Monday, October 30, 2006

Thoughts On Literacy

I've opinied on this one myself, but the learned Colonel Jeff Cooper had some pretty succinct thoughts on the subject matter. I'll post them here, and this link is to a website with his commentaries, for your reading enjoyment. He died a couple of weeks ago, and the world is poorer for his loss. He was a warrior, a gentleman, and a scholar. He is of an age that produced greatness, and unfortunately we will probably not see his like again. How sad. His thoughts on reading are as follows:

"Various observers view our general decline of literacy with alarm. To us it seems that the reasons for this sort of thing are quite obvious. The reason no one reads is television. In homes where television affords "instant babysitter" for children and instant conversation for adults, there is no need to learn the pleasure that may be experienced by the exploration of our culture. Television provides a substitute for original thought. This in turn obscures the delights of learning, and this takes much of the fun out of life. Learning is the one pleasure in which there can be no satiety. Anything else you like to do will become tiresome if practiced too much. (Perhaps you do not think so, but if you ever have the opportunity to try it you will find out.) In my youth, back in the period between the great wars, reading for pleasure was very widely experienced. That is what people did in the living room after dinner, and every member of the family could choose his own delights. Hemingway, before television, habitually packed a "book bag" with him in the field. During the noon pit stop, there was a choice of two or three volumes to enjoy. Onboard the ocean liners there was a 10 o'clock reading session on the boat deck. Do you know of anyone today who will sit down and pick up a volume which does not have any utilitarian or self-aggrandizement purpose? By reading you can improve your language skills, and your language skills enable you to take advantage of our wonderful English language. I am not instructed in comparative linguistics, but I am told by people who are that the English language is the most explicit of any in use. In English you can say exactly what you mean, which is certainly not true of other tongues we know about. When my work is translated from English into German, for example, it usually takes more space - sometimes as much as three times as much space - to make the same point. When I was teaching through Chinese interpreters, it was pretty obvious that getting a given point across was a major undertaking.

The point is that as our level of literacy decays, our culture decays, and with television in the saddle, this is not going to change. By all means try to turn your children into intellectuals. This is the greatest gift you can give them, but do not expect too much as long as that tube is playing."

I've made it a point in the last few years to read and collect things by the great gun writers of times gone by. Bill Jordan, Ed McGivern, Robert Rurak, Peter Capstick, etc. I've bemoaned the lack of command that so many people today have over both the spoken and written English language. The men I list above were just ordinary men. They weren't scholars, professors, or all that highly educated, comparatively. However, they all had such a wonderful command of the English language. Their vocabulary is far and above what most college graduates today possess, and they don't write anything but grammatically correct sentences. It's the Queen's English, at its finest.

That's why I'm partial to Edgar Rice Burroughs, H.P. Lovecraft, James Fenimore Cooper, and writers that can tell an amazing story with great language finesse. I put Stephen Hunter in the same category, though he's a modern writer.

The Jellicle Cat

The Cathouse delightfully posted this blast from the past.....

Most people won't remember anything else T.S. Eliot did. Fewer still connect him with Andrew Lloyd Weber in any meanginful connotation.

I seem to remember one of my three readers doing this at a UIL event in junior high school....he probably won't remember since I'm having to remind him who I am every time we meet lately......

Sunday, October 29, 2006

A Prayer For The Baby

I've been saying something like this most every day for the past nine months. The words change every time. The circumstances have certainly changed in my life since we figured out we're about to be parents, but each day's prayer is something like this:

"Our Father In Heaven, we thank you for the blessings you've given us. Just the chance to be here another day is something to be thankful for. I look forward to what experiences you'll throw my way each day.

"We especially thank you for the chance to become parents, and raise this little soul along in the world. Thank you for allowing us to grow together as a couple, and for allowing us to put together this little family, along with our friends and weird pets. We can't wait to see our baby for the first time. Let us show him at least a small part of the unconditional love that you have for us, and let him know that he is loved by you and us. Help his mother and I deepen our relationship with you as the relationship with our son grows.

"We ask that you open our hearts to your will, and let your strength and grace work through us, to help this little baby along in the world. Guide us in how to raise this little one according to your will. We're scared about being parents, and we're afraid of the cost of failure. We see as the time gets closer this is something we cannot do by ourselves: you have to do it. Just guide us in how you want it done, and open our hearts to let us figure out how you want it done. Help us to realize that it isn't about us. It's about you, and what you want for this baby and this family. We let our human nature get in the way of what you want for us.

"Lead us through this very difficult time. It's tough being unemployed with so much riding on my shoulders right now, and I know how much worse this is making things for my wife. I cannot help but feel a failure. Again, open up my heart to your will, and put me where I need to be to support this little family, keep a roof over their heads, and provide for their needs. I've tried so hard to make a better life for the family, and I keep messing it up. Every time I try, I'm seeming to make things worse. So I turn it over to you, because obviously I can't do this without you. It's in your hands now, mine alone don't seem to work too well.

"Guide the doctors and nurses as they bring our son into the world, and be with his mother through what she's about to endure. Protect her and the baby as they go through what they have to in order to bring him out into the world.

"Bless him as he grows up, and bless us with what we need to guide his way as he grows up, and walks on the path you've set before him. Let us help him to avoid the mistakes we made, if we can.

"As I come closer to being a full-fledged parent, I begin to understand a bit more about the relationship that you have with us, God, and what you want us to have with you. Much like what we want from our son, you just want us to love you as a child should its parent. The amazing thing is that your love doesn't stop, and isn't conditioned on us loving you. Just like our love for our son will be.

"Thank you, God, and we ask this in the name of Jesus."

When I feel the little guy moving and responding to my voice, it puts a lot of things in perspective. He's not even officially here yet, and he's already affected our lives in such a wonderful way.

Definitive Condition One for the 1911

Thanks to Benjamin at Reasonablenut for linking this from the Anarchangel. This appears to be the best, most concise statement of the dangers of Condition Two Carry for the 1911.

Food for thought. Since Condition One appears to be the safest way to carry, as well as the speediest way to get the gun into operation if necessary, it seems like the only way to go.

Again, my head says yes, but my heart says no.....I'll come around eventually.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Kennedy Is A Traitor...

...According to this post. Read for yourself. Four Right Wing Wackos is an entertaining site.

This shocks me a bit. But it goes to show that the politics of socialism have been going on longer than what we care to think. A reminder that we should be ever vigilant, or else we'll find ourselves with a party in power that believes that individual rights should be suborned to the will of the collective.

And a strong reminder as to what the Democrats are all about.

Friday, October 27, 2006

Another Interesting Bit Of Commentary

Newsmax runs the following artice: 10 Reasons to Vote Republican. It's written by Phil Brennan, a staffer for Newsmax.

I'll run them down here in quotes from the article, and discuss them somewhat:

"Reason #1. The economy is kicking butt. It is robust, vibrant, strong and growing. In the 36 months since the Bush tax cuts ended the recession that began under President Clinton, the economy has experienced astonishing growth. Over the first half of this year, our economy grew at a strong 4.1 percent annual rate, faster than any other major industrialized nation. This strong economic activity has generated historic revenue growth that has shrunk the deficit. A continued commitment to spending restraint has also contributed to deficit reduction."

Kyle's Commentary: I agree with this. Tax cuts work, and they work well. Putting money back into the hands of the people increases tax revenues, and allows people to grow their business fairly well. There may be a bit of a problem with the last statement he makes under reason #1, but we'll get into that here in a bit.

"Reason #2. Unemployment is almost nil for a major economy, and is verging on full employment. Recently, jobless claims fell to the lowest level in 10 weeks. Employment increased in 48 states over the past 12 months ending in August. Our economy has now added jobs for 37 straight months."

Kyle's Commentary: As someone out of work, I've got a vested interest in throwing the BS flag on this one, but the numbers don't lie. I'm just in the minority at the moment. It goes along well with everything else that's being said about the economy.

"Reason #3. The Dow is hitting record highs. In the past few days, the Dow climbed above 12,000 for the first time in the history of the stock market, thus increasing the value of countless pension and 401(k) that funds many Americans rely on for their retirement years."

Kyle's Commentary: Again, the sign of a healthy economy, but we know how fickle that wench of a stock market can actually be. One terrorist attack and it'll be raining stockbrokers.

"Reason #4. Wages have risen dramatically. According to the Washington Post, demand for labor helped drive workers' average hourly wages, not including those of most managers, up to $16.84 last month -- a 4 percent increase from September 2005, the fastest wage growth in more than five years. Nominal wage growth has been 4.1 percent so far this year. This is better or comparable to its 1990s peaks. Over the first half of 2006, employee compensation per hour grew at a 6.3 percent annual rate adjusted for inflation. Real after-tax income has risen a whopping 15 percent since January 2001. Real after-tax income per person has risen by 9 percent since January 2001."

Kyle's Commentary: I don't think we can argue the economy has done pretty well after the slump 9-11 threw us in. I'm not arguing this, though I would like to see the numbers indicating what the cost of living has increased by in relation to the wage increase.

"Reason #5. Gas prices have plunged. According to the Associated Press, the price of gasoline has fallen to its lowest level in more than 10 months. The federal Energy Information Administration said Monday that U.S. motorists paid $2.21 a gallon on average for regular grade last week, a decrease of 1.8 cents from the previous week. Pump prices are now 40 cents lower than a year ago and have plummeted by more than 80 cents a gallon since the start of August. The previous 2006 low for gasoline was set in the first week of January, when pump prices averaged $2.238. In the week ending Dec. 5, 2005, prices averaged $2.19. Today, gasoline can be found for less than $2 a gallon in many parts of the country."

Kyle Commentary: A bit of a problem here, when Exxon has announced all-time record profits earlier this week. Gas is still too darn high as far as I'm concerned, and we're still way too depended for our energy from people that hate us and want to kill us. I don't think the Republicans can take too much credit for this, other than just simple lassiez-fare. Though since the Demoncrats would tax the crap out of the gas, thus making it cost more to the consumers, maybe there's a little something here.

"Reason #6. Since 9/11, no terrorist attacks have occurred on U.S. soil. Since 9/11 the U.S. has not been attacked by terrorists thanks to such programs as the administration's monitoring of communications between al-Qaida operatives overseas and their agents in the U.S. and the monitoring of the international movement of terrorist funds -- both measure bitterly opposed by Democrats."

Kyle's Commentary: I'd agree with this one. At least the terrorists are having to focus on their back yard as opposed to ours. We know the Demons would oppose any wiretapping, give more protections to non-uniformed combatants than what they deserve, and basically stick our country's collective butt in the air like the French Vichy, so one can't really argue this one coherently for the Demons. They've said exactly what they want in the war on terror, and it ain't a happy thing for our security.

"Reason #7. Productivity is surging and has grown by a strong 2.5 percent over the past four quarters, well ahead of the average productivity growth in the last 30 years. Strong productivity growth helps lead to the growth of the Gross Domestic Product, higher real wages, and stronger corporate profits."

Kyle's Commentary: Captitalism works. Enough said.

"Reason #8. The Prescription Drug Program is working. Despite dire predictions that most seniors would refrain from signing up to the new Medicare prescription benefits program, fully 75 percent of all those on Medicare have enrolled, and the overwhelming majority say they are happy with the program."

Kyle's Commentary: I still don't like it, though. Kill all the plaintiff's lawyers and you could probably afford drugs, insurance, and whatever else on your own. It smacks too much of socialism, methinks. This and the education bill appear to be Bush caving into Demoncrat pressures, and I hate it. This isn't conservative at all.

"Reason #9. Bush has kept his promise of naming conservative judges. He has named two conservative justices to the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. In addition, he has named conservative justices who are devoted to the Constitution as it is written and not as activist liberal judges think it means. The strong likelihood that one or more justices will retire from the Supreme Court makes it mandatory for the Republicans to hold the Senate and have a chance to name new conservative justices."

Kyle's Commentary: This alone puts me over the top. My protest voting buddies can't make one single argument to refute this statement, nor will they make more than a half-hearted effort. Judicial activism is probably the biggest threat to our freedom here in America, and this is the type of judge the Demons will put on the benches, if given the chance. We know this to be true. I know it's a presidential appointee, but Bush won't get any more judges on if he doesn't have a Senate that will pass his nominees. The Republicans would have an easier time getting another Republican in office for President if they still hold the power, and things go well.

"Reason #10. The deficit has been cut in half three years ahead of the president's 2009 goal, with the 2006 fiscal year budget deficit down to $248 billion. The tax cuts have stimulated the economy and are working."

Kyle's Commentary: There may be some problems with this statement. It's hard to see how wartime spending can do anything but go up. It's not like WWII didn't put us into debt, and this one is probably more expensive in terms of war toys. Flametoad has provided a couple of links that refute this little statement; here and here, and the logic is sound in both pieces. My problem is that economics and accounting make my head want to explode. However, there is no arguing that tax cuts actually helped increase tax revenue, which left a less-than-expected budget shortfall. So at least that's progress. Isn't it?? But we still had an increase in spending, though the receipts grew. In short, still too much federal spending.

For me, the judge issue is paramount. I guess as a lawyer I have seen what bad judges can do, at both the trial and appellate levels. That danger alone is enough to keep the Demons out. Ignore it at your peril.

Food for thought, at any rate.

An Interesting Commentary

Bill O'Reilly's new column is fairly insightful. It discusses California's attempt to pass a parental notification bill for underage abortions.

Let's not discuss whether abortion is right or wrong. I've made my belief very clear, and there's no need to rehash here.

What there is a need to do is to recognize that Hillary Clinton is violently opposed to the bill. In other words, she thinks the government is better to decide what is best for teenage children, as opposed to their parents. By the way, the bill carves out certain exceptions for notification, all of which are common-sensical, pretty begnin provisions. It leaves the power to a judge in certain situations such as abuse, etc. I tend to agree with O'Reilly.

That's the problem with liberal democrats. They are socialists. If they had their way, the state decides how much money you should have, what you rights are, how much money you give to the poor, who the poor actually are, etc. You exist at their leisure. You raise your children how they see fit, not how you believe. That's simply evil.

Something like this should be decided by the family, not the State. Pro-life or pro-choice, I firmly believe that it's none of the State's dang business. It's certainly the family's. Thus, the danger of liberalism in general, personified by the Demoncratic party. Socialism/communism.

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Fear and Loathing of Politics

I am completely sick of political ads. Especially since I have complete and utter faith that everything stated in them is a lie. Except the, "...and I approve this message," bit.

I often have to wonder about myself. I like to think that I'm principled, but there are times where I am at odds with what being principled really means. The political forum, for instance, has caused me a lot of soul-searching moments lately. It also causes me to fly off the handle at the drop of a hat. Sometimes figuring out what the "right" thing to do is not as simple as it should be.

I've two friends that have my sincere admiration, because they are doing what I think is absolutely the right thing to do in the upcoming election. They are not voting Republican. I've discussed this ad nauseum on this blog, but it breaks into four postulates. First, Republicans didn't act as conservative as they should have on the border issue, government spending, marriage amendment, etc. Second, they should not be rewarded for failing to act on their conservative mandate, and a third party option should be exercised. Third, is a vote for a third party de facto allowing demoncrats to win, and what's the proper choice of action? Fourth, is the previous interrogatory simply a scare tactic on the part of Republicans to make sure their base turns out and vote for them, even though they are hacked off to no end?

The first and second thoughts appear to be 100% correct. That's what my heart tells me. Intellectually, the third postulate appears to be correct as well. There's no third party out there that 100% supports my views. I like the libertarian stance on government, but the drug thing is just too out there. The fourth postulate also has the ring of truth to it. Unfortunately, there's some fire to that smoke.

My friends argue there is no way to teach our political leaders a lesson other than with our votes. My money sure won't help matters. I think they are absolutely correct.

Here's the point where postulate #4 really hits me. And here's where my main concerns rear their ugly heads. I shudder to think what the courts will become if demoncrats gain the upper hand. Bush won't get any conservatives on any benches. It doesn't matter what laws are passed, or are on the books. If judicial activists rule the courts, their damage can do on unchecked for decades. This is a big problem, as far as I'm concerned. The average citizen has no idea how badly liberal judges can screw up our Constitution, and what they can inflict on us that the legislature could never do to us.

Gun control is also a big issue for me, as are taxes and abortion. I know what the demons will do given the chance. So frankly, the scare tactics work well for me, because these aren't simply random, abstract fears. They'll come to pass, if past history is any indication. I also believe that we ignore history at our peril on issues like this.

The right thing to do in this case is not vote Republican. If they aren't going to stand for what they say they stand for, run the bums out of office. In this regard, my friends are doing both the morally right thing to do, as well as the courageous thing, as far as I'm concerned. Will this actually teach the Republicans a lesson? Only one way to find out. However, this course of action puts us at risk for higher taxes, gun control, weaker national defense, etc.

So should I do what my heart tells me, and not reward the bad behavior of the Republican party? (For example, voting for a border fence, then voting not to fund it.) Or do I dare risk the consequences of a protest vote? On the one hand, vote my conscience. On the other hand, voting my conscience puts my beliefs at risk because a party hostile to them will take power. Thus, the dilemma.

This isn't an easy decision to make. It appears to be a losing propositon either way. And it's completely the fault of the politicians for putting me in this dilemma.

I'm absolutetly no good with moral dilemmas.

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

I'm Not The Only One....

....who's worried about what Islam is set to do to the world.

Here's a bit from Mark Steyn via Newsmax, who has a book out on the subject.

Scary stuff. We have to realize this is a war, and fight it as such. Steyn thinks it might already be too late.

The problem is that Islam is motivated, organized, and they have the culture of political correctness to hide behind and to utilize. You can see what is happening in Europe right now, and apparently France is still burning from young Muslims rioting continually for over a year now. This story also details what has been going on over there. Via the Drudge Report.

Scary, eh? Good thing it's a religion of peace, or we'd be screwed.....

Randomness Again

As to the carry weapon, here's the current thoughts: small mouse gun for primary, compact double-action auto as the second gun.

The Glock 19 seems to be the forerunner as the second gun. It's light, high-capacity, super-reliable and durable, and double-action. No need to worry about carrying with the hammer back, safety, etc. 9mm ammunition is everywhere, and cheap. Magazines are easy to come by. Parts are easy to find as well, if one were to ever need them. The sights are high visibility. The pistol points very well. Recoil is next to nothing with the 9mm, so anybody can shoot it. It will hide in the Pager Pal, deep pocket, hip holster, whatever.

The double action gets the nod on both weapons.

Election thoughts: again, does one protest vote to prove a point? No good points are made by doing this. Inaction that allows a known evil to rise to ascendency is just as bad as a deliberate action that helps bring the same thing to pass. Do we really want additional gun control, higher taxes, more entitlement programs, and a weakening of national defense? Not a smart choice by voting for that, or passively allowing that to happen.

I have my limits, though. I'm still not ever going to vote for John McCain, evenif he was running against Emperor Palpatine. Now that I think about it, there may be a passing resemblance between the two........hmmm.

One month until baby. Scared, happy, nervous, worried. Not the best time to bring a little life into the world, but the timing wasn't mine. I know God has a purpose for all of this, and the timing of it all. I just have to allow him to work his plan, and stay out of his way. It's awfully tough right now. I just read Luke 4, dealing with the temptation of Christ. Are job offers a similar temptation? How do we know if we are following the right path?

The other thing that I can't help but think is: why us? Why are we having to go through all of this? What's the point? Will there really be something better to come out of all of this? How in the world are we going to survive everything that we are having to go through?

Faith is tough when you're about to starve to death. Literally. I guess that's why it's called faith.

Robert Parker's SPENSER novels are terrific. This is detective fiction at its best. Plus, there's never been a better sidekick than Hawk. I see now where Robert Crais pulled the inspiration for Elvis Cole and Joe Pike. Well worth the read. I've knocked out eight of Parker's novels in the last week. They're short reads, but page-turners of the highest order.

Regular television has very few merits. HEROES on NBC is a pretty good show, mixing XMEN with XFILES. A great combination, in my humble opinion. THE UNIT is another quality show, with good writing, sympathetic characters, and a pretty good dose of realism. Dennis Haysbert is an actor with incredible presence and charisma. He's got a good ensemble cast to work with as well. CRIMINAL MINDS seems to be a decent show.

I maintain that reality television sucks away IQ points. Oprah is shilling for all liberal democratic causes and candidates, and I've formally banned her from the house. Michael J. Fox is now officially just as bad, and we won't support anything he appears in or endorses. After watching BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II the other day, it won't be hard to avoid his movies. That was awful.

Clooney's a liberal, but at least he had the guts to speak out about the awful situation in Darfur. Too bad he's off ER.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Familiarity Breeds Competence.....Frankenstein's 1911

A good portion of Saturday was spent cranking off rounds with friends. It was a much-needed good time. I put at least 300 rounds through Uncle Gaston's plastic pal.

I was noticing a readily discernable time between the shots and the impact with the targets relative to 9mm and .357 Sig. The .357 really gets to the target in a hurry. If one is shooting at any distance, it's very noticeable how quickly the round hits. It's also noticeable how loud that round is when touched off. I was also keenly aware of the displaced air when the shot was fired. That's one hot round.

In comparison, the 9mm is shooting about the same size of bullet, but it doesn't get there quite as quickly. When shooting a reactive target such as an empty metal cylinder, it's apparent the .357 is hitting with more kinetic energy that the 9mm. Lots more.

I am not a fan of the .357 Sig. It recoils very sharply, and I'm just not a fan of shooting something that's painful to the giver as well as to the receiver. I'd hate to be around one without ear protection, for certain. There's a huge muzzle flash as well, when the round goes off. I suppose if you missed your target at close range, you can at least set it on fire.

A friend of mine has been shooting the same 1911 .45 for about 16 years or so. Well, pretty much the same 1911. It's a custom frame that's had some additions over the years. It's huge, clunky, and heavy. If Dr. Frankenstein built a 1911, it would look a lot like this one. If it runs out of ammo in a fight, he can beat his targets to death with it. It's got huge sights on it. It's got a huge fat hammer, and a very smooth trigger. Otherwise, there's nothing really special about this .45. No fancy polymer frame. No night sights, no fancy custom trigger, no light rails, etc. There's nothing on the pistol that could be considered, "tactical" by the modern standards of such. But it worked, and worked well. Not one jam. Not one misfire. Not one miss on a target, from what I could tell. I couldn't say the same. Though to be fair, I only had one jam that was attributable to bad ammo. Another lesson learned.

This friend has pretty much carried this gun for 16 years. It fell out of service for awhile when a Glock 17 showed up. But it came back. It then got shifted to the back burner when a Sig interloper tried to move into contention. But again, it came back. He's always loved the feel of this gun, and the way it handled. It's been a constant in his life.

More importantly, he shoots the old warhorse phenomenally. We shot combat drills with it, as well as plain target shooting. To say that he beat the rest of us soundly is an understatement. He's accurate. He's fast on the draw, and fast on the target. There was a noticeable level of skill with the old Frankenstein 1911 that none of the rest of us had. The scary thing was, this guy hadn't shot in over a year. And he shamed the rest of us.

I can't tell you how many pistols I've gone through over the years. I can shoot just about anything decently. I can qualify with just about any auto that I've picked up. But I can't hit the shots that he can hit. I have no confidence in the preciseness of my shot placement with any of my guns. I am nowhere near that good as this friend of mine with the Frankenstein 1911. He's scary good.

I think the reason is that he's been married to one pistol for all these years. It's almost a part of him. He can pull off any shot he needs to make with this pistol, probably without thinking about it. Even if he hasn't shot it much lately, he still carries it day to day. He still puts it on his bedside table every night. It fits his hand.

If a critical, life-or-death pistol shot had to be taken; I'd want him to take it with the monster 1911. This friend of mine knows that pistol inside and out. It's been a constant companion. And it shows.

So the lesson learned is to pick one weapon. Learn it inside and out. Carry it every day. Clean it and take care of it. Learn its quirks, its likes and dislikes. Learn to trust it. It will pay off dividends if needed. It will fit the hand like a glove, and point as naturally as a finger. The bullets will hit where they were intended to hit.

I've got to pick one pistol and stick with it, and put in lots of range time to ever catch up in the competency department.

Friday, October 20, 2006

Sporting Arms, Shmorting Arms

Yeah, I know I said the other post was going to be the last one for the weekend. But the greatness of Kim du Toit has published another winner that I had to link to. Find the essay here.

du Toit's basic point is well-taken. I cringe when I hear some idiot politician state they won't take away my sporting arms. I don't care about those. I care about self-defense pistols, rifles, and assorted goodies. I don't hunt nearly as much as I would like to. And I'm not alone. Most of my Second Amendment friends don't hunt. They shoot a lot, but they shoot IDPA or IPSC style-shooting, punch paper, or knock down steel plates.

I'm worried about somebody coming along and outlawing Glocks, Sigs, Berettas, H&K's, Rugers, etc. They'll say they have "no sporting purpose," and that will be the end of them. Think it can't happen? Look at Great Britian, Canada, Australia, etc. Look at everything the democrats did with gun rights while Clinton was in office. They used that exact language, and it's the same language the demons use when the squawk about gun control now. Mark my words, there is a very active gun control lobby out there, and they have the ear of the demoncratic party.

I have stated over and over again that the Bill of Rights lists individual rights that all people have, and that the government CANNOT infringe upon. If those rights are abridged, you have tyranny. The Second is the only amendment that puts proactive, real power in the hands of the citizens of the United States. Everything else is just a paper right, and an abstract concept.

Keep this in mind when you go to the polls in a couple of weeks. Any politician who talks about "sporting arms" is thinking about snatching your pistols, AR's, and AK's. They're just trying to phrase it somewhat diplomatically to not lose your vote.

Light Posting

This will be my last entry for the weekend. I'll hopefully be back online Monday. I should have some entertaining shooting stuff to post. Well, it will be entertaining to ME, anyway.

By the way, all prayers welcome on the job search front. Everything helps....:)

The Lesser Of Two Evils Part Deux

Rush Limbaugh had a great point yesterday. Well, he has great points every day, but this was particularly erudite.

Why in the world would we as conservatives cast away a protest vote, when the likley result would get the Democrats in power? Why would we want to empower the party that hates conwervatives, has constantly ridiculed conservative christians, wants to appoint activitist judges to the courts across the nation, wants to take away our gun rights, etc.? In other words, why protest when the likely result will be a weakening of our own values by allowing a party that hates everything we stand for into office?

I tend to agree. The Clinton years set this country back financially, defensively, and Constitutionally. I can't protest vote, if the result is that the democrats gain power. I've seen what they are all about, and we know exactly what it is they plan to do if they get into office. For more information, check out this link from the Washington Times on that very subject.

On the other hand, John McCain is threatening suicide if the Demoncrats win......via Limbaugh's site....

So protest voting really doesn't do anything for us this time out. Other than weaken us. I guess the key is to focus on what's important to you, and vote for the candidate that comes closest to supporting your points of view. For instance, what's important to me is lower taxes, strong prosecution of the war on terror, appointing conservative judges to the courts, gun rights, pro-life policies, and a less hostile environment for Christians out there.

We know the loony left has the demoncrat party. We know they hate guns, hate Christianity, want socialism, want higher taxes, etc. We can't allow that sort of nonsense to gain any further foothold than what's already out there. It's a defensive vote, if nothing else.

Keep in mind Bush did get us some good conservative judges on the courts. That's worth its weight in gold. There are three Supreme Court justices that are about retirement age. We could potentially get three more conservatives. We will not if conservatives lose the house and senate. Bush won't get a single nominee passed, unless he's a flaming communist. On that one issue alone, we should do whatever it takes to keep the demoncrats out.

We can pressure Republicans to stand up and do the right thing. It worked in the case of Harriet Meyers when Bush screwed up and put her out there as a Supreme Court nominee. We've gotten some movement on the border issue. Granted, it hasn't gone as far as it should have, but we've made some progress. We keep up the pressure, we'll pull it off.

But we can't apply that pressure to a liberal demoncrat in office. Keep that in mind.

Limbaugh also made a great point yesterday. If we protest vote and the demons get in office, we'll have two years of hell. We'll be so sick of what the demons do to our country that we'll vote for whatever the Republicans can put out there to beat Hillary. That would probably be McCain, since he's just slightly to the right of Gorbachev. Do we REALLY want that choice? Readers of this blog know what I think of McCain. I'd rather Republicans keep office. That way, we'll have a more conservative candidate for President in two years. They are at least responsive to the pressure I can bring to bear on them. A demoncrat won't be, and they are the antithesis of all we stand for.

Just more to think about. The more I do so, and the more I study the issue, I'm convinced that a protest vote is pretty stupid. Why allow the enemy a stronger foothold? Why set conservativism back that much more? We've made progress, we just need to keep up the pressure. And we have to have candidates who would respond to our pressure.

I know this is a recant of what I've said in this blog before. I still don't like it, and I'd vote in a heartbeat for a conservative third party out there that had a chance of winning. But there's not one. So there we go.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

The Lesser of Two Evils

I posted awhile back on the horrendous choice that we have come November. Vote for the Republicans who have thoroughly betrayed us on the issues that mattered to conservatives, or vote for the communist Democrats.

It's not really much of a choice, when you start to think about it.

Kim du Toit pontificates on this exact subject matter in this post. He gently reminds me of what will probably happen to gun rights in America, should the Democrats get in power.

I just hate the thought of voting for somebody because they are, "not as bad as the other guy." What kind of choice is that? du Toit is right on several issues in this post. The Republicans absolutely deserve to get stomped in November. The blame for the Foley scandal and the border falls on the elephant's shoulders. I despise rewarding bad behavior. Why endorse a party that voted to build a fence on the border, then turned around and voted NOT to fund the thing? That's just pure evil. I'd love to see them run out on a rail.

However, I agree that Demoncrats in office are the greater evil. I hate socialists, higher taxes, lawsuits, globalization, and all the other stuff the Democrats blatantly stand for. By the way, if you're running as a democrat in a local election, as far as I'm concerned you've signed off on the same stuff. You're standing to be counted with the enemy. Sorry, I'm a black and white kind of guy.

The Republicans captured their current political power by giving lip service to conservative ideals and values. They've failed to actually follow through with much of them. The border is wide open, corruption runs amok in Washington, and senseless legistlation gets passed, further eroding our freedom and bloating an already fat federal budget and bureaucracy. Where's the conservatism there?

But we know what the demoncrats would have done, if given the chance. Tax increases across the board, an increase in lawsuits, more entitlement programs, weaker national defense, weaker homeland security, and a further suppression of conservative ideals and values across the nation.

With the Republicans in office, gun rights got some major boosts, we haven't had another domestic terror attack, we kicked the tails of some pretty nasty Islamo-fascists, the deficit got trimmed, and we placed some conservatives on the Supreme Court. The last part alone is a victory of monumental proportions. We cannot afford to allow the Supreme Court to degenerate further. It wouldn't matter who was in power if the Supremes are predominately liberal. Granted, it took a conservative riot to force Bush to appoint decent judges, but at least he listened.

Change for the sake of change might well be cutting off our collective noses to spite our collective faces. Not the brightest of ideas. We also have to face the reality that a third party is not going to win in most cases. I learned via Perot what sort of trouble that can cause. I'd give anything to go back and remove Perot from the 1992 and 1996 ballots. We wouldn't have had Clinton at all, and that's an undisputable fact.

I suppose that sometimes, the lesser of two evils is really the only choice you can make. If we keep the communists outside the gate for two more years, that's a good thing.

It does make one think we're between the Scylla and Charybdis as far as the parties are concerned. But a protest vote for a third party candidate might well put us in a worse position than what we're currently in.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Why George Lucas Is The Devil.....

..or at least, he's some sort of higher-up demon.

This is a post from an avowed libertarian, science fiction author, and gun-guy named L. Neil Smith. He's the writer of the Lando Calrissian series of books out there in the Star Wars Universe.

For the record, the best Star Wars spinoff ever were the Han Solo books by Brian Daley. Those of you in the know, know what I'm talking about. Everyone else: you owe it to yourself find those books and read them. No Star Wars author since has the grasp of what the fans loved about the characters more than Daley did. They're awesome, and I think they are now out of print.

Apparently, Daley got on the wrong side of politics at Lucasfilm, and didn't ever get to write anything else in Star Wars. This post is somewhat instructive of the circumstances. It is also apparent that Smith created his characters to reflect somewhat his political leanings. I'm ok with that. After all, Solo and Calrissian were both pirates of the first order. I'm guessing in real life, they'd be pretty close to libertarians.

Readers of this blog know that I honor Lucas for creating Star Wars, and hate his chubby guts for the ruination he inflicted upon it. Like allowing Kevin J. Anderson to write a Star Wars book. And then not having him killed. And allowing the murder of Chewbacca, who he apparently thought of as no more than a pet. Let's not even talk about how the prequel trilogy sucked in comparison to the greatness of the un-digitized IV, V, and VI.

Instead, let's all be reminded that Lucas's take on the Star Wars universe is different than the majority of its fans. We loved certain things about it, Lucas apparently hated those self-same things. But he's the owner, so I guess he gets to do what he wants with the stuff. All I can do is carp.

Monday, October 16, 2006

Random Thoughts And The Error Of Our Ways

From Xavier Thoughts, a nice link about a son and his dad. It really makes one think about how amazing unconditional love really is, and what it can accomplish.

Reasonablenut had himself a good time at the tactical pistol course that he took. He's now a firm believer in Condition One carry for a 1911. I'm slowly coming around.

The always erudite and enjoyable James over at Hell In A Handbasket gives us a great story about a little old lady, her Beretta, and at least ten years of not being a victim. If you think the Second Amendment isn't worth it after reading this, you're a philistine of the highest order. And not one person got shot in this tale, I might add.

Porta's Cat pontificates on the dimunitive "mouse gun." I agree. Calling them "mouse guns" does a disservice to the guns and their obvious utility. This is especially true if you've seen what a simple .22 bullet will do to most game animals in this state. I love the big calibers, but a person isn't inadequately armed with a small pocket pistol in .22 or so. When somebody makes a 9mm semiauto that's the same size and weight as a Beretta Tomcat, doesn't kick like a psychotic rhino when you shoot it, and actually stays in one piece after firing, I think we'd all want one. Until then, a lot of us will pack our mouse guns, and be well served.
As is my wont, I was ruminating over the various mistakes I've managed to pull in my relatively short existence on this earth. Everything serves its purpose, so I believe. So what possible good can come of all of this stuff??

With the impending birth of our son, a reason did spring to mind. I'm about to step into the biggest role that I will ever play on the world stage. I'm about to be a Dad. Perhaps all that stuff was simple training. Perhaps my mistakes can serve to make me a better parent. Maybe I can pass on what I've learned the hard way. Maybe the experiences themselves will shape my parenting. I'd hate to think it was all for nothing.

Or possibly my only function in life is to serve as a warning to others??

Sunday, October 15, 2006

Much Ado About Nothing

I've nothing much to write on this evening.

I could vent about the job situation, or lack thereof. I could say that I'm scared, frustrated, humiliated, ashamed, and nervous all at once. I could degenerate into a sustained burst of self-loathing about the whole thing, how I should have known better, how I am to blame for the whole sorry mess, etc. I could vent about the place that I worked, and what I think about them. I could vent about how weird it was to catch my former boss and his wife driving down my cul-de-sac, staring at my house earlier this week. Disturbing, to say the least. I still don't know what that was about. I could vent about how bad I think this will affect any future job prospects that I might have.

I'm really glad to be rid of the place. I've never had a job that I hated so much. And I've had some really stinker jobs. It was a combination of personalities that didn't mix, a morally reprehensible line of work, a system that was in growing pains, micromanagers who really weren't able to effectively train, and dual stress from the job and the personal side of things that made this the wrong career move for me. It goes back to one of my earlier posts, where I mentioned that if you don't believe in what you are doing, then you really shouldn't be doing it at all. Lesson learned yet again.

I could rant on about my continued waffling on the gun issue. Since I'm going to be outdoors for an extended period this weekend, I figured a Glock would be a pretty good choice for wilderness packing and fun shooting. At least it won't rust if it rains. However, I discovered the Glock .45 I have is an older one, with a serial number that falls in a series of ones that are known to blow up if they get a bad round put through them. Thanks, internet. Time to send it back to Uncle Gaston. That sort of ruins my faith in the firearm. I now don't trust it, and that means I really shouldn't carry the thing.

I could state that I'm looking forward to church in the morning. That's an unusual thing. But if one happens to find the right church, it's a pleasure to go. Going someplace that's comfortable, nonjudgmental, informative and educational is a good thing. It's actually fun. Plus, they have really good coffee. No, really. They do. I'd better get to bed so that I don't need as much of it to remain conscious.

I could write about the sugar glider waiting until the labrador is completely asleep and snoring, and then dive-bombing him. It's pretty funny to watch. She knows exactly what she's doing.

I could write about the labrador, and how he basically never leaves my side. He's excited to see me every time I come home, and he's all about unconditional love. It's a great feeling to know that somebody loves you, and it doesn't matter what your personal failings are. It doesn't matter that I'm not a multi-millionaire. That should be a lesson learned for me. I've got a wife that loves me, pets that love me, a family that loves me, friends that love me, a god that loves me, and a baby on the way. Blast the job situation. It's not really that important, in the grand scheme of things. It was a sorry job anyway. When I've got that kind of unconditional love coming my direction, nothing else is all that important. I'll be fine, no matter whether I ever work in the legal field again or not. And I'll be a better person for it, one way or the other. That I firmly believe.

So much ado about nothing, indeed.

Saturday, October 14, 2006

Evil Democrat Lawyers From Hell

An interesting post from somebody I haven't read before, Smoke on the Water, linking an article about what Clinton planned to do to gun rights.

Here's the actual link from Judicial Watch, which is a great website for what's happening in the world.

Anybody who was paying attention in those Dark Ages known as the Clinton years realized what the evil fatboy was up to.

Look no further than the idiotic assault weapons ban, which basically limited our magazine capacity to ten rounds, mandated background checks, etc. The passage of the Brady Bill had me pretty well convinced the Apocalypse was on us.

The fear of lawsuits under the Clintonistas forced Smith and Wesson to refuse to sell their products at gun shows, and to sign off on the other ridiculous measures set forth in this link. At the time, Smith and Wesson was owned by a British corporation. Since the Brits are halfway to the socialist workers paradise envisioned by Marx, it didn't take them long to fall into step with our own fat little Stalin; Slick Willie. This action drove American gun owners away from Smith and Wesson in droves. It finally resulted in the Brits having to sell off Smith and Wesson. It was bought by some good godfearing Americans, who saved one of the stalwarts of the gun manufacturing industry. However, Smith sales continue to suffer a bit, simply because of a lingering prejudice from caving in to the Clintonistas. God bless capitalism. We can vote with our wallets as well as our ballots.

On the plus side, the Brady Bill probably helped Kimber's rise to prominence in the 1911 world, not to mention increasing interest in 1911's nationwide. When you're limited to only ten shots, might as well have them be nice, fat .45's.

Combine the Brady Bill with a concerted legal assault on the gun industry, and that pretty much tells you what the Democrats are all about, as far as gun rights. Here's ample proof, in my opinion.

So when a Democrat says that he or she is pro-gun, quiz them about the Clinton years. They'll either deny all of this, or state they don't agree with it. The next obvious question is, "why the @#!! are you a democrat then?" I don't think you can be a democrat and be pro-gun. Thus, I'll never be a democrat.

This is another great example of how lawyers can just about ruin anything they get their grubby little paws on. This is the inherent danger of having so many lawyers motivated by greed and/or liberal ideology. They'll use the system to destroy what they don't like. Or they'll milk it for all the money they can squeeze out of it.

This link shows the game plan was just like what happened to the tobacco industry. Any moron knows that cigarettes are bad for the health. Most rational human beings realize that smoking is one's own risk; do it at your personal peril. But its a personal freedom, and liberals hate that sort of thing. Unless it's the personal freedom to murder unborn babies and turn violent criminals loose on the street, of course. Liberals love that sort of thing.

So they attack it through tort law. They create a spurious claim that the manufacturers of the product are responsible for the consequences of its use. Guns can kill people. We all know this. Cigarettes cause cancer, we know that. But what happened to personal responsibility?

Simple. Personal responsibility doesn't generate the almighty dollar, or further the cause of socialism. Responsibility is a direct consequence of personal freedom. You can't have one without the other.

I'm not saying that an attorney shouldn't make money. We have a certain skill set and specialized knowledge that should be compensated, same as any profession. But there's a fine line between making money because of your knowledge of the legal system, and using your knowledge to abuse the legal system in order to make money and/or further a social agenda.

There's a pretty big difference. Suing the guy that shot and killed your family member is probably not a bad thing. Suing the company that made the gun that killed your family member is something else entirely. It's creating some sort of fictional responsibility that simply isn't there. It's equivalent to suing Ford for deaths caused by a drunk driver behind the wheel of an F-150. It's not Ford's fault by any means. It's the fault of the scumbag who got drunk and got behind the wheel of the truck. Mark my words, that sort of lawsuit is coming, if it hasn't happened already.

Most plaintiff's lawyers are Democrats. They vote that way because democrats love lawsuits. It enables them to further their liberal agenda, and it allows them to line their pockets. It's one or the other, sometimes a combination of both. They'll justify it as being all about the injured plaintiff, but it's a hollow argument at best. Every plaintiff's lawyer that represents someone they KNOW is bilking the system will justify it in the same way.

Take a hypothetical case: A rear-ender car wreck, very low impact, and very minimal property damage. When I say minimal, I mean the only thing needing fixing was the bumper to the car in front. And that fixing would consist of buffing out the scratch and repainting, at best. The supposedly injured person had a history of back and neck problems. This plaintiff goes on to claim further back and neck injuries from this low-speed impact. The plaintiff runs up over $10,000 in medical bills. The plaintiff retains a lawyer, who tells the plaintiff what doctors to go see, what sort of treatment plaintiff needs, what sort of mri's are needed, and how long to treat. The lawyer expects the person who hit the plaintiff to pay all the medical, plus lost wages, plus pain and suffering, plus anything else they can think of. The supposed injuries are no different than what the plaintiff was complaining of prior to the accident.

Plaintiff's lawyers will file this case all day long. They'll justify it by saying the person is injured, and the law can provide them compensation. They'll justify it by saying that everyone deserves representation, and if they say they were hurt, who are we to argue against them?

This is the danger of the system as it is. It's not about what is morally right or wrong. It's about using the system to generate money or further a political agenda. Lawyers will completely suborn their sense of morality in order to keep the money rolling in, or to push the socialist agenda. Sometimes the socialist agenda keeps the money rolling in, as is the case of plaintiff's personal injury law. The supposedly injured party is simply a stalking horse, put out there to distract from what the lawsuit is really about.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Enough To Almost Make You Believe In Conspiracies

I mentioned earlier that I felt pretty much sold out by the Republicans. They aren't acting conservative, that's for sure. To make matters worse, everything the conservatives believe in finds itself under attack in the month before a major election. Lord help us, but the Republicans have given their attackers plenty of ammo to shoot.

Domestically, we have a series of horrible school shootings by madmen. We all know that every time something like this happens, we have gun control commies crawling out of the woodwork, screaming about how the NRA kills children. It's utter nonsense of course, but the Second Amendment comes under fire every time this happens. Check this post out from Individ concerning the statistics on such things. Children dead at the hands of a madman is bad press, indeed.

Oddly enough, this sort of thing happens right before an election, which seems destined to run those who at least puport to be conservative out of office.

Domestically, our border is allowing in a flood of illegal immigrants who are set to ruin our economy and our very way of life. They are helped by socialist nut jobs who scream about the rights of people who aren't even United States citizens. Traditional family values and Christianity are under attack in this country. When the, "family values" party contains a would-be pedophile, it smacks of hypocrisy.

On the foreign front, all sorts of fun stuff. The maniacal midget in North Korea sets off a nuke. The current administration and Republican-controlled Congress are going to take the blame for allowing it to get this far, thought we all know that the Clinton administration allowed this particular devil to get the tools he needed to set this thing off.

In Iraq, the violence escalates, and an explosion at a US ammo dump in Baghdad caused a ton of damage. Incidentally, we know the violence in Iraq is being egged on by Iran. Its president believes he must bring about an apocalypse to trigger the return of the Muslim Messiah. On a related note, Iranian soldiers were present when North Korea test-fired a missile earlier this summer.

All of this happened under the current administration's watch. Like it or not, the Republicans have had a couple of years to do something meaningful on quite a few of these issues. They failed. Worse, they failed because they refused to do anything, for one reason or another. The border leaps immediately to mind.

They'll pay the price for it in the upcoming elections. And it couldn't happen at a worse time. If this country ever needed the triumph of conservative ideals, it would be now. With what we are faced domestically and abroad, this country needs the same strength and moral clarity it showed in WWII.

Bush did a good job early on. But he appears to have lost his focus, and seemingly forgot who elected him. The Republicans puport to be the voice of conservatives in this country, and it was the conservative portion of the population that mobilized and got them into power in the last couple of elections. There was a clear mandate from the people. And the Republicans flat-out stabbed their supporters in the back, by and large.

So they'll pay the price for it, and we'll end up ten times worse with democrats running the show. We'll pay higher taxes, and we'll suffer continued erosions in family values. We'll probably have to suffer erosions on our Second Amendment rights. And we'll be ripe for attack from our enemies.

I blame the Republicans, by and large. They were supposed to do a job, and they failed miserably. By not standing up for what they were supposed to believe in, they have weakened themselves politically. Their political weakness translates to our country itself weakening; something we could ill-afford with what we face as a nation.

It almost makes one believe in a dark conspiracy against conservatism.

Monday, October 09, 2006

How The Republicans Sold Us Out, Part 1000

Michelle Malkin concisely sums up the load of dung being shoveled at us concerning the border fence.

Basically, today is the last day Bush could sign the legislation into law, or a pocket veto would go into effect.

Plus, the border hoopla he kicked up last week in Arizona was only for the 1.2 billion he had appropriated for Homeland Security---not the fence.

So we've gotten the shaft. This proves without a doubt the Republicans aren't really interested in helping us out on border security. Why???

Read this little post on Flametoad regarding the "cheap" labor the wetbacks have been inflicting upon us, and how easily that problem is remedied.

Yes, "wetback" is a derogatory term. I meant it that way. Sue me.

In a nutshell, the border remains open because nobody, and I mean nobody, in our government wants to do anything about it. That is sickening. The Republicans are just as guilty, if not more so than the Democrats. They've had the political clout to get it done, but refuse for some unknown reason. Our vaunted state senators, who in correspondence assured me they were all for halting the flow of illegal immigrants into the US, voted against funding the border fence.

So that's a direct stab in the back, as far as I'm concerned. There's no other way of looking at it.

Thus, a dilemma. I hate the demoncrats, and everything they stand for. The Republicans say they stand for the same things I do, yet their actions do not indicate such. I'm not voting democrat. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to vote for the Republicans that are up there.

What does that leave me? A protest libertarian vote? That almost ensures the democrats will get into office.

Previously, I've written about right and wrong. Voting for the lesser of two evils still means I'm condoning some sort of evil. That doesn't sit well with me. With everything else that I've had blowing up in my life lately, I've realized that I'm not compromising my moral standards and values any more. Ever.

So I guess that means the Republicans have lost my vote. So it'll be all independent voting this next election. But it's the right thing to do at this point.

The heck with all of them.

"The World Is Collapsing Around Our Ears..."

By the time some of you wake up and read what happened in the world today, you are going to find it a different place than when you last paid attention to it. Not in a pleasant way, either.

I was watching Fox News, when they broke the fairly scary news that North Korea successfully tested a nuclear bomb. This happened last night, around 10:00pm central time.

I don't think this really comes as a surprise to anyone, does it? However, this is a big problem. The world is now a much more unsafe place to live in. Again, my fears are not so much for me, but what of the world my unborn son is going to have to face?

Kim Jung Il has made no bones about it. He wants to unite all of Korea under his Communist regime. He's run incursions into South Korea for years. I hate to be alarmist, but I get the feeling North Korea will invade fairly soon. I hope not.

So what does the United States do? For one, we'll have to prepare to fight the Korean War Part Deux. We're committed there, and have been for over 50 years now. No turning back at this stage in the game.

Forget China. They could have probably stopped this crap years ago, but they never did. Why? Because North Korea draws an incredible amount of attention away from the evil that is China. As long as we're paying attention to North Korea, we won't worry about China. And I think it unlikely that China will back up North Korea if they decide to invade. There's too much China now has to worry about on the world stage these days.

I have the feeling that we will be giving Japan whatever they want as far as nuclear missiles and other assorted radioactive goodies. It just makes sense. North Korea will probably take South Korea first, and then worry about Japan. However, I suppose they could try and strike Japan first, take out what U.S. bases are there, and then take South Korea. Who can predict what a madman will do?

Giving nukes to South Korea would probably not be a good idea. In all likelihood, we wouldn't want to give more technology that could possibly fall into the hands of the Communists. Japan would probably be able to defend itself a bit better.

By the way, if one has an urge to blame somebody for this mess, look no further than the fat, smiling face of Slick Willie Clinton. On his watch, he allowed nuclear technology to be sold from the U.S. to North Korea. However, North Korea PROMISED they wouldn't try and develop atomic weapons, if they could only be allowed to turn the lights on across their poor nation. After all, it was for the children.

We see how well that one turned out. Thanks, Bill.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Thoughts On The Double-Action

Yeah, here I go again, waffling on the choice of defensive sidearms. I had made up my mind that the 1911 style was going to be it. Hands down, no more waffling.

It still seems to me that a double-action is the fastest, safest way to carry. The Condition One stuff with a 1911 just scares the tar out of me. The hammer down on a loaded chamber is probably more fraught with danger than Condition One, but it looks safer to me. My intellect says no, but my eyes like the hammer down.

Again, the problem is that it takes so much time to get the hammer back on the pistol in a hurry. It's a lot easier to draw and pull the trigger with a double action.

Then there's the whole safety/no safety issue. In other words, the Sig or a Beretta? I like the safety. It makes me feel better. It doesn't take much time to get it off, if I practice faithfully drawing and shooting. But the Sig can be shot even more quickly, since there's no safety to worry about.

I guess it's all personal preference. I like the safety. At least this week. Next week I'll have waffled again, and might be carrying a Single Action Army Colt revolver. Or a baseball bat.

When it comes to the handgun in combat, I suppose it's best to look at what the real fighting men have had to use. We'll take military men out of consideration for a bit. We'll focus on police officers, because their use of handguns is probably more on a par with what the average citizen is likely to face.

Police officers seem to favor a double action of some sort. In the old days the sidearm of choice was a double action revolver. In modern times, a double action automatic. The evolution has gone from double actions with safeties (Beretta and Smith and Wesson) to double action only pistols (Glock and Sig). The aberrations from department to department include some 1911's here and there, and some still stick with the double-actions with safeties. But I see more Glocks and Sigs than anything else in the holsters of law enforcement. The stats say these guns seems to work the best. If it's good enough for the pros, why not for the rest of us?

Arrgh! What to do? And I haven't even begun to carp on the caliber choice.

Justice and The Law

I just watched a bit on O'Reilly with a family who lost a 6 year old to a drunk driver. The trial is ongoing, and will probably wrap up this week in New York. O'Reilly asked the dad what sort of punishment he wanted for the drunk driver.

The dad was pretty honest. He said he wanted him dead. I can't blame the guy.

Once upon a time, I became a lawyer. I took an oath. Part of that oath was to preserve the integrity of the system. Part of becoming a lawyer is to embrace the law. It's the last bastion before anarchy, etc.

But what's justice, really? Three different concepts of it leap into mind. There's justice, there's the law, and there's the right thing to do.

1. Pure justice would dictate the father of the 6-year old gets first crack at the drunk, and gets a chance to mete out revenge. That would balance the scales, one would think. We aren't going to get justice out of our current system. No way.

2. If he's left to the tender mercy of the system, the jury could walk him. Or they could find him guilty. He could face a maximum of 20 years. That's the worst. The average sentence is probably 12 or better. Is that an appropriate punishment? The guy will lose everything in prison. He'll have a felony record, which will probably prevent him from getting a decent job even if he survives prison. None of that is fun. Is that justice, though?

3. Let God deal with it in his own way. The drunk still has to face earthly punishment, of course. The interesting thing to me is that the drunk will have to account for what he's done in accordance with the system. But he'll get a free pass from God, if he accepts it. Kind of a hard concept to handle. I think most people would say that hell is probably too good for this child-killing drunk. But he's got the same shot at salvation as the Pope. There's an evil part in all of us that is almost offended that this murderer gets the same shot at redemption as the best of us. And he very well might refuse to follow that path, and he'll get the slow-roast for all eternity. Bottom line: it's not our call.

My faith in the legal system has taken some pretty hard knocks lately. I think the theory of the system is great. However, the people who get to run it have really messed it up.

What's "fair" for this drunk? Our Hammurabian concept of justice says he needs to die. Our legal system says he needs to get 20 years max. And our religion says this drunk will be welcome with open arms if he accepts God's mercy.

Man's basic eye-for-an-eye instinct? Our laws? Or God's laws? Pretty different concepts, with pretty dramatically different outcomes, in the end.

The first two are pretty fallible concepts. They can be changed in accordance with what Man thinks is right at any one time. Every two years we get bombarded with new laws that usually contradict the last batch we passed. Every so often, our societies change their entire outlooks on things. We don't pluck out eyes anymore, though part of me likes the concept.

The third relies on a higher power to arbitrate the whole mess. I'm seeing more and more how the laws of men fail us. I'm getting more and more inclined to allow the third option to have its way.

But that's pretty tough, isn't it??

Words of Wisdom from Ol' Blood and Guts Himself

General George S. Patton was probably the finest military commander the United States has ever produced.

Why? Because he understood the purpose of a military campaign. It's simply to kill the enemy, crush them without mercy, and make sure more of them die than us. It's not to police them, win their hearts and minds, or any of that stuff. Armies kill people and break things, and impose their will by the very force of arms. That's what they do. God bless them for that.

Here's a few words of wisdom from Ol' Blood and Guts himself. The guy was never a politician, and I love him for that reason. That's why he wasn't the President after WWII. And I think the way he was treated after he won such decisive victories broke his heart. Flametoad hyped me to this Wikipedia entry, and it was great fun reading it.

I don't think the war in Iraq is going quite as bad as what the stinking media leads us to believe. I think it could go a whole lot better if perhaps we applied what Patton taught. Instead of being policemen, use the military for its god-given purpose. Smash. Kill. Destroy, and demoralize. When the enemy has been whipped as thoroughly as Japan was in WWII, they'll quit or face eradication. Even as nuts as the Japs were in WWII, they saw their doom if they pursued the war any further. And they surrendered. It was their only option. They chose wisely.

Patton also understood what a fighting man fights for. In the abstract, they fight for their freedom, their families, and their way of life. When the guns start firing, they fight for the man beside them; their buddies.

That's why I think what our modern military is faced with is fatal to its very spirit. When a country prosecutes its military for killing the enemy, or even suspected enemy in a war zone, it's in trouble. It doesn't have the will to win. When a military hears from its political leaders that they don't believe in the war, and don't think the war is winnable, it's sunk. Ring any bells?

I think it's counterproductive (not to mention dangerous) to train men to fight and kill, send them off to battle, and then try and restrain them from fighting and killing an avowed enemy. It's stupid, dangerous, and asinine, all at once.

It's also ridiculous to expect them to act as policemen. Send policemen in to be policemen. Let the soliders be soliders.

What would Patton think about the way the War on Terror has been run? I shudder to contemplate what the man would be saying. But he'd be dead-right.

A war is the last, most terrible option a country can face. But once the decision has been made to utilize the military, let it go. Let it do what it does best. Let it kill the enemy until it surrenders, or is destroyed. Don't get in its way until the objective has been reached. And for the love of the almighty, don't forsake those warriors who have been sent into harm's way to do what must be done.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006


This is just wrong.

Work safe.

Freudian Slip

Ever wonder what's going through oyur favorite television anchorwoman's private thoughts while she's broadcasting?

Here's a rare insight.

Might want to listen to this one with the volume down somewhat.

Again, hat tip to the Texican Tattler.

"I Ain't Through With You Yet, Bub!"

I just had to post this one.

A very detailed Wolverine costume, and how it was made.

I wish I had an ounce of craftsmanship like that.

Monday, October 02, 2006

A Rumination Of Right And Wrong

A subject near and dear to my heart, lately. The topic deserves some discussion.

The entire currently elected political body should be run out of office. That's from the president on down to the last representative, probably down to your local dogcatcher. Obviously, the entire system is corrupt. Even the guys like Ron Paul who have supposedly been doing the right thing all these years need to go. Why? Because they're ineffective.

Once they're gone, we start replacing our elected officials with regular people. Farmers, ranchers, business heads, PTA moms, etc. In other words, people who know what it's like to work for a living. Have each of them vote to apply two term limits to every elected official at the Federal level. Professional politicians have gotten us in this mess, and it's time to clean house.

This stuff with Congressman Foley, for instance. There's a few things that need to happen. First, he should resign. Second, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, after an investigation telling us just exactly what the piece of crap did while in office. I'm thinking that somewhere along the way more fire will turn up amidst the smoke. Third, whoever else gets smoked out in the investigation needs to face appropriate punishment.

Why say something like this? Because every person on both sides of the political spectrum should be calling to hang Foley, if there's sufficient evidence. What we have is political maneuvering, at this point. That drives me nuts. Tony Snow came out today and had the audacity to say we shouldn't be making such a big deal about what he termed are, "naughty emails."

Tony, you've officially sold out. I'll go so far as to say he'll never work with any sort of respect in the talk radio circuit again. I won't listen to him any more. And by downplaying this stuff, he's complicit in it.

Blame goes to the demoncrats here as well. Why wait for years to pull this one out? Why wait until an election? Why does Bob Woodward wait to publish a book that damages Bush on the Iraq war? Simple. It's a power play.

None of those sorry dogs in Washington care about us once they are elected. They show some concern again when they try to get re-elected, but otherwise the game is political power up there. It's obvious they'll use every dirty trick in the book to get it. We have only to look at the border issue, the war on terror, and this Foley stuff to see how bad it's gotten. George Allen's senate race is another great example.

So the solution is to limit how much power these morons can have. Prevent them from getting to be lifers, like that fat gasbag Kennedy. Get 'em out. We won't get these stupid, constraining laws if we put people who actually work for a living in office. If they have to go back to work and live with the laws they pass, they'll be a bit more selective about creating new legislation.

Hold them accountable. If somebody pulls something like what Foley has done, the punishment needs to be worse than what an ordinary citizen would face. They deserve it, because they've breached our trust.

Instead, we have politics played. Instead of taking out this monster when they all could have years ago, they've played politics with a pedophile. They've endangered our children because of it. It's both sides that are doing this.

Why the vehemence in this post this evening? Let's just say that I'm realizing more and more that when principles get sacrificed for any purpose; be it money, politics, or whatever, it's a pathway towards evil. It can't be allowed to happen.

I'll soon be a father. And the world my little boy is going to come out in scares the fire out of me. We've got Muslims lining up to kill us. We've got idiots in our own country that think socialism is a nifty idea. We've got pedophiles loose in the streets, and loose within our highest elected offices. Their fellows rally around them, when they should be lynching the sorry dog. We've got the people who were elected to protect us selling us out. It's wrong; pure and simple.

Whatever reason our politicians come up with to justify selling us out is simply the beginning of a slide in morality. And we can't tolerate it any more. So it's time to run these bums out, and replace them with people who aren't afraid to do the right thing. Further, they need to be limited in terms of the amount of damage they can do while in office.

It's a question of right and wrong. I am now more convinced than ever that allowing just a bit of evil to get a foothold opens the door for much more to follow. That's in our jobs. In our politics. In cutting off somebody in traffic.

More on this as the week goes on....