable, when I went and renewed my CPL I noticed the sheriff was wearing a 1911.  Ended up talking about firearms for a bit, he then pulled it out, unloaded it, and let me look at it, it was a Kimber TLE.  This was on Friday, he dropped my permit off the following Monday with my wife at home.  While some of that I realize is the benefit of living in a small town, the level of service and personably though should be what every department strives for.

Quote of the Day–Breda

I laughed. Friends from Arizona, Texas, Idaho, and Tennessee had been relaying messages in an attempt to locate the gunchick from Ohio…and I’d been on the opposite side of the same restaurant the entire time.
Isn’t the internet amazing? You meet the nicest people here.  –BredaA Funny Thing Happened

[While she may blame it on the niceties of the internet, I would be more apt to say it’s the general behavior of those in the gun community.  I have found the majority of the gun culture very friendly, helpful and open(seriously, watch the video, the guy let me squeeze of 10 bucks in ammo).  Gunnies naturally are eager to share their knowledge and help those around them, especially friends they’ve made along the way.  It doesn’t really have to be about guns, we just like helping.  -B]

Sometimes the truth hurts

For some reason this was marked as only “mostly true” though.

For the point the NRA is making — accidents only, guns v. medical misadventures — the numbers back up their claims but need clarification and context. We rate this claim Mostly True.

For those who aren’t aware, some doctors have been claiming that guns should be removed from the home because of the higher likely hood of being injured in an accident.  When one actually inspects the numbers you are more likely to die at the hands of your physician due to an accident than you are because of a firearm.

Politifact stated this was only mostly true, and from examining their reasoning it’s because of the number of deaths by suicide and murders.  The claim from doctors though pertains to accidents, and this statement is a rebuttal directly at doctors.  Not to mention the fact though that the number of deaths caused by those two items, would just be replaced by alternative tools.  CO2 in the garage, and a baseball bat both work to replace the firearm in the arena of suicides and murder.

Let’s play the substitution game:

  • You are more likely to be attacked by a toaster if you have one in your house.
  • You are more likely to suffer an electric shock if you have electricity wired to your house.
  • If you ride in a car, you’re more likely to die in an auto wreck. 

You can’t play the statistic game by saying because you have X it is more likely, that’s a given.  If you go see a doctor you’re more likely to die because a medical mistake.  There’s counters to each of the above:

  • Without a doctor you’re more likely to die from a simple disease. 
  • Without a car you’re more likely to die in a bicycle/horse/(insert alternative transportation idea here) riding accident. 
  • Without electricity you’re more likely to die in a fire caused by your alternative heat source.  Without a toaster, you wouldn’t have toast! 
  • Lastly, without a firearm, you are more likely to die at the hands of a criminal.

H/T: Alan