Petitions Galore

Sources:
http://www.weerdworld.com/2011/lets-play-a-game/
http://ncguns.blogspot.com/2011/09/lets-have-some-fun-with-our-president.html

The anti-rights lobby has established a 'ban private sale' petition with the White House.  They need to get 5000 votes for it to do any good.  They aren't close.

However, there are some petitions well worth signing, such as support of HR822, and some others.  Take a look, and if you feel so inclined, add your name to the petition.  I won't say you must, but I would recommend it.  Let's send a clear message to the executive branch that this is what we want!

Grandma is Willing to Protect her Own

Source:
http://3bxsofbs.infamousanime.net/?p=4480

Bob S. has a great write-up on this incident.  The short version is that there was a robbery, suspects were fleeing, one hid under her bushes, and regretted it.
Fortunately she did not need to actually employ deadly force to gain compliance from the suspect who made that mistake.  He immediately became polite, cooperative, and compliant when he realized that someone protecting their family is willing to do so without hesitation.  He clearly knew he was in the wrong (mentioned that 'the cops are looking for me'), and knew what he had to do to remain intact.
I would tip my hat, were I wearing one, to her, and hope she never is required to take such action again, while taking joy in the knowledge that she is willing and able if she is.
He makes this point, which is the fundamental point of self defense:

She didn’t go out looking for trouble but was ready when it came to her.

That is why we put forth the effort to arm ourselves.  Not to find trouble, but to handle it when it finds us.

My Daughter's First Magazine

So, my daughter has fired a pellet gun before today.  Allow me to clarify that.  She held it, and I pulled the trigger, because she doesn't have the strength in her hand to squeeze the obnoxious trigger on it.  However, she has no problem squeezing the triggers on the actual firearms.

That said, check out the video below.  It's the last 7 rounds of her first magazine with a real pistol.  She's still a little over-eager, squeezes them off more quickly than she needs to fire them, and she tends to flinch.  But for a young lass on her first day, she's not doing too shabbily at all!

She's got some learning to do, but she's off to a good start.

And yes, I probably am biased.

200 Murders - 1 Scandal or Is it the Fault of the Guns?

Source:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/09/20/attorney_general_in_mexico_200_murders_result_of_operation_fast_and_furious

So, the AG in Mexico has basically said that 200 (at least) murders are the result (so far) of the Fast and Furious scandal.  Now, you and I both know that murderers will murder, with whatever weapon(s) is(are) available.  Weer'd has a great pile of examples.  It's an insignificant percentage of how many actual events like it happen, but it's the exact image of what we know to be true.  Murder isn't cause by guns.

So, my question is simple.  If we hold them to the same standard they claim when arguing with us, that being 'Guns cause death!' then what is the logical conclusion?

Step 1 - They allowed guns to be illegally trafficked across the border.

Step 2 - Those guns killed people.

Step 3 - Because it was the guns which committed the crime, the supplier(s) of the guns should be held accountable.  (After all, when someone robs a bank with a gun, it's the fault of the gun store who sold him the gun, or the firearms manufacturer, or ANYONE but the actual criminal.  He's the victim of the terrible evil of being a gun owner.  Even if he illegally owns that gun.)

Step 4 - The fault lies squarely with the DOJ and ATF.  No one else to blame, they forced the dealers to sell the guns in circumstances where they would otherwise not have made the sale, they forced the situation to fall into such a place that the weapons made it to their destination.  They hold all blame.  Not even the criminals who pulled the triggers share in that blame.

At least, that's what I'd be forced to think if I bought into the lies of the antis.  Instead, I see this scandal in a different light.

Step 1 - Normally law-abiding gun dealers were forced to break the law, their own policies, and have unethical business transactions with people with whom they would prefer not to do business.  They were forced into committing commerce against their will, as it were.

 Step 2 - Firearms purchased in these circumstances were allowed to cross an international border, violating a large pile of other laws, again at the behest of those who were pushing this agenda.

 Step 3 - The firearms were sold illegally in Mexico, to the cartels, violating yet more laws.

 Step 4 - The guns were then used in the commission of various crimes, by criminals, including murder.

So this is where my logic takes a turn from what they would espouse:

Prosecute the criminals.  Charge them with what they did, and move on.  In Mexico, that means prosecuting the murderers for murder.  Oh wait, those are the cartels that their own government has allowed to get to where they are.  The police there won't cross their paths.  So, looks like the murderers are walking.

But, where does that leave the DOJ and ATF here who facilitated, and even forced, this to be an issue?

Accessory to murder, for one.  Countless other laws, and international laws, were broken in this scandal.  Those responsible need to be held 100% accountable.  To do less is to tell the rest of the world that we don't care about justice, only agenda.  There are those who say we should send those responsible to Mexico to stand trial.  

I have two problems with that:

1 - The crimes they committed happened here in the States, not in Mexico.  We should not extradite people to other countries for crimes committed here.  They should be charged and prosecuted HERE for those crimes.

2 - We need to lead on the issue of holding those in power accountable.  Sending them off to be prosecuted elsewhere in no way demonstrates to a watching world that we are serious about being an ethical, upright, just nation.

Your Papers Please...or Voter Fraud Counter-Measures

Sources:
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/voter-id/groups-urge-feds-stop-voter-id-bill/

http://www.imao.us/index.php/2011/09/nuke-the-news-taxes-create-jobs-day-of-yawn-and-yay-fraud/

 American's enjoy several unique options in life, which leads America to be a very unique place to live.  One of the options which has defined America throughout her history has been the right of the citizenry to vote.  This right has given the people a clear voice int he organization and execution of the government.  Well, it used to be clear.

It's no secret that over the last several decades accusations of fraud at the polling places, and in the counting afterward, have been rampant.  Chicago is notorious for having the dead turn out in droves to vote.  And this before we even really started considering the coming zombie apocalypse.  Maybe this is the origin?

What do we do with rampant accusations of voter fraud?  How do we protect the voice of the people?  How do we prevent a phony lip-service-only voting system like exists in much of the world from taking over here?

UPDATE:
The below paragraph is how I initially worded it.  Bob S. from 3 boxes of BS has helped me to understand how I was wrong in my original statements.  After this paragraph is the updated version of it, corrected for accuracy and clarification.

Governor Perry in Texas instituted a voter ID check.  The concept is simple, and it seems to be effective.  "Prove you are a citizen, and you get to vote."
Now reads:
Governor Perry in Texas signed into law a voter ID check.  The concept is simple, and it seems to be effective.  "Prove you are who you say you are, and you get to vote."
I now return you to your regularly scheduled blogpost

However, there is some controversy.  There are two sides to every argument; this one, I think, has three.

1. It's only fair to everyone else participating in the system that all people prove their eligibility to participate in the system.  It has to happen if the system is going to work the way it was intended to work.
2. There's no need for it.  
3. This bears too much of a concept of 'Your Papers Please' and is fundamentally opposed to what we as Americans hold to be dear.

Personally, I'm torn between options 1 and 3.  Option 2 I completely disregard, as I firmly believe SOMETHING needs to be done.  However, what that something is, I'm not entirely certain.  I lean toward option 1, as the concept of 'your papers please' is more along the lines of when people are traveling around and are being accosted by law enforcement without provocation or just cause.  Really, since when is 'subversive material' illegal in the US?  Last time I checked, reading material wasn't illegal.

This is different from those evils, and I think a necessary step to take to protect this nation.  There may be a better way to do it, and if there is, I'll be happy to entertain it.  While this is a right of the citizens of this nation to vote, the difference in this case is the citizens voting.  There must be a vested interest in the future success of this great land.  Illegals, the dead, and others have no vested interest in that success.

As Frank said regarding those who oppose this concept:  

"...make them carry the pro-voter fraud label as there is no — NO — logical reason to be against having to prove you can vote before voting other than that you are for voter fraud and think it will help your side."

Please, share your thoughts on this issue!

Knife in the Pocket

Origin:
http://gunblogblacklist.blogspot.com/2011/09/whats-in-your-ouch.html
http://northwest1524.blogspot.com/2011/09/trusty-dusty-knife.html
http://neanderpundit.com/?p=4643
http://nonoriginalrants.blogspot.com/2011/09/scuse-me-while-i-whip-this-out.html
http://rfaa.blogspot.com/2011/09/blog-meme-ho-sharp-cutty-stab-edition.html
http://www.weerdworld.com/2011/whip-out/
http://www.thebredafallacy.com/2011/09/my-knife.html

So, the concept is 'take the knife out of your pocket, and post a picture.'  Except, I have to ask 'which knife?'
To say I have 'many' is probably a fair assessment.  I like being able to get to a knife in any pocket in any position I happen to be sitting, in any vehicle or other restraint.
So, without further ado, here are the two which came out most quickly when I saw the meme:

The Tanto bladed knife I've had for more years than I can remember.  The other I picked up in 2009 while in San Francisco for business.  I especially like that one because of having the seat-belt cutter and window-breaker incorporated.  Very useful tool.

What is(are) in your pocket(s)?

Debt Reduction or Holding People Hostage?

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/us/politics/obama-plan-to-cut-deficit-will-trim-spending.html

After reading this, it's pretty obvious that the administration's plan is a combination of two things.

1 - Raising taxes by $1.5 TRILLION when the economy is already suffering tremendously (because that's always such a great idea).

2 - Holdng our troops hostage.  These men and women deserve so much, and O-nutjob would use them for political leverage? 

That doesn't even mention that the plan would cut medicare and medicade, the very thing he accused Republicans of wanting to do.  While I would be fine with eliminating social programs (HOW to eliminate, I'm willing to discuss, as we probably can't easily go cold-turkey), to make even hinting at touching these programs out to be an evil, then to proceed and actually do it yourself is as hypocritical as it gets. 

As a wise man once said, "If you want to know what the left is doing, look at what they are accusing the right of doing."

Life is Busy

This is more of a 'light posting' apology than anything else.  Life has become hectic!
I've been extremely busy with various things I'm working on with my fiance, not the least of which is planning a wedding and buying a house.  We started a new sermon series at church this weekend, which meant I had to spend some extra time getting the lights set for that, and the list goes on.
All that said, I'm planning to step up the posting again at some point in the near future.
Please bear with me, I am only human, after all!

Ataaaack Waaatch Part Deux - Joking Around

Source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/attack-watch-new-obama-campaign-site-to-fight-smears-becomes-laughing-stock-of-the-internet/2011/09/14/gIQAspHDSK_blog.html?tid=sm_facebook

It's good to see that there is a post at the Washington Post ridiculing it as well.  Sure, they attempt to point out the 'motivation' and the 'good things' that will come of such a site.  But let's face it.  They know as well as we do that it's an attempt at censorship.  One which will ultimately fail.
Instead, it's like being on a battlefield, and our enemies have air-dropped a large supply of weapons and ammunition behind our lines.
As I said to a co-worker, the people know what he's trying to do, and won't stand for it.  Her response was that not everyone hates it, the people living on "government money" (our money) love it.  I then said 'Stop trying to depress me. I said people, not sheeple.'
Let's keep the joke going.  Toss comments and funny links here, share the best stuff you can find!
This video (sent to me by a friend) is priceless!

You Don't Deserve to Keep Your Money

Source:
http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=2285496

The important quote is as follows:

“I’ll put it this way. You don’t deserve to keep all of it and it’s not a question of deserving because what government is, is those things that we decide to do together."

Just let that marinate in your brain for a while. 
You (the free US citizen) do not deserve (are not entitled to, have no right to, and have no obligation in your favor of having) to keep (possess, to do with what you will) all of it (the money you have earned by your hard work and effort)....
What else do we need to hear from the left before we understand that they HATE freedom, they HATE capitalism, and they HATE liberty?

OC: Pros and Co...Well, Pros Anyway

Source (Weer'd has some fantastic posts.):
http://www.weerdworld.com/2011/we-are-all-open-carry/

My first thought about any sort of carry is simple:

...The right of the people to keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed.

 Emphasis mine.
Any restriction of carrying a weapon is infringing on the right of that weapon-holder to bear his or her arm(s).  There is no twisted logic or convoluted methodology of law-making which will ever change that.  Any restriction is an infringement.
All that said, the movement for open carry has been growing.  The people who are pushing this movement are making great progress for logic and reason.  The politicized results of their carrying openly are having the desired effect overall.
I have been OCing for years off and on.  There are times I prefer it for various reasons, from having pants on which are too tight to allow proper concealed, to other garments which won't allow for concealment, to knowing I'm going to be in a neighborhood in which I'd much rather not be.  The advantages of OC are many, and with a proper understanding of those advantages it provides for the safety of all individuals.  As Weer'd said, the stakes couldn't be higher.  Those of us who carry, do so following the letter of the law, because it only takes one mistake to be unable to properly defend ourselves and our loved ones going forward.
So, without further ado, a brief list of advantages of open carry:

1. Crime-against-self reduction.  A criminal seeing that you have a firearm on your hip is less likely to attempt to make you a victim.
2. Crime-against-others reduction.  A criminal seeing that you have a firearm on your hip is less likely to attempt to victimize someone else in your vicinity.
3. Ease-of-access.  Typically drawing from concealment is slower than from open.  Obviously with proper training any timing differences can be mitigated.  However, in an 'all things equal' world, the lack of fabric between your hand and the grip of your sidearm, the faster you can bring it to bear, and put it to it's designated role.
4. Comfort level.  When I am OC, it feels far more comfortable than when I am concealed.  I'm a bigger guy, so it's difficult to find that sweet spot which causes no discomfort whatsoever.
5. Familiarity.  Allowing other people with whom you interact on a day to day basis to see that you are carrying a firearm, and at the same time you are NOT shooting people over parking spaces, or randomly shooting people, or any of the other evils the antis claim, is about the most positive press we can ever hope to have.
6. Style.  There are a tremendous number of stylish, beautiful holsters being created today.  Personally, I am unable to find one, as it seems there isn't much market for my pistol of choice.  However, many weapons have many options for carrying, and with the right accessories, it can really compliment an outfit.

There are many many many more pros than this.  Share what pros you consider to be important, or key in your decision making process.  Do you OC daily, or just occasionally?  Are you prepared to deal with accidental OC?
Share your thoughts!

Attack Watch

Source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XYKRokgX00

This is a scary video.  Before I go any further, please take a moment to view it in it's entirety. 

So, I suspect this blog, among many many other blogs, will appear on this website.  Looks like it's time for us to lay low, and cling bitterly to our guns and Bibles.

9/12 - The Morning After

I thought long and hard about what to post yesterday.  I was fully intending to put aside my 'typically don't post on Sundays' habit and write something for the anniversary of the attacks against our nation.
But I couldn't bring myself to do it.
Why?  One simple question:  What has changed?
Sure I could talk about what I was doing, or how I felt, or what awakened in my understanding of the world around us.  I could go on for hours about what it felt like when I realized we are hated simply because we are free.  I could go into detail every minute of my day: Evacuation to talking to my friend in Army Ranger School at the time, to the trouble I had sleeping that night.  But the point is, it doesn't really matter.
When America awakened on 9/12, we all knew something was different.  We all realized we needed to change our outlook on the world around us.  We all knew that life would never be the same again.  What we didn't know was that we were going to do more harm to our own country than the combined efforts of every terrorist have done.
I know I typically write about freedom, firearms, and the like.  But today I'm going to temper that writing with something a little more faith-driven.  I've never attempted to hide the fact that I believe the God of the Bible, who sent His Son Jesus to pay the penalty for sin, and die a substitutionary death on the cross for us.  For me.
So what does that have to do with the events of the decade following this tragedy?  The answer is simple:  Everything.
I've learned much in the past decade, not the least of which being that those of us who have this faith have an obligation to lead people.  We are to the the ones holding the standard, encouraging people to continue on when it seems there is no hope.  We are the ones who are to be willing to give our lives for others, even strangers, because our eternal security is assured.  We are the ones who are to bring hope to those who don't see any, and joy to those who don't know her touch.
And we are to do it, not because of anything within ourselves, or because we are better than anyone else, or because we are supposed to do it.  We are to do it because greater is He who is in us than he who is in the world.  It's not our own power, it's not our own love, and it's not our own means.
So in the decade since that tragedy, while our rights have been being systematically stripped by an oppressive government bent on crushing the people, and we've watched loved ones giving their lives in an attempt to free others from the control of similar evil governments, we continue to stand.  We are called to be salt and light to a world in need.
Are we?  Are we taking those difficult stands, choosing the right path, even when our own nation seems to be turning completely against us?  Are we calling evil for what it is where we find it?  Are we prepared with an answer when people ask us questions, or attack us unjustly?  Are we ready to defend our faith with our minds and hearts?  Are we ready to reach a world in need?

The Evils of Fire(arms)

Source:
Wizard's First Rule by Terry Goodkind (Amazon)

This is well worth the read.

   "And now, to the other part," Michael continued, "to the real suffering around us.  While we have worried about the boundaries that have not harmed a single one of us, many of our families, friends, and neighbors have suffered, and died.  Tragic and needless deaths, in accidents with fire.  Yes, that is what I said.  Fire."

    People mumbled in confusion.  Michael was starting to lose his bond with the crowd.  He seemed to expect it; he looked from face to face, letting the confusion build, and then dramatically he thrust his hand out, his finger pointing.

   At Richard.

   "There!" he screamed.  Everyone turned as one.  Hundred of eyes looked at Richard.  "There stands my beloved brother!"  Richard tried to shrink.  "My beloved brother who shares with me" - he pounded a fist into his chest - "the tragedy of losing our own mother to fire!  Fire took our mother from us when we were young, and left us to grow up alone, without her love and care, without her guidance.  It was not some imagined enemy from across a boundary that took her, but an enemy of fire!  She couldn't be there to comfort us when we hurt, when we cried in the night.  And the thing that wounds the most is that it didn't have to be."

   Tears, glistening in the sunlight, ran down Michael's cheeks.  "I am sorry, friends, please forgive me."  He wiped the tears with a handkerchief he had handy.  "It's just that only this morning I heard of another fire that took a fine young mother and father, and left their daughter an orphan.  It brought my own pain back to me and I couldn't remain silent."  Everyone was now solidly back with him.  Their tears flowed freely.  A woman put her arm around Richard's shoulder as he stood numb.  She whispered how sorry she was. 

   "I wonder how many of you have shared the pain my brother and I live with every day.  Please, those of you who have a loved one, or a friend, who has been hurt, or even killed, by fire, please, hold up your hands."  Quite a few hands went up, and there was a wailing from some in the crowd.

   "There, my friends," he said hoarsely, spreading his arms wide, "there is the suffering suffering among us.  We need look no further than this room."

   Richard tried to swallow the lump in his throat as the memory of that horror came back to him.  A man who had imagined their father had cheated him lost his temper and knocked a lamp off the table as Richard and his brother slept in the back bedroom.  While the man dragged his father outside, beating him, his mother pulled Richard and his brother from the burning house, then ran back inside to save something, they never knew what, and was burned alive.  Her screams brought the man to his senses, and he and their father tried to save her, but couldn't.  Filled with guilt and the revulsion at what he had caused, the man ran off crying and yelling that he was sorry.

   That, his father had told them fa thousand times, was the result of a man losing his temper.  Michael shrugged it off; Richard took it to heart.  It had instilled in him a dread of his own anger, and whenever it threatened to come out, he choked it off.

   Michael was wrong.  Fire had not killed their mother; anger had.

   Arms hanging limply at his side, head bowed, Michael spoke softly again.  "What can we do about the danger to our families from fire?"  He shook his head sadly.  "I do not know, my friends.

   "But, I am forming a commission on the problem, and I urge any concerned citizen to come forward with suggestions.  My door always stands open.  Together we can do something.  Together we will do something.
   "And now my friends, please excuse me, and allow me to go comfort my brother, as I am afraid bringing out our personal tragedy was a surprise to him, and I must ask his forgiveness."

Used with permission under the "fair use" tribute.
Now, re-read the entire story above, and add the word 'arms' after every instance of the word 'fire.'  Spooky, right?  Now, while doing that, focus on this line:

Michael was wrong.  Fire had not killed their mother; anger had.

Terry Goodkind is an excellent author, and I highly recommend the 'Sword of Truth' series.  Wizard's First Rule is the first book of the series.  The entire series has quite a few analogies such as this.  He brings up some fantastic questions, and uses basic, yet perfect, logic to resolve them.  Later in the series he discusses the fairness of taking what people have earned from the earners, and distributing it to those who do not earn. 
And yes, he was heavily influenced by Rand.

Chime in on your thoughts!  (Pun intended, for those who have already read the series.)

Jobs - Now in Brighter Packaging

Source:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904836104576560593248402036.html

I didn't bother listening to the speech last night.  I don't think I was anywhere that I could have even if I wanted to watch my blood pressure climb, and feel my pulse race.  That said, it seems to be the buzz today, getting the most attention from outmoded news media (newspaper, tv, radio, etc), as well as current, relevant news publications (such as blogs, online reporting, etc).  

While I am not an expert in things of economics, I do have a fair amount of common sense.  So I'm going to comment on some of the things I've read.

Under Mr. Obama's plan, the unemployed would see several additional programs to help get them back to work.

 When I  hear/read that, I can't help but think 'More spending, more government agencies, more cost to the people who do have jobs, more cost to the people who can create jobs.'  Government programs have a tendency of backfiring, or resulting in the opposite of their intent.

Meanwhile, employers would get a tax credit of up to $4,000 to hire people who have been out of work for more than six months, a move that would help level the playing field for the long-term jobless, said Rutgers economist Bill Rodgers.

The level playing field should not be forced based on an outside force.  It should be level to the people in the playing field.  Each person should succeed or fail by their own efforts.  If this goes into effect, it will have the result of people who see companies hiring those who are unemployed for a longer period of time choosing to spend  that time living off the government teet, and not being a productive member of society, opting rather to wait until they are part of the 'group' which gets special treatment.

As with the 2009 stimulus package, much of the proposed policy is directed toward the construction industry and the more than 1 million unemployed construction workers in America.

Again, special treatment for one group of people.  Rather than focusing on the root problems, and how they impact the entire economy and nation, this package seems to be carefully directed at specific people.  That sounds a LOT more like a campaign strategy, or a vote-winning strategy, than a 'fix the problem' strategy to me.

The plan would put $30 billion into renovations at schools and community colleges, $50 billion into the modernization of roads, airports, waterways and railroads, $15 billion into "Project Rebuild," a program that refurbishes vacant and foreclosed homes and $10 billion into financing for a national infrastructure bank that would use both public and private investment to finance infrastructure projects. Mr. Obama said these initiatives would create "hundreds of thousands" of jobs.

So, rather than taking steps to increase the availability of jobs overall, this will focus on specific, short-term jobs which may or may not last once the indicated projects are done.  

Mr. Obama's plan would cut payroll taxes in half for up to the first $5 million in wages businesses pay and offer a $4,000 tax credit to companies that hire long-term unemployed. It would also extend the so-called "100% expensing," which allows firms to take an immediate 100% tax deduction on capital investments, an incentive that would otherwise expire at the end of the year.

Two out of three ain't bad, right?  Anytime taxes are cut, especially taxes which can be seen directly relating to the number of employees, will always benefit job growth.  So he's got that part right.  But why stop at $5 million?  Why not make it across the board?  Additionally, the ability to write-off capital investments is extremely beneficial to the economy, as it removes some of the burden of that type of expenditure.  The removal of that burden gives more willingness to  the companies to spend the money, which provides work for other companies, and more jobs overall.  But, again, see above regarding the tax credit for hiring long-term unemployed.  

Still, because the proposed tax breaks are temporary, their effectiveness in creating hiring will be blunted, said Bill Rys, tax counsel at the National Federation of Independent Business, a small-business association.

So make those tax incentives permanent.  

As of right now, I see nothing in what I've been able to find which gives me any confidence that this plan will have a positive, lasting impact.  There are steps here which will help, but only if taken to their logical conclusion.  The rest is just another stimulus package, and more 'spreading of the wealth.'  

If the purpose of the money being given for these projects is job creation, how about a tax refund to everyone equally based on what they paid?  Match that with permanent tax cuts, and you'll see job growth.  Anything less than that is merely lip service for the purpose of garnering votes.

Setback for Freedom in VA Court

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/08/us-usa-healthcare-ruling-idUSTRE7874S720110908

The court ruled that the federal government has the power to FORCE the citizenry to purchase health insurance. 
This is just one more loss we face as we attempt to fight to keep the American way of life intact.  The very concept of a government forcing it's citizens to participate in any activity is as tyrannical as it gets.
It also appears the VA court thinks the federal government can undermine the state's own laws.

Sadly, no Debate Update

Due to my schedule conflicting with the schedule of the Debate (really, why didn't someone tell them I was busy, and would be unable to watch?) I was unable to watch the debate this time.  As such, no update on the debate.  If I'm able to find the entire video, audio, or transcript, I will toss some commentary out there.  If you happen to know where I can get any of the above, please drop me a link.
Thanks folks!

The TSA is Evil

Source:
http://www.popehat.com/2011/09/06/complain-about-being-sexually-assaulted-by-a-tsa-thug-theyll-sue/

DISCLOSURE:  This post and the link contain graphic descriptions of non-consensual  sexual encounters.  Not appropriate for all ages.

I highly recommend reading this entire article.  I also highly recommend offering any support you are able to Amy.  She did what every one of us who has flown under the TSA should do.  This gradual taking of more power by them, and more denial of our rights needs to stop, and be reversed.  The TSA needs to be disbanded.  They are an evil organization, which takes pleasure in using what little authority it has to sexually assault US citizens, and pays it's employees to do that. 
Not only is that rape, but it's inverted prostitutional rape.  Yes, I made up a word and phrase.  But think about it.  When someone pays for sex, it is prostitution.  When someone is sexually assaulted, it's rape.  When someone is paid to rape someone else, it becomes a new issue all together. 
Don't believe me?  Just ask any of the women who have had fingers and hands pushed "...between their labia."  Ask any of the men or boys who have had their penises grabbed.  This is legalized rape.  This is the dehumanization of the citizens of the USA.
The TSA is a criminal, evil organization and must be stopped.

At Least He Shot Himself For Us

Source:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/06/at-least-8-reportedly-shot-at-ihop-restaurant-in-nevada/

Yet another example of the police and law enforcement agencies being too slow to react.  After a shooter shoots people and himself, they arrive.  After the threat is neutralized, they shut down a street.  After ________ they _________.  Fill in those blanks with pretty much anything you want.  We see this in case after case, instance after instance.
If the police existed to prevent crime, this discussion would never happen.  however, they are a reactionary force, not a preemptive force.  They are unable to prevent this sort of thing.  \
I don't know anything about the shooter at this point, if he was high, if he had mental problems, if he was an escaped con out to get the world, or if he was a normal Joe who snapped, or what.  At the end of the day, that doesn't matter.  What matters is that no one there took the action to stop him.  It could be that none of them was armed, or it could be that he already shot those who were.  What will you do if you're confronted with such a situation?
This is why it's important for us to take our safety seriously, and responsibility for ourselves, and not rely on others for it.

Blog publishing post

Just tossing a unique code out to the interwebs.  Please keep moving.

AVWHV6KXW2CM

Busy Weekend

I had a very busy Memorial Day weekend.  It included interviews for reception halls for a certain upcoming event, as well as the other party of said event putting an offer on a substantial investment.

What did you do this weekend?

What Does it Mean to be Aware of Your Surroundings

Source:

http://3bxsofbs.infamousanime.net/?p=4379&cpage=1#comment-18379

I have always made it a special point to be alert to my surroundings.  We have a responsibility to ourselves and to our loved ones to be aware of danger, alert to trouble, and the like.  This can be exhausting, if you don't apply your methods correctly.  

To use the definitions used here I have personally primarily used a combination of two levels of awareness: 

1 - Relaxed Awareness - when in places where I spend most of my time, and it's easy to be alerted to something being out of place.  The office, the house, church, etc.

2 - Focused Awareness - when in places where I am not familiar, and as such things out of place are less likely to stand out to me, as 'everything' is out of place by my perspective.  New settings, new city, job interviews, special social occasions, and public areas which change frequently due to layout and visitor changes such as malls, restaurants, stores, garages, and the like.  

I have constantly encouraged this concept (though not worded nearly so well, or so detailed) to my loved ones.  

In what level of awareness do you typically find yourself?  Do you pay attention to what's going on around you?  Would you be taken by surprise if someone unexpected walked in the office?  Would you be unable to react if you witnessed a mugging while shopping?  Would you see that box sitting somewhere that it shouldn't be?  

It's very easy to be aware of what is going on around you without draining yourself.  I encourage you to try!

Idiocy Begets Idiocy

Source:
http://christopherburg.com/2011/09/02/citations-and-anti-gun-stupidity/

I always enjoy reading a solid refutation of idiocy.  Simple logic, common sense, and any ability to reason more than a mouse will lead to the logical conclusion that restricting freedom does not lead to safety.  Quite frankly, it leads to the opposite.
I have always found it rather telling as well that so often their arguments are either unsupported by any statistic, or they simply repeat the same things they hear within their own circles day after day.  It's the old adage that if you tell a lit often enough you'll start to believe it.
Take a look through the post, follow the links to the data, and smile to yourself as you gain even more firepower to use in the war for freedom.

Privatize the PA LCB?

I'd love to see the LCB privatized for more reasons than I can count.  The biggest are as follows:

1 - Why does our government think it's a good idea to sell it's citizens something?
2 - Broader selection and variety.
3 - Lower prices.
4 - The ability to order wines from around the world, and have them shipped to your home.  (Other drinks as well, not just wines.)
5 - Opens the door to transporting across state lines and not violating any laws in the process.

The list can go on, but these are the most important aspects of this effort.  So please, if you live in PA, and care about freedom, contact the president of the state senate here, and ask that he move the liquor privatization bill forward:
http://www.senatorscarnati.com/connect.htm

Update:
Turns out Sebastian talks about it as well.