The Minuteman

As I said previously when carrying you’re a diplomat, and Robb Allen does a fantastic job in his interview.

I think Caleb from Gun Nuts Media said it better than I can.

I want everyone who advocates for open carry to go to Robb’s blog and watch the video he did with the local ABC affiliate.  That is how you advocate for open carry.  He looks like a normal dude, doesn’t shout about A RIGHT UNEXERCISED IS LOST, and he certainly didn’t wave a shotgun around.  Instead, he acted like a rational dude and made his points succinctly and intelligently.  And he even wore pants.

Whether or not you like it, while carrying you are having to break down the negative stereotypes associated with carrying from the media.  This is much more easily done by acting and behaving exactly like Robb did.  Serious kudos to you Robb, that’s the way to win hearts and minds!

Caused by another person from my graduating class.  This whole incident was one big gigantic bag of fail from bad decisions that was just waiting to happen.

Michael R. Fiorini , 26, was charged with fatally shooting Christopher D. Johnson , 27, around 3:15 a.m. Thursday.

Fiorini and his ex-girlfriend broke up in 2004 after dating for five years, according to court documents. He had been physically abusive, she told detectives.

The woman said she and Johnson had been dating about a month.

Ok this is the first sign that you had a very poor choice in a relationship at least you were smart enough to finally see it and get out.

Court documents give the following account:

After seeing Fiorini recently at a bar, the woman had started texting and talking on the phone with him. They were talking and texting the night of the shooting when Fiorini text-messaged her that Johnson wasn’t good for her.

You run into your physically abusive ex in a bar and decide it’s a good idea to start chatting again?  Then he finds out you have a new boyfriend, who thinks this could possibly end well?  Most certainly one should at least arm themselves when dealing with an abusive ex.

Fiorini said he was going to come over and kill Johnson.

The woman, 27, replied she would call police if he came over. He called 12 more times but she didn’t answer.

So yeah, how did that relying on the police work out for you.  The woman was lucky to get out of this incident alive, however her new boyfriend Chris was not.  The second the threat was issued given his previous history it should have been considered very real.  Numerous poor choices contributed to this event.  I really wish this would have ended better, if Fiorini ended up an addition to the Dead Goblin Count I wouldn’t be upset, but sadly in this case it was the innocent man caught in the middle.  Also if you hear your wife or girlfriend scream in the middle of the night, who comes out unarmed?

This is by no means the first time a horrible idea like this has come up, but this is just unbelievable. 

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has issued a letter instructing state police to release the names of authorized gun owners in Illinois to the press, the Associated Press is reporting.

Why would anyone think this is a good idea?  Whose business is it who owns a firearm.  All this serves to do is provide a shopping list for criminals.  They know which houses are armed and which houses are not.  They know which houses to wait until the owner leaves which will have another weapon for them, and which houses are unarmed to invade after stealing the weapon.  It’s a shopping list for criminals.    Not only that though, it provides a starting place for bigots to find and harass gun owners.

The ice cream machine is going to be down for the night.  The Short Lady with Grey Hair just informed me that my childhood cat just had to be put down.  Her kidneys had shut down and treatment over the past 3 days didn’t improve it.  She kept my mom company for the past 6 and half years after my dad passed away.

I might put some stuff up, but I think I’m going to find something more entertaining that staring at the abysmal problems created by our government.

This summer, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security plans to begin testing a portable DNA scanner, The Daily has learned.

They probably just want the DNA to verify your identity.  Except how would they do that unless they already had a sample on file?  What is most disturbing though is that DNA is exclusionary, not inclusive.  If the DNA doesn’t match you are clear, however if it does, there is a significant statistically likelihood you’re still innocent if the evidence is based on DNA alone.  Other forms of evidence need to be provided to illustrate your connection to the crime.

Many probably wouldn’t care, however this information is becoming more and more sensitive due to genetic conditions.  There is still the question of how exactly it’s going to be used, and if they’re going to try and skirt the 4th Amendment again.  Never the less, the rapid acquisition of power by the DHS is very concerning, and they’re only gaining more.

Here we are in the middle of a recession depression and Alexander Rodriquez is essentially getting out of paying taxes. The greedy ass baseball player, with a contract of being the highest paid player, has now figured out how to avoid real estate taxes that the rest of us have to pay.

When Rodriguez’s moves into his $6 million, five-bedroom penthouse his tax bill will be $1,150. In contrast, Stephen and Phyllis Franciosa pay $3,100 in taxes one their one-family home in the Pelham Bay section of the Bronx.

The middle class is repeatedly hosed on taxes, yet those that make large sums of money don’t have to pay a dime?  Taxes should have to be paid equally across the board, which means everyone pays the same amount.  Taxes should be a flat tax.  To take it further, everyone should pay the same dollar amount and not have it based on a flat income percentage.  People have no right to vote to raise taxes when they are not going to be paying it.  The idea of raising taxes on people who make more than $200k is simple for many who make less than $200k most are happy to say yes.  What right do they have to vote away someone else’s money?  For all intents and purposes they are taking it by force and putting it in their own pocket.

If you are receiving money from the public coffers, you have no business voting.  You are not actually paying or contributing to society, instead you are using force to make others support you.

I got my first piece of hate mail, and it was such a piece of work I felt it was best posted and responded to here.  All quotes are left unaltered, all quotes in red are a part of John Fowler’s email.  The whole email start to finish is contained here, with my comments placed in between parts.

From:
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 3:23 PM
To:
Subject: [TMM] You

John Fowler sent a message using the contact form at http://www.the-minuteman.org/contact.

I have a few things to say. Now, before you dismiss this as some random message filled with insults, I’d like you to consider this rather a form of aggressive constructive criticism.

A list of insults is not a good sign.  Constructive criticism, now that I can appreciate.

Firstly, you are extremely ugly and at least slightly overweight, which can cause health problems (you should have those checked out, maybe even the ugly part). Your fat cheek cups the stock of your gun like a baby breastfeeding.

It almost makes me feel dirty to look at it, despite there being no pornographic material whatsoever.

I fail to see how my being ugly is constructive criticism.  I am exactly how my mom and dad made me.  While I am overweight, I am still active and in decent shape.  My wife feels no fat in my cheek, neither do I.  I have the standard pad from the gap created by the Maxilla, Zygomatic Bone, Zygomatic Arch, and the Sphenoid Bone, where the Coronoid Process of the Mandible inserts.  The gap is covered by the Masseter muscle, as well as the Zygomaticus major and minor muscles which allow facial expression.  If you want I can have my doctor remove them so I can no longer smile and just constantly looked pissed off.

Secondly, your article on TSA, Lost Fliers and EPIC Lawsuits: No. They are not breaking the law. Because the law has not yet been defined. Therefore they CANNOT in any way, shape or form break that law. You say that yourself in the article, you idiot. You contradict yourself a minimum of four times in the article. And you know what? Flying is a choice. A privelege. Provided NOT by the government, but by individual companies who must make flight safe by THEIR standards, not YOURS. These are BUSINESSES, not government fucking agencies.

Actually they are breaking the law, the 4th Amendment is pretty clear on that fact. It is so clear in fact they admit to violating it, but I guess you were too lazy to watch the video.  That is in fact breaking the law PERIOD.  Can you please point out how I contradict myself in that article, because the theme through the whole article is how the TSA is pointless and breaking the law.  The closest it gets to violating that theme is my translation full of snark regarding the TSA requesting the justice department to NOT issue an injunction banning the use of the body scanners.  So the government was asking them not to give an injunction and let them continue breaking the law.

As for flying being a choice yes it is, however airlines are run by private enterprise just as you state.  The TSA though, is a part of the Department of Homeland Security and is run by the government.  Airlines are not free to choose their own screening methods, or what they deem necessary for the security of their airlines.  The TSA is refusing to allow private screening companies to take over and replace them.  So what voice do the airlines have in these standards, because as the Port Authorities attempt to replace the TSA, the TSA isn’t allowing it to happen.  The TSA is the one responsible for creating their standards and practices.

Thirdly, comparing your “plight” in this country to the Jews defending themselves from Nazis in WW2? Really? Do I even need to comment on this? Are you really so colossally fucking ignorant and self-absorbed that you believe you can empathize with THAT particular group of people? Wow. Just wow.

What exactly is the “plight” you are referencing?  My assumption is you are referencing gun control and gun rights.  I in no way started this comparison; it has been attributed to a man by the name of Aaron Zelman.  His grandfather survived the Holocaust and he founded the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.  There is a direct tie between gun control and the disarmament of the Jewish people.  I am not the only one who has used this analogy, and it is a very common thread given history.

Fourthly: “Many ask why I feel this way and the answer is always the same, history. I’ve studied it, learned from it, and found things that embodied the best in humanity” – Is this part of the reason you got kicked out of college? 

You ‘know too much’ about stuff? Since your car crash “ding” on your record provided you such “insight” into “the system”, one might assume that you would have the knowledge and foresight to graduate from a fucking four year college.

Obviously you didn’t read very carefully (quote below is from me):

“I graduated in 2008 with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering, or applied mathematics as I call it.”

I was never kicked out of college, I don’t know where you got the idea I was kicked out.  I left UW and went to WSU because I wasn’t accepted into their engineering program.  I attribute this to the fact I wasn’t an international student paying a huge tuition fee or altering their diversity numbers in a politically correct way.  I know this because others were accepted into the UW School of Engineering who had received lower grades. Instead of being a wuss and going to business school, I transferred to WSU and was immediately accepted into their engineering program. 

Your constructive criticism is downright helpful!  You made me go back in time and finish a degree I already had earned, not for you, not for anyone else other than myself.

Fifth, “What we’re seeing now is their fear, they know it’s coming to an end if they can’t get the public to believe their lies again. Well if they can’t get the lies to be believed, all they have left is violence.” – your comment on the Democrats’ opinion of the labor battles in Wisconsin. You know, for all you criticise others on violent behavior, narcissistic tendencies, and even sociopathic behavior, you certainly display a lot of the signs yourself.

Citations please?  While I have posted some content that some would consider advocating violence, they are only such if completely removed from proper context.  Many have noticed that the left resorts to violence when their lies and deceit no longer work.  This is not constructive criticism otherwise you would have cited examples.  Have you ever actually done peer reviewed papers and actually had to provide constructive criticism, because I haven’t really seen any yet.  I have never openly stated that unprovoked violence is ok.  The closest I have ever come is my essay on “When to Fight”.  I avoid conflict as much as possible and attempt to resolve issues by peaceful means.  The only fights I have ever been in, I did not throw the first punch.  What I do advocate is defending yourself, your family, your property, and your tools for self-defense themselves.

Sixth, wow, I’m no professional writer but you are terrible with punctuation.

I mean, absolutely horrific.

Again, please cite examples?  I’m more than happy to make corrections when I am informed of errors.  What I’m actually sensing is that you are upset with my writing style.  I am the one writing, not you.  If you don’t like what I write or how I write, go someplace else.  I am not forcing you to read this.  If you think my writing can be improved, illustrate it. Please don’t forget the misspelling of “criticize” in the Fifth judgment, “privilege” in the Second judgment and the improper period after “No” in the Second judgment should have been “No!” or “No,” as it was being used exclamatorily.  If you want to criticize one must be flawless in doing so.

Seventh, you give other people who own firearms a bad name.

Well I cannot rebuke this directly because that becomes a “me versus you” argument.  So instead I emailed Joe Huffman for his opinion of your statement.  Here is his reply:

“I vehemently disagree with him on point 7.”

That from the man ranked #19 in the list of top gun blogs.

Then Laurel said the following:

“Don’t feed the trolls.”

So another gun blogger, disagrees, and obviously feels you’re trolling.

You piece of trash.

Sincerely,

John Fowler, your biggest constructive critic

Again, calling me a piece of trash is constructive criticism?   So let’s synopsize all of this.

• I’m fat
• I’m ugly
• The TSA is not breaking the law because the law isn’t defined even though they admit violating the 4th amendment
• Using a comparison made by a major member of the gun culture who had every right to makes me wrong.
• I never graduated from college and my B.S. in Electrical Engineering doesn’t actually exist
• I’m self-absorbed, prone to violence, and a sociopath, yet there is no evidence to support that since there are no examples given.
• I’m horrible at writing because you dislike my style.  Again no actual examples or how to improve my writing.
• I make all firearms owners look horrible despite the fact others would disagree.
• I’m a piece of trash, why I’m not really sure.

Here’s some constructive criticism for you Mr. Fowler. 

• Engage the person you’re trying to improve.
• Make sure you really understand what you’re talking about.
• Don’t make personal statements, no matter how much you want to, those are insults not criticism.
• Identify areas that need improvement and then use them as examples stating how you would improve them.
• Make sure you can back up any statement with evidence of why it’s true, and if it’s constructive you need to provide what can be done to change that fact. 

Today a new reference on the definition of narcissism was added to Webster’s.  Nancy Pelosi has now added her picture to Webster’s Dictionary.

"I have some friendly amendments," said Christine Pelosi, a political strategist, at the committee’s session during the DNC Winter Meeting at the Marriott Wardman Park hotel Thursday afternoon. She is a member of the committee.
"You think I’m kidding," Christine Pelosi added, to surprised laughter from the room. The proposed changes, she indicated, came out of a discussion with her mother.

She actually rewrote the complements coming from her own party because they weren’t good enough.  This woman is delusional, she feels that she is beloved by all of America, and if she was any more self absorbed she could be the spokeswoman for Bounty.