Quote of the Day – Ambulance Driver (11/20/2012)

But as a son, no matter how far you have ventured into manhood yourself, you are never prepared to tell your father goodbye. I know this for a fact.

Ambulance DriverBob Scruggs
September 10th, 2012

[QFMFT.  I remember that day like it was yesterday.  I remember taking a couple midterms just after finding out about it.

It wasn’t really surprising to either my mom or I, cancer’s a bitch like that you know.  A friend of mine actually came up to the UW the day before to give me a ride home so I could say goodbye since it was obviously coming.  I said my goodbye’s though a part of me wishes I hadn’t because that is the image burned into my head, not as I saw him when I left back to UW that Sunday night.  That Sunday night was when he said his final goodbye to me.

I still wasn’t ready for it though.  Nothing ever really makes you ready for it.  I remember the Calculus test I took shortly after my mom told me over the phone.  I don’t however remember what I got on it.  I do remember the TA and professor looking at me like I was nuts.  My dad would have kicked my ass for using it as an excuse and I knew it.

Luckily the next week was Thanksgiving break, my roommate and I played a couple of rounds of Command and Conquer Generals as well as Ghost Recon trying to keep my mind off of it.

Come to think of it, I think that’s also when we recreated part of the battle of Gettysburg on the ceiling of our dorm room.

You thought I was kidding didn’t you?  Sadly I can’t find the rest of the pictures I took.

The wife was in the Cougar marching band and Apple Cup was at UW that year.  I drove back up early Saturday morning and worked on homework and played games.

I don’t remember who won, I do remember walking back across campus to the dorm with her after the game and someone said something derogatory about her, it was then I knew I was in the second stage of grief.  While wearing a UW sweatshirt I replied, “Said like a true Hucking Fusky” and just  squared my shoulders back while looking at him.  They peeled off as some of his friends urged him and we continue across campus uninterrupted.

There’s no way I would have swung first, but I kind of wanted someone to try it.  I wanted someone to fill in for the nameless unseen mass that had upended my life.  I wanted something to direct my anger and rage at.

I never really denied it, for the most part I just accepted it.  Just because I accepted it doesn’t mean I was happy about it.

While you can prepare for death as much as you would like, no matter what it just never seems to be enough.  Death however is a fact of life and boy does it suck. -B]

Quote of the Day – Tamara (11/19/2012)

Brethren and Sistern, there is an obvious lack of sufficient sermonizing here, so let me turn to the Book of Armaments, Chapter Four, Verse One: “Be Sure Of Your Target And What Is Beyond It.” There is no codicil that says “Unless you’re in a shoot house,” or “Unless you’re going really fast.

It’s not okay to shoot your fellow range patrons EVEN… and I’d like to make this perfectly clear… EVEN IF THE RSO SAYS IT’S COOL.

(Emphasis mine.)
Tamara KeelSeriously? Seriously?
November 18th, 2012

[While yes we can jokingly say wouldn’t it be nice at times if that were true.  But honestly thank god Tam is right.  Just because the RSO says your safe doesn’t absolve you from maintaining control of your weapon and properly identifying your targets.

Everyone is a RSO, period, full stop, end of discussion.  We all know these tacticool operators do and say some crazy crap.  The problem is impressionable youth take it and accept their quotes as gospel.  What happens in the end though is Mr. Tacticool ventilates someone who didn’t need ventilating.  The response from Fanbois?  Justification, absolvance, and excuses.  None step up to the accountability and responsibility department.  Both of which are critical for gun owners.

I wish I had saved it but recently I had stumbled across a video on Youtube and the individual in the comments started arguing against the four rules.  His complaint was because you need exceptions to the rules for things like maintenance and training.  The way around this is to create rules where no exceptions exist.  Funny thing for me is I’ve never needed an exception for maintenance or training.  Instead I use a dummy gun, or I watch my muzzle while cleaning and disassembling.  I promptly put him on my do not listen or watch list.*

Why?  Because the 4 rules are rules, without exemption and the wonder is you have to break two of them to end up in deep trouble.  I am willing to accept Alan’s condensed rules as it is merely the 4 rules condensed and non-redundant.  This individual had used a real weapon as a demonstration piece under the crux of it being unloaded.  Unloaded or not, I don’t like people pointing guns at me.  Why?  Because it’s how people get hurt and the comment after is always, “I thought it was unloaded.”  Grab any number of safe training methods, leave the real guns off to the side.

Back to the subject at hand though.  The nut behind the trigger ultimately has the responsibility of the safe handling and discharge of their weapon.  Failure to do so cannot be blamed on anyone other than the shooter.  The RSO is there as an extra set of eyes to try and stop things before they become unsafe.  Even then though final responsibility falls with shooter.

They don’t DQ RO’s when a shooter does something wrong for failing to stop them in time.  So why should anyone get a pass in this case?  -B]

*I would link said video, but I have spent the last 30 minutes searching and couldn’t find it.  It is possible and quite probable he pulled the video after trying to justify pointing a weapon at something he didn’t really want destroyed.  It was a video on muzzle up vs muzzle down and weapon retention.  If you know of the video, bump the link.  He was using an AR.

Quote of the Day – Joe Huffman(10/9/2012)

I think it’s doable. Won’t you help make my dream come true? It’s for the children.

Joe Huffman – The clock is ticking
October 8th, 2012

[It’s a worthy dream and important for the children of the future. Remember every time we create a smile like this:

Sarah Brady cries and they continue their decent into political irrelevancy.  Wont you think of the children and help throw a group of bigots into the dust bin of history.

Think about it, a generation who’s only knowledge of the Brady Campaign and CSGV will be that there is evil in the world that must be watched for and even if it’s found, it can be destroyed.

Donate, become active, continue the push.  Honestly I want to be able to buy a suppressor in the next 5 years and not have to wait for a year for a “stamp” so I can merely own a piece of safety equipment.  I think that is certainly within the realm of possibility.

Again, do it for the children.  Sarah Brady’s tears are just a bonus, a sweet, sweet bonus. -B]

Quote of the Day–Adam Kline (10/3/2012)

The NRA thrives on weak challenges; it sees them as fundraising opportunities. Its supporters are ready to believe that any gun bill — no matter how rational its purpose or how minor its scope — is a threat to God-given and constitutionally protected rights, and will contribute generously, giving the organization not only the psychological momentum of a win, but likely a surplus as well. It is up to us to choose our battles wisely.

(Emphasis mine)

Adam KlineSen. Kline: Democrats haven’t wimped out on guns

October 2, 2012

[h/t to Joe for the article. First, side rant. Adam Kline also said the following:

The way it works in this democracy is that we legislators represent our constituents. We can get a majority of our colleagues on an issue when enough of us sense that the people are there, or almost there, or at least going there, and that we may have to push them there, but at the end of the day our risk will not have been wasted. The work of moving public opinion on an issue cannot be done by legislators alone, whose work makes us generalists, but must be done by the activists who care particularly about that issue.

We don’t live in a democracy Mr. Kline.  We live in a constitutional republic.  I realize though that a majority of those who now work in the legislative bodies are ignorant of how the system was actually designed to work and prefer to twist and manipulate it to destroy the rights of the minority.  For you see a democracy is nothing more than mob-rule.  If the mob wants to take your property, they can.  If the mob wants to kill you, they can.  If the mob decides they would rather bleed you dry like a slave, they can.  The point of a constitutional republic is that both the majority and minority are protected equally.

Now back to the quote at hand, more specifically the part emphasized.  There is a reason we view it as a threat to a natural and enumerated right.  Because it IS! I grew up in the age of the 1994 assault weapons ban.  I remember it quite well and it’s goal was down right obvious.  Don’t believe me?  The most popular rifle in America would still be banned if it wasn’t for the expiration of the AWB.

That was claimed by supporters as being rational and the only way to curb gun violence.  The thing is, statistically gun control has been proven to be ineffective over and over again.  Further when you compare nations with strong gun controls it becomes obvious it creates a world that is less safe for the law abiding. 

That is the crux Mr. Kline.  The American public no longer likes being criminalized by the government for merely having and effective tool of self defense.  The American public sees what you’re doing and claiming for exactly what it is.  You’re issue is that you can no longer control the narrative.  Not only can you not control the narrative but you’re upset because the people on your side of the debate are crazy and violent.  Because of this your side of the debate is left standing still every time you attempt to infringe on that natural and enumerated right.

It is however unsurprising that you find your home the Peoples Republic of Puget Sound and you feel your “majority” other wise known merely as Seattle is a right for you to dictate life throughout the rest of the state.  I doubt this will make any difference given the 37th Legislative district is the equivalent of Communist China, but if you live there, please send that tyrant home.

So in closing Mr. Kline, in the words of Melvin Udall, “Where did they teach you to talk like this, some Panama City sailor wanna hump hump bar, or is this get-a-way day and your last shot at his whiskey, sell crazy some place else, we’re all stocked up here.”  -B]

Quote of the Day – A Girl and Her Gun (9/19/2012)

The most dangerous thing about these people is that they want to affect our minds. They want to convince us that we do not matter. That we have no value. That if we were truly decent and caring people we would care more about the man trying to shove parts of his body into you or me by force than our right not to have that happen.

A Girl and Her GunYou Have Worth

September 19th, 2012

[I find it interesting that our opponents arguments are exactly as A Girl points out more and more.  There is little to question about the way our opponents view criminals and the law-abiding.  Their views are that the life of the criminal is worth more than the person who is being violated.

How sad is it when their position in the argument is that you should let the criminal violate you and then the state will give him “due process”.  I don’t think he really understands how the legal system works.  Due process isn’t a method to argue against self-defense.  Due process is a legal term to protect the innocent from the force of the state.  Due process only applies within the realm of the state.  A criminal does not get entitled to have a jury vote thumbs up or down before their victim can fight back.  The victim is a one man jury and the state will apply due process on that one man jury.

What does this mean for criminals?  It means that if a criminal tries to kill someone, the victim can try to kill them right back.  In the eyes of the law and due process, the victim will be justified in their actions while the criminal will not.

Never mind that the particular individual who brought about this argument failed reading comprehension 101.  As I told A Girl yesterday regarding his commentary on “due process”:

WTFO? I think I just killed brain cells trying to make that supposedly logical leap…

It is unbelievable how willfully our opponents voice their distaste for the law-abiding while embracing, defending, and supporting criminals. -B]

Quote of the Day-Bill Quick(9/7/2012)

I live in California which means I am living in prison.

Bill Quick – Comment at Gun Blogger Rendezvous

[The most common reply to someone at GBR when they say they’re from California is either “I’m sorry” or “My Condolences.”  This comment was made while talking to a representative from the NRA when he was asking about what was on the horizon to help with the restrictions seen in places like California.

It is obvious that I’m around my kind of people.  While we all recognize that we are winning and doing well, as Joe said yesterday, “We’re no where near done, we’ve barely gotten started and have a long way to go.” -B]

Quote of the Day – @JeremyAllan (8/24/2012)

@barronbarnett @linoge_wotc I want her disarmed, yep. I don’t want her to be prey.

August 24, 2012

[Those two statements are mutually exclusive and I tried multiple analogies.  He also couldn’t understand how group punishment wouldn’t serve any purpose and is unfair.

That “conversation” on twitter was long and drawn out in the end three things were blatantly obvious.

First he suffers from Peterson Syndrome.  He would gladly have a higher overall crime rate for fewer “gun deaths”.

Second he cannot comprehend that disarming the law-abiding public makes them prey.  To most illustrate this point here was his final tweets:

@GunFreeZone @barronbarnett @linoge_wotc I truly hope you’re never in a position where you would feel the need to use your guns for defense.

@GunFreeZone @barronbarnett @linoge_wotc Because I don’t wish you or any of your loved ones harm. The opposite. Rather, prosperity.

Yet he admits he would prefer my wife who has a physical disability to be disarmed unable to effectively defend herself.  How can you be prosperous when you’re dead because you weren’t able to effectively defend yourself?

This also completely ignores the analogy I made for group punishment for alcohol and holding everyone who drinks responsible for the actions of others.  He dodged the question at first.  Then when he came back around, he said he would give it up if the law told him to.  Except history says that prohibition doesn’t work and any attempts to outlaw “insert noun here” always fail.  His solution was to say that didn’t matter and my argument was invalid.

Lastly he lives in a world of complete denial.  How warped is his denial, I linked to the Harvard study I talked about yesterday.  This was his response:

@barronbarnett @linoge_wotc @dthurstonHarvard is not infallible. This is propaganda.

When presented with facts and evidence, that has been peer-reviewed mind you, his response is to dismiss it as propaganda.  When someone is so ready and willing to dismiss any facts brought before them without a second thought what else is there?

I will add that throughout that entire debate, Linoge, Miguel, and I were the only ones backing our statements with examples and evidence.

All they offered was that guns should be banned and that would solve the problem.  What they don’t realize is that option has been examined, and the conclusions have been proven false, and the adults in the room have moved on in the conversation.  Their solution is to bring new people to the debate to scream for the same old thing as if some how doing it again, this time only harder will work.

I have some bad news to our opponents though.  No matter how badly you outlaw guns, people will have them.  Especially when it’s as easy as pressing the print button.  The debate is over, we’re merely still here because you’re currently grieving. -B]

Quote of the Day – Says Uncle (8/9/2012)

And people seem to think big truck means cut them off. Seriously, people, this things don’t come to a stop fast. Knock that off. A F550 nailing your Prius won’t go well.

Say UncleBlogging Notes

[It’s that time of the summer again. All the college students are coming back into town and I usually discover this is the case by narrowly avoiding accidents a couple of days in a row as people cut off and generally disrespect my truck.

It is amazing the number of people who seem to think that my truck since it doesn’t accelerate like a sports car must stop like a brick hitting the ground.  Umm, no, you see there’s this thing called Newton’s laws of motion.  That combined with momentum means that the next time you decide to whip around me and cut me off, I may not be able to slow down enough so that your right rear quarter doesn’t hit my front bumper.

If you see a full size truck on the road, respect it.  Also realize that the space he’s leaving between him and the vehicle in front of him is not so you can barely squeeze in, it’s so he doesn’t run that person over.  Also if you pull out in front of one at close range, on the highway no less, you better be testing your 0-60 time.  If that truck slams on his brakes, don’t act surprised and flip the bird when he passes you as you’re also doing 5 under.  Remember, might makes right, and well, your little Subaru isn’t a match for the truck.  [end rant] -B]