The Minuteman

Story: a 17 year old pregnant girl pays a 21 year old guy to beat her in order to cause a late term miscarriage.

Utah’s solution: criminalize miscarriage caused by “reckless behavior”.

What defines reckless behavior?  Supposedly the Utah law makers just want to prevent such an atrocity from happening again.

There are several factors that should be addressed before jumping straight to amending the current laws on the books.  First, look at the reasoning behind the girl’s actions, her boyfriend threatened to leave her if she didn’t do something about the baby. Second, what is her mental status considering she paid someone to beat her up?  Third, she must have a super low self esteem is she is willing to stay with the asshole of a boyfriend.

The consequences that could come down from this new law would include criminalizing women who don’t actually do anything wrong.  Women who have a miscarriage could be brought under scrutiny by the courts and possibly have charges brought against them for a natural cause of death.  These women don’t need the emotional and psychological burden added to them by the legal system.  They will already be under a slew of emotions just from the loss of a miscarriage.  A miscarriage does not equal abortion no matter how one looks at it.  An abortion is intentional, a miscarriage is a naturally occurring tragedy for the mom.

Another example of the games unions play in maximizing their leverage to get their way occurred Hawaii.

HECO executives said the strike would slow efforts to restore service to about 8,000 Oahu homes and businesses, mostly in the Ewa Beach area, that were without power last night.

It reminds me of the games Fox plays with different cable and satellite providers just prior to the Super Bowl.  Fox had done the same thing in the past with Time Warner and Comcast.  The crisis is created when the most customers will be in trouble.  Whether or not the raises are justified are inconsequential, people get very upset when their lights don’t come on with a flip of a switch.

If you get enough people to yell and scream, who don’t actually know or understand the facts, who are inconvenienced by your strike, they will support you to end it as quickly as possible.  People who do this are despicable, dishonest, and should just be terminated from their jobs.  This is nothing more than leveraging a crisis for extortion and using it to get their way. 

There  are a couple common sayings where I work.  Many of these sayings are extremely flexible and can be applied just about anywhere in your life.  Here are three of my favorites.

• Hope is not a plan

Hoping that something does or doesn’t happen isn’t a solution to the problem.  This goes for anything from fiscal crisis to violent crime.  Some hope that they will not become the statistical anomaly, however hope is not a plan.  It does nothing to prevent or alter the outcome regarding the events concerned.  Hoping a man doesn’t stab you while he’s mugging you isn’t really a plan to solve your problem.

This can be seen with other things as well.  Hoping a child doesn’t drown isn’t a plan, that’s why there is rescue equipment at most pools.  Hoping a kitchen fire doesn’t happen isn’t a solution to deal with the problem should one occur, instead many have fire extinguishers in their kitchen.  Hoping a tire doesn’t go flat on your car doesn’t prevent it from happening, that’s why you carry a spare.

This also goes for dealing with legislation, both good and bad.  I’ve been following HB 1016 and SB 5112 so closely and contacting those I should because hoping it will pass is not going to make it so.

A plan is a series of actions one is going to take to solve or prevent a problem.  Hope is merely trying to wish the problem away or out of existence. 

• Wait is not a verb

While the word “Wait” can be used as a verb, it is not actually an action.  It is used to indicate the absence of action.  Waiting for someone else to solve your problems is never a solution.  Waiting to do something is like letting a positive feedback loop run while providing no negative feedback negating none of it.  Eventually the problem will be so big you can do nothing about it.

Some would rather wait for someone else to solve their problems.  Some do this because they want to feel morally superior, others do it because they feel waiting isn’t a  problem.  The fact is though, problems get worse over time if nothing is done.  Calling someone else to solve your problem is still waiting because you’re not doing anything.

• If you want to see the future, invent (create) it

If you want to see the future of something you care about, then create it.  Don’t wait for someone else to create it for you, they may even create something that you really dislike.  From a rights and freedoms perspective you can help cement the future.  You can work to get legislation changed, you can work to gather information and rally others, there are numerous things  that can be done to create your future.

Back when I was still growing up, the future was still quite uncertain regarding gun rights.  Thankfully many throughout our culture have stepped up to create the future we have now and are still working so the future is even brighter than it is now.

Can anyone think of any others that should be added?

I came across something earlier in the week that was hilarious.

Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years

The solution to global warming is nuclear winter.  It just reminds me of that classic saying, “There are very few problems that cannot be solved by the suitable application of high-explosives.”  It just requires that they be applied correctly.

It is becoming more and more obvious that the war on drugs is a losing battle.

The Midgett crew flew into action. The crews of self-propelled semi-submersible vessels are known to scuttle their vessels upon detection, so the Midgett ordered the sub’s crew to the deck of the ship – and prepared to rescue the sub crew from the ocean in the event they sank the boat.

This is not the first submarine to be discovered recently.  Prohibition doesn’t work, it makes considerably money for criminals, because this is how prohibition works.

So the WSU Daily Evergreen ran a horrible opinion piece today regarding carrying concealed weapons on campus.  The piece was so full of inaccuracies, it just couldn’t be ignored, especially since many will take it as fact.

She starts by listing off Texas and Arizona which are currently looking at legalizing concealed carry on campus as Utah has done.  She then follows this up with this baffling quote of contradiction. 

I believe people should exercise their right to bear arms. Though I believe the right to bear arms should not be negated under any circumstance and strongly agree with the National Rifle Association slogan which states, “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people,” I have to question the expected benefits that come from passing these laws. Texas and Arizona are known for their gun friendly customs, but most students and faculty do not want this legislation passed. If the state’s efforts are to create a safer environment for the campus, they should pay more attention to the desires of the student body.

There is a common theme throughout that entire comment, feelings.  There are no facts presented, she attempts to justify the position by how most students and faculty feel.  Her arguments then continue on to what is called projection.  She uses many of the classic examples that we often hear the VPC or Brady Campaign use.

• The problem is actually quite rare and carrying is unnecessary.

Most people have a fire extinguisher in their kitchen, not because there is a high likelihood of fire, but because it’s a tool that can stop the problem before it becomes severe.  People have disaster preparedness kits in their garages for rare and statistically unlikely events.  Many have training in CPR and First Aid, I also am a Certified Rescue Diver, not because I expect to use any of them, but they are tools and training to help in an emergency.

Firearms are tools, they are carried not in the hope that something will occur, but to be used in the event of the unexpected.  Hope is not a plan, and wait is not a verb.  People who can defend themselves as well as others are disarmed and forced to be victims by the ban of weapons on campus.

People carry all the time, more than you probably even realize.  How is there a magical line that makes the campus any more safe than any other place?  Also, firearms are not used only in the incident of a mass shooting, but are used in other forms of self-defense against violent crime.

• Police won’t be able to differentiate between the good guys and bad guys.

This is a classic argument used by gun grabbers.  It has been proven false numerous times, including at Appalachian School of Law,  New Life Church Shootings, and even in Tucson a carrier not only wasn’t shot, but didn’t shoot the person who disarmed the shooter.  Searching through Google, I was not able to find any news article, or standard post indicating this has ever actually happened.  All I was able to find was stuff from the VPC and Brady Campaign spreading their lies.

• Someone else may obtain the weapon and use it.

Not everyone attending the university lives in the dorms or in Greek housing.  Why should they be punished and prevented from defending themselves because others do?  That aside, there are methods that can easily be employed to secure a weapon, even in dorms or Greek houses. 

• Carriers could go and get drunk while carrying.

This shows a complete ignorance of the law.  It is illegal to be drunk and carry.  Not only is it illegal, but it can result in your permit being suspended, weapon confiscated, and a mess of legal bills.  This whole assumption centers around projection.  The author sees herself doing it and assumes that everyone else would.  The bigger problem with that though is permit holders are some of the most law abiding people in the country.

These points also ignore the fact that 26 different colleges in three states have legalized carry on their campuses for permit holders and none of these points has been a problem. 

At the end, she closes that the school should fund alternative methods of security.  This action is nothing more than a security theater.  The fact is you are responsible for your own safety and security.  No matter how much money you throw at the problem, you will not be able to solve it by alternative methods.  Preventing people from effectively defending themselves serves no other purpose than to ensure that they are nothing more than defenseless victims should the unlikely actually happen.  This whole argument is about being prepared for the unexpected.  Just because it is unexpected doesn’t mean it can’t happen here.

The house already passed HB 1016, SB 5112 is the Senate Companion Bill.  It was scheduled for a second reading today.  A public hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee has been scheduled for March 9th, at 1:30 PM.

If the date or time change I will update it here.  If you can make it, please go and show your support.

My original letter can be seen here.

Yet again the A Security Theater failed to prevent someone from carrying a weapon onboard an airplane.  It wasn’t just any  weapon though, it was the same principal weapon used in the September 11th hijackings. 

A passenger managed to waltz past JFK’s ramped-up security gantlet with three boxcutters in his carry-on luggage — easily boarding an international flight while carrying the weapon of choice of the 9/11 hijackers, sources told The Post yesterday.

This is by no means a surprise to those of us who actually have bothered to pay attention to the TSA scorecard.  Here’s the other recent failures that come to mind.

• A man carried a firearm aboard in his laptop bag.
• Adam Savage carried two 12 inch steel razor blades.
• Missed a Knife.
• Teen sneaks onto a commercial jet.
• Another Missed Knife.

The TSA during red team tests has an abysmal failure rate.  Not only is it abysmal, Joe actually spent some time testing an X-Ray machine and found it is extremely easy to conceal a weapon.  Continuing on in the same article we see the following from the TSA:

"There have been a number of additional security layers that have been implemented on aircraft that would prevent someone from causing harm with boxcutters," she insisted.

"They include the possible presence of armed federal air marshals, hardened cockpit doors, flight crews trained in self-defense and a more vigilant traveling public who have demonstrated a willingness to intervene."

Which seriously begs the question, why do we need the TSA?  They do nothing but demean and humiliate the public.