Cranky-D

In the latest episode of NCIS Los Angeles, they could somehow look at the bullets after a shooting and know the shooters were using AK47s. Wow, I didn’t know that the 7.62×39 was only used in that rifle. That’s because lots of other rifles chamber that round. Furthermore, not every .30 caliber bullet will be from a 7.62×39. Also, they act as if acquiring an AK47 is somehow a difficult proposition. I happen to know that they are legally obtainable (at least in any state but CA) from lots of places. Importing them illegally to CA would be easy.

Finally, since the shooting was a drive-by, they showed people shooting from the inside of cars. None of the rifle barrels I saw looked like an AK47 barrel because they were missing the proper flash hiders.

This stuff is not hard to get right. They could have easily told the same story and had their gun facts straight, but I guess that’s too much for these clowns. Again, remember that they get stuff wrong all the time, because you and I know when they are getting stuff we know wrong.

Be careful who you try to rob: Man shoots four thieves during a robbery attempt.

via Ace of Spades

Here is a piece written before the election, but I think it’s still a good read. A quote:

Let me back up a moment here. I had read some of Atlas shrugged, but I confess,not all. That said, I have read a number of reviews on the ideas presented by Ayn Rand in the form of the objectivist ideology, and the debates surrounding them. For those who do not know what I am talking about, I suggest you read up on it, because I am seeing striking number of themes from Atlas Shrugged being played out in real time in the election ahead. Anyway, “going John Galt” is basically refusing to allow yourself to be punished for achieving. This is done by withdrawing your contribution to society in the form of taxes, by producing less, and thusly getting taxed less. For instance; a contractor can work six days a week, earning $300K per annum, and paying $150K in taxes netting him $150K for himself, or he can work two days a week, earning $100K per annum, falling into the “middle class” category, paying just $25K in taxes, and keeping $75K for himself. So, he chooses to work two days a week, gets to spend more time with his family, and stiffs the government of $125K in tax revenue. It works well for him because a third of the work means only a loss in half his pay, and he keeps more dollars per hour he works by curtailing his productivity. On a macro scale across the nation, this kind of revenue loss will deprive the government of wealth, and therefore; power. In this way, the productive will blackmail the government. Also, it will be more likely that the productive will start blackmarket trade. They will hide the transfer of goods and services. Watch for it.

There are a few things to note. First of all, if taxes go up enough, I will strongly consider cutting back in work. Right now I don’t make enough for it to really matter, but I have the potential to make a lot more. If that happens, well, I have the feeling that I will consider working less. Those who know me know how lazy I am anyway, so perhaps that isn’t really news.

The big thing will be the underground economy. I expect it will happen, and happen pretty soon. Even without policy changes, the bad state of economic affairs and the soon to be inflating dollar will take many out of the money game. I guess since I have only debt, high inflation will help me since I’ll be able to pay it off with “cheap” dollars. However, we will all have less overall wealth since I cannot see the government changing tax rates to compensate for their debasing of the currency (see bailouts, which are now apparently going as high as 7 trillion dollars… yikes!).

There are other things. Our new president has a track record of being in favor of laws that restrict the second amendment rights of citizens. His chief of staff is of a like mind, as is his apparent nominee for attorney general. If they are able to pass restrictive laws, or even attempt to do so, I expect the states to follow. I live in a purple midwestern state, and I like it here very much, but if they decide that gun ownership is to be restricted here more than it is already, I will have to leave it behind and go elsewhere.

I guess I will probably go to Texas in that event. North Texas, I think, because I don’t like humidity all that much. I think that Texas will probably be the last stand of citizens who refuse to be subjects.

I hope I’m wrong, and none of this happens, and all the panic buying of firearms and ammunition we are seeing turns out to be for naught. However, don’t count on it.

The following is from an Obama/Biden policy statement found here.

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn’t have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

You know what “commensense” means? It means a way to incrementally take away guns.

The guns on foreign battlefields are fully automatic weapons (otherwise known as “Assult Weapons”). If you want to purchase such a weapon, you have to pay a high price. First of all, they are available only in limited numbers, and are thus expensive. Second, you must pass an FBI background check to own one. The “Assult Weapons” ban actually refers to semi-automatic versions of such weapons. They are no more dangerous than any other rifle. In the hands of a law-abiding citizen (the only person who would obey such a ban) they are the same as any other rifle. In the hands of a criminal, they are dangerous, just like any other gun in the hands of a criminal.

“Assault weapons” only account for a fraction of the crimes in which a gun is involved, something less than 1 percent I believe. Therefore, such bans mostly effect law-abiding citizens. The fact that taking away guns from honest citizens raises the crime rate in general is also something ignored by many of our representatives. Of course, they think that crime is not a people problem but a gun/knife/baseball bat problem. I find it impossible to understand how they reach such conclusions, but that’s because my brain is actually fully functional and I don’t like depriving rights from my fellow citizens. Also, while I have a huge ego, I still believe in my heart of hearts that I really don’t know what’s best for anyone other than myself. I would make a bad philosopher-king. A good portion of our representatives think of themselves in a much more elevated manner.

Of course, I don’t own any guns, so I guess it really doesn’t matter to me. But I worry about other people’s rights. We need to keep an eye on our new president-elect lest he stray from the path.

Update: they have since removed all the content from that page. There is a google cache of the page as it used to be. I found out about the change at Ace’s blog.

I actually had two commentors today. Unbelievable.

One of them asked me what “gun pron” is. This post is to demonstrate what I’m talking about. The first picture is of a standard M1A with a flash suppressor and adjustable sights.

Pretty. Maybe a little scary with that magazine hanging down there, since good little guns don’t have that feature. Compare that to this gun, the Mark 14 Ultimate Battle Rifle.

Sexy. Dangerous. Hide the children! Those who know guns realize that these two rifles are functionally equivalent. I can shoot just as many bullets with the first as with the second, barring barrell overheating issues which wouldn’t be a problem unless you’re actually in a war.

I want the second one more than the first, though I’d love to have both. The second one makes gun-fearing wussies cry, and that’s a good thing.

Note: I lifted those images from the Fulton Armory site. I hope that’s okay with them.

Damn, one more post tonight. It’s 5:42am.

I think that most people who are anti-gun have never actually been exposed to a gun. Held one in their hand. Punched some holes in a target.

I don’t feel like providing links, but you can find them if you like. I’ve seen plenty of reports of anti-gun people being converted once they actually held a gun in their hands and shot some targets. Again, I’m not a news site. I provide opinions. If you like, hit some of the links on the sidebar. Kim DuToit is great for gun links about converts.

So many people realize after shooting a gun that a gun is not in and of itself evil. It is a thing. A tool. Yes, it is a tool to deal death. But you must realize that there are times when dealing death is the proper course of action.

I don’t think that another person has a right to deprive me of my life. And, if someone takes your money, are they not depriving you of a piece of your life? I say they are. I say that you have a finite time on this planet, and that if someone takes your money they have taken a small piece of your life. If you’re not armed, or if you are not prepared, it may be worth the trade to give up that little piece of your life. But if you’re a proper citizen, and armed, and ready to defend your life and your property, you should refuse to give it up.

I would prefer that the mere showing of a gun would change the dynam ic enough to make the predators retreat. But if it is not, one should be prepared to follow through. Sure, we’d all like to believe the best of our fellow human beings. But if they’re trying to deprive me of my sustenance, they should be prepared to be disappointed.

If you think the police can defend you, you are deluded. Most encounters take place within seconds. If you are a woman, you should have a gun at all times. I would hope you can get a carry permit for it, but I would still suggest you have a gun anyway. I would much rather you killed a potential rapist rather than live through a rape. And while I don’t know firsthand, I’ll bet almost every rape victim would agree.

Now, I’m a man. I’m a fairly big man, but not all that tall, though I have to believe other people who tell me that. I don’t carry, because I have not got my concealed carry license yet. But I plan to get one. Even so, I’m not much of a target because I tend to keep most people from bothering me simply because of my (perceived) image. I have not endured a real threat in years. I provide this information as disclosure. I’m not interested in bragging rights.

I think every woman should carry at least a .38, and be prepared to use it. There are plenty of nasty guys who truthfully need killing. I think any man who attempts or succeeds at rape or molestation should be killed. I think they should die if they even attempt such acts.

You know what’s even better? Most of the time, I believe, the fact that you are armed or can demonstrate that you are armed will solve the problem immediately. You can run off the bad guys without firing a shot. That is cool. That is how it should be. Be proactive. Understand that your protection is your business and no one else will help you. Unless you are my friend and I am there, of course.

It’s 6:03 am. Woohoo!!

Update
All redundancy in the second to last paragraph has been left for your enjoyment. I said it was an under the influence post.