For the record, I hate Low Plank Obliques. On the other hand, picking a Friday after work, after a long week, and fighting a stomach bug all week, and still not being up to 100% to start the Insanity work out is probably not the best decision I've ever made. On the other hand, this is the good kind of hurt.
We shall see how this goes.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Supporting Starbucks
Source:
http://gunvictimsaction.org/starbucks-boycott/
I won't allow this link to be clicked to send you on to the opposition. I don't want them getting 'hits' from me. However, if you copy and paste that into your web browser, you can see why I'm choosing to support Starbucks. They have the anti-rights crowd's panties in a twist.
Essentially they have decided to not ban firearms, and rather are simply following the state regulations on weapons. They are choosing to stay neutral, and not infringe on anyone's rights, on either side. They aren't forcing people to carry weapons into their establishments, nor are they preventing it.
Therefore, I will be visiting a Starbucks on 2/14/2012, somewhere in South-Western PA, spending my hard-earned money with them. I would encourage all of my friends to do the same as well.
On the frustratingly-humorous side, check out this quote about a Glock:
Idiots.
http://gunvictimsaction.org/starbucks-boycott/
I won't allow this link to be clicked to send you on to the opposition. I don't want them getting 'hits' from me. However, if you copy and paste that into your web browser, you can see why I'm choosing to support Starbucks. They have the anti-rights crowd's panties in a twist.
Essentially they have decided to not ban firearms, and rather are simply following the state regulations on weapons. They are choosing to stay neutral, and not infringe on anyone's rights, on either side. They aren't forcing people to carry weapons into their establishments, nor are they preventing it.
Therefore, I will be visiting a Starbucks on 2/14/2012, somewhere in South-Western PA, spending my hard-earned money with them. I would encourage all of my friends to do the same as well.
On the frustratingly-humorous side, check out this quote about a Glock:
It shot 31 bullets in 15 seconds, killed 6, and injured 14.So, of course, the gun shot itself that often. Not the person who pulled the trigger. The gun chose to go commit the crime, not the criminal. And the people were defenseless against an inanimate object. If you listen to their arguments, you'd believe that guns were NOT inanimate objects, but beings with minds of their own, able to kill of their own volition.
Idiots.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Reasonable Profits Board
Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/205085-dems-propose-reasonable-profits-board-to-regulate-oil-company-profits
My first question, why should any one person or group get to decide what a 'reasonable profit' for any other person or group is? The only times that applies would be...tax payers deciding what politicians should make, or church members deciding what their pastor(s) should make.
This is a very frightening scenario:
Imagine you're in a business yourself for a moment.
If you are going to be taxed 100% of your profit above a certain point, would you be likely to lower your prices, or change your reporting and how you determine what profit is?
Another stance to take with this: If profit is limited, won't that lead to less R & D, and therefore fewer advancements in the industry, leading to stagnation, and job loss, as well as higher prices over all?
As Quinn likes to say, "Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent."
I would not be surprised in the least to see the result of something like this leading to higher prices at the pump. This should be discouraged in the strongest language possible. Contact your reps today!
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/205085-dems-propose-reasonable-profits-board-to-regulate-oil-company-profits
My first question, why should any one person or group get to decide what a 'reasonable profit' for any other person or group is? The only times that applies would be...tax payers deciding what politicians should make, or church members deciding what their pastor(s) should make.
This is a very frightening scenario:
The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a "windfall profit tax" as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what a reasonable profit is.They want to be able to tax 100% of the profit above a certain amount. Arbitrarily determining what is appropriate for a company to make.
Imagine you're in a business yourself for a moment.
If you are going to be taxed 100% of your profit above a certain point, would you be likely to lower your prices, or change your reporting and how you determine what profit is?
Another stance to take with this: If profit is limited, won't that lead to less R & D, and therefore fewer advancements in the industry, leading to stagnation, and job loss, as well as higher prices over all?
As Quinn likes to say, "Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent."
I would not be surprised in the least to see the result of something like this leading to higher prices at the pump. This should be discouraged in the strongest language possible. Contact your reps today!
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Facebook gives Politico Private Information?
Source:
http://allthingsd.com/20120112/facebook-gives-politico-deep-access-to-users-political-sentiments/
The concept is essentially like Google's selling of statistical data. Except deeper and more personal. In theory, no one will be reading what you say in a 'This guy hates our ideas' kind of way. But it does open the door to abuse. It strikes me as a very slippery slope.
What are your thoughts on this latest Facebook controversy?
http://allthingsd.com/20120112/facebook-gives-politico-deep-access-to-users-political-sentiments/
The concept is essentially like Google's selling of statistical data. Except deeper and more personal. In theory, no one will be reading what you say in a 'This guy hates our ideas' kind of way. But it does open the door to abuse. It strikes me as a very slippery slope.
What are your thoughts on this latest Facebook controversy?
Monday, January 16, 2012
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Cranky Chick - Writes to Joan
Source:
http://sarahandmom.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/dear-joan-peterson
I found her open letter from Weer'd and fell in love with it. She expresses very precisely what is on all of our minds.
She understands personal responsibility and true freedom far better than Joan could ever hope to grasp those elements of society.
http://sarahandmom.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/dear-joan-peterson
I found her open letter from Weer'd and fell in love with it. She expresses very precisely what is on all of our minds.
She understands personal responsibility and true freedom far better than Joan could ever hope to grasp those elements of society.
Logic vs. Candlelight Vigils
Source:
Undisclosed.
I won't link them, they don't need any traffic from me. But, I did make a mistake today. I strolled (clicked?) on over to the CSGV blog to read the post where they 'out' those who had negative things to say about their candle lighting vigil.
I call this a mistake, because the quotes they pull tend to be tremendously out of context. When I decided to post a comment to point out that obvious error, I realized that commenting is disabled. Really? You're going to out people, using their real names and cities of residence, but won't even extend the courtesy of having an open dialog with those people?
OK, I can wrap my brain around the fact that they are desperate enough to be that hypocritical, they are desperate. I can wrap my brain around their being on the wrong side of the issue, not everyone has taken the time to study various issues from a truly neutral standpoint. I can even wrap my brain around their attempting to take a holier-than-thou stance, it IS, after all, what people tend to do when they do not have the moral high ground.
Where I have issues is with them claiming to be honoring those who have lost their lives to 'gun violence.'
Not only is their premise a bad premise, but the very act of mocking those killed in one incident in this fashion is appalling. Yes, I say they are mocking those killed, because they are using the tragedy to further their own agenda.
Let's think about this logically:
Step 1 - Define Vigil:
Step 2 - Determine their usage of it.
Clearly, they are not using the first definition, as they are not keeping watch over anything, and I have yet to hear any of them invoke the name of our Creator. At least, not in a vain fashion. So, let's look more closely at the second definition. "...support of a particular cause..."
Step 3 - Determine the intent.
What cause? If the 'vigil' is to 'honor' deceased, that's not a cause which needs much intentional support. Step 4 - Apply logic to the method.
Those who loved the deceased honor them as they deserve. Outside onlookers 'honoring' them tend to be a distraction, and a detraction, from any honor being given unto them.
Which means that there's another motive. Is it an attention getting motive, as Miguel suspects? I think that's a reasonable direction to go with this. So, really the 'cause' they are supporting here is drawing attention to themselves.
Alternatively, other motives could include, but are not limited to, the following:
Attempting to thwart their entrance into the dustbin of history.
Attempting to redirect attention from the REAL issue (crime) and topple a straw man they have built.
Attempting to gain monies from people who are too lazy to do the research behind the 'cause.'
Attempting to force themselves into current issues in order to 'feel better' about themselves.
Attempting to use a genuine tragedy perpetrated by a pathetic individual to further their own agenda.
Please, comment below with your own ideas of what their motives or goals could have been. I'm curious to see what we can come up with!
Undisclosed.
I won't link them, they don't need any traffic from me. But, I did make a mistake today. I strolled (clicked?) on over to the CSGV blog to read the post where they 'out' those who had negative things to say about their candle lighting vigil.
I call this a mistake, because the quotes they pull tend to be tremendously out of context. When I decided to post a comment to point out that obvious error, I realized that commenting is disabled. Really? You're going to out people, using their real names and cities of residence, but won't even extend the courtesy of having an open dialog with those people?
OK, I can wrap my brain around the fact that they are desperate enough to be that hypocritical, they are desperate. I can wrap my brain around their being on the wrong side of the issue, not everyone has taken the time to study various issues from a truly neutral standpoint. I can even wrap my brain around their attempting to take a holier-than-thou stance, it IS, after all, what people tend to do when they do not have the moral high ground.
Where I have issues is with them claiming to be honoring those who have lost their lives to 'gun violence.'
Not only is their premise a bad premise, but the very act of mocking those killed in one incident in this fashion is appalling. Yes, I say they are mocking those killed, because they are using the tragedy to further their own agenda.
Let's think about this logically:
Step 1 - Define Vigil:
- A period of keeping awake during the time usually spent asleep, esp. to keep watch or pray.
- A stationary, peaceful demonstration in support of a particular cause, typically without speeches.
Step 2 - Determine their usage of it.
Clearly, they are not using the first definition, as they are not keeping watch over anything, and I have yet to hear any of them invoke the name of our Creator. At least, not in a vain fashion. So, let's look more closely at the second definition. "...support of a particular cause..."
Step 3 - Determine the intent.
What cause? If the 'vigil' is to 'honor' deceased, that's not a cause which needs much intentional support. Step 4 - Apply logic to the method.
Those who loved the deceased honor them as they deserve. Outside onlookers 'honoring' them tend to be a distraction, and a detraction, from any honor being given unto them.
Which means that there's another motive. Is it an attention getting motive, as Miguel suspects? I think that's a reasonable direction to go with this. So, really the 'cause' they are supporting here is drawing attention to themselves.
Alternatively, other motives could include, but are not limited to, the following:
Attempting to thwart their entrance into the dustbin of history.
Attempting to redirect attention from the REAL issue (crime) and topple a straw man they have built.
Attempting to gain monies from people who are too lazy to do the research behind the 'cause.'
Attempting to force themselves into current issues in order to 'feel better' about themselves.
Attempting to use a genuine tragedy perpetrated by a pathetic individual to further their own agenda.
Please, comment below with your own ideas of what their motives or goals could have been. I'm curious to see what we can come up with!
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Personal Experience: Carwash Ambush
This isn't the first time I've had to use a firearm in self-defense. It's merely the first since I started blogging. But, several things come into play which I want to emphasize to anyone who happens to be reading this.On Sunday, I was hanging out with my daughter at my fiance's house. My future in-laws were there, the ladies doing wedding planning, my daughter and I watching a Narnia marathon, and a relaxing day being had by all. After the snow fall of the week prior, I decided it would be a good idea to wash the salt from the car before it had any more chance to corrode my paint and undercarriage, and make me another victim of the steel buckle of the rust belt.
As such, I asked my daughter if she would like to accompany me to the car wash. Her eyes lit up, and after the Narnia movie which was playing at the time ended, we were on our way.
Upon pulling into the parking lot, I noticed two young guys sitting on a curb along the back portion of the lot. They didn't strike me as significantly out of place, as there is a fair amount of pedestrian traffic there. This is not a bad part of town by any stretch of the imagination, and there are always people milling about.
As I rounded the back end of the car wash, I asked my daughter whether we should use the 'spray it yourself' or the automatic wash. She chose the automatic, as she enjoys watching the machine do the work. Since this particular car wash has no brushes or rollers or other 'things-which-hold-dirt-from-other-cars-and-use-it-to-scratch-mine' I conceded, and proceeded to the far end of the building, getting in line behind a dark purple Pontiac Grand Am.
At this point, I noticed that the Grand Am was a significant distance behind the next car up in line, but attributed that to the driver having the vehicle in park while waiting for others to move up, and being in no hurry, so I brushed it off. I looked into my mirror to chat with my daughter, and noticed out of the corner of my eye movement in my passenger side-view mirror. As I shifted focus to that mirror, I saw the aforementioned young men walking in the direction of my car, from behind. I then noticed that they both had their hands clutching things in such a way that I could not see what was in them. At this point, my senses went into overdrive, and I started taking in every detail of what they were doing.
They split up behind my car, one coming to the driver, the other remaining on the passenger side. At this point, I knew hesitation COULD prove to be a problem, and taking a simple precaution would cause no problems. So, without interrupting my daughter (who was talking about something which for the life of me I can't remember now), I drew my firearm from my holster, and held it against my chest, with the barrel directed at the driver's window. As the kids reached the front doors of my car, they turned to face it from both sides. I turned to look at the one on my left, made eye contact, raised my gun ever so slightly. His eyes widened, and he turned to run. I then looked to my right, and saw what was in the hand of the kid on the other side of the car. An ASP. At this point, I started to swing my firearm in his direction, expecting to have to fire it after he broke the glass. As soon as he saw what was in my hand, however, he also bolted. After he ran, the car in front of me (remember that dark purple Pontiac?) turned a tight turn, and booked it around the corner.
The kid who had been by my driver's side door ran through one of the DIY carwash stalls, shoving the guy who was washing his car. I watched him on the other side, as the other kid reached him, and then the car. They jumped in, and took off up the street.
My daughter, meanwhile, was blissfully unaware of the encounter. As a parent, I'm exceedingly grateful that I was not only able to protect her, but I was able to do it in such a fashion that she never had to feel any fear, and was able to continue her story with only a slight pause when she noticed the guys run from the car.
The entire incident took a very short amount of time. I couldn't begin to guess how long it did take, but even reviewing the slow-motion capture in my head, there was very little time involved.
Remember I said I wanted to point out a few things? Well, here are they key factors:
1 - It was broad daylight.
2 - It was in what is considered to be a safe area. A 'good part' of town.
3 - This area, on the whole, has a lower crime rate than most of the rest of the USA.
4 - I was not out looking for anything, instead trouble found me.
5 - If I did not pay attention to my surroundings, things could have gone very differently, especially if I was not already preparing as they were approaching.
6 - They did not have (that I was able to see) any firearms of their own. That would not have prevented them from perpetrating violence upon myself and my daughter.
7 - If I had been unarmed, or prevented from owning or carrying a weapon, it would not have ended so peacefully.
8 - One person against many doesn't stand a chance, without something to balance the odds. The threat of violence was sufficient to bring resolution to the situation without the need to follow through with the threat.
9 - I hope the thugs who sought to ambush me (or whoever happened to pull into the lot behind their getaway) will reconsider their plans, and realize that their victims may not be willing to be victimized.
This is just another reason why we have a 2nd amendment. Personal responsibility. Only I am able to protect myself and my family. I cannot rely on anyone else to do so.
UPDATE: I spoke with the police, and let them know about the event. I provided as detailed a description of all the actors as best as I was able, and they have filed it as something for which to be alert. No incident report, nothing else exciting.
As such, I asked my daughter if she would like to accompany me to the car wash. Her eyes lit up, and after the Narnia movie which was playing at the time ended, we were on our way.
Upon pulling into the parking lot, I noticed two young guys sitting on a curb along the back portion of the lot. They didn't strike me as significantly out of place, as there is a fair amount of pedestrian traffic there. This is not a bad part of town by any stretch of the imagination, and there are always people milling about.
As I rounded the back end of the car wash, I asked my daughter whether we should use the 'spray it yourself' or the automatic wash. She chose the automatic, as she enjoys watching the machine do the work. Since this particular car wash has no brushes or rollers or other 'things-which-hold-dirt-from-other-cars-and-use-it-to-scratch-mine' I conceded, and proceeded to the far end of the building, getting in line behind a dark purple Pontiac Grand Am.
At this point, I noticed that the Grand Am was a significant distance behind the next car up in line, but attributed that to the driver having the vehicle in park while waiting for others to move up, and being in no hurry, so I brushed it off. I looked into my mirror to chat with my daughter, and noticed out of the corner of my eye movement in my passenger side-view mirror. As I shifted focus to that mirror, I saw the aforementioned young men walking in the direction of my car, from behind. I then noticed that they both had their hands clutching things in such a way that I could not see what was in them. At this point, my senses went into overdrive, and I started taking in every detail of what they were doing.
They split up behind my car, one coming to the driver, the other remaining on the passenger side. At this point, I knew hesitation COULD prove to be a problem, and taking a simple precaution would cause no problems. So, without interrupting my daughter (who was talking about something which for the life of me I can't remember now), I drew my firearm from my holster, and held it against my chest, with the barrel directed at the driver's window. As the kids reached the front doors of my car, they turned to face it from both sides. I turned to look at the one on my left, made eye contact, raised my gun ever so slightly. His eyes widened, and he turned to run. I then looked to my right, and saw what was in the hand of the kid on the other side of the car. An ASP. At this point, I started to swing my firearm in his direction, expecting to have to fire it after he broke the glass. As soon as he saw what was in my hand, however, he also bolted. After he ran, the car in front of me (remember that dark purple Pontiac?) turned a tight turn, and booked it around the corner.
The kid who had been by my driver's side door ran through one of the DIY carwash stalls, shoving the guy who was washing his car. I watched him on the other side, as the other kid reached him, and then the car. They jumped in, and took off up the street.
My daughter, meanwhile, was blissfully unaware of the encounter. As a parent, I'm exceedingly grateful that I was not only able to protect her, but I was able to do it in such a fashion that she never had to feel any fear, and was able to continue her story with only a slight pause when she noticed the guys run from the car.
The entire incident took a very short amount of time. I couldn't begin to guess how long it did take, but even reviewing the slow-motion capture in my head, there was very little time involved.
Remember I said I wanted to point out a few things? Well, here are they key factors:
1 - It was broad daylight.
2 - It was in what is considered to be a safe area. A 'good part' of town.
3 - This area, on the whole, has a lower crime rate than most of the rest of the USA.
4 - I was not out looking for anything, instead trouble found me.
5 - If I did not pay attention to my surroundings, things could have gone very differently, especially if I was not already preparing as they were approaching.
6 - They did not have (that I was able to see) any firearms of their own. That would not have prevented them from perpetrating violence upon myself and my daughter.
7 - If I had been unarmed, or prevented from owning or carrying a weapon, it would not have ended so peacefully.
8 - One person against many doesn't stand a chance, without something to balance the odds. The threat of violence was sufficient to bring resolution to the situation without the need to follow through with the threat.
9 - I hope the thugs who sought to ambush me (or whoever happened to pull into the lot behind their getaway) will reconsider their plans, and realize that their victims may not be willing to be victimized.
This is just another reason why we have a 2nd amendment. Personal responsibility. Only I am able to protect myself and my family. I cannot rely on anyone else to do so.
UPDATE: I spoke with the police, and let them know about the event. I provided as detailed a description of all the actors as best as I was able, and they have filed it as something for which to be alert. No incident report, nothing else exciting.
Humbling Note
I needed something to kick-start me out of my lull in blogging. I think I found it with this article. It's not written about blogging, but rather about the gun community.
It really is a humbling thing, to be part of something so big, yet so small in how we treat one another. I really do have a tremendous amount of joy for this group of people all across this country. And while I will never be able to say it so succinctly or effectively as she already has, I will say that it is an honor to be a part of it!
It really is a humbling thing, to be part of something so big, yet so small in how we treat one another. I really do have a tremendous amount of joy for this group of people all across this country. And while I will never be able to say it so succinctly or effectively as she already has, I will say that it is an honor to be a part of it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)