"...We love to cut you down to size, we love dirty laundry..."

One would think that was KDFW Fox 4 Dallas' theme song, after seeing the following video.
First, a bit of background, from the Dallas Morning News:

A Ledbetter-area business owner fatally shot a suspected burglar Sunday morning – the second time in three weeks that he killed an intruder, Dallas police said.

James Walton, owner of Able Walton Machine & Welding in the 2000 block of Chalk Hill Road in West Dallas, was alerted to the intruder when his motion sensor system activated about 9 a.m. Sunday, police said.

Mr. Walton, who also lives at his business, went downstairs with a shotgun and fired at a man who had broken in. The intruder was later identified by police as Jimmy Gannon of Ferris.

Now, take a gander at how Rebecca Aguilar ambushed Mr. Walton in the parking lot of the Academy where he went to get a shotgun to replace the one the police took from him:



"Are those tears of remorse?...Are you a trigger-happy kind of person? Izzat what you wanted to do, shoot to kill?" Good grief, this Rebecca Aguilar is a real piece of shit. They haven't even invented the words to describe just how contemptible that sort of judgmental, self-righteous, ratings-hungry behavior is, not to mention the mooks who would engage in it.
As Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit said:

I was struck by reporter Rebecca Aguilar's body-language, literally standing over him in judgment with tailored suit and umbrella. The way she looked down, literally and figuratively, on an old man who had defended his life, entirely legally, and reduced him to tears seems to me to be representative of the worst stereotypes of Old Media.

A-yep. I would say I hope creatures like Aguilar aren't ever forced to make the choice of whether to pull that trigger, but I can't say that because it's not true. I would love nothing more than to see people like Aguilar be forced to make that decision and the sooner the better. It's really the only adequate remedy to such reprehensible behavior. I know it'll likely never happen, but we can certainly all hope. Maybe if it did she and those like her wouldn't be so damn judgmental.
In the meantime, it seems Aguilar has been suspended by KDFW for her reprehensible behavior. Time will tell if she keeps her job, but whether or not she does, I still shudder to think how many reporters in all forms of media see that and don't think she did anything wrong.

I Get Referrals...

From Wilmington, Ohio, "How much is a Ruger P90DC worth?"
My question is, why in the hell would you wanna sell it? The Ruger P-Series pistols are arguably the best value in the market for what they cost. Maybe a bit bulky for a carry piece, but for a house or truck pistol you could hardly do better. Granted, the P90 is on an entirely different level than, say, a Sig P220 or Kimber Covert, but I'll say this anyway -- When it comes to a defensive sidearm, if one could plot a price vs. quality curve on a graph, the Ruger P-series pistols would probably occupy the sweet spot on it. Buddy, if you're out there, keep that gun. If you get rid of it, you'll regret it one day.

Monday Media Snippet Musings

Now this just floored me. I never would have expected this kind of snark to appear in any major newspaper, even the Dallas Morning News:

Re: "Teen opens fire at school – Suspended student kills himself after injuring 4 in Cleveland," Thursday news story.

Tragic school shootings are still occurring, and school children are dying. All gun ownership should be prohibited except by the military and law enforcement. People would feel safer and not ever worry about being shot by a criminal.

Germany successfully confiscated weapons in 1938, while Rwanda and Uganda disarmed the populace.

These examples bear witness to successful government confiscation, so are American citizens ready for these next steps?

Makes me wonder how many people caught what the writer was really getting at, although I am sure there were some who were thinking he was actually serious and -- more frighteningly -- agreed with him. But that was just brilliant. I tell you what, some of the letter-writers are better than the people who actually write for the papers. Which brings me to the next item, from Cornell Sun blogger Tony Manfred:

...People aren’t keeping muskets in their cupboards in case the government comes and tries to take their land; they are stockpiling assault rifles so they can go out and murder dozens of little kids before anyone can even reach for their cell phone to call 911. Our loyalty to the Constitution is killing thousands of Americans a year.
And for those who want to keep guns legal so that they can fulfill some twisted fetish by murdering defenseless animals, I’m deeply sorry. I know that hunting is a popular hobby in this country but allowing people the pleasure of slaughtering animals at the expense of human lives is unacceptable. Once guns are made illegal, hunters can trap deer and beat them with baseball bats or knife them to death, everyone wins.
The delusional Neanderthals at the National Rifle Association should be charged as accomplices in every gun-related murder since 1871. Their efforts to brainwash millions of people and bully politicians into thinking that anti-gun laws are written by communist traitors have led to hundreds of thousands of murders. The NRA’s motto for demanding widespread firearm availability, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” is one of the single dumbest combination of words in the English language. Are you kidding? If I don’t have a gun, the likelihood that I will be able to kill to you is undeniably much lower. Guns kill people. There is no chance that Americans would be killing each other at this high a rate if guns were illegal. You’d have to be crazy to think that there would be the same amount of murders in this country if no one had firearms. Something that can inflict as much damage as a gun has no business being readily available.
I’m all for individual liberty, but giving 300 million people the option to murder each other is not an inalienable right. The idea that not allowing citizens to carry firearms strips them of their rights is vastly overstated. My right to stay alive, my right to not get murdered, supercedes your right to have the option of murdering me. This is a case of putting the right to life behind the right to bear arms. Fewer guns make everyone safer. Banning guns allows for an unfettered pursuit of happiness.

To think the leftists accuse the People of the Gun of being closed-minded, reactionary bigots. And the pot sayeth unto the kettle, "thou art black!" He calls us delusional Neanderthals...how delightfully open-minded and tolerant of him!
"Stockpiling assault rifles so they can go out and murder dozens of little kids." What the hell do you say to that? And what does it say about the people who run the Cornell Sun that they would let anyone write such a hateful screed? Just think -- brain-dead mooks like Manfred are going to be the ones running the major media institutions in this country before we know it! Doesn't that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside? I know it does me!
Fewer guns make everyone safer, eh? Yes, indeed. Ask all the German Jews who had their guns taken away from them, or how about some of those ethnic Tutsis in Rwanda, or the Cambodians who lived under the rule of the Khmer Rouge...oh, wait, you might have a problem with that, considering so many of them are six feet under, which is arguably a state of being that can hardly be characterized as being safer...
One more time, for all you gun-haters reading this. Molon Labe, you sons of bitches. Come and get them. And do it your own damned selves. At least show that much integrity, instead of sending other men with guns to do your dirty work for you.

An Awesome Tune, From An Awesome CD, From An Awesome Band

Now playing here: Cross Canadian Ragweed, "17," from their 2002 self-titled "purple" album...
"The porch swing still looks the same, she probably won't even remember my name, just like she didn't back then...is she married, is she doin' fine, does she know about all the nights I laid awake cryin', just to know her hand...the door opens and I run away, just like the same ole clown...you're always 17 in your hometown..."

UPDATE: 10:40pm Texas time: Pat Green & Cory Morrow, "Are You Sure Hank Done It This Way," from 2000's Songs We Wish We'd Written. Yes, the Waylon hit from 1975, and it rawks...

More Shania Fanboy Invective!

...in comments to this post:

You are seriously jealous or something. You seem to forget that Shania is a global megastar and long eclisped your little country station.

As I said immediately after, the only thing Shania Twain ever "eclisped" was the level of teh suck that she established for herself to begin with. I really don't give a damn about her success or the lack of it. What I have the problem with is the fact that she was marketed as a country artist and radio people gave her airplay that would have been better spent on artists who weren't using the country genre and radio format as a jumping-off point to other genres. I am every bit as disgusted with that as I am the Dixie Chicks using the platform they were given as a result of their success as a platform to spout off political crap. As for me being jealous, that's just about the most damnably pathetic argument I've seen as of yet. I am quite happy with my life and my musical tastes, what the hell would I have to be jealous of?
I don't begrudge Shania Twain her success. She makes pretty decent bubble-gum pop, I guess, but to call it country is, to put it mildly, an insult to the genre and everyone who made it what it is today. As for the selling the records without "catoring" to country radio...well, there are a lot of people who sell records without kowtowing to the ridiculous confines of country radio. Maybe not in the tens of millions, but they do make a pretty fair living as far as I can tell; if they couldn't make a living at it I'd guess they wouldn't still be doing it. And even if they did sell millions of records, you wouldn't find us as their fans using those numbers trying to justify our tastes as so many of Shania Twain fans do. And yeah, it IS "so many." I have seen more people than I can count over the last ten years use that EXACT argument. They think it's such a big deal and I don't understand why. Granted, I think it's cool that somebody like George Strait can go platinum singing George Jones and Guy Clark and Bruce Robison songs like he did on his latest cd, but even if he didn't I'd still like him and buy his cds and go see him live when I could. I suppose the Shania Twain and Faith Hill fans feel the same way, but still I can't help but think they're more than a little bit insecure. If they weren't they wouldn't find any validation in the fact that millions of others share their tastes. But that's just what I think about that.

More Good Stuff...

here: Bruce Robison and Kelly Willis, "Angry All the Time." Tim McGraw had the hit with it, but Bruce was the writer and the one who recorded it first. For my money Bruce is a much better singer, though Tim did a serviceable job with it....

Friday Morning Computer Musings

So I had a couple of interesting conversations this week with a computer tech. He spent some time in the Army and he's been tinkering with electronics longer'n I've been alive. Of course the old PC vs. Mac debate came up, and being the recent Mac convert I had to ask him what he thought, especially considering the fact that Microsoft recently rolled out the bug-riddled Vista operating system. He had nothing but good things to say about the Mac, and basically said Microsoft more or less conditioned the world to accept less than the best when it comes to operating systems with the way the company operated; the systems they put out would more or less run on any PC with the appropriate specs regardless of who made the individual parts, but they could get away with that because of the way they wrote the software, which of course is what leads to crashes, viruses and the like. This is in direct contrast, of course, to the Apple OS which will only run on the Apple computer. Not only that, the way some manufacturers put those PCs together leaves a lot to be desired, especially as it relates to memory. Just for an example, I went to see him again yesterday and he was working on a Compaq with Vista installed. As if Vista wasn't flawed enough, it took more than half the computer's memory just to start the damn thing up, let alone run it continuously, or its programs -- and this was with the memory that came from the factory. Then he showed me an error message he was getting, which showed that the computer was having problems with a printer port -- and that particular computer didn't even have that kind of printer port. He told me he would not recommend a person in the market for a new computer get a PC with Vista for at least another six months, after Microsoft rolled out the service packs for it. I don't know how well Vista is selling and don't really care, but I'd be willing to bet this particular example was not an isolated one. It was a bit serendipitous that I ran into this fella, as earlier this week I saw the picture below on another blog...


Some might think what I am about to say is just nit-picking, but I'll say it anyway. Used to it didn't bother me so much, but it burns my tail more and more when I see reliance on hardware or software that doesn't come from Microsoft cast as a defining characteristic of a lefty moonbat. (Note: I most emphatically DO NOT think Ron Paul is a moonbat even though I don't agree with some of his foreign policy ideas, but if you read most of the righty blogs you'll see that sentiment expressed.) If I were a betting man, I'd bet my next firearm that the vast majority of those who make fun of folks who rely on non-Microsoft products have never even used those products. (Mike Hendrix at Cold Fury came up with a dead-on term for the malady those people suffer -- Apple Derangement Syndrome.) I have to wonder what these people would say if they ever sat down and used an Apple, or Firefox for that matter.
Oh, yeah, and speaking of alternate web browsers -- I told this same computer tech about the nickname I've seen for the Microsoft browser, Internet Exploder. His response?
"Yeah, that's about right."

A few words on bein' a Texan...

jimmyb said in comments to this post...

I could be a Texan?!!?!!?

You honor me, sir.

And you could be an Ohioan.

Or is that an insult...?

There's a whole lot of folks out there who measure up to the honor of bein' a Texan, I think. Texas is just as much a state of mind as it is a geographical location, if not more so. Call it like you see it, live and let live, and that sort of thing. You don't necessarily have to be born or raised between the Sabine and Rio Grande to measure up to the lofty Texas standard, and by the same token just because you were born and/or raised in Texas doesn't automatically make you authentic. For some reason the late, lamented Molly Ivins comes to mind, the Texas-born newspaper columnist who trafficked in hoary cliches, faux populism, trusty canards, and half-truths (and yes, Mr. Chaffin, I did steal that from you. :)). Maybe I would have thought differently had I agreed with what she said, but I still can't help but think I'd have been immensely embarrassed for my state and my political ideology that someone like Molly was who represented them both. (As far as Texas newspaper columnists go, I much prefer Leon Hale.)
As far as bein' an Ohioan -- well, I haven't met that many, though I'd guess most of 'em were good, salt-of-the-earth folk, much like Texans. I did have this one girl from Lorain screw me over but good several years ago, but I'm not gonna paint everybody from the Buckeye State as deceitful, clueless ****s. I would consider bein' an Ohioan as a compliment in most cases. Now, New Yorker, New Jerseyan or Massachusettsite, THAT might be different... ;-)

I think he missed the irony...

Some idiot leftist blogger, on the shooting of the kids by the Wisconsin cop:

Well.. here we are again. A tiny town in Wisconsin, 7 young kids are dead and no one knows why. A deputy sheriff who was 20 years old apparently got into a jealous rage and went after a girl, taking the others in his path.

He was a deputy sheriff. He was a cop. He was obviously dangerous and he was armed.

So when, oh when will there be gun control in this country? How many more have to die?

"When will there be gun control"? Hey Sparky, guess what? They HAVE gun control in Wisconsin. As a matter of fact it's one of only two states where you cannot lawfully carry a firearm on your person under any circumstances -- in other words, it's exactly the conditions you and your emasculated gun-hating brethren want us all to have to live under. You could even say that "the government...(had) a monopoly on force" here. (Ladd Everitt, call your office, you evil son of a bitch!)
And as Dave Hardy points out, the Big Three of the gun-grabbing organizations in the U.S. are all conspicuously silent on the matter. I wonder why that is? Maybe because what happened up there put the lie to the statement that only the police and the military should have guns? Or maybe they think that if they ignore what happened, it'll be swept under the rug or maybe those people that evil bastard killed will all come back to life?Whatever it may be, they can all go straight to hell, the whole sorry lot of them.
(h/t Nicki)

What Planet Are These People From?

More idiocy from the aforementioned Ladd Everitt of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Ownership:

"If we love to say that we’re the freest country, then why [do]… our elected representatives… talk about getting government out of people’s lives? If you’re so proud of democracy then acknowledge that government had some role in that."

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over? I believe it was Ronald Reagan who said, "that government which governs best, governs least." The only roles the government has in a nation of free people is to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to (the people) and (their) Posterity." And I for one will acknowledge those roles, but beyond that the only legitimate role the government has is to stay the hell out of the way. Personally, I think that the more the government meddles in people's lives, the more it undermines the role of insuring the domestic tranquility. And that's why elected officials talk about getting government out of people's lives, and furthermore, it's also why those who act on that talk are held in such high esteem by freedom-loving people.
And there was something I don't think I addressed before, namely Everitt's being so aghast at the prospect of the overthrow of "our democratically elected government." I just have to ask myself, have he and his acolytes even read any of the documents this country was founded on? Specifically the Declaration of Independence? I mean, the men who wrote that document freely and openly acknowledged in said document that such action was THE RIGHT AND DUTY OF A FREE PEOPLE. Don't take my word for it. Read it for yourself, if of course you haven't already:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

We hold that document in such high esteem that we have been celebrating its creation -- and the actions those men and many more took to back it up -- for the last 200-plus years. And this is but one more reason I can't ascribe the motives of Everitt and his minions to ignorance any longer. One more time, folks, these people are evil to the core. Somehow I think they speak so frankly because they're frustrated at the lack of progress of their insidious agenda, and I don't think it's too late yet to keep working within the system of government we have set up -- but even so, I said it at 45superman's place yesterday and I'll say it here:
The more I hear talk such as that coming from Everitt and people like him, the more I agree with a quote posted on David Codrea's blog by Mike Vanderboegh that led into one of his essays:
"Hell, let's just start shooting the bastards. Let's get this crap over with while I'm still young enough to march in the victory parade down Pennsylvania Avenue."

D.C. Gun-Ban Advocates Get Pwned

...and you can read it here. A few choice snippets:

The court of appeals explained that allowing individuals to possess only non-functional firearms inside their home is tantamount to prohibiting such
weapons outright. "As appellants accurately point out, § 7-2507.02 would reduce a pistol to a useless hunk of ‘metal and springs.'"...

The city's handgun ban is not rendered constitutional simply because the city claims (mistakenly) to refrain from violating the Constitution in other ways, e.g., by not banning rifles and shotguns. The court of appeals aptly described that argument as "frivolous." Pet. App. at 53a. By Petitioner's logic, the city could ban the practice of religions it believes foment a disproportionate level of violence so long as it "allowed" an array of other religious practices that still satisfy spiritual needs. ...

The rights secured by the Second Amendment are not negated by the various policy preferences masquerading as social science in Petitioners' brief.
The city is not required to approve of the freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The city is not required to believe such rights are efficient or well-advised, or contribute to the formation of a wholesome society. The city is required only to obey the Constitution.
There is not one individual right secured by the Constitution that cannot be challenged in some manner on policy grounds. The fact that some may think those values unwise, or even unsafe, does not mean they may simply be ignored. Indeed, the whole point of enshrining certain rights in a constitution is to ensure that the liberties they protect not be subject to competing, evolving – and often, as in this case, misinformed – policy views of government officials.
And if policy benefits could be invoked to ignore constitutional provisions delegating power to the government, this Court would soon be asked to adjudicate the existence of everything from the postal monopoly to the income tax.
Petitioners' opinions of the normative policy choices reflected in the Constitution, as ratified and still operable today, are irrelevant. Whatever a court of social science might say about the city’s firearms prohibitions, this is a court of law. ...


Petitioners correctly note that the Second Amendment "does not require the District to stand by while its citizens die." Pet. at 30 (emphasis added). Yet the city consistently fights to secure its right to stand by while its citizens are victimized by crime.
For example, the city has successfully defended its right to "stand by while its citizens" are raped, kidnapped from their homes, and further abused. Warren
30 v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981) (en banc). The city has likewise successfully defended its right to "stand by" in the face of the worst urban rioting in our nation’s history. Westminster Investing Co. v. G.C. Murphy Co., 434 F.2d 521 (D.C. Cir. 1970).
The city has even defended its right to "stand by while its citizens die" when the perpetrator is a police officer. Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. 1983) (en banc). Indeed, the city has asserted its right to "stand by while its citizens die" in the course of volunteering their assistance to the police. Butera v. District of Columbia, 235 F.3d 637 (D.C. Cir. 2001).

I'm just a layman, and a clearly biased one at that, but that has to be the most thorough dismantling of an opponent's case that I've ever seen. And we're not just talking about Fenty and his minions in Washington either. The anti-gunners from sea to shining sea always bring up the point that we as citizens don't need guns, that the police will protect us, but they have never once addressed the judicial precedent -- set by more than a few cases -- that says that citizens are not entitled to individual police protection and indeed have no legal recourse when said police fail to provide said protection. I don't know how the plaintiffs in this case chose Gura & Possessky to represent them in this pivotal battle, but it's plainly obvious to me that they struck solid gold. And I think that if the Supreme Court doesn't take the case, and rule that the Second Amendment is an individual right -- as the Founding Fathers so obviously indicated it to be in their other writings -- it'll be the clearest indication yet that the court has yielded too much to the socialist forces who want our great country to follow all of the failed models of government across the pond and through history, not to mention a cowardly move on their part. It's long past time for this issue to be settled and for us all to regain our rights, once and for all.

Rant of the Day: Colt Snobbery

Seems that here and there I see people dumping on certain brands of 1911s, certain as in everything that doesn't have the prancing pony on it. You probably know exactly what I'm talking about, too:
"If it ain't a Colt it is a copy."
To each his own, but I find that to be the most infuriating type of gun snobbery out there. I know Colt was the original 1911 manufacturer and that everyone who came after them was more or less following in their footsteps. So technically I suppose one could say that everything that came after the Colt WAS a copy...but it seems to me that the implication of the term is that every 1911 that isn't a Colt isn't worthy -- or is less worthy -- of the name, the legacy, or the reputation, and pardon my french, but I just can't help but call bullshit on that. Every now and then I am tempted to unleash teh snark on some unsuspecting prancing-pony worshipper who's looking down his nose and ask him, "What about an Ithaca? Or Remington-Rand or Singer? Were THEY copies too?" I can confidently say that I have n-e-v-e-r, not even once, seen any Colt worshipper talking smack about anything that the troops used in the great wars of the first half of the 20th century, Colt rollmark or no. And I can't help but think that it's solely because of where those guns have been. Which by itself is worthy of a measure of respect, granted -- but still, I can't help but wonder what the Colt worshippers would be saying if Remington-Rand, Singer or Ithaca were still cranking out 1911s today.
I don't have any experience with Colts. I'll admit it. I would like to own one at some point, but as of yet it hasn't worked out for me to get one -- mainly because of my personal priorities vis-a-vis what I want in my gun collection. I COULD have had a Colt a long time ago but wanted other guns first. And I don't understand why, for example, my Springfields are somehow less worthy just because they don't have the prancing pony on them. I don't think I settled for less, and I don't think I'll be settling for less when I get that Dan Wesson Razorback either...and I'll go on record as saying that anyone who does think I am settling for less can go jump in the lake.

...yes, I'm loving this station...

Now playing here: Charlie Robison, "Loving County," from his 1999 cd Life of the Party. A killer song (in more ways than one), from a great cd....

"...and the moon is so bright, it don't look like night, and the diamond, how it sparkles in the lights of Loving County...."

Dirty Range Fun

not THAT kinda dirty, just keep readin'...
So last weekend I loaded up a few more rounds of 10mm, as I had a few more primers here and there I needed to put to good use as well as some more Berry's 180-grain plated flat-nose bullets.
I had a few left over from the last range trip with the 10mm...it's been a few weeks since I've taken the 10mm out, because I nailed my Shooting Chrony as I was testing a load I'd worked up before I even got the first reading on how hot it was. But I ordered a new one late last week and it came in Monday, so today I took it to the range to see how it worked out. I picked up another Shooting Chrony, but I took a step up to the Alpha model, the red one that will hold one 2- to 32-shot string and calculates average velocity, standard deviation and extreme spread. I took about 60 rounds today, with the following specs:

Case: Federal and a few Winchesters, three times fired
Bullet: Berry's 180-grain plated flat-nose
Charge: 12.1 grains of Accurate Arms No. 9
Primer: Remington 2 1/2 (large pistol)
OAL: 1.260"

Firearm: Kimber Stainless Target II

The only difference between this load and what I've loaded before was the primers, as I'd been using CCI large pistol primers before. And there was a bit of difference that I could see, from both the velocity readings and inspection of the pistol after shooting.
The load with the CCI primer was running just over 1150 fps on average, with individual shots running anywhere from 1120 to 1190, while the load with the Remingtons was running about 1120. I only took a seven-shot string, but the load was amazingly consistent through the string, anywhere from 1115 to 1128 feet per second; that's the lowest extreme spread I've had with ANY load I've worked up. I don't know how it would have changed if I had taken a longer string; maybe I'll try that next time out and see how it works.
But then again, I might not. The lower velocity I could deal with -- that much could be remedied with a higher charge, as examination of the cases showed it was running at about-normal pressures -- but it seems that not all the powder is burning, as the gun was a good bit dirtier when I was finished shooting than it usually is. I suppose one could also try magnum primers -- I've read of people using them a lot with the 10mm -- but I just don't know if I want to try that with a stock gun, as it'll ramp up both pressure and velocity if what I've been told is right. In any event, other than the dirty gun, it was a fun range day. But to twist the old saying, even a bad day at the range beats a good day at work. Better too that I managed to recover well over half my brass. I think I recovered about 50 out of 65, and it didn't take me that long either. Maybe I'm gettin' better at that too!

Color Me Speechless!

Perusing The High Road this morning, I saw a mention that a group called the Congress of Racial Equality filed an amicus brief in support of the appellants in Parker v. D.C., the case that will determine whether the nation's capital gets to keep in place its blatantly unconstitutional gun laws. So I summoned my Google-fu, and it seems it was strong this morning, as it led me to this. Click and you'll find just about everything the folks on the side of liberty have been talking about for years in relation to gun control being used as a tool to oppress minorities. Just a snippet:

Behind current gun control efforts often lurks the remnant of an old prejudice, that the lower classes and minorities, especially blacks, are not to be trusted with firearms. Today, the thought remains among gun control advocates: if you let the poor or blacks have guns, they will commit crimes with them. Even noted anti-gun activists have admitted this. Gun control proponent and journalist Robert Sherrill frankly admitted that the Gun Control Act of 1968 was “passed not to control guns but to control Blacks.” Robert Sherrill, The Saturday Night Special 280 (1972). “It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the 'Saturday night special' is
emphasized because it is cheap and it is being sold to a particular class of people. The name is sufficient evidence - the reference is to 'n****r-town Saturday night.’” Barry Bruce-Briggs, The Great American Gun War, The Public Interest, Fall 1976 at 37.

As they say, read the whole thing. What a refreshing contrast to other groups supposedly committed to the goal of racial equality such as the NAACP, who blame the guns themselves as opposed to those who are actually committing crimes with them -- although I will admit I get the idea that the folks at CORE might well be thought of as a bunch of "Uncle Toms" for not falling in line. But they're exactly where they need to be on this issue, and good on them!

Quote of the Day, or Maybe the Week...

From Hyunchback, in comments to the last post:

"Alex, I'll take 'Consequences' for $500."

"Auschwitz".

"What happens when government has a monopoly on violence?"

"Correct!"

Like I said, grade-A snark, and true as true can be...

Another Anti Slipup...

or, one more reason gun controllers are evil to the core...

"We need your help," National Council of Churches President Michael Livingston implored of the WCC’s “Living Letters” team while they were in Washington, D.C. "We need your help to turn around this terrible situation we have." No doubt sincerely, he told the ecumenical group: "We want to learn from you, and from our own stories, to make this world a world of peace."
Mostly Livingston wanted the “Living Letters” to help advocate stricter gun control in the U.S. He was joined by Ladd Everitt of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, who bewailed: "We have a real pride in violence in our country." He likewise exclaimed, "We also profit from it,” fingering the U.S. films that “glorify violence and promote vigilante justice,” according to a WCC account.
More revealingly, Everitt insisted that “the government must have a monopoly on force,” according to an account by my assistant Rebekah Sharpe, who attended the meeting. He identified the obstacles to fuller gun control as “hardcore gun owners” who have a “profoundly, virulently anti-government attitude.” Many of these hardcore zealots adhere to the National Rifle Association’s ostensible belief that “if our government becomes tyrannical they have a right to take over that government, our democratically elected government!”

The government must have a monopoly on force? After the events of the 20th century, in which almost 175 million people were murdered by government agents who by and large had the monopoly on force? Once again, I cannot find the words to describe just how evil, how rotten to the core these people are. I know well what Occam's Razor might say to this -- never ascribe to evil what can be attributed to ignorance -- but in the case of the gun-grabbers I just don't buy that anymore. And what to say of this "World Council of Churches"? I have spoken of the Religious Left before, but still I found it breathtaking that supposed "men of God" would lend their names to efforts to leave God's people defenseless. And, once again, there are no wors to say just how evil that is. Evil and quite ironic as well, considering the radical Muslims seem to be taking over various parts of the world across the pond. Maybe it's wrong of me to think this, but I can't help but think the people who advocate that monopoly on force deserve to live under that boot of tyranny, and all the attendant characteristics and consequence of that tyranny. Let them live as second-class citizens, be stoned to death or have their heads cut off. At this point I am more than willing to tell them to their evil faces, "you scumbags asked for it."
(h/t Armed and Safe)

More Musical Musings For Your Sunday Morning: Stark Contrast and Numbers

So I've been thinking for a couple of days, well, since late Friday night as I went on an ice cream run to Walmart and Rascal Flatts was on the radio (WARNING: Bubble-gum-pop-masquerading-as-country-alert). Last night, one of the selections in the player was Cross Canadian Ragweed's Live And Loud at Cain's Ballroom, and on that set is an absolutely chilling acoustic cover of Neil Young's "The Needle and the Damage Done." And I couldn't help but think of the stark contrast between those two songs, and the two bands that recorded them. I'll be the first to say that CCR isn't exactly country in the same way that George Strait and Alan Jackson are, but if one of the definitions of country music is something that is real, raw and edgy -- and yes, you can wager your donkey it is -- then Cody Canada and the boys are just about as country as country can be. Contrast that to something like Rascal Flatts, something that's just had the edge and the soul focus-grouped right out of it for the sake of appealing to the most people, and it's just sickening. I know that -- taking CCR and certain songs in their repertoire as an example -- songs about getting strung out and killing cheating lovers aren't going to appeal to everyone, but is that necessarily a bad thing? And taking yesterday's commentary as an example, just because somebody rakes in the cash when they go out on tour, why do so many people take that as an indicator of how good their product is? And make no mistake about it, that's exactly what Shania Twain and Rascal Flatts make -- a product, seemingly tailored to do nothing more than make money. I know the folks down here on the Texas music scene don't rake in that kind of cash, but even so they all still make some damned fine music. And if it came down to picking between that limited appeal and the rest of the country taking notice of what's going on here, I for one would just as soon take that limited appeal. Otherwise there's the chance of the music getting more bland and watered-down for the bigger market, as happened with Pat Green -- can anybody tell me why people dump on folks like George Strait and Alan Jackson but give Pat a pass? Nashville does indeed suck, but there are some diamonds in that particular lump of coal, even if they aren't so easy to find these days.
And then there's the whole live-show element of it -- when I went to see Ragweed a couple of weeks ago, that $15 ticket got me less than ten feet from the stage. I could almost have reached up and shaken Cody Canada's hand. On the other hand, the closest I've been to George Strait is the fourth row from the stage at Austin's Frank Erwin Center, and only then because of tickets from a broker at a price about 3 or 4 times the face value. They were more than worth it, but I couldn't shell out that kind of cash every time I went to see George or I'd be going to see him a lot less. You can't even buy the kind of up-close-and-personal for the big names that you can get with the artists on the Texas scene for the price of a cd. There's a lot to be said for that, I think. It's good to be a Texan, yes it is...

Now playing....

here: Lee Ann Womack, "Does My Ring Burn Your Finger."
Great, great stuff, what Lee Ann does best...

Come Again?

In comments to this post earlier this morning:

What a stupid comment by you. How has Shania Twain long disappeared from the scene lmao!!!! She is on hiatius with her family and is a music icon.
Shania is the biggest selling country female of alltime and has the money and power to do what you want.
Either you are stupid or hate Shania. Shania's last tour in 2004 grossed over 120 million worldwide and all her albums are the top in music all over the world.
So to say the biggest selling country female has disappeared from the scene because she takes a few years off to look after her family is laughable.
Get a grip and face reality. Shania does what she wants and when she wants to.

Way to make friends and influence people there, Sparky. Really, I could give a damn how much money Shania grossed on her last tour. In fact, you can call that little tidbit another corroboration of the old saying that "there's a sucker born every minute." People bitch and moan about Apple Computer's success being all about marketing -- well, I'll tell you straight up that the people in Nashville, New York and Los Angeles who have marketed Shania Twain's "music" to the "country" audience for the last 12 years, make the marketing folks in Cupertino look like rank amateurs. And I love how these fans of Ms. Twain love to cite those figures, as if it's validation of their taste. I am by no means a pop music hater -- Evanescence was in the cd player yesterday on my ride to work -- but pointing to sales and airplay figures to justify one's tastes seems to me to be extremely shallow. As for Shania Twain being a "country" artist, we'll just go back to what Peter Cooper said:

But if country means "whatever," it really means nothing at all.

And of course this is just my opinion, but the inclusion of Shania Twain in the "country" genre would seem to indicate that there are some out there who indeed think that country does mean "whatever." As for Ms. Twain being on hiatus...whatever you want to call it, I hope she stays on it. And it's been quite the long hiatus, considering the last chart hit she had was about three years ago to the best of my recollection. No matter what you want to call it, she has indeed more or less disappeared from the scene, and all I as a fan of real music can say is, good riddance.

GOP Congresscritters To Start Fighting Back...

against an increasingly openly hostile media?
Via Ace of Spades, via Jeff Goldstein, we have this:

Looks like MSNBC correspondent David Shuster may have deprived loyal MSNBC viewers of their favorite GOP talking heads — at least for now.

This week, the MSNBC reporter “sandbagged” Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) during an interview by asking her to name the last solider from her district to die in Iraq. After she couldn’t, Shuster named the solider himself and then scolded the Tennessee Republican for her hypocrisy.

But it turns out that the soldier Shuster named — Pvt. Jeremy S. Bohannon — was not from Blackburn’s district after all. The incident landed Shuster in some GOP hot water, and the newsman was forced to make an on-air apology for the incident last night.

But that might not be the end of it, as irked Republican Hillers are now planning a boycott of Shuster’s employer.

“We don’t mind skipping MSNBC. No one watches that channel anyway,” says a high-placed Republican consultant.

If this happens, it's about time. I for one have gotten rather tired of the coastal and big-city media continually trying to put over the illusion of objectivity when there's evidence in spades that they're biased so far to the left that they might as well all be the public-relations arm of the Democratic Party. As if that wasn't bad enough, they actually bash the blogs for being biased as if it were actually a bad thing! Maybe it is and maybe it isn't, but the thing about the blogs is at least they have the integrity to admit that bias up front. I know well that the media is supposed to be a watchdog over the government, but when they willingly become lapdogs of one side or start selectively reporting the facts in order to push an agenda, then that role gets to be undermined. Yet still they proclaim to be fair and objective. Do they really think Americans are that dense? The answer would seem to be "yes." I've seen evidence here and there that circulation, ratings and revenues are all going down to varying extents, which could very well be taken as an indicator that Americans are on to what the coastal media thinks of them. It'll be interesting to see what the effect of the GOP blackball of MSNBC will be.

Let's Play, Spot the Incongruity

Saw this yesterday at work and found it a bit surprising....

Somebody puts copies of the Quran in the toilet of a New York university and is charged with a HATE CRIME against Muslims. I wish I was inventing this.

If the copies were his (apparently they were not), he may perhaps be charged with vandalizing the toilets. If the books were stolen, then he's a thief too. But a HATE CRIME?

Praeger makes a very good point on this video--Piss Christ is a work of art, and this is a hate crime. The guy should have called up the press and announced the unveiling of his new work prior to doing this, maybe he'd have avoided the hate crime charge.

This should scare the hell out of everybody. This CAIR idiot laughs at the very idea that one is afraid of and dislikes religion, and would like to have that made illegal. He does not understand the American Constitution, he hates the First Amendment, and he and his kind have the ear of American public officials.

Now. Where's the incongruity? Well, it would seem the individual who wrote the above commentary, also writes the feverish rantings featured here. So it would seem he's afraid of the Muslims subverting our Constitution -- and probably our beloved Republic created by said Constitution -- but he would deny the people of said republic the means to fight back against the subverting of that Constitution. Now, I am not saying that a bunch of good ole boys with just 1911s and M1As could beat back an invasion by anyone, but I would think that small arms would play a fairly large role in at least certain terrorist operations. Yet the Culturologist with the mail-order degree would deny those arms to all but the military and police, never mind the inherent flaws of inadequate response time by both. The guns would be just another tool in the box, and by themselves might not be enough, but as for me I'd rather be able to take a few of those thugs out before I went down. As they say, better to die on your feet than live on your knees. And one could could modify that by saying, better to die on your feet than die on your knees. It's too bad some folks can't see that because of their fear and hatred of certain inanimate objects. Come to think of it, maybe they deserve to live in dhimmitude.

Too Effin' Cool...Are YOU A Member Of the Tribe?

...or, alternatively titled, Maybe Laura Washington Is Good For Something After All...
Linoge, who is quite the enterprising soul, read the above-mentioned Ms. Washington's bigoted rantings and took some inspiration from them. Behold, the tribal attire of the People of the Gun:



Wear the logo, friends, and wear it proud. I know I will.
:-)

Laura Washington Is A Bigoted Fool

Several other bloggers have commented on this already, and I wasn't going to say anything, but now I think I just have to...

The gun army, made up almost exclusively of white men from suburban and rural areas, is loaded for bear.

It's been said before, but it bears repeating: When you talk out of your fourth point of contact, a lot of crap is bound to come out. Call it yet more verbal diarrhea, but I find this little bit particularly offensive, not to mention stunningly ignorant of history. Unless my memory fails me (on what I've read about what's gone on in the last 40 years or so), the folks beating the drum for yet more gun control back in the late 1960s were -- wait for it! -- almost exclusively white men! And gun control as a tool to marginalize disfavored classes of people goes back a lot further than that, back even to the days before the Civil War! Yet here this so-called "journalist" is, trying to cast less stringent gun laws as a seemingly racist proposition, when in fact the opposite is true, as shown by history. Beyond that, though, I'd say this whole "gun people are racist white men" angle is just another indicator of just how intellectually and morally bankrupt the gun controllers are. It's comforting to know, though, that all they have to fall back on are emotion-driven arguments and ad hominem attacks. But wait! There's more!

Through organizing, the Internet, and plunking down plenty of cold hard cash, the gun lobby has proven it is ready for primetime. Meanwhile, its opponents are languishing in the wee-hours of late-night local cable.

Languishing on late-night local cable? For a journalist -- and someone who teaches the craft, to boot! -- Washington does a piss-poor job of paying attention to various media. The TV networks and the various print media have been serving as a platform for various gun-grabbing organizations to spout their lies and brazen deceptions for YEARS now. Not only that, but the antis' bias comes through in other ways also. Just for one example, you hear the figure bandied about every day that some 15,000 homicides are committed with guns each year -- but how many times do you hear that countered with the Lott and Kleck studies that have shown that the number of defensive gun uses each year surpasses that by hundreds of thousands, at the very least, and it might well be into the millions (anywhere from 700,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year)? Those of us on the pro-liberty side do have money, but there's no question the media has been in the gun-grabbers' back pocket for a good while now -- and as for the gun-grabbers having no money, just what the hell are they doing with all that cash they get from George Soros and the Joyce Foundation? Hmm, come to think of it, they're probably just pissing it all away on half-hearted publicity stunts like the gunguys, licensetomurder and 50caliberterror web sites. Still, though, to cast this as some sort of David vs. Goliath battle is just so off-base that it almost defies verbal reaction.

The NRA has built a juggernaut of a website that networks gun advocates from hither to yon.

How odd. I don't think I've ever once been on the NRA's official website, even though I do get their e-mail updates. I just never really saw any reason for it, even though I am a member. And I know I am not the only one.

Women and the African-American church—get them behind the keyboard, and you’ll unleash a thunderous counterpunch to the gun lovers’ old one-two.

What a beautiful example of the glittering generality. Sounds gooood, but there just doesn't seem to be much behind it. My question to Ms. Washington would be, what exactly would this "thunderous counterpunch" entail? To what end would it be? Yet more gun control laws that don't work? Or are we talking about something more sinister like door-to-door confiscation? She doesn't say, but of course she says nothing of the 80 million gun owners who didn't commit a crime yesterday, so I am guessing she thinks women and blacks should agitate for just that, consequences be damned -- and it would seem that with the title of this piece, "Let's Pry Open Those Cold, Dead Hands," she does indeed think forced disarmament is the way to go.

African Americans have plenty of motivation. According to a recent report by the U.S. Justice Department, nearly half the people murdered in the United States in 2005 were black. Most lived in cities and were felled by guns. While blacks make up about 13 percent of the nation’s population, they comprised 49 percent of all murder victims.

Oh, and here's another of the tried-and-true gun-haters' tactics -- anthropomorphizing the inaminate object, the firearm. "Felled by guns"?! I had to cast another look at my nightstand just now to make sure that .45 wasn't sneaking up on me...
Really now...once again, the words of Macbeth come to mind:
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Would that the idiots like Laura Washington only strutted for an hour....

More Leftist BS, and Another Glimpse of the Real Giuliani

First up this morning, in the Chicago Sun-Times, we have Richard Daley -- the mayor of Chicago who thinks citizens shouldn't have the right to defend themselves yet is himself protected by a round-the-clock battery of armed-to-the-teeth bodyguards -- making fun of Fred Thompson:

"The sad comment is when you see some of the candidates going into a gun show and they think that's machoism. Someone walks into a gun show and says, 'Oh boy. I'm here watching people buy all types of guns and see all types of guns and ammunition,' " Daley said.

"The first thing you think is, 'How about a police officer just driving through a community. Why don't you go visit them and talk to them about gun violence. Why don't you talk to some families of gun violence [victims].' It's like machoism: 'I'm gonna go to a gun show, walk around and show you how macho I am.' That's not machoism. That's strictly a political stunt."

Daley never mentioned Thompson by name. But when pressed to identify whom he was talking about, the mayor said, "The newly arrived candidate on the Republican side."

The mayor set his sights on Thompson after joining the International Association of Chiefs of Police in unveiling a new report on ways to prevent gun violence. Financed by the Joyce Foundation, the report includes 39 recommendations on ways to protect and better train police officers, control access to guns and improve public safety.

"It's like machoism: 'I'm gonna go to a gun show, walk around and show you how macho I am.'

Good grief, what a turd Daley is. I don't think Fred Thompson's manhood was ever really in question, gun show appearance or not. If I wanted to play psychoanalyst this morning, I'd say that Daley's verbal diarrhea is a textbook demonstration of his insecurities vis-a-vis his own manhood. As for me, I don't agree that it's a political stunt on Fred's part; it'd only be a stunt if someone like Daley dared to darken the door of a gun show. But the fact that Daley singled out Thompson as opposed to Mitt Romney or Rudolph Giuliani says something all by itself -- if Thompson didn't have a good chance at going all the way to at least the GOP nomination, I'm betting Daley would have kept his trap shut.
Speaking of Giuliani, via Armed and Safe, I see that the esteemed *sic* ex-NYC mayor will be speaking at a gathering of the International Association of Chiefs of Police -- the same group that recently released a study calling for various gun bans, which was funded and apparently written by the Joyce Foundation, the same cretins that fund gunguys.com, 50caliberterror.com and other places bursting at the seams with anti-gun asshattery -- not to mention various and sundry disarmament schemes and organizations in various Midwestern states. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Giuliani would go before these people, considering his record -- but still I find it to be more than a little insulting for him to claim that he supports the RKBA. I'd love to see him more publicly called out on his two-facedness on this issue, but somehow I just don't see it happening. Which is more than a little disheartening...

Rita Reflections, Part II: Making The Most Of It

continued from here...
I got into Sulphur Springs Wednesday night, and through the day Thursday in between watching CNN, the Weather Channel and whatever else we could find on the TV, I talked with a few friends back in the old hometown, making plans to go see 'em. I figured that while I was up in those parts I'd make the most of it. I talked with Kim at some point either Thursday or Friday, and if I remember right she had to work Thursday but was off Friday.
"How about we go out for a bite to eat Friday night?"
"Yeah, I think that'll work out the best for us."
I headed back to the old hometown about 3:30 or so Friday afternoon, as Rita was bearing down ever closer on the Texas-Louisiana coast. As it worked out, she had taken a last-minute turn and was weakening, and she was then projected to come ashore somewhere in the vicinity of Sabine Pass. This place was still going to be a hell of a mess when I came back, but nowhere near as bad as it would have been had we been on the dirty side of the Category 5 monster she was about the time I was riding into Smith County that Wednesday night. But for a little bit Friday night, I was going to spend some time with my best friends in the world and forget about what was happening back home -- or at least not worry about it as much. I got into town a little before 5, met up with my brother from another mother -- aka my best friend from high school -- and ran around with him a little bit. I told him I was gonna split there in a little bit and meet up with the aforementioned female friend for a little bit before I came out to where we were all staying for the night.
"Oh, no you're not. Bring her out here."
Somehow I didn't think she'd go for that, and truth be told I was looking for a different environment to talk with her anyway, so I more or less begged off on that point. Not so much because of any kind of romantic interest but because it would have been more than a bit uncomfortable considering certain things that had happened some time before. And I never wanted to take the chance on losing her friendship anyway. I knew that once that line was crossed there'd be no going back. And I was still smarting because of the three years of my life I had thrown away on my last so-called "relationship." Back to the story, Kim called as we were riding down the road and I let it go to the voice mail and called her back a bit later. I was almost afraid I wouldn't be able to get out, as brother from another mother was a bit insistent.
"I'll be back in a little bit!"
"Well, all right..."
We met at her parents' house, stayed and chatted for a little bit as I was introduced to them, and then it was off to Red Lobster. We got in her little Ford Escape and I left my car there, as she put in a mix cd she had made a while back...
"Since you been gone, I can breathe for the first time...I'm so movin' on, yeah, yeah..."
More memories from that time a year before. At that point I hadn't gotten to the point that I didn't care anymore, hadn't gotten to the point that I'd be feeling what Kelly Clarkson was singing in that song, and had you told me I'd get to feeling that way I'd have told you that you were crazy. We were both singing along, and for a few sweet moments it was like none of the previous year's events had ever happened.
We got to Red Lobster about 6:30 or 7 that night, and as I was sitting there, I told Kim with a grin, "You know what? I'm gonna see if I can get the hurricane refugee discount. Let's see what the waitress says."
So the waitress came back to the table, and I did just that -- asked her, with a grin on my face, "Can I get the hurricane refugee discount?" Kim, bless her heart, just busted out laughing. I wasn't serious, but the waitress thought I was there for a minute. I told her I was from the area where Rita was coming in, but my driver's license still had a Sulphur Springs address on it and I don't think I had anything that was proof I was living in the Golden Triangle, so I don't think I could have gotten said discount if I had kept pushing it. I was just having fun, though. ;-)
I bid Kim goodbye about 9:30 or 10 that night and got back out to my other friend's house, where they were all playing poker and, of course, drinking beer. And of course I brought some too...I was in the mood for Shiner Bock and bought a 6-pack on the way back to the house. Lucky for me the buy-in for the Texas Hold 'Em game was low, because I am absolutely no good at poker...
I awoke the next morning, not quite feeling like death, but I did have quite the splitting headache...I stumbled out to the car and went to the Walmart in town to get some aspirin and didn't even notice, until after it was pointed out to me, the big ole dent in the back side of the car right behind the driver-side rear tire. Friend's mother was backing out to go to work earlier that morning and had backed right into it. We exchanged insurance information and I told her I'd take care of it when things got calmed down. I went back to Sulphur Springs later that morning...my grandmother told me to come back early, because at that point it looked like the remnants of Rita were going to come right up through that part of Texas, with heavy rain and tropical-storm-force winds (between 39 and 74 mph). Lucky for me, though, it came in further east and we missed the brunt of it, and all that was left to do when I got back to Sulphur Springs, was play the waiting game...

Now Playing...

...here: Chris LeDoux, "This Cowboy's Hat."
As Scott Chaffin would say, good stuff, Maynard.

...and Giuliani's pandering escalates...

I guess it was expected that Rudolph Giuliani would speak before a gathering of the National Rifle Association sooner or later, but even so, I can't help but think he and his people have audacity to spare in coming before us and saying he believes in protecting our rights when his record so clearly indicates otherwise. Perhaps it's another indication of the strength of the hand we're playing with in the poker game of politics, but still it's quite insulting to see him come forth and tell us he's on our side now. A glimpse behind the curtain:

"Your right to bear arms is based on a reasonable degree of safety," he said.

No. My right to bear arms is based on the premise that I have the right to exist and to defend that existence by any means I can manage from any threat that comes down the pike, from a mugger on up to a government bent on my enslavement.

"I believe that law enforcement should focus on enforcing the laws that exist on the books as opposed to passing new extensions of laws," he said.

You mean, like the Sullivan Act which you once-upon-a-time advocated as a model for the rest of the country?

Giulaini explained the lawsuit he initiated in 2000 against gun manufacturers by saying that he was "excessive in everyway that I could think of in order to reduce crime" but said that "intervening events" like September 11th had caused his views to evolve. "I think that lawsuit has gone in the direction that I don't agree with."

Somehow I can't help but think the only thing that caused your view to evolve, Mr. Giuliani, is your decision to run for president. And I don't really know what different "direction" that lawsuit has taken, other than just the gun dealers taking the fall as opposed to the manufacturers too. You were wrong to file the damned lawsuit in the first place.

Really now. When I read about this speech to the NRA, I thought of a few things...



and...


and...


Rudolph Giuliani has betrayed the American people time and time again, and absolutely nothing he says can undo that betrayal. I am sure I am not the only one who can't wait to see this campaign get to the point that he's forced to go on back to New York because of Fred Thompson, or Duncan Hunter. It's not even 7:30, and I think I need a drink already...

Another Of Those "Amen" Moments

Just heard this song from Jared Pete Gile at Radio Free Texas, and yes, I was saying, "amen to that..."

I don’t really know who’s to blame but it’s plain to see that things have changed
Country music just ain’t what country music was before
Pure sh*t coming out of my radio I feel worse than an inmate on death row
And I guess I just don’t know what good country music is anymore

That new duo Big and Rich make me madder than a son of a bitch
When I hear that their songs are new the top of the charts
Cause they bring a little midget out on stage and make him dance around like he’s their slave
What they're doing to that little feller it just breaks my heart

What would Hank Williams say
About the crap that they’re calling country music today
Didn’t this used to be about the songs
Could somebody tell me just what in the hell is going on

Let’s talk about ole Tim McGraw the biggest hypocrite I ever saw
Too much pop in your country well Tim I ain’t buying that
Cause yesterday on my TV I saw you and Nelly on CMT
And I hear Snoop Doggy Dogg is shooting a video with Rascal Flatts

What would Hank Williams say
About the crap that they’re calling country music today
Didn’t this used to be about the songs
Could somebody tell me just what in the hell is going on

And I hate when ole Kenny Chesney goes to playing air guitar
And I can’t believe the old lead singer for Poison was a judge on Nashville Star
And ole Toby Keith probably wouldn’t agree but I think that it’s wrong
When a tune called “Who’s your Daddy?” is considered a hit country song

What would Hank Williams say
About the crap that they’re calling country music today
Didn’t this used to be about the songs
Could somebody tell me just what in the hell is going on

Well these are tough times to be living through it’s a shame country music lost Chris Ledoux
Not to mention Waylon Jennings, Johnny Cash and even ol Conway
But at least they wrote songs I could understand Today I guess I’m just not a smart enough man
Save a horse ride a cowboy what does that mean anyway

What would Hank Williams say
About the crap that they’re calling country music today
Didn’t this used to be about the songs
Could somebody tell me just what in the hell is going on

And if you're not listening to RFT, well, you oughta be...

Shall We Play A Game?

Let's call it, "How Many Guns In My Collection Or Guns I Have Owned Would Be Banned If Sarah Brady Had Gotten What She Wanted From The Klintons."
Via JR comes a reminder of what could have happened in the early 1990s on the gun front had the gun-grabbers not overplayed their hand and gotten their nether regions smacked by the voters: the onerous legislation that came to be known as "Brady Bill II." This is what caught my attention:

"Saturday Night Specials" would be outlawed. They would be defined as:

1. A handgun with any parts made of zinc alloy.
2. Any handgun that uses .22 short ammunition. Many guns that use .22 long rifle can also use .22 short, and would thus be banned.
3. Any revolver with a barrel less than 3 inches.
4. Any semi-automatic pistol with combined height and length of less than 10 inches.
5. Any seme-automatic pistol without a "positive manually operated safety device."

That's four of my guns that would be gone right there --
Revolver with a barrel less than 3 inches long: Ruger SP101, 2.25" barrel
Semi-auto pistol with combined height & length of less than 10": Very likely my Kimber Tactical Ultra II -- that's right, friends, that thousand-dollar pistol would have been classified as a "Saturday Night Special."
Any semi-automatic pistol without a "positive manually operated safety device" -- Both of my Ruger P-series pistols.
That's four of my guns gone, and we're not through yet!

All magazines which hold more than 6 rounds would be outlawed. Possession of existing magazines with a larger capacity would be allowed under the same terms as currently applicable to possession of machine guns: a 10-point FBI fingerprint; an expensive federal tax; and possession only allowed if a letter of authorization from the local police chief is obtained.

There would go my other 1911s -- 7-rounders for the .45s, and 8-rounders for the 10mm -- because I'm betting there's no way in hell I could have afforded that federal tax. The smart money says the Bradys would have gotten that tax indexed to inflation, and there's no telling what it could have come to. No doubt the gun manufacturers would have done their best to adapt, but considering the black market that would have come about for guns that could accommodate magazines holding more than 6 rounds, I have no doubt said guns would have been next on the ban 'n' confiscate list. Looks like my current magic number is 7; that's 7 of my guns I'd have had to turn in or face jail time, fines, or whatever those cretins decided the punishment would have been for failure to comply.
And then there are all the taxes and fees that would have come about; Dave Kopel mentions a $300 fee for an arsenal license, where an arsenal is defined as more than 20 firearms or 1,000 rounds of ammunition -- and magazines and parts of the action would have been defined as firearms for the purposes of the bill. This fee would have to have been paid every three years.
Then there were all the various taxes on guns and ammunition, and on another site I saw a mention of fees on range visits as well -- to the tune of almost $100 per visit -- and then there was a mention of no ranges permitted in counties with populations of over 200,000 people. As of 2005, the population of Jefferson County, TX was 243,914 (source). So no more gun club, and Mr. Leger out on Highway 90 would have had to close his range.
Scary stuff to contemplate, indeed, all of it...thank God the voters threw the gun-grabbers out in 1994, as you see what the damn Clintons got through Congress in just a couple of years (the Brady Bill and the AWB). It's frightening to think what they could have done with even another two years.
And, as Kopel says, "It would be interesting to know which, if any, items from the Brady II bill are rejected today by the Brady Campaign or the political candidates which it has endorsed." I'd bet they still support every last one of those items -- they just grew a brain after the 1994 elections and shut up about most of them. Well, most of them grew a brain, that is -- you're still going to find idiots like Josh Sugarmann and the Culturologist with the mail-order degree who think every last one of those items should be the law of the land.
In any event, it's a sobering reminder of what could have been...

Rita Reflections: Running From the Devil, or The Storm America Forgot

I know I didn't say much about it a year ago, and I think that had to do with the fact that I had a raging case of new gun euphoria, and that I was worrying about my last semester of college. It seems now, though, that life has finally calmed for me after the last couple of years, and I find myself thinking of this day two years ago, September 21, 2005 -- the day I ran from the approaching Hurricane Rita.
If I remember right, I had gone to work about 10 or 11 that morning. I was still working retail, and it was fairly busy with people stocking up on hurricane supplies, non-perishable food, stuff like that. A dear friend of mine had called me a couple of days earlier -- I think it was Sunday night, Sept. 18 -- asking me if I was going to evacuate. I told her no.
"Are you crazy?!"
"Kimberly, honey, it's going to be hitting about 100 miles on the other side of Galveston, I think we'll be fine." At the time the storm had been on track to hit Matagorda Bay, between Galveston and Corpus on the Texas coast.
As it turned out, though, the storm track shifted up the coast in the next couple of days and on Wednesday, Sept. 21, if I remember right, it looked like Rita was going to come ashore somewhere between Galveston and Freeport -- just about too close for comfort. I started seriously debating whether I was going to evacuate, but I finally made my decision as I saw many of my coworkers getting their checks and signing the evacuation list. So I called my mother, as I was standing in line to get my check.
"Hey, would it be all right if I went ahead and went to Sulphur Springs?"
"Yeah, that'd be ok." The original plan was for me to hitch a ride with my mother and two sisters as they were headed east, to central Louisiana to ride out the storm. But I was worried about sitting in that horrendous evacuation traffic crowded like sardines in her Tahoe, and plus I was worried about things I would lose if I left it behind. I know it might sound selfish, but I wanted to have some things to start over with just in case it did come to that. The next call I made was to my uncle on my mother's side in Sulphur Springs, some 75 miles east of Dallas and 275 miles inland from the Golden Triangle. We had talked a couple of days earlier and they told me I was welcome to come up there.
"Hey, I'm gonna go home, pack some stuff and head that way."
"All right, be careful. We'll have supper for you when you get here."
After I got my check, I swung over to the local Academy to pick up some extra ammo just in case. Stupid of me not to already have the extra on hand, but I was still a bit of a noob to the self-defense world and the realities of hurricane evacuation. They didn't have my ammo of choice -- 230-grain Federal Hydra-Shok in .45acp -- so I picked up some Winchester JHPs instead.
I got home about 2 that afternoon. As I remember it was sunny with a few clouds, and rather warm as Southeast Texas Septembers are. I backed my car into the slot there in the parking lot in front of my apartment, cleared out the trunk and the back seat and started packing. Over the next 2 1/2 hours I put everything in that car that would fit -- books, cds, clothes, all my electronics save for my TV and dvd player, that thing was packed to the gills when I was done. For good measure, the Ruger P90 I'd picked up about a month earlier went loaded in a holster directly under the seat, and about 4:30 I pulled out, uncertain of what I'd be coming back to. I stopped at the Exxon down the road to get some gas for the car -- wonder of wonders, they still had some! -- and put about $10 worth in it, thinking that'd be enough to get me to at least the other side of Lufkin before I had to fill up again.
I headed out of town on Highway 69 , and the traffic was pretty light for the first 10 miles or so. I was thinking, "Hey, this isn't so bad, looks like I made the right choice to get out." Unfortunately, a few minutes later I found I thought too soon that the traffic wasn't going to be bad. Just before the Highway 69/IH-10 split on the south side of town, traffic came almost to a standstill as they were diverting people from Houston this way. Stop'n'go traffic, oh boy, this means the car's gonna be runnin' hot, which means AC off and windows down...and so it was, over the next 2 1/2 hours through Beaumont and Hardin County.
I fared much better than most, though. The rest of my family -- with the exception of my stepdad, who if I remember correctly waited till Friday to get out -- went from the Bolivar Peninsula to the Lafayette, Louisiana area, and it took them almost 9 hours to to make that ~175-mile trek, with two toddlers along for the ride. Fun stuff, or maybe not so much. Metropolitan Houston had it even worse -- at one point it was 19 hours from Galveston to Dallas, and 24 from Galveston to San Antonio.
Even before I made it to Woodville, halfway between Beaumont and Lufkin, traffic was flowing normally again. It was much better than I thought it would be; I really thought traffic would be locked up at least to Lufkin if not further than that.
Through it all I was strangely not so stressed. There was a little bit, of course, but I was thinking back to the same time the year before, as what I thought would have been forever was going into its death spiral and "I want to be just friends" was far too close into the future. And THAT was a fat lot worse than any hurricane, for a bruised heart, a broken trust and a shattered sense of self-worth are a hell of a lot more difficult to replace than, say, a couch, bed or computer. I found myself thinking about her as I was shooting up Highway 69 south of Tyler and Cross Canadian Ragweed's self-titled "purple" cd was in the player...

"...Look at you, high on your pedestal, and gettin' off on lookin' down on me...our situation's gone from bad to critical, and I think it's time one of us started movin' our feet...I don't need you criticizin' me, I don't need you walkin' all over me, I don't need you always tellin' me what to do...and I don't need you..."

I pulled into my grandmother's driveway about 11:30 or so, and my uncle was still up; he helped me unload all my things out of the car and we put it all in the spare bedroom, where it was to stay for the next three weeks. We stayed up and talked for a little bit as I ate, and I think I got to bed about midnight or so. Little did I know that as I was running from Rita, about 10 the night before if I remember right, she had strengthened to a Category 5 monster with winds of about 175 mph and was headed for High Island, which would have put us on the dirty side of the storm, with all the wind and water....

More Political Musings for Your Friday Morning -- Rudy 'n' Fred

Once again, Tamara hammers the nail right on the head:

...people aren't lining up to board the Rudy train because he's another RINO, anti-gun, big city, northeastern politician; Kerry with an elephant; Dukakis with more red in his bunting. I'm about as "socially conservative" as... well, metaphor fails me. I'm not at all socially conservative, but I wouldn't vote for Rudy Giuliani at gunpoint, and neither would anyone else I know South of the Mason-Dixon or West of the Mississippi. If the GOP wants a sure loss in '08, they're welcome to continue with this big media Giuliani circle jerk, but don't expect me to join in.

Said nail-hammering was in response to Ace's contention here that conservatives aren't lining up to support Giuliani because they're waiting on another Reagan. And like Tam, I am 100 percent sure that isn't the case. Every single complaint I've heard about Giuliani has to do with the fact that he's an authoritarian statist who will unhesitatingly throw various civil and natural rights under the bus for the sake of maintaining law and order -- not the fact that he isn't the reincarnation of the Gipper (and if he was, even then he'd still be flawed, for as I recall, Reagan supported both the Brady Bill and the AWB). Such doctrinaire analysis is the exact reason I don't read the big political blogs nearly as much as I used to -- they don't have nearly as good a reading of what's going on as they like to think, and not to mention the fact there are at least a few out there who would be willing to throw said rights away for the sake of The Party getting the upper hand.
Next up, we have fundie James Dobson on Fred Thompson:

...Fred Thompson, who was once seen as the savior of conservatives, isn't getting any better news of late. Evangelical Christian leader James Dobson, in an email message to friends, said he could not support the former Tennessee Senator, according to the AP.
"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, ... favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?" Dobson asked. "He is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"

Yes, well, Jimmy, as far as this conservative Christian is concerned, you and all your followers can go take a flying leap off a cliff outfitted with wings made of lead. I am as much of a conservative and a Christian as anyone, but as far as I can tell, kowtowing to Dobson and his ilk to the extent they would like would ultimately be any candidate's undoing. And then where would we be? We'd be stuck with President Obama or yet another President Clinton, and very likely with a Democratic Congress to boot. It was bad enough in the early '90s...and there's no guarantee we'd see another 1994-style GOP takeover of Congress. I am by no means comparing Dobson and his people to the radical Islamists now running Iran, but I seem to recall reading here and there that Jimmy Carter actually supported the 1979 overthrow of the shah of Iran and the country's ultimate rule by Ayatollah Khomeini because, like Carter, Khomeini was supposedly a "man of God." It may be a reduction ad absurdum, and it might not even be true, but it still works as a great example of how supporting someone because of a common religious fervor may ultimately backfire -- and in a big way in the case of Carter's support of the shah's overthrow. But if Dobson and his people are even half as irrelevant as I think they might be, I think Fred! will do just fine. Here's hoping...

Would It Be Wrong Of Me...

to call this pseudo-intellectual feminist claptrap?

I'm disappointed that Foster--who won an Oscar for her intelligent and poignant performance as a rape survivor in "The Accused"--has chosen to portray a woman who buys a gun and turns into an almost cartoon-like shooting machine.
*snip*
How about a flick that shows formidable women using their brains, power and sex appeal to take the guns away from the guys without using physical force? Maybe Foster can play someone like, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer Diane Feinstein, or Hillary Clinton; intelligent, powerful women who have consistently voted for gun control, getting them an F rating by gun lobbyists.

It would seem the author of this blithering idiocy believes the woman lying raped and strangled in the alleyway is indeed morally superior to the woman with the 1911 in her hand and a dead rapist at her feet. There really aren't any words for the evil that's at the foundation of such a belief, if you ask me. Once again, that might sound extreme, but self-defense is our right and duty -- and the gun controllers would rob us of the most effective means of it, and for what? One more time, gun control has not worked anywhere it's been tried, and I just. Do. Not. Believe. That there's any reason we can let people who espouse and promote such ideas get away with it any longer. We need to start calling this exactly what it is -- pure, unmitigated evil -- or, perhaps more accurately, keep calling it that.
As for "formidable women using their brains, power and sex appeal to take the guns away from the guys without using physical force," well, friends, that is just an out-and-out LIE, and that's all there is to it. Why? Because the four women in question really wouldn't be using their "brains, power and sex appeal" to take those guns away. They'd be sending other men with guns behind badges of federal authority to take those guns away, and one more time, it'd come down to violence settling the issue, one way or another. But then I guess that wouldn't fit the feminist narrative Ms. Kobrin was trying to spin. How ironic that these people preach female empowerment yet would strip them of one of the most effective tools for said empowerment. Seems to me that the feminist movement as envisioned by Sandra Kobrin and her ilk is little more than a paper tiger, all talk and no action, or all hat and no cattle as the old Texas idiom goes. Whatever you want to call it, whatever credibility these people still have is ample testimony to the truth of the old saying, "there's a sucker born every minute."
(h/t Armed and Safe -- welcome back, bud!)

'Twas a good Wednesday...

...because I went shooting, ordered a new gun and got one back in from the shop!
The day started early, out at the gun club with my stainless Ruger P89 and half a box of 9mm. After a year of shooting .45 -- I don't even remember the last time I shot the 9mm -- it felt almost like a BB gun. A rather snappy BB gun, but still, it seemed like it was a LOT different than what I remembered. I suppose that might have something to do with my 10mm adventures as well, but in any event I did have a lot of fun. But as they say, even a bad day at the range beats a good day at work! Somebody left a good number of .38 Special cases laying on the concrete, and I thought, hey, that's free money there! So I picked them up, as well as my 9mm and a few .40S&W cases and am going to save them to recycle later when I get more. From what I understand, the price of brass has been going up as well, though I don't know what that price is. I've been pondering the idea of getting a household-size trash can and filling it up with brass people leave, whether or not I reload it. I'd be a little skittish about reloading range pickups because of the uncertainties -- how many times it was loaded (if any), how hot the loads were and all that. As far as 9mm, .38 and .40S&W go, I don't shoot enough 9mm to really justify the time involved, I'd rather shoot .357 Magnum to avoid crud buildup in the chambers, and as for .40, well, regular readers already know I shoot a REAL middle-bore pistol cartridge. ;-) Ah keed, Ah keed, of course...but once again, I still think it's what should be on the shelves instead of the .40.
Speaking of the big bad Centimeter cartridge, I swung by my friendly local fun dealer FFL today and asked him to find me a Dan Wesson Razorback to keep the Kimber Stainless Target II company in the safe and double the 10mm fun. I think it'll be running me about $800-850 depending on the markup, but we'll see. I would have gotten it earlier this summer, but I found myself in a bit of a bind and have been working my way out of it. Such is life, though, and it could have been a lot worse. I am unsure how long it will take for him to find the pistol, but it may be no more than a couple of weeks.
Finally, as I was at said FFL's shop, he opened his safe and pulled out a box and said, "I think this is for you." It was my Springfield Loaded 1911 that had to go back to the shop to remedy a jamming problem. That was actually what I had primarily gone down there to find out about, to see if it was in. Springfield has a pretty good turn around time and I was thinking this time it'd be no different. And it wasn't! According to the work order, Springfield's 1911 wizards replaced the extractor and modified the breech wall. I have about 80 rounds on hand of .45acp, and this weekend I'll be going to pick up a box and see how she runs now.
So yeah, it was a good day, and more fun is yet to come!

Would You Like Some Cheese With That Whine?

I must say, seeing this in the Houston Chronicle this morning just really rubbed me the wroooong way...

Tickets are sold out, fans are in tears and parents are in an uproar. Sound like a Duran Duran tale from the '80s — or N' Sync in the '90s? No way. There's a new tour furor, and it's over 'tween sensation Miley Cyrus, star of Disney Channel's Hannah Montana.
Her Nov. 11 show at Toyota Center sold out Saturday in five minutes. Now the only way to get tickets is at inflated prices from ticket brokers or individuals.
*snip*
Among parents dismayed by the fast Houston sellout and subsequent price gouging is Sandra Isget of Groveton. Having promised her 8-year-old son she'd get tickets, she wound up paying $629 for two seats to a Bossier City, La., show via Ticket Exchange, a service of Ticket Master, which allows fans to sell or buy among each other.
"I didn't trust eBay, because you don't know who those people are," Isget said.
Now she's having buyer's remorse.
"It was supposed to be something light-hearted and fun, and it's turned into something more expensive than our monthly mortgage," Isget said. "My son has no knowledge of us going into credit-card debt to get the tickets. I thought it would be worth it — that it would compensate for my own mental anguish — but it leaves me with such a bad feeling. I'd promised him. How far am I willing to go to keep that promise. If I refused, that only hurts him."

She prooomised him. Oh, the humanity!
Good grief. Is it wrong of me to say that I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for people like this? I believe the phenomenon seen described in those last three paragraphs is known as letting your mouth write a check your ass can't cash -- although, to be fair, the lady didn't say she couldn't afford them, just that she'd be going into debt. But still, if they can't afford the tickets at whatever price they end up having to pay, well, that's life. And maybe if she'd been as aware as she should have been, she wouldn't have made that promise -- although she really shouldn't have made it so blindly in the first place. I don't really care for the scalping phenomenon myself, but if ~$315 a seat is what the market will bear, well, that's life. It's full of disappointments, but I think we all learned that right about the time we learned to talk and dealt with it accordingly. Were I to come face-to-face with folks like the above-quoted mother, I'd be sorely tempted to say, "you should have known better, quit your whining, cowgirl up and deal with the choices you made." Call it callous or cold-hearted, but it's what I think.