"I would like to have a designer purse with a gun pocket (she meant holster). That would be me in a nutshell."
-Wifey
She is probably going to make one at some point.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Do People in the South put their Kids to Bed?
Wifey and I decided to spontaneously go out for a drink at about 10:40 tonight. We usually don't go out or whatever but just felt like getting out of the house. We went to our friendly local Applebees. Every table or at least 2/3rds of them had a kid and it was almost eleven when we got there. A couple times when we first got here we went there a bit on the late side say 8-9ish and saw a few kids. Enough to notice and discuss it. We sort of floated the hypothesis that since it cools down later in the evening peoples schedules sort of shift later.
Back home I don't think I've seen little kids out at all much past 8 let alone sitting down to dinner.
Is our local applebees just a haven for parents who do not put their kids to bed or is this some sort of a regional/ cultural thing? I am really curious.
Back home I don't think I've seen little kids out at all much past 8 let alone sitting down to dinner.
Is our local applebees just a haven for parents who do not put their kids to bed or is this some sort of a regional/ cultural thing? I am really curious.
Real Small Pistols, Utility, Defense and a Fiddling with Guns
Creedmore recently talked about 'pocket pistols' and Hermit mentioned a couple of his (just scroll down). Being me I wanted to get my .02 cents in. Things here have been a bit crazy so it took awhile to get to. Also I didn't want to just do a completely conceptual post so I made the sacrifice to go to the Pawn Shop and fiddle with some little pistols.
[ Begin Rant:I don't really like calling these 'pocket pistols' because to me that implies just throwing it in a pocket or a purse and calling it good. Getting a decent draw from a gun that has rotated in your pocket or is lost in your purse full of shit is not realistic. It will snag or you will come up with the barrel in your hand instead of the grip and because of this some goblin will stab you then rape your face.
I know that is very harsh but I am saying it because I love you and don't want your face to get raped. Seriously use a pocket holster or a purse holster or a belt holster or an ankle holster or some sort of a new unique holster I haven't heard of. End Rant]
I fiddled with a little Beretta and a little Taurus. I liked the Beretta enough to potentially own one. It would add a new caliber but going with the Bobcat would negate that. Then again in the grand scheme of things I am not going to get 10 mags and a case of ammo for a pocket gun, just can't see it. Getting 300rds of defense ammo and 4 mags would be plenty for me. If things get bad enough that I can't just order another mag if I need one the little guy would stay at home.
People often bash these little guns and while I can't disagree with a lot of their arguments I disagree with their conclusion. Are these better then compact or full sized handguns in calibers above .38special or 9mm, absolutely not. If you are going to own a small collection of guns one of these will probably not be on the list; then again for someone with a well rounded collection of 8+ guns it could make sense. One of these will be a lot more practically useful then a 4th glock/1911/full sized .357mag.
These guns absolutely loose when compared to full sized handguns. The problem is that entire preface is basically fucked. It is like saying that a leatherman isn't as good as a whole box of tools or that an E tool isn't as practical as a full sized shovel. These guns are not useful because they are better then full sized handguns; they are useful because you will have them when you would not have a full sized handgun or even a compact handgun. You can have one on your absolutely all the time unless wearing a bikini or banana hammock. A little .22/.25/.32 is a heck of a lot better then fists, mace or a pocket knife. Disagree?
How about we get in a fight where I get a little Beretta .22 and you get your fists? Or you get a knife and I get the .22. I wager one of us would get shot in the face.
Edited to include: As Oblio13 noted there are some relatively new options out there. Innovative gun makers Khar and Kel Tech both have guns that are not much bigger than the above mentioned really small pistols but chambered in .380 and 9mm. Maybe somewhere between sub compact and very small would be the best way to categorize these, to be honest I am not sure.
I do not know you or your situation. Those in the wilds of Idaho or the wide open plains can open carry the biggest piece that rides comfortably on their belt; however someone who is in a less free state or works in an office but has to walk to their car in the dark might find a .32 in a pocket holster very comforting.
I do not currently own a pistol in this size range though one is now going to need to be added to the wish list. Suppose one of these must be added to the pistol list. The more I think about it the more I can see a niche for one.
Thoughts?
[ Begin Rant:I don't really like calling these 'pocket pistols' because to me that implies just throwing it in a pocket or a purse and calling it good. Getting a decent draw from a gun that has rotated in your pocket or is lost in your purse full of shit is not realistic. It will snag or you will come up with the barrel in your hand instead of the grip and because of this some goblin will stab you then rape your face.
I know that is very harsh but I am saying it because I love you and don't want your face to get raped. Seriously use a pocket holster or a purse holster or a belt holster or an ankle holster or some sort of a new unique holster I haven't heard of. End Rant]
I fiddled with a little Beretta and a little Taurus. I liked the Beretta enough to potentially own one. It would add a new caliber but going with the Bobcat would negate that. Then again in the grand scheme of things I am not going to get 10 mags and a case of ammo for a pocket gun, just can't see it. Getting 300rds of defense ammo and 4 mags would be plenty for me. If things get bad enough that I can't just order another mag if I need one the little guy would stay at home.
People often bash these little guns and while I can't disagree with a lot of their arguments I disagree with their conclusion. Are these better then compact or full sized handguns in calibers above .38special or 9mm, absolutely not. If you are going to own a small collection of guns one of these will probably not be on the list; then again for someone with a well rounded collection of 8+ guns it could make sense. One of these will be a lot more practically useful then a 4th glock/1911/full sized .357mag.
These guns absolutely loose when compared to full sized handguns. The problem is that entire preface is basically fucked. It is like saying that a leatherman isn't as good as a whole box of tools or that an E tool isn't as practical as a full sized shovel. These guns are not useful because they are better then full sized handguns; they are useful because you will have them when you would not have a full sized handgun or even a compact handgun. You can have one on your absolutely all the time unless wearing a bikini or banana hammock. A little .22/.25/.32 is a heck of a lot better then fists, mace or a pocket knife. Disagree?
How about we get in a fight where I get a little Beretta .22 and you get your fists? Or you get a knife and I get the .22. I wager one of us would get shot in the face.
Edited to include: As Oblio13 noted there are some relatively new options out there. Innovative gun makers Khar and Kel Tech both have guns that are not much bigger than the above mentioned really small pistols but chambered in .380 and 9mm. Maybe somewhere between sub compact and very small would be the best way to categorize these, to be honest I am not sure.
I do not know you or your situation. Those in the wilds of Idaho or the wide open plains can open carry the biggest piece that rides comfortably on their belt; however someone who is in a less free state or works in an office but has to walk to their car in the dark might find a .32 in a pocket holster very comforting.
I do not currently own a pistol in this size range though one is now going to need to be added to the wish list. Suppose one of these must be added to the pistol list. The more I think about it the more I can see a niche for one.
Thoughts?
Quote of the day
Between men and women there is no friendship possible. There is passion, enmity, worship, love, but no friendship.
Oscar Wilde
Oscar Wilde
quote of the day
"No group has been more taken care of by government than American Indians and no group is in worse shape. "
-John Stossil
-John Stossil
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Reply To Somebodies Comment
I like approving comments so I can see what people put up. More about knowing what is going on and being able to reply to that comment on last Tuesdays post then controlling content. Anyway a fellow wrote a comment on guns.
He specifically decided he should not own more than 5 guns. He currently has 4:
a bolt action .270
a ruger mini 14 .223
mossberg partner 12 gauge
and some sort of a 9x18 soviet bloc piece
He wondered what my thoughts were on his collection. In terms of individual guns I can find little to argue about. Mossbergs and Mini's are pretty darn common and well liked. The .270 isn't as common as a 30.06 or a .308 but it passes the country store test so I can't say much. As for the pistol I would stock PLENTY (3+ cases) of ammo because unless I miss my guess you may be able to pick it up at a well stocked store in the big city but other than that it is mail order.
As for what you should get for the fifth gun I can observe that you do not own a .22. Maybe you don't like plinking and choose to practice with centerfire weapons, I am not sure. In any case you mentioned maybe getting a .44 magnum. Can't say anything bad about them in terms of power and such. My advice is that unless you life in Grizzly country go with a .357. The odds of finding .357 magnum ammo are far better as everyone and their mom owns a .38 or a .357mag. Since the pistol you have now is definitely an odd ball getting something very common could be wise.
He specifically decided he should not own more than 5 guns. He currently has 4:
a bolt action .270
a ruger mini 14 .223
mossberg partner 12 gauge
and some sort of a 9x18 soviet bloc piece
He wondered what my thoughts were on his collection. In terms of individual guns I can find little to argue about. Mossbergs and Mini's are pretty darn common and well liked. The .270 isn't as common as a 30.06 or a .308 but it passes the country store test so I can't say much. As for the pistol I would stock PLENTY (3+ cases) of ammo because unless I miss my guess you may be able to pick it up at a well stocked store in the big city but other than that it is mail order.
As for what you should get for the fifth gun I can observe that you do not own a .22. Maybe you don't like plinking and choose to practice with centerfire weapons, I am not sure. In any case you mentioned maybe getting a .44 magnum. Can't say anything bad about them in terms of power and such. My advice is that unless you life in Grizzly country go with a .357. The odds of finding .357 magnum ammo are far better as everyone and their mom owns a .38 or a .357mag. Since the pistol you have now is definitely an odd ball getting something very common could be wise.
quote of the day
I think that reading of the barrel from time to time is part of gun ownership.
-Hermit Jim
-Hermit Jim
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Wednesday
It was definitely not a good day. In the very near future my life is almost certainly going to change in significant ways; for good or bad I am not sure yet. I just know that things can't stay the way they are now. Hopefully things get better. Wouldn't say happiness parse because as Dennis Leary says that is fleeting. A general feeling of peace would sure be nice though.
Things are sort of messed up right now in a couple ways so if you want to say a prayer, kill a chicken and dance around it or put in a good word with the wooden spoon you worship it would be appreciated.
Things are sort of messed up right now in a couple ways so if you want to say a prayer, kill a chicken and dance around it or put in a good word with the wooden spoon you worship it would be appreciated.
Seriously Guys?
Our government wants to spend $700,000,000.00 dollars on birth control for wild horses. This is so completely insane I don't even know what to think. It is so random, off the wall and completely nuts that I can't even rant about it.
Hot Chick Wednsday
This feature has sort of gone by the way side which is fine. Some stick and some don't. Saw this pic online and figured some of you might be amused by it.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Pearls on Fixing Healthcare
We have talked a lot about health care recently. I was pretty much done talking about this matter till I saw the awesome post Pearls wrote. Sometimes she really hits them out of the ballpark and this is one of those times. Read her post below.
Single payer system stinks or How I singlehandedly solved Universal Healthcare ;)
She radically redefined the problem in such a way that it is far more manageable.Book Order and Linkage
I ordered the last in the Matthew Bracken trilogy (1, 2)last night. Would have picked up another book to get the free shipping but I couldn't really find anything I was super enthusiastic about. If a total book nerd like me buys every book that just seems interesting it would get expensive fast. Wifey was going to get a book but the one she wanted would have taken forever to ship.
I got a comment about linkage the other day. Dorcas Daddy (sp) asked about getting some link love. Up till now the blogs we read section has been where permenant links are. I keep this fairly streamlined because I actually use it on a daily basis. Please don't take it personal but while my desire to read blogs is almost infinite my time is finite. Decided to make a links section in the immediate future. If you link to this site post a comment and we will reciprocate.
I got a comment about linkage the other day. Dorcas Daddy (sp) asked about getting some link love. Up till now the blogs we read section has been where permenant links are. I keep this fairly streamlined because I actually use it on a daily basis. Please don't take it personal but while my desire to read blogs is almost infinite my time is finite. Decided to make a links section in the immediate future. If you link to this site post a comment and we will reciprocate.
Something Interesting at Survivalblog
From time to time I link to survivalblog posts. I do this because they are noteworthy to me or I want to talk about them. In this case it is noteworthy and now I will have a link back to it. This is important to me because while posts are available in the wonderful archive the sheer amount of information there makes it difficult to sift through.
Nobody Even Knows
Hermit wrote a great post the other day. I wasn't quite sure what I thought about it for a couple days. Still not sure. The thing that concerns me is that no single person truly understands our federal code in its entirety. I've heard it said that if put together it would look about like a nice hefty set of encyclopedias. No human being can understand that let alone be able to accurately quote it.
I think our law (at all levels) should be simple enough that a normal non mouth breathing person can understand them. Maybe business law, import export and some other stuff might be difficult to streamline but there is no reason our criminal code should be so darn complicated.
Of course ignorance of the law should not be an excuse because we all know some asshole in a trailer somewhere genuinely believes it is fine to drive his El Camino 90 miles an hour while drinking a tall boy and beating his wife. Then again things are just way too complicated right now. Expecting people to live under a set of laws they do not understand is not realistic.
We are probably all criminals right now.
I think our law (at all levels) should be simple enough that a normal non mouth breathing person can understand them. Maybe business law, import export and some other stuff might be difficult to streamline but there is no reason our criminal code should be so darn complicated.
Of course ignorance of the law should not be an excuse because we all know some asshole in a trailer somewhere genuinely believes it is fine to drive his El Camino 90 miles an hour while drinking a tall boy and beating his wife. Then again things are just way too complicated right now. Expecting people to live under a set of laws they do not understand is not realistic.
We are probably all criminals right now.
quote of the day
"The .gov wants to destroy my healthcare, the islamofascists wanna destroy my .gov (which means they may not be all bad, in some ways), the christofascists wanna tell me who I can sleep with, and the telemarketers are rapidly becoming higher and higher on my list of ‘people first up against the wall when the revolution gets here’."
-Commander Zero
-Commander Zero
Trip To The Gunshop
At the local Gunshop they were nice enough to find me some boxes to send the long guns in. Of course I looked around some. Checked the price of shotguns just for the sake of curiosity. Saw a couple of tricked out 870's at recockulous prices, I think $800 and $1100ish. Nothing super fancy it didn't seem like; ghost ring sites and buttstocks with pistol grips seemed to be it. Unless they somehow made it so a Glock 9mm is hiding in the buttstock I am not impressed. Guess that addage about fools and their money is still true.
Checked the prices on assorted evil rifles and saw something which strongly resembled a Steyre Aug. Of course I had to take a closer look and handle it. Was so little and compact, totally optics ready. Aside from being on the wish list if I ever need to put a rifle in a backpack this would be a good one to have. With a price a bit over $2,200 it is certainly on the long list. An M1a, 10 mags and a couple hundred rounds of ammo would be purchased first in any case, got to have priorities. Some of us like nice cars or boats or jewelry. I like guns.
On a side note it seems mag prices have gone back down a few bucks which is cool. Who knows how long that one will last. Going to pick up some more mags on pay day.
The bad part of this trip to the gun shop is that I didn't get anything cool. The good part is that it cost me nothing and I got to fiddle with a real cool gun.
Checked the prices on assorted evil rifles and saw something which strongly resembled a Steyre Aug. Of course I had to take a closer look and handle it. Was so little and compact, totally optics ready. Aside from being on the wish list if I ever need to put a rifle in a backpack this would be a good one to have. With a price a bit over $2,200 it is certainly on the long list. An M1a, 10 mags and a couple hundred rounds of ammo would be purchased first in any case, got to have priorities. Some of us like nice cars or boats or jewelry. I like guns.
On a side note it seems mag prices have gone back down a few bucks which is cool. Who knows how long that one will last. Going to pick up some more mags on pay day.
The bad part of this trip to the gun shop is that I didn't get anything cool. The good part is that it cost me nothing and I got to fiddle with a real cool gun.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Life, Driving Around and The South
Today I got off work fairly early. Now that I am getting out of here there is some flexibility in schedules and while I have stuff to do I can sort of choose when to do it. I got home and after eating we were just sitting around sort of bored. We decided to go for a spontaneous little trip. Drove the back road to a near by town. I love the neat little farms and awesome houses. A few houses are old and fancy but most are just cool old farmhouses with real character. Also the countryside in general is just real pretty. On the drive I swear there was almost a church for every 3-4 farms. I know people down here are pretty darn serious about their religion but the church to house ratio seems high to me. Stopped at sort of a nature area to just look around. Didn't see anything special but it was nice all the same.
Got to town and just turned around. Wasn't dinner time and we didn't need anything there. A group of armed men in two vehicles accosted us and forced us to stop at a small stand which sells ice cream. Seeing it was closed those men held us hostage all the way to a baskin and robbins in town. If 6 guys with AK's say you are going to order and eat two scoops of cookie dough ice cream what else can be done?
After being released (thankfully unharmed;) we headed home. I was reminded about a couple weird things about the South or at least decent sized towns in the South. People just walk into the road. Some guy decided to cross 6 lanes of moving traffic just by walking into it. Cars move 40-50 miles per hour on that road. This happens all the time here.
Also people just seem to randomly wonder around in the predominantly poor urban area. I am not talking about playing in the little yards or people obviously going to or fro, coming back to the store and such. People just seem to be slowly roaming around in an aimless manner. If I don't have anything to do I don't just go moseying around aimlessly waiting for something to happen.
As for the heat I have pretty much gotten used to it. I do not like it but have pretty much gotten acclimatized. One thing I do like about the summer here is that everything keeps its color and doesn't seem to get all brown.
Got to town and just turned around. Wasn't dinner time and we didn't need anything there. A group of armed men in two vehicles accosted us and forced us to stop at a small stand which sells ice cream. Seeing it was closed those men held us hostage all the way to a baskin and robbins in town. If 6 guys with AK's say you are going to order and eat two scoops of cookie dough ice cream what else can be done?
After being released (thankfully unharmed;) we headed home. I was reminded about a couple weird things about the South or at least decent sized towns in the South. People just walk into the road. Some guy decided to cross 6 lanes of moving traffic just by walking into it. Cars move 40-50 miles per hour on that road. This happens all the time here.
Also people just seem to randomly wonder around in the predominantly poor urban area. I am not talking about playing in the little yards or people obviously going to or fro, coming back to the store and such. People just seem to be slowly roaming around in an aimless manner. If I don't have anything to do I don't just go moseying around aimlessly waiting for something to happen.
As for the heat I have pretty much gotten used to it. I do not like it but have pretty much gotten acclimatized. One thing I do like about the summer here is that everything keeps its color and doesn't seem to get all brown.
BMI, Fat, Health and Fitness.
TOR says: Michael, Your comment was interesting so I put it up here. It addresses a couple of different things worth touching on. For most people in terms of practical real world utility and health weight and cardiovascular ability are bigger issues than muscular strength. If you are currently of a healthy weight then you do not need to manage weight at this time, lucky you. I didn't say BMI I said weight. By weight I do not mean your weight judged against some other people or some random number I mean judged for you. If you are ruthlessly honest with your self you can easily come up with how heavy you should be.
I will agree that what we are and should be measuring is fat. However most people (myself included) can't or won't go get their body fat accurately (hydrostatic or pro's with calipers) tested on a regular enough basis to see if your program is working. This leaves a lot of us with keeping track of weight as the best alternative. For most people the two serve essentially the same purpose.
Unless someone begins a weight lifting routine (like you did) or really ups their program and gains a lot of muscle; it is reasonably safe to assume that most of what is gained or lost over a given period is going to be fat. While lifting if you gain 15 pounds and add 80 to your squat and 50 to your bench press the gain is probably muscle. If you gain 15 pounds but only add 25 to your squat and 10 to your bench the gain is probably mostly fat.
As for running. Sprinting has a more explosive strength component than running longer distances. Most collegiate and competitive sprinters are fairly muscular people. As for distances over a mile people run better when they are lighter. A rare person who did not run regularly and then started lifting hard and running will be faster when they are a bit heavier. Pretty much everyone else will run faster when they are lighter, conversely they will run slower when they are heavier. I have personally seen multiple people gain or loose 20+ pounds and have it radically affect their run times. It is not so much about the amount of muscle or fat you have it (as running takes relatively little muscle) it is simply about weight. The more you weight the harder it is for your heart, lungs and legs to move your body. Show me a fat person who has trouble with cardiovascular endurance and I will almost guarantee they will do better at a healthier weight.
As for strictly focusing on abilities? There are many ways to get to being strong, able to run and of a healthy weight. About weight mattering or not as I said before; being of a healthy weight and having real functional fitness very rarely happen apart. Show me a chunky guy who can run ten miles in gear and I will show you a guy who could run ten miles in gear FAST if he lost the weight.
Edited to include
Michael replied... with my thoughts in italics.
"By weight I do not mean your weight judged against some other people or some random number I mean judged for you."
Fair enough. Too many people fall into the trap of trying to compare themselves against someone else. Everyone is a little different with a different build, and different strengths, weaknesses, and potentials.
I know you didn’t mention the BMI specifically, but if a few readers didn’t automatically think of it while reading, I’ll… do some pushups.
Personally, my weight is still too high, because I’m still a little pudgy. But there is muscle growing underneath, and my health is steadily improving every week. I just know that if I had worried about the weight, and not my actual fitness level (you don't think the two are related?), I would have ended up doing counter-productive things to try to bring the weight down. Focusing on getting the Fat down and ignoring the scale numbers was the key to finally improving myself (after many years of failed diet and exercise programs) Glad you got headed down a track of improvement. Provided you are consistently tracking body fat percentage this seems like an effective plan.
“...competitive sprinters are fairly muscular people. As for distances over a mile people run better when they are lighter.”
Good point, I hadn’t thought about that.
I guess my main point can be summarized as this: Improve yourself physically in as many ways as possible. Don’t get to focused on one thing.
I will agree that what we are and should be measuring is fat. However most people (myself included) can't or won't go get their body fat accurately (hydrostatic or pro's with calipers) tested on a regular enough basis to see if your program is working. This leaves a lot of us with keeping track of weight as the best alternative. For most people the two serve essentially the same purpose.
Unless someone begins a weight lifting routine (like you did) or really ups their program and gains a lot of muscle; it is reasonably safe to assume that most of what is gained or lost over a given period is going to be fat. While lifting if you gain 15 pounds and add 80 to your squat and 50 to your bench press the gain is probably muscle. If you gain 15 pounds but only add 25 to your squat and 10 to your bench the gain is probably mostly fat.
As for running. Sprinting has a more explosive strength component than running longer distances. Most collegiate and competitive sprinters are fairly muscular people. As for distances over a mile people run better when they are lighter. A rare person who did not run regularly and then started lifting hard and running will be faster when they are a bit heavier. Pretty much everyone else will run faster when they are lighter, conversely they will run slower when they are heavier. I have personally seen multiple people gain or loose 20+ pounds and have it radically affect their run times. It is not so much about the amount of muscle or fat you have it (as running takes relatively little muscle) it is simply about weight. The more you weight the harder it is for your heart, lungs and legs to move your body. Show me a fat person who has trouble with cardiovascular endurance and I will almost guarantee they will do better at a healthier weight.
As for strictly focusing on abilities? There are many ways to get to being strong, able to run and of a healthy weight. About weight mattering or not as I said before; being of a healthy weight and having real functional fitness very rarely happen apart. Show me a chunky guy who can run ten miles in gear and I will show you a guy who could run ten miles in gear FAST if he lost the weight.
Edited to include
Michael replied... with my thoughts in italics.
"By weight I do not mean your weight judged against some other people or some random number I mean judged for you."
Fair enough. Too many people fall into the trap of trying to compare themselves against someone else. Everyone is a little different with a different build, and different strengths, weaknesses, and potentials.
I know you didn’t mention the BMI specifically, but if a few readers didn’t automatically think of it while reading, I’ll… do some pushups.
Personally, my weight is still too high, because I’m still a little pudgy. But there is muscle growing underneath, and my health is steadily improving every week. I just know that if I had worried about the weight, and not my actual fitness level (you don't think the two are related?), I would have ended up doing counter-productive things to try to bring the weight down. Focusing on getting the Fat down and ignoring the scale numbers was the key to finally improving myself (after many years of failed diet and exercise programs) Glad you got headed down a track of improvement. Provided you are consistently tracking body fat percentage this seems like an effective plan.
“...competitive sprinters are fairly muscular people. As for distances over a mile people run better when they are lighter.”
Good point, I hadn’t thought about that.
I guess my main point can be summarized as this: Improve yourself physically in as many ways as possible. Don’t get to focused on one thing.
why i like the country
Today I was going home for my lunch when I saw a guy trying to push start his car. I stopped to help him out. In the 5 minutes I was there, 3 other people stopped to give us a hand. This is why I like the country; the one place left where people have a concept about community. Obama could learn a lot from us.
Staying In Shape
Fitness is entirely under rated in this community of ours. I see lots of peoples pictures and stuff and instead of being stressed that your only shooting 1.5MOA or that you just have 3 tons of grain stored it would be wise to stress if you are in good enough shape. I am not trying to be mean or anything. Some bloggers do that and talk in a totally holier than thou way but I don't roll like that.
Being fit is probably one of the most important attributes a potential survivor can acquire. Yeah you need some food and a couple guns would be good to have as is some water but you get the point. It is unrealistic to assume you will be chilling out at home and your massive stores of food and water will keep you alive. You might need to walk a long distance or carry heavy things. You might find yourself doing physical labor in the heat of the summer instead of typing in an air conditioned building. Those who are physically fit are less likely to be injured (also they recover faster from injuries:) and deal better with stress.
Part of this is because I care about you and part of it is because I am finally getting working on my fitness goals. I adjusted the weight one down a bit to an even 170. To accomplish the running goals I am going to start doing some speed work in the afternoons and focus more on maintaining a specific pace (which gradually improves) during other runs. Over the next few months being able to run more consistently should help with this goal. I am also going to start doing crossfit and apft improvement targeted exercises in my off time.
I started last week with mediocre results. Got 3 after work workouts which was good and was mediocre on counting calories. Over all I give myself a C- for the week. Did loose the target one pound which is a good thing. The first week of caring about what you eat and exercising after work is sort of iffy. Got to do better next week.
I am not going to say that it is all about weight. You can certainly be thin and in completely mediocre shape. I probably know a dozen girls roughly my age who are thin but in horrible shape living on cigarettes and fancy coffee. Maybe saying being at a healthy weight is a better way to express it. While thin and in shape do not equal each other being truly in shape doesn't happen often without being at a pretty healthy weight. [I've only known one guy who was in darn good shape and fairly heavy. He was probably 6' and 225 looking like his only lifting was 16oz curls at the pub. My Grandmother would probably call him husky. Dude ran a sub 11 two mile; bad for a college athlete but great for a random Army guy.]
I have tried a lot of things and genuinely believe in counting calories. There are a million different theories but at the end of the day in terms of weight management it is calories in and calories out. If you burn more calories than you take in you will loose weight. If you consume more calories than you burn you will gain weight.
I got converted to this by a personal trainer I ended up spending a bunch of time around. As he put it "how can you study if you don't know what the test is on?". You can eat bacon and drink beer every day and loose weight or you can get fat eating lean chicken and salad. At the end of the day it is all about calories.
Some people can just manage portions and automatically adjust when they are gaining a bit of weight. I am not one of those people.
For me to be successful at dieting/ loosing weight I need to count calories and weigh myself at least weekly. If I consistently (over a couple weeks) am not loosing weight I am eating too many calories. Maybe it works differently for you but that is what I have found. For me the number to loose weight is 2,000. If I eat 2,000 calories at least 5-6 days a week and don't completely blow the other 1-2 I will loose weight. I am 5'10" with a decent build and am reasonably active. Someone significantly larger might need to eat more in the neighborhood of 2,400 calories. Just got to find out what works for you. FWIW Wifey looses weight at 1,200 calories. Ladies I am sorry but life is not fair.
In terms of exercise I think a good program should be varied but must include cardiovascular exercise and body control and muscular endurance/ strength. Being able to walk/ run decent distances, control your body and lift stuff are probably the most authentic measures of fitness. I like a combination of crossfit and running for being in good all around shape. I do pushups and situps because I must for work.
The one thing that is essential which I fail at is that even when you have reached your goal weight or whatever you need to keep tracking your fitness to maintain. I have a bad tendency to gain and loose the same pounds over and over again. On the bright side I have narrowed it from 20 to 10 to 5ish but it still ain't fun.
Here are my thoughts stumbled to through trial and error. You have 3 weights to keep track of.
First is your goal weight. This is often where your weight loss effort stops.
The second weight is the weight where you start paying more attention to what you are eating and such. Maybe you just ate a bunch of ribs last night and need to drop a huge duece but it is time to pay more attention.
The third is your flat out freak out weight. You are gaining weight so obviously what you are doing is not successful. This is where your weight loss efforts need to get kicked back into gear.
For a long time I just had the goal weight and the freak out weight and didn't keep track of calories or portions or really anything in between. That lead to a definite Yo-Yo albeit a ten pound one. This is why I have added the second weight to help keep things more reasonable.
To be honest I am probably going to be counting calories to some degree for the remainder of my life. Really tired of gaining and loosing weight.
Thoughts?
Being fit is probably one of the most important attributes a potential survivor can acquire. Yeah you need some food and a couple guns would be good to have as is some water but you get the point. It is unrealistic to assume you will be chilling out at home and your massive stores of food and water will keep you alive. You might need to walk a long distance or carry heavy things. You might find yourself doing physical labor in the heat of the summer instead of typing in an air conditioned building. Those who are physically fit are less likely to be injured (also they recover faster from injuries:) and deal better with stress.
Part of this is because I care about you and part of it is because I am finally getting working on my fitness goals. I adjusted the weight one down a bit to an even 170. To accomplish the running goals I am going to start doing some speed work in the afternoons and focus more on maintaining a specific pace (which gradually improves) during other runs. Over the next few months being able to run more consistently should help with this goal. I am also going to start doing crossfit and apft improvement targeted exercises in my off time.
I started last week with mediocre results. Got 3 after work workouts which was good and was mediocre on counting calories. Over all I give myself a C- for the week. Did loose the target one pound which is a good thing. The first week of caring about what you eat and exercising after work is sort of iffy. Got to do better next week.
I am not going to say that it is all about weight. You can certainly be thin and in completely mediocre shape. I probably know a dozen girls roughly my age who are thin but in horrible shape living on cigarettes and fancy coffee. Maybe saying being at a healthy weight is a better way to express it. While thin and in shape do not equal each other being truly in shape doesn't happen often without being at a pretty healthy weight. [I've only known one guy who was in darn good shape and fairly heavy. He was probably 6' and 225 looking like his only lifting was 16oz curls at the pub. My Grandmother would probably call him husky. Dude ran a sub 11 two mile; bad for a college athlete but great for a random Army guy.]
I have tried a lot of things and genuinely believe in counting calories. There are a million different theories but at the end of the day in terms of weight management it is calories in and calories out. If you burn more calories than you take in you will loose weight. If you consume more calories than you burn you will gain weight.
I got converted to this by a personal trainer I ended up spending a bunch of time around. As he put it "how can you study if you don't know what the test is on?". You can eat bacon and drink beer every day and loose weight or you can get fat eating lean chicken and salad. At the end of the day it is all about calories.
Some people can just manage portions and automatically adjust when they are gaining a bit of weight. I am not one of those people.
For me to be successful at dieting/ loosing weight I need to count calories and weigh myself at least weekly. If I consistently (over a couple weeks) am not loosing weight I am eating too many calories. Maybe it works differently for you but that is what I have found. For me the number to loose weight is 2,000. If I eat 2,000 calories at least 5-6 days a week and don't completely blow the other 1-2 I will loose weight. I am 5'10" with a decent build and am reasonably active. Someone significantly larger might need to eat more in the neighborhood of 2,400 calories. Just got to find out what works for you. FWIW Wifey looses weight at 1,200 calories. Ladies I am sorry but life is not fair.
In terms of exercise I think a good program should be varied but must include cardiovascular exercise and body control and muscular endurance/ strength. Being able to walk/ run decent distances, control your body and lift stuff are probably the most authentic measures of fitness. I like a combination of crossfit and running for being in good all around shape. I do pushups and situps because I must for work.
The one thing that is essential which I fail at is that even when you have reached your goal weight or whatever you need to keep tracking your fitness to maintain. I have a bad tendency to gain and loose the same pounds over and over again. On the bright side I have narrowed it from 20 to 10 to 5ish but it still ain't fun.
Here are my thoughts stumbled to through trial and error. You have 3 weights to keep track of.
First is your goal weight. This is often where your weight loss effort stops.
The second weight is the weight where you start paying more attention to what you are eating and such. Maybe you just ate a bunch of ribs last night and need to drop a huge duece but it is time to pay more attention.
The third is your flat out freak out weight. You are gaining weight so obviously what you are doing is not successful. This is where your weight loss efforts need to get kicked back into gear.
For a long time I just had the goal weight and the freak out weight and didn't keep track of calories or portions or really anything in between. That lead to a definite Yo-Yo albeit a ten pound one. This is why I have added the second weight to help keep things more reasonable.
To be honest I am probably going to be counting calories to some degree for the remainder of my life. Really tired of gaining and loosing weight.
Thoughts?
quote of the day
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out." Bill Hicks
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Still Awake
Haven't been sleeping well the past few days. Hopefully this trend corrects itself soon. Guess I am going to go back to laying in bed and alternating between trying to sleep and calculating how much time I have left to sleep if I get to sleep right now.
Political Views
A couple people have recently questioned my political self identification. I decided to take the worlds smallest political quiz out of idle curiosity. I think it is fairly accurate. In this recent post I talked to some length about my political beliefs if you are curious. As for me being a libertarian or not?I certainly fall more into the displaced republican (who is against big government and doesn't want to get involved in peoples private lives) side of the house than the pseudo Anarchist side of the house. I think there are definitely some folks hanging around who believe that any sort of government is too much. They live in a world that is at a minimum completely unrealistic.
On some matters like defense and border security I have distinctly Republican sympathies. On lots of other matters I am in camp with the libertarian party.
Upon reflection I still look at myself as a libertarian albeit one who looks at the world how it is not for how they wish it would be also I just plain dissent on some matters. For lack of a better place that is where I identify myself.
Sunday Night Roundup
Not a whole lot happened this weekend. We pretty much just hung out. Did go to the gun shop and pick up some boxes to send the long guns home in. Today we went to the mall. Walked through the book store but didn't get anything. On a side note you can tell the Mrs is completely awesome when at the mall and you say its fine if she can gets some clothes or whatever and she doesn't spend a dime. I am going to order the last in Mathew Brackens trilogy pretty quick here.
We had a pretty Americana dinner of hot dogs, beans and chips. I threw in a couple beers. Has been a pretty decent day.
We had a pretty Americana dinner of hot dogs, beans and chips. I threw in a couple beers. Has been a pretty decent day.
To All The Single Ladies Out There
"If a guy is treating you like he doesn't give a shit, he genuinely doesn't give a shit. NO EXCEPTIONS."
Stole this from He's Not That Into You.
Stole this from He's Not That Into You.
Disorderly Conduct
Recently, Dr. Gates from Harvard was arrested on a Disorderly Conduct charge. A crime most people aren't aware of, Disorderly Conduct is basically causing a disturbance. This arrest has started, what will undoubtedly be a short lived, debate. Time magazine has run a story discussing what Disorderly Conduct is, how it came to be, and its current application.
The way I look at this statute is it is designed for those people who commit criminally stupid acts. I have a Disorderly Conduct case possibly going to trial next week. This guy decides to take a walk, at night, down fairly busy street, lays down in the street, and gets in a minor tussle with the police. The guy is just a d-bag. What Disorderly Conduct charges allow police to do is maintain order. Whether this charge should be a Class A Misdemeanor is a issue, but whether this should be a crime, I think, is pretty clear. Whether Dr. Gates actions were bad enough to arrest him is also arguable (I think this arrest was a little extreme).
The issue I have with this charge is how much discretion officers normally have. I think a better system would have, in the statute, the various situations which fall under the law. For example, it could be a) causing a group of over 5 people to feel alarm, b) Obstructing traffic on a public way, c) disturbing people between the hours of midnight and 5am. This would give the police, and DAs guidance on what is Disorderly Conduct.
TOR here: I have a couple thoughts on this. Since I am on admin here they will go into the post not the comments section. Ryan and I have talked about this in the past. His opinion may have changed some in subsequent years but mine is more or less the same. Simply put I believe Cops need a fairly open ended law to deal with people who are just being total asshats. Some places call it disorderly conduct and others call it disturbing the peace. I am not a lawyer or anything but to me this is a just fine. The wide discretion Cops have with this charge is needed to deal with its open ended ness and maintain order.
Simply put it would be impossible to very specifically describe every possible stupid thing some idiot could do. A guy standing outside of a nice restaurant banging a giant dildo on the window screaming the lyrics to the Frank Sinatra tune "I did it my way" at dinner time should be politely asked to knock it the fuck off and then if he fails to comply he should be arrested. Do we need the statute to say that banging a giant dildo against the window while screaming Frank Sinatra songs is illegal to know you should not do that? I think not.
If an individual Cop gets a little too enthusiastic about arresting people for disturbing the peace odds are high that the DA will just choose not to charge the person. If a stupid case gets past the DA the Judge and Jury should take care of it. I may be mistaken but I don't think a whole lot of people are getting convicted of unjustified disorderly conduct/ disturbing the peace charges on a broad national scale.
The way I look at this statute is it is designed for those people who commit criminally stupid acts. I have a Disorderly Conduct case possibly going to trial next week. This guy decides to take a walk, at night, down fairly busy street, lays down in the street, and gets in a minor tussle with the police. The guy is just a d-bag. What Disorderly Conduct charges allow police to do is maintain order. Whether this charge should be a Class A Misdemeanor is a issue, but whether this should be a crime, I think, is pretty clear. Whether Dr. Gates actions were bad enough to arrest him is also arguable (I think this arrest was a little extreme).
The issue I have with this charge is how much discretion officers normally have. I think a better system would have, in the statute, the various situations which fall under the law. For example, it could be a) causing a group of over 5 people to feel alarm, b) Obstructing traffic on a public way, c) disturbing people between the hours of midnight and 5am. This would give the police, and DAs guidance on what is Disorderly Conduct.
TOR here: I have a couple thoughts on this. Since I am on admin here they will go into the post not the comments section. Ryan and I have talked about this in the past. His opinion may have changed some in subsequent years but mine is more or less the same. Simply put I believe Cops need a fairly open ended law to deal with people who are just being total asshats. Some places call it disorderly conduct and others call it disturbing the peace. I am not a lawyer or anything but to me this is a just fine. The wide discretion Cops have with this charge is needed to deal with its open ended ness and maintain order.
Simply put it would be impossible to very specifically describe every possible stupid thing some idiot could do. A guy standing outside of a nice restaurant banging a giant dildo on the window screaming the lyrics to the Frank Sinatra tune "I did it my way" at dinner time should be politely asked to knock it the fuck off and then if he fails to comply he should be arrested. Do we need the statute to say that banging a giant dildo against the window while screaming Frank Sinatra songs is illegal to know you should not do that? I think not.
If an individual Cop gets a little too enthusiastic about arresting people for disturbing the peace odds are high that the DA will just choose not to charge the person. If a stupid case gets past the DA the Judge and Jury should take care of it. I may be mistaken but I don't think a whole lot of people are getting convicted of unjustified disorderly conduct/ disturbing the peace charges on a broad national scale.
Defiance Free Form Review
Instead of doing something more formal I am going to keep this page open and just post thoughts as they come to me. Spoilage should be very minimal. If you read down the list while watching the movie you could probably see what I am thinking about what. Or just read my random ramblings now.
-This is sort of like a European Jewish version of Red Dawn
-For random or spontaneous time in the woods a tarp is a very useful thing to have.
-If you are short on guns and ammo and you kill people taking their guns and ammo is advisable.
-This movie is fucking awesome
-Close lining a guy on a motorcycle is effective, cool looking and hilarious.
-I am real glad I never made the Bielski brothers angry.
-It is a lot easier to hide in the woods than in the city. You might be able to hide out for a long time in an isolated rural area, particularly one with dense woods and or mountains.
-The number of potential fighters you have is not as important as the number you can arm and field. 4 guys with 4 guns is a more useful fighting force than 14 guys with 2 guns.
-Darn near every line from this movie could be a quote of the day.
-If they have no way to communicate and aren't really talking with anyone how do random Jews keep showing up at their supposedly well hidden camp site?
-How is it that a nice looking miraculously clean woman of appropriate age showed up for each main character?
-UH OH
-When people have weapons with them it is easier to rapidly deploy.
-Having alternate patrol bases is essential. That way you can just yell out 'black' or 'gold' and people know where to go.
-These guys are doing a great job of improving things but I really hope I never have to go to war with amateurs.
-If I am ever a partisan commander I want a big sweet fur hat and a nice wall tent.
-WTF is Tuvia riding around looking all noble on a white horse? This is quite random.
-There is certainly a compromise between many hands making for light work and being able to feed everybody.
-HTF are random Jews still finding their secret hiding place?
-Leadership squabbles are best handled in private not in front of the rank and file.
-Glad I wasn't a Jew in Europe circa 1937-1945.
-The ability to blend in and out of the population at will is essential for partisans.
-An old school watch maker can probably go a long way toward fixing guns.
-Now Tuvia is giving a motivational speech from on top of his white horse. Seriously?
-My wife has decided she is not a home maker or unemployed; she is an intellectual albeit a poorly compensated one.
-Glad I didn't have to learn to shoot with a Mosin Nagant. Their wonderfully smooth bolt and pleasantly mild recoil would make it a wonderful first weapon.
-On how sweet, random romantic moments.
-Wish we could have had a Jew wedding tent (huppah)when we got hitched. Wifey also wanted to do the whole chair dance thing but MIL vetoed those ideas. Something about not being able to pick and choose religious traditions.
-The concept of leaders keeping the rank and file in the dark to prevent them from worrying is a dangerous one. If things can be turned around before a critical point it is fine but otherwise instead of having time to adjust to an unpleasant reality people get the shock of being lied to and an unpleasant sudden reality. Like spouses who hide money problems this tends to end badly.
-Wish I had a Walther P38.
-Someone just dropped an angry German Shepard with a single round (ball I am sure) from a Walther P38 to the body. This is rediculous. A friend of mine put almost a whole magazine of 9mm JHP into a large dog that attacked him. He put several shoots in the chest and several more in the head to get it to die. The proper weapon for large angry dogs is centerfire rifles or shotguns.
-Even if speed is of the essence it is essential to fully clear a building before going on to conduct your mission of sabotage or theft or whatever. Move in and kill everybody THEN worry about the other stuff.
-I will try and forgive them for being Commies.
-WTF this is some twisted shit.
-My previous thought that it is a bad idea to make a Bielski angry is re confirmed.
-Contraceptives are an important consideration for groups who have people of birthing age. While no method other than abstinence (expecting couples to do that long term is not realistic;) is 100% it is a lot easier to make some preparations than deal with a pregnancy and child birth.
-A Nazi held hostage by a bunch of Jews. Turnabout is certainly fair play.
-It is prudent to have some sort of delaying action planned in order to allow the main element to have time to withdraw. While the enemy will expect contact at the location of your camp they will be less likely to expect it a quarter mile up past said camp. A land mine or IED and a couple guys with rifles can make a far larger force move in a very slow and cautious manner.
-I say again, have a plan for alternate patrol bases. Trying to get everybody on the same page during a chaotic time sensitive situation is unrealistic. Plan this shit in fucking advance and get everyone on the same page!
-If you are dismounted it is highly advisable to stay out of open areas. These are called danger areas for a reason.
-Combat pickups can be a good way to increase your firepower.
-Seriously how do the random Jews keep finding them?
I enjoyed this movie and am quite glad I rented it today. CPT Mo's private stock and cola makes a very nice drink. It is smooth and has a delightful hint of spices. For a few bucks more than normal Captain Mo it is worth it IMO. The rum and coke isn't my regular drink but once in awhile it is sort of nice. I am not going to be able to ship my liquor collection to Germany; so I might as well drink what I can reasonably enjoy without being a constantly drunken asshat. The liquor will go to my buddy when we go but I might as well enjoy it between now and then.
That is all
-This is sort of like a European Jewish version of Red Dawn
-For random or spontaneous time in the woods a tarp is a very useful thing to have.
-If you are short on guns and ammo and you kill people taking their guns and ammo is advisable.
-This movie is fucking awesome
-Close lining a guy on a motorcycle is effective, cool looking and hilarious.
-I am real glad I never made the Bielski brothers angry.
-It is a lot easier to hide in the woods than in the city. You might be able to hide out for a long time in an isolated rural area, particularly one with dense woods and or mountains.
-The number of potential fighters you have is not as important as the number you can arm and field. 4 guys with 4 guns is a more useful fighting force than 14 guys with 2 guns.
-Darn near every line from this movie could be a quote of the day.
-If they have no way to communicate and aren't really talking with anyone how do random Jews keep showing up at their supposedly well hidden camp site?
-How is it that a nice looking miraculously clean woman of appropriate age showed up for each main character?
-UH OH
-When people have weapons with them it is easier to rapidly deploy.
-Having alternate patrol bases is essential. That way you can just yell out 'black' or 'gold' and people know where to go.
-These guys are doing a great job of improving things but I really hope I never have to go to war with amateurs.
-If I am ever a partisan commander I want a big sweet fur hat and a nice wall tent.
-WTF is Tuvia riding around looking all noble on a white horse? This is quite random.
-There is certainly a compromise between many hands making for light work and being able to feed everybody.
-HTF are random Jews still finding their secret hiding place?
-Leadership squabbles are best handled in private not in front of the rank and file.
-Glad I wasn't a Jew in Europe circa 1937-1945.
-The ability to blend in and out of the population at will is essential for partisans.
-An old school watch maker can probably go a long way toward fixing guns.
-Now Tuvia is giving a motivational speech from on top of his white horse. Seriously?
-My wife has decided she is not a home maker or unemployed; she is an intellectual albeit a poorly compensated one.
-Glad I didn't have to learn to shoot with a Mosin Nagant. Their wonderfully smooth bolt and pleasantly mild recoil would make it a wonderful first weapon.
-On how sweet, random romantic moments.
-Wish we could have had a Jew wedding tent (huppah)when we got hitched. Wifey also wanted to do the whole chair dance thing but MIL vetoed those ideas. Something about not being able to pick and choose religious traditions.
-The concept of leaders keeping the rank and file in the dark to prevent them from worrying is a dangerous one. If things can be turned around before a critical point it is fine but otherwise instead of having time to adjust to an unpleasant reality people get the shock of being lied to and an unpleasant sudden reality. Like spouses who hide money problems this tends to end badly.
-Wish I had a Walther P38.
-Someone just dropped an angry German Shepard with a single round (ball I am sure) from a Walther P38 to the body. This is rediculous. A friend of mine put almost a whole magazine of 9mm JHP into a large dog that attacked him. He put several shoots in the chest and several more in the head to get it to die. The proper weapon for large angry dogs is centerfire rifles or shotguns.
-Even if speed is of the essence it is essential to fully clear a building before going on to conduct your mission of sabotage or theft or whatever. Move in and kill everybody THEN worry about the other stuff.
-I will try and forgive them for being Commies.
-WTF this is some twisted shit.
-My previous thought that it is a bad idea to make a Bielski angry is re confirmed.
-Contraceptives are an important consideration for groups who have people of birthing age. While no method other than abstinence (expecting couples to do that long term is not realistic;) is 100% it is a lot easier to make some preparations than deal with a pregnancy and child birth.
-A Nazi held hostage by a bunch of Jews. Turnabout is certainly fair play.
-It is prudent to have some sort of delaying action planned in order to allow the main element to have time to withdraw. While the enemy will expect contact at the location of your camp they will be less likely to expect it a quarter mile up past said camp. A land mine or IED and a couple guys with rifles can make a far larger force move in a very slow and cautious manner.
-I say again, have a plan for alternate patrol bases. Trying to get everybody on the same page during a chaotic time sensitive situation is unrealistic. Plan this shit in fucking advance and get everyone on the same page!
-If you are dismounted it is highly advisable to stay out of open areas. These are called danger areas for a reason.
-Combat pickups can be a good way to increase your firepower.
-Seriously how do the random Jews keep finding them?
I enjoyed this movie and am quite glad I rented it today. CPT Mo's private stock and cola makes a very nice drink. It is smooth and has a delightful hint of spices. For a few bucks more than normal Captain Mo it is worth it IMO. The rum and coke isn't my regular drink but once in awhile it is sort of nice. I am not going to be able to ship my liquor collection to Germany; so I might as well drink what I can reasonably enjoy without being a constantly drunken asshat. The liquor will go to my buddy when we go but I might as well enjoy it between now and then.
That is all
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Movie Night
Got Defiance in the dvd player and a big glass of Captain Morgans Private Reserve and cola sitting next to me. This evening has some promise. Look forward to a review.
Very Interesting Info on Posse Comitatus
The myth of Posse Comitatus . Though far less concerned with the growing role of the military in domestic affairs then some of you I certainly found this educational and interesting to boot. It is a bit heavy and sort of long but worth the read.
Hat top to YeOldFurt.
Hat top to YeOldFurt.
On Government
Coachteet said this and it was too good to let it sit in the comment section of a post awhile back.
Brass,
Your assertions are sophomoric (at best). Let me take you back to government 101. There has never existed, nor shall there ever exist, a "free society" as defined by you. You are defining freedom as living without restriction. That would be a truly horrible and shortlived social experiment. Ask the folks in Darfur. Somalia. Ask yourself how wonderful freedom would be when there is no consequence to someone punching a hole through your head, taking your land, enslaving your family, etc. Government can be defined as "those who control the monopoly of violence in a given territory". Even in a society so free as the United States.
The difference in our country is that it is ruled by a government of the people, for the people and by the people. This doesn't equate to living in a utopia as defined by Brass. The laws are, generally, the laws because it is the consensus of the people. The current government serves at the pleasure of the people (whether the congressperson you voted for is the one who one). The popular vote decides who shape our laws. Popular sentiment gets the laws changed, or made to remain the same. Is it perfectly so? Hardly.
You refer to rights and morality as if they were synonymous. They are not. That is because "morality" in practice is mutable and cannot really be defined by a collective. Morality is different for every individual. Rights and laws are determined, in theory, by the majority opinion of what is "right" or "moral". Even if those laws conflict with your personal opinion on what is "moral".
Thus, for example, some drunken asshole shouting obscenities at 2a.m. CAN be arrested, because most people long ago decided this was the right response to dealing with this type of behavior. And most people still agree.
You see, you have rights in our free society. But the right to swing your fist ends where the next man's nose begins (to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes).
The premise from which you base your entire argument is fundamentally flawed.
Once again, you use a poor example to try and prove a point. The local gen-du-roi do not have the authority nor license to commit rape (however, they would in your "free society"). But, let's move forward with your example, but clean up the ambiguity so I can point out the fundamental flaws in your argument.
Let us assume that by "island" you mean a new land, completely isolated and outside the authority of any existing government. Total power vaccuum. 10 people are dropped onto this island, Eden II. No escape or rescue. 9 of the 10 collectively agree that raping the 10th person is fine. Guess what? That's the law, and it is "right". Why? Because the minority does not have the power or support to make it otherwise. You and I might not agree with this decision, but we are not on the island.
Now, let's assume Coachteet is on the island. Coach is a conscientious objector. He feels that by divine decree, rape is not OK. Vote is 8-2. Guess what? Rape is still "right". The 2 dissenters argue, and attempt to defend themselves. Coach gets overwhelmed and has his head smashed in by a rock. You really should not have broken the law, Coach.
OK, same scenario, except Coach has an AK-47 with a 100 rd drum mag. Guess what? Rape is wrong. All hail, Coach. However, this is a dictatorship, and technically a less free society than the previously existing democracy. Regardless of your personal opinion on what is right or moral, Brass.
Regardless of how sophisticated or technologically advanced we become, he who has the biggest rock has the power. How you personally feel about this, Brass, makes absolutely no difference. It is the immutable truth throughout human history.
The beauty of the US is that we the people have the rock. Not so in North Korea. Nor medieval Europe. Nor ancient Egypt. Be thankful. And be respectful to the police.
-Coachteet
TOR says: Well said. I was actually going to write about the topic of government today but what Coachteet said sort of beat me to it and since it covered most if not all of my ideas I just put his comment up into to main page.
Now for my thoughts. I have been having a fairly ongoing conversation with Brass and a couple other folks about this issue. No ding on them and my tone might have been a bit different than Coachteets but in any case what he said was so darn close to what I was going to say that it made more sense to post his comment instead of writing the same.
In terms of political identity here are my thoughts.
If I had to answer what my political orrientation is in one word I would say "liberterian".
If I had to answer it in a single sentence it would be "something between a 'small l' liberterian and a republitarian.
If I had a paragraph I would say that I cannot identify as a republican because I think they mettle too much in the personal affairs of people and that I lean towards the small government side of the liberterian party. I am for a balanced budget and low taxces. I am for some reasonable laws to protect workers and various at risk groups such as children. The militarizatiion of our law enforcement at all levels concerns me greatly. I think something of a minimal safety net is a good thing but a welfare state is evil. I lean against abortion but am probably not for banning it outright. I don't care what sort of guns are in your safe, what substances you enjoy or who shares your bed. I am for securing our borders and getting illegal immigrants out of our country. I am for a strong military to protect our nation but think our international military footprint could shrink significantly. I am conservative on some topics and liberal on others. I do not neatly and completely fit into the beliefs of any political party and find people who truly 100% toe any party line scary.
I do not believe any rational person can truly say we would be better off without any form of government. Also I think lots of fancy liberterian/ anarchist ideals about how things could work do not measure up to the tests of history or reality. The amount of government we should have can certainly be debated but I do not think its presence or worth can be argued.
With everything in life there is the theoretical/ philosophical answer and what actually works in real life, often the two are not the same. Look at it like this. It is the way to build a house that an engineer or a construction management major knows and the way that my uncle who has built houses for 20 years knows. It is how a sociology or criminal justice professor views crime and criminals vs the observations of a beat cop who has 20 years on patrol. It is the difference between the views on fighting of some tacticool instructor who wears nice crisp 5.11 clothes and gets his credibility from winning a bunch of competitions vs a Delta Guy who has spent the last decade shooting people in the face. Lots of fancy liberterian/ anarchist ideals about how things would work do not measure up to the tests of reality or historic examples.
We need government to protect us from each other by punishing those who abuse or violate others and by keeping property rights relatively secure (fucking eminent domain) among other things. If someone steals my stuff, assaults my wife or whatever government will probably not be able to stop them but there is a reasonable chance it will seek out and punish them. That certain acts are censured means that most people will not do these acts. Because of logistical issues government can not often protect people but it can and does punish those who break the law after the fact. This punishment goes a long way toward keepiung most people from violating the rights of others. I like being able to leave my residence with the knowledge that my property will almost surely be secure. I like knowing that contracts will generally be followed and if nothing else there is a reasonable way to pursue grevances in a legal manner instead of with a rifle.
We can certainly have an interesting debate about how far government should go into fiddling with our lives to protect or help people but I don't think the essential nature of some amount of government can seriously be questioned.
Brass,
Your assertions are sophomoric (at best). Let me take you back to government 101. There has never existed, nor shall there ever exist, a "free society" as defined by you. You are defining freedom as living without restriction. That would be a truly horrible and shortlived social experiment. Ask the folks in Darfur. Somalia. Ask yourself how wonderful freedom would be when there is no consequence to someone punching a hole through your head, taking your land, enslaving your family, etc. Government can be defined as "those who control the monopoly of violence in a given territory". Even in a society so free as the United States.
The difference in our country is that it is ruled by a government of the people, for the people and by the people. This doesn't equate to living in a utopia as defined by Brass. The laws are, generally, the laws because it is the consensus of the people. The current government serves at the pleasure of the people (whether the congressperson you voted for is the one who one). The popular vote decides who shape our laws. Popular sentiment gets the laws changed, or made to remain the same. Is it perfectly so? Hardly.
You refer to rights and morality as if they were synonymous. They are not. That is because "morality" in practice is mutable and cannot really be defined by a collective. Morality is different for every individual. Rights and laws are determined, in theory, by the majority opinion of what is "right" or "moral". Even if those laws conflict with your personal opinion on what is "moral".
Thus, for example, some drunken asshole shouting obscenities at 2a.m. CAN be arrested, because most people long ago decided this was the right response to dealing with this type of behavior. And most people still agree.
You see, you have rights in our free society. But the right to swing your fist ends where the next man's nose begins (to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes).
The premise from which you base your entire argument is fundamentally flawed.
Once again, you use a poor example to try and prove a point. The local gen-du-roi do not have the authority nor license to commit rape (however, they would in your "free society"). But, let's move forward with your example, but clean up the ambiguity so I can point out the fundamental flaws in your argument.
Let us assume that by "island" you mean a new land, completely isolated and outside the authority of any existing government. Total power vaccuum. 10 people are dropped onto this island, Eden II. No escape or rescue. 9 of the 10 collectively agree that raping the 10th person is fine. Guess what? That's the law, and it is "right". Why? Because the minority does not have the power or support to make it otherwise. You and I might not agree with this decision, but we are not on the island.
Now, let's assume Coachteet is on the island. Coach is a conscientious objector. He feels that by divine decree, rape is not OK. Vote is 8-2. Guess what? Rape is still "right". The 2 dissenters argue, and attempt to defend themselves. Coach gets overwhelmed and has his head smashed in by a rock. You really should not have broken the law, Coach.
OK, same scenario, except Coach has an AK-47 with a 100 rd drum mag. Guess what? Rape is wrong. All hail, Coach. However, this is a dictatorship, and technically a less free society than the previously existing democracy. Regardless of your personal opinion on what is right or moral, Brass.
Regardless of how sophisticated or technologically advanced we become, he who has the biggest rock has the power. How you personally feel about this, Brass, makes absolutely no difference. It is the immutable truth throughout human history.
The beauty of the US is that we the people have the rock. Not so in North Korea. Nor medieval Europe. Nor ancient Egypt. Be thankful. And be respectful to the police.
-Coachteet
TOR says: Well said. I was actually going to write about the topic of government today but what Coachteet said sort of beat me to it and since it covered most if not all of my ideas I just put his comment up into to main page.
Now for my thoughts. I have been having a fairly ongoing conversation with Brass and a couple other folks about this issue. No ding on them and my tone might have been a bit different than Coachteets but in any case what he said was so darn close to what I was going to say that it made more sense to post his comment instead of writing the same.
In terms of political identity here are my thoughts.
If I had to answer what my political orrientation is in one word I would say "liberterian".
If I had to answer it in a single sentence it would be "something between a 'small l' liberterian and a republitarian.
If I had a paragraph I would say that I cannot identify as a republican because I think they mettle too much in the personal affairs of people and that I lean towards the small government side of the liberterian party. I am for a balanced budget and low taxces. I am for some reasonable laws to protect workers and various at risk groups such as children. The militarizatiion of our law enforcement at all levels concerns me greatly. I think something of a minimal safety net is a good thing but a welfare state is evil. I lean against abortion but am probably not for banning it outright. I don't care what sort of guns are in your safe, what substances you enjoy or who shares your bed. I am for securing our borders and getting illegal immigrants out of our country. I am for a strong military to protect our nation but think our international military footprint could shrink significantly. I am conservative on some topics and liberal on others. I do not neatly and completely fit into the beliefs of any political party and find people who truly 100% toe any party line scary.
I do not believe any rational person can truly say we would be better off without any form of government. Also I think lots of fancy liberterian/ anarchist ideals about how things could work do not measure up to the tests of history or reality. The amount of government we should have can certainly be debated but I do not think its presence or worth can be argued.
With everything in life there is the theoretical/ philosophical answer and what actually works in real life, often the two are not the same. Look at it like this. It is the way to build a house that an engineer or a construction management major knows and the way that my uncle who has built houses for 20 years knows. It is how a sociology or criminal justice professor views crime and criminals vs the observations of a beat cop who has 20 years on patrol. It is the difference between the views on fighting of some tacticool instructor who wears nice crisp 5.11 clothes and gets his credibility from winning a bunch of competitions vs a Delta Guy who has spent the last decade shooting people in the face. Lots of fancy liberterian/ anarchist ideals about how things would work do not measure up to the tests of reality or historic examples.
We need government to protect us from each other by punishing those who abuse or violate others and by keeping property rights relatively secure (fucking eminent domain) among other things. If someone steals my stuff, assaults my wife or whatever government will probably not be able to stop them but there is a reasonable chance it will seek out and punish them. That certain acts are censured means that most people will not do these acts. Because of logistical issues government can not often protect people but it can and does punish those who break the law after the fact. This punishment goes a long way toward keepiung most people from violating the rights of others. I like being able to leave my residence with the knowledge that my property will almost surely be secure. I like knowing that contracts will generally be followed and if nothing else there is a reasonable way to pursue grevances in a legal manner instead of with a rifle.
We can certainly have an interesting debate about how far government should go into fiddling with our lives to protect or help people but I don't think the essential nature of some amount of government can seriously be questioned.
Erin Andrews
To start with, I haven't seen this newest celeb tape... And I don't plan on going out of my way to watch it. To be blunt, I don't really care. However, this is typical of a society which takes its celebrity way, way, way to obsessively.
I don't watch ESPN. I didn't know who Erin Andrews is until this story came out. All I know now is that FoxNews has talked about it for almost a week. CNN wont shut up about objectifying women, and the damage this has done to her reputation (really, she didn't have anything to do with it, so it can't damage her reputation, and shit, I didn't know who she was before, so it has upped her in my book).
All in all, we need to leave each other alone. She's cute, but so are a lot of other people. But when stuff like this happens, its not the end of the world. Lets all take a big breath, and step back.
I don't watch ESPN. I didn't know who Erin Andrews is until this story came out. All I know now is that FoxNews has talked about it for almost a week. CNN wont shut up about objectifying women, and the damage this has done to her reputation (really, she didn't have anything to do with it, so it can't damage her reputation, and shit, I didn't know who she was before, so it has upped her in my book).
All in all, we need to leave each other alone. She's cute, but so are a lot of other people. But when stuff like this happens, its not the end of the world. Lets all take a big breath, and step back.
Maggy on Minimum Wage
"I doubt many people would be super pleased to lose their vacation, sick days and go back to working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week for pennies on the dollar in a shitty factory."
-Maggy on the minimum wage discussion.
TOR says: I think people too often forget that so much of what shapes our current work environment is in some way government mandated. In addition to what Maggy said you could add 401K's and just about every other retirement plan or retirement tax benefit (roth IRA, etc all) to the list.
-Maggy on the minimum wage discussion.
TOR says: I think people too often forget that so much of what shapes our current work environment is in some way government mandated. In addition to what Maggy said you could add 401K's and just about every other retirement plan or retirement tax benefit (roth IRA, etc all) to the list.
The Colony
This seems like an interesting show. Might be worth watching.
I haven't actually seen it, but I like the concept. For those of you who watched Combat Missions, this seems like another of the just bad ass reality TV shows (not the shitty big brother kind).
I haven't actually seen it, but I like the concept. For those of you who watched Combat Missions, this seems like another of the just bad ass reality TV shows (not the shitty big brother kind).
Minimum Wage
I should have known this is coming. Something in me can't let a discussion on anything happen without throwing my .02 cents in. That is probably why I have a blog but enough of the self examination.
I think it is a good thing that we have a minimum wage. Everything in government is a compromise where someone is protected/ helped and another is restrained/ limited/ hurt. In this case I personally think helping/ protecting low skilled workers is the best thing. I am for employers being limited in the lowest amount they can pay a worker.
As for "a minimum wage job is an indication that one needs to find a better paying job, or a second job" comment and views on minimum wage employees at large. I bet if you surveyed (full time or close to it) minimum wage workers they probably would not tend to say things are going perfectly and their shit is locked down.
It is my observation that most people choose the best paying job they can get and reasonably tolerate. Some people have a job they truly love that doesn't pay the best. Another group of people have jobs that might not pay the best but have some other perks such as having convenient hours, being easy, a great location, etc. Saying they should get a better job is like saying that a football team should win by scoring more points than the other team or that the way to get strong is to lift heavy weights.
People work minimum wage type jobs for 3 fairly specific reasons:
1. They are not qualified for a better paying job they can reasonably tolerate. Lots of young people and students fall into this category. Tomorrow in some mall in your local mall there is a smoking hot 23 year old working in a store refolding stuff and politely chatting with customers. She could make 20 times the money by stripping but would not do that and thus folds overpriced clothes for minimum wage.
2. They can't get a job in their chosen field. Maybe they are a trained carny but there are no circuses hiring. A sudden job loss can often mean people get a lower paying job in the short term.
3. The job has some sort of a perks. Maybe the hours are great or they love the location (ski bums, etc) or there is the opportunity for training and future advancement. In any case a job that is low paying for whatever reason fits into their overall plan.
When we talk about people by income bracket it is very important to remember that while the percentages of people in certain income brackets does stay fairly constant people themselves move radically. They tend to get older and acquire skills which are more valued. Over a lifetime peoples incomes often change radically. Most people who are working a minimum wage job this year will not be working one in five years.
I don't look down on anyone for the job they are working provided they don't bitch about it excessively. This is for a couple of reasons. First of all it was how I was raised. Second of all the they are probably doing the best they can. Third and lastly we are all a few messed up events from being in a place where we need to work at a low paying job for awhile.
I think the people hurt most by minimum wage increases are those employers who have a high % of low skill positions which fall into that category. I don't say low skill in a mean way or mean to imply that the people who hold these jobs don't have any skills; more that the requirement for these positions are usually something like having a pulse and possibly being able to do very basic math.
As for jobs being lost by this I personally am not so sure. If it takes 4 people to cook the food, 1 to work fast food and 3 for the counter then odds are they won't try to have only 3 in the kitchen. Most people who have enough of a business to employ multiple people over the table would not employ people they don't have work for. It seems more likely to me that jobs won't so much be gotten rid of as not added.
As for the argument that prices will just inflate and cancel out said raise for low income workers I don't think it holds a lot of water. As we have noted with inflation in other areas inflation is not even. Some areas where large amounts of low wage workers such as restaurants will have to choose between eating the change and raising prices. However unless confronted by some sort of evidence I would be inclined to think that most prices will probably not significantly change.
I think it is a good thing that we have a minimum wage. Everything in government is a compromise where someone is protected/ helped and another is restrained/ limited/ hurt. In this case I personally think helping/ protecting low skilled workers is the best thing. I am for employers being limited in the lowest amount they can pay a worker.
As for "a minimum wage job is an indication that one needs to find a better paying job, or a second job" comment and views on minimum wage employees at large. I bet if you surveyed (full time or close to it) minimum wage workers they probably would not tend to say things are going perfectly and their shit is locked down.
It is my observation that most people choose the best paying job they can get and reasonably tolerate. Some people have a job they truly love that doesn't pay the best. Another group of people have jobs that might not pay the best but have some other perks such as having convenient hours, being easy, a great location, etc. Saying they should get a better job is like saying that a football team should win by scoring more points than the other team or that the way to get strong is to lift heavy weights.
People work minimum wage type jobs for 3 fairly specific reasons:
1. They are not qualified for a better paying job they can reasonably tolerate. Lots of young people and students fall into this category. Tomorrow in some mall in your local mall there is a smoking hot 23 year old working in a store refolding stuff and politely chatting with customers. She could make 20 times the money by stripping but would not do that and thus folds overpriced clothes for minimum wage.
2. They can't get a job in their chosen field. Maybe they are a trained carny but there are no circuses hiring. A sudden job loss can often mean people get a lower paying job in the short term.
3. The job has some sort of a perks. Maybe the hours are great or they love the location (ski bums, etc) or there is the opportunity for training and future advancement. In any case a job that is low paying for whatever reason fits into their overall plan.
When we talk about people by income bracket it is very important to remember that while the percentages of people in certain income brackets does stay fairly constant people themselves move radically. They tend to get older and acquire skills which are more valued. Over a lifetime peoples incomes often change radically. Most people who are working a minimum wage job this year will not be working one in five years.
I don't look down on anyone for the job they are working provided they don't bitch about it excessively. This is for a couple of reasons. First of all it was how I was raised. Second of all the they are probably doing the best they can. Third and lastly we are all a few messed up events from being in a place where we need to work at a low paying job for awhile.
I think the people hurt most by minimum wage increases are those employers who have a high % of low skill positions which fall into that category. I don't say low skill in a mean way or mean to imply that the people who hold these jobs don't have any skills; more that the requirement for these positions are usually something like having a pulse and possibly being able to do very basic math.
As for jobs being lost by this I personally am not so sure. If it takes 4 people to cook the food, 1 to work fast food and 3 for the counter then odds are they won't try to have only 3 in the kitchen. Most people who have enough of a business to employ multiple people over the table would not employ people they don't have work for. It seems more likely to me that jobs won't so much be gotten rid of as not added.
As for the argument that prices will just inflate and cancel out said raise for low income workers I don't think it holds a lot of water. As we have noted with inflation in other areas inflation is not even. Some areas where large amounts of low wage workers such as restaurants will have to choose between eating the change and raising prices. However unless confronted by some sort of evidence I would be inclined to think that most prices will probably not significantly change.
Friday, July 24, 2009
quote of the day
"This is not a gun.
To you, it is Bar-Kokhba's spear;
it is Samson's jaw-bone;
it is Ehud's sword;
it is the slingshot young David used to bring down the monster Goliath.
And we will become warriors, like the Maccabees, and the Sicarii -- brave mean and women, fighting for their freedom, as they were... Fire!"
- Jamie Bell, as Asael Bielski, training newcomer partisans to shoot, in Defiance (2008).
Screenplay by Clayton Frohman and Edward Zwick, based on the book Defiance: The Bielski Partisans by Nechama Tec.
To you, it is Bar-Kokhba's spear;
it is Samson's jaw-bone;
it is Ehud's sword;
it is the slingshot young David used to bring down the monster Goliath.
And we will become warriors, like the Maccabees, and the Sicarii -- brave mean and women, fighting for their freedom, as they were... Fire!"
- Jamie Bell, as Asael Bielski, training newcomer partisans to shoot, in Defiance (2008).
Screenplay by Clayton Frohman and Edward Zwick, based on the book Defiance: The Bielski Partisans by Nechama Tec.
Interesting Analysis on the Federal Minimum Wage Increase
Here are a couple of highlights:
The prospects for a teen looking for work are grim, and the wage hike may exacerbate their problems.
Low-skilled and younger workers stand to gain -- if they're working
"There's an economic argument to be made that when you push things up at the bottom during a recession, you're pushing more money into the pockets of people who are surely going to spend it and not going to save it,"
[TOR says: While the whole minimum wage thing can certainly be debated (if we should even have one, what it should be, etc) I don't think anyone could legitimately argue that a few more bucks to minimum wage workers will not go strait into the economy. If that is the best way for money to enter the economy I do not know. If the redistribution of it will help or hurt our economy I don't know. I just know that people who are making minimum wage are almost universally not doing well money wise. Someone who brings home a bit less than a grand a month then that gets an extra few bucks is going to spend it in a way that gets spread around. They will probably get or do something they have been living without like some clothes, better food, dinner out, a night at the bar, etc. Conversely if I (in the middle class) get an extra few bucks a month I will put it to savings, precious metals, etc which doesn't really spread through the economy. ]
Some consumers could see higher prices
Read the whole article here
The prospects for a teen looking for work are grim, and the wage hike may exacerbate their problems.
Low-skilled and younger workers stand to gain -- if they're working
"There's an economic argument to be made that when you push things up at the bottom during a recession, you're pushing more money into the pockets of people who are surely going to spend it and not going to save it,"
[TOR says: While the whole minimum wage thing can certainly be debated (if we should even have one, what it should be, etc) I don't think anyone could legitimately argue that a few more bucks to minimum wage workers will not go strait into the economy. If that is the best way for money to enter the economy I do not know. If the redistribution of it will help or hurt our economy I don't know. I just know that people who are making minimum wage are almost universally not doing well money wise. Someone who brings home a bit less than a grand a month then that gets an extra few bucks is going to spend it in a way that gets spread around. They will probably get or do something they have been living without like some clothes, better food, dinner out, a night at the bar, etc. Conversely if I (in the middle class) get an extra few bucks a month I will put it to savings, precious metals, etc which doesn't really spread through the economy. ]
Some consumers could see higher prices
Read the whole article here
Professor Gates, Cambridge PD and Experiences with LEO's
Someone sort of hijacked a thread to talk about this. Other people responded to it so now I must also. From what I have heard here are my thoughts.
I can genuinely understand that some disenfranchised peoples can have genuine fear of cops. According to some internet stuff Prof Gated grew up in West Virginia and by his age it could well have been a time and place where white cops kept clan uniforms in their cars and mixed law enforcement and an agenda of fear. I don't think that background really came into play here though. I would suppose a lot of people of that era would be far more inclined to "Yes Sir" "No Sir" their way through a situation like that.
I think this guy was an elitist. He has been teaching at Harvard for a very long time with all of those social trappings. He was also probably tired from the long trip he was coming back from.
It seems like the cops acted in a completely normal manner. The only white one was their diversity expert and the others were black and hispanic. On a side note I can't help but think what would happen if 3 random but completely innocent white cops had gotten this media attention. I think this man was tired and upset. He is an elitist and probably hadn't talked with a cop in decades let alone interacted in a law enforcement capacity.
Cops speak in certain language sometimes. They will very often give you warnings. A friend of mine was pre funking outside of a bar and the cops came. They asked him to dump out his can of beer and he said "let me finish it off" and then was promptly ticketed for an open container. He was stupid and for part of a fucking can of bud light could have saved a lot of grief. I believe the police report said the cop told him something to the effect of "you are starting to be disorderly" which is a pretty fucking blatant warning.
This guys arrest (which was dropped) had nothing to do with breaking into his own house and everything to do with being an asshole to the cops afterwords.
Here I am asking for it.
Thoughts?
I can genuinely understand that some disenfranchised peoples can have genuine fear of cops. According to some internet stuff Prof Gated grew up in West Virginia and by his age it could well have been a time and place where white cops kept clan uniforms in their cars and mixed law enforcement and an agenda of fear. I don't think that background really came into play here though. I would suppose a lot of people of that era would be far more inclined to "Yes Sir" "No Sir" their way through a situation like that.
I think this guy was an elitist. He has been teaching at Harvard for a very long time with all of those social trappings. He was also probably tired from the long trip he was coming back from.
It seems like the cops acted in a completely normal manner. The only white one was their diversity expert and the others were black and hispanic. On a side note I can't help but think what would happen if 3 random but completely innocent white cops had gotten this media attention. I think this man was tired and upset. He is an elitist and probably hadn't talked with a cop in decades let alone interacted in a law enforcement capacity.
Cops speak in certain language sometimes. They will very often give you warnings. A friend of mine was pre funking outside of a bar and the cops came. They asked him to dump out his can of beer and he said "let me finish it off" and then was promptly ticketed for an open container. He was stupid and for part of a fucking can of bud light could have saved a lot of grief. I believe the police report said the cop told him something to the effect of "you are starting to be disorderly" which is a pretty fucking blatant warning.
This guys arrest (which was dropped) had nothing to do with breaking into his own house and everything to do with being an asshole to the cops afterwords.
Here I am asking for it.
Thoughts?
Does This Sound Familiar?
Read this. Think Glenn Beck has talked about it in the past but sometimes it is easier to get information from the written word. It lets me stop and reflect on something for a second instead of needing to keep up with what is being said on the telly.
Ever had someone talk about what they would do in a hypothetical situation and then years later been in a similar situation? Maybe it is a weird coincidence that they have done steps 1,2,3 of a 7 step plan but I would get ready for steps 4-7 just in case.
Ever had someone talk about what they would do in a hypothetical situation and then years later been in a similar situation? Maybe it is a weird coincidence that they have done steps 1,2,3 of a 7 step plan but I would get ready for steps 4-7 just in case.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
No Can Hom Invades Meh
Hermit wrote about home invasions yesterday. This got me thinking about them. First of all I wanted to get it strait what the definition of a home invasion is. Home invasion is the crime of entering a private and occupied dwelling, with the intent of committing a crime, often while threatening the resident of the dwelling. It differs from burglary because burglary is breaking in to commit specific crimes (namely theft) while home invasion is to commit any crime. Though not specifically stated home invasions usually happen with the knowledge that the residents are home while burglars generally want to avoid people. Home invasions are more aggressive and violent then burglaries typically are. They often turn into a hostage scenario way too fucked up for a horror movie.
Home invasions are truly the worst case scenario of home defense. Multiple armed criminals (often very hardened and experienced) forcing their way into your home (or gaining entry under false pretenses) is about as bad as it gets. If 7 armed hardened criminals break into your place and you plus two buddies aren't practicing pulling security facing the door with loaded rifles and body armor you are completely fucked. I like that about as much as you do but sorry but it is true. You might do well and kill 3 or 4 of them but you're fucking toast. On the 'bright side' I would imagine that 2-3 goblins is probably a lot more realistic.
Minimizing readily visible displays of wealth or making it obvious (even to people at shops or whatever) that you have compact highly valuable objects in the home is a good idea. Not opening the door for anyone you don't know is pretty much common sense. If you are able then reinforcing doors is a good idea. Other than that there's not a whole lot you can do to prevent a home invasion from starting.
I did however decide to adjust my home defense plan some. A friend of mine keeps a pump shotgun and a pistol by his bed and another pump shotgun and pistol where he usually sits. I have conceptually liked this setup for awhile but never saw the need. Now I see the need. Already had a shotgun and pistol by the bed and decided having the same in the living room would be prudent. The already present pistol is great for picking up before going to the door to discretely answer it but isn't exactly what I would want if things were to turn ugly. Having a pump shotgun in my hands immediately could well be the difference.
Home invasions are truly the worst case scenario of home defense. Multiple armed criminals (often very hardened and experienced) forcing their way into your home (or gaining entry under false pretenses) is about as bad as it gets. If 7 armed hardened criminals break into your place and you plus two buddies aren't practicing pulling security facing the door with loaded rifles and body armor you are completely fucked. I like that about as much as you do but sorry but it is true. You might do well and kill 3 or 4 of them but you're fucking toast. On the 'bright side' I would imagine that 2-3 goblins is probably a lot more realistic.
Minimizing readily visible displays of wealth or making it obvious (even to people at shops or whatever) that you have compact highly valuable objects in the home is a good idea. Not opening the door for anyone you don't know is pretty much common sense. If you are able then reinforcing doors is a good idea. Other than that there's not a whole lot you can do to prevent a home invasion from starting.
I did however decide to adjust my home defense plan some. A friend of mine keeps a pump shotgun and a pistol by his bed and another pump shotgun and pistol where he usually sits. I have conceptually liked this setup for awhile but never saw the need. Now I see the need. Already had a shotgun and pistol by the bed and decided having the same in the living room would be prudent. The already present pistol is great for picking up before going to the door to discretely answer it but isn't exactly what I would want if things were to turn ugly. Having a pump shotgun in my hands immediately could well be the difference.
Peoplz Be Emailin Meh
Hi,
Isabelle here from OpenCongress.org. I just wanted to write quickly and let you know that your recent blog post on S.1390 got picked up by our blog aggregator and is now posted in our list of articles on that bill. Now people looking for information on the bill can find your article through its bill page on OpenCongress. Check it out here:
http://www.opencongress.org/bi
Since you're writing about bills in Congress on your blog, I encourage you to check out OpenCongress as a research tool and a source for finding out what's moving in Congress. One of our main functions that you can see off the homepage is to provide context to bills, showing which ones are being viewed by people the most, which are being blogged about the most, and which are in the news the most. You can also follow the OpenCongress Blog for updates on legislation and issues that are moving in Congress.
http://www.opencongress.org/bl
Best,
-Isabelle
Some Interesting Stuff on Groups and Retreats
Like most of you I read survivalblog. Its format draws tons of talent and works really well. A particular thread on groups and retreats has been interesting me. I didn't want this one to slip through the cracks. Had something of a post about my thoughts on it written but decided against it. On the topic I do have a couple quick thoughts.
1. It is essential that everyone is on board with your plans. It is too easy for a couple real enthusiastic people to come up with an ambitious plan and those who disagree for whatever reason will pay lip service to it just to get along. The folks who paid said lip service will then not follow through with the action component of the plan by failing to come through with the time/ energy or money (usually we are talking about one or the other) to see it completed.
As much as I think unanimous votes (by so called 'black ball') are a real pain in the ass for all but the really largest (to throw out a number say more than 8-10 adults) and/ or most rigidly structured groups (likely those organized along close family or religious lines) it is probably the only way to ensure a high % of plans are followed to completion. Expecting people to put more than a token amount of their time/ energy/ money/ into something they don't agree with just isn't realistic. As noted in the above article it may be a good idea to come up with reasonable penalties for failing to follow through on agreed upon obligations. Having some common sense informal clause about major life changes or emergency situations such as: injuries, death in the family, radical changes in work schedule or income, etc would probably be wise.
If everyone is truly on board it is practical to go through with the plan. I find that with informal agreements (which group stuff usually falls into) that involve more than token amounts of time/ energy/ money it is often wise to write things down. Say what you are all going to do in plain simply language, have everyone sign that they agree (after the voting) and make copies for all to keep. These written agreements may or may not be legally binding, I don't know as I am not a lawyer. [On a tangent I would say that if you are going to make significant group purchases, put improvements into a piece of property, have significant amounts of property stored on another persons land or such it would be prudent to shell out the cash and get legally binding documents to protect everyone involved.] The main point of this is not that it is legally binding but that EVERYONE INVOLVED KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE AGREEING TO. Peoples memories get fuzzy over time and can often change significantly.
In the survival blog post they mentioned how some people may not be as gung ho about defensive training or food storage or whatever and. I think that finding a group of people who have exactly the same beliefs and willingness to contribute (time/energy/money) or work towards preparedness at the same pace is not realistic. If you get 3 people odds are one will be fairly gung ho, another will be less so and the third will lagg aways behind. It seems like taking a step back and looking at the big picture may be useful in this area.
Ask yourself (and maybe other group members) if the group is better or worse off because of this person/ family is involved. This is probably the big question to answer.
If the answer is that they make the group better (or I suppose don't make it worse off) then stop sweating the small stuff. Seems like If everyone in the group agrees the answer is that they make the group worse off then it is probably time to have a serious discussion with this person/ family. If they are willing to meet the groups concerns then work with them to come up with a realistic plan on a reasonable timeline. Expecting someone who makes 28k a year to purchase 3 guns/ 50 mags/ 5k rounds and get professional firearms training in the next 6 months is not realistic. Expecting someone to build up 6 months worth of food storage over the next year probably is realistic.
If the group is worse off because a person/ family is involved and they don't agree to take the steps the group has agreed upon and everyone else has taken then it is probably time for the group and those folks to part ways.
Thoughts?
1. It is essential that everyone is on board with your plans. It is too easy for a couple real enthusiastic people to come up with an ambitious plan and those who disagree for whatever reason will pay lip service to it just to get along. The folks who paid said lip service will then not follow through with the action component of the plan by failing to come through with the time/ energy or money (usually we are talking about one or the other) to see it completed.
As much as I think unanimous votes (by so called 'black ball') are a real pain in the ass for all but the really largest (to throw out a number say more than 8-10 adults) and/ or most rigidly structured groups (likely those organized along close family or religious lines) it is probably the only way to ensure a high % of plans are followed to completion. Expecting people to put more than a token amount of their time/ energy/ money/ into something they don't agree with just isn't realistic. As noted in the above article it may be a good idea to come up with reasonable penalties for failing to follow through on agreed upon obligations. Having some common sense informal clause about major life changes or emergency situations such as: injuries, death in the family, radical changes in work schedule or income, etc would probably be wise.
If everyone is truly on board it is practical to go through with the plan. I find that with informal agreements (which group stuff usually falls into) that involve more than token amounts of time/ energy/ money it is often wise to write things down. Say what you are all going to do in plain simply language, have everyone sign that they agree (after the voting) and make copies for all to keep. These written agreements may or may not be legally binding, I don't know as I am not a lawyer. [On a tangent I would say that if you are going to make significant group purchases, put improvements into a piece of property, have significant amounts of property stored on another persons land or such it would be prudent to shell out the cash and get legally binding documents to protect everyone involved.] The main point of this is not that it is legally binding but that EVERYONE INVOLVED KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE AGREEING TO. Peoples memories get fuzzy over time and can often change significantly.
In the survival blog post they mentioned how some people may not be as gung ho about defensive training or food storage or whatever and. I think that finding a group of people who have exactly the same beliefs and willingness to contribute (time/energy/money) or work towards preparedness at the same pace is not realistic. If you get 3 people odds are one will be fairly gung ho, another will be less so and the third will lagg aways behind. It seems like taking a step back and looking at the big picture may be useful in this area.
Ask yourself (and maybe other group members) if the group is better or worse off because of this person/ family is involved. This is probably the big question to answer.
If the answer is that they make the group better (or I suppose don't make it worse off) then stop sweating the small stuff. Seems like If everyone in the group agrees the answer is that they make the group worse off then it is probably time to have a serious discussion with this person/ family. If they are willing to meet the groups concerns then work with them to come up with a realistic plan on a reasonable timeline. Expecting someone who makes 28k a year to purchase 3 guns/ 50 mags/ 5k rounds and get professional firearms training in the next 6 months is not realistic. Expecting someone to build up 6 months worth of food storage over the next year probably is realistic.
If the group is worse off because a person/ family is involved and they don't agree to take the steps the group has agreed upon and everyone else has taken then it is probably time for the group and those folks to part ways.
Thoughts?
Coming Back to Something
My recent quote of the day courtesy of Sgt Jarhead definitely brought some discussion. I love you all dearly but most of you missed the point for a couple reasons.
I think that "as long as your neighbor is not doing something that is directly affecting you, it is none of your concern" was taken wrong in two different ways.
The first of these comes back to an arguable inherent weakness of libertarianism. In the libertarian philosophy acts are punished BECAUSE they impinge on the rights of others not BECAUSE THEY MAY LEAD TO impinging on the rights of others. Casing point, the folks in the house next to you smoking crack in and of itself does not harm you. Maybe they have a job and like to smoke some rock when they get home. I am as aware as you are of the incredibly high probability of your neighbors crack habit being a factor in a broad variety of crimes including but not limited to breaking and entering, petty robbery, and vehicle prowls. The point is that people are punished for actions that directly impinge on the rights of others. It is (and would be) illegal to break into a house, rob someone or prowl their vehicle. Because A (crack use) is often linked to B (various crimes) doesn't mean that A should be illegal because in and of itself it doesn't directly cause B or infringe upon anyone's rights.
To close this part of the discussion I have two thoughts on the specific topic of drugs. (this isn't my full view on the matter, just as it applies to this post) Alcohol is involved in roughly half of the arrests made in the US on a yearly basis and nobody is talking about banning the sauce. Hard drugs are involved in a far smaller percentage. As for peoples health we obviously don't care about it at all as you can get a meal at Hardys that has more calories then you should eat in a day. Also tobacco probably kills more people in a week than hard drugs do in the whole year.
The second part was more surprising to me. Seems like everyone got the LIVE and forgot the part about let live. A neighbor with a broken down El Camino on blocks in his yard is irritating just as listening to Deaf Leoppard play in his yard while you try and go to sleep isn't fun. Then again he probably doesn't like you mowing the lawn at 8 am Sunday morning or regularly having a dozen screaming children running around in your front lawn. He might not mow his lawn regularly and you are often grinding away in your metal shop.
Simply put I firmly believe it is ridiculous to expect people to keep their noses the heck out of our business if we can't keep our noses out of theirs. Maybe they like dope and you like guns or whatever. You don't like their sweet IROC Camaro and they think the dinner parties you throw mess up parking on the block and are generally irritating. To think that it is completely wrong for your beliefs/ lifestyle/ rights to be legislated against in any way but that it is fine to pass or otherwise promote "common sense rules" about what others can and can't do is at best poorly thought out and childish or at worst completely hypocritical.
Thoughts?
I think that "as long as your neighbor is not doing something that is directly affecting you, it is none of your concern" was taken wrong in two different ways.
The first of these comes back to an arguable inherent weakness of libertarianism. In the libertarian philosophy acts are punished BECAUSE they impinge on the rights of others not BECAUSE THEY MAY LEAD TO impinging on the rights of others. Casing point, the folks in the house next to you smoking crack in and of itself does not harm you. Maybe they have a job and like to smoke some rock when they get home. I am as aware as you are of the incredibly high probability of your neighbors crack habit being a factor in a broad variety of crimes including but not limited to breaking and entering, petty robbery, and vehicle prowls. The point is that people are punished for actions that directly impinge on the rights of others. It is (and would be) illegal to break into a house, rob someone or prowl their vehicle. Because A (crack use) is often linked to B (various crimes) doesn't mean that A should be illegal because in and of itself it doesn't directly cause B or infringe upon anyone's rights.
To close this part of the discussion I have two thoughts on the specific topic of drugs. (this isn't my full view on the matter, just as it applies to this post) Alcohol is involved in roughly half of the arrests made in the US on a yearly basis and nobody is talking about banning the sauce. Hard drugs are involved in a far smaller percentage. As for peoples health we obviously don't care about it at all as you can get a meal at Hardys that has more calories then you should eat in a day. Also tobacco probably kills more people in a week than hard drugs do in the whole year.
The second part was more surprising to me. Seems like everyone got the LIVE and forgot the part about let live. A neighbor with a broken down El Camino on blocks in his yard is irritating just as listening to Deaf Leoppard play in his yard while you try and go to sleep isn't fun. Then again he probably doesn't like you mowing the lawn at 8 am Sunday morning or regularly having a dozen screaming children running around in your front lawn. He might not mow his lawn regularly and you are often grinding away in your metal shop.
Simply put I firmly believe it is ridiculous to expect people to keep their noses the heck out of our business if we can't keep our noses out of theirs. Maybe they like dope and you like guns or whatever. You don't like their sweet IROC Camaro and they think the dinner parties you throw mess up parking on the block and are generally irritating. To think that it is completely wrong for your beliefs/ lifestyle/ rights to be legislated against in any way but that it is fine to pass or otherwise promote "common sense rules" about what others can and can't do is at best poorly thought out and childish or at worst completely hypocritical.
Thoughts?
No Insurance Club
Health care in America is in Turmoil
The No Insurance Club says private contracts are the solution
More and more Americans are going without health care especially preventative health care. The reasons ─ costs are too high, patients can’t get accepted due to a pre-existing condition, companies are cutting back on benefits, people have been laid off from work, and the list goes on.
What’s being done to improve healthcare? Government wants more control and regulation and the system seems to be leaning toward socialized care. Insurance companies continue to increase premiums, which prices healthcare out of reach for the average American. Employers can no longer float the cost of insurance so they pass it on to their employees. Patients aren’t the only ones being affected by the current state of healthcare. More and more doctors are going out of business and hospitals are cutting back due to escalating costs and payment defaults.
The current remedy: Americans are taking out major medical policies for catastrophic events with high deductibles to keep monthly premiums down, or are turning to Medicaid, mini-clinics at grocery stores/pharmacies, and emergency room visits for common illnesses.
What about prevention and maintenance? More than 90 percent of health related issues can be taken care of with preventative care and maintenance but only a small percentage of Americans currently enjoy the benefit of preventative healthcare.
The No Insurance Club has come up with a fresh look at health care by offering an affordable alternative to traditional insurance options.
The No Insurance Club connects patients with participating board certified physicians that will treat and care for preventative healthcare needs for a one-time prepaid annual membership fee.
NIC patients make a one-time annual payment that is typically less than a one-month premium with traditional insurance
- Patients receive up to 12 office visits per year that also include immunizations, $4 or less in-office prescriptions, and additional services including blood tests
- No deductible, no co-pays, no premiums
- No surprise bills to patients
- Viable alternative to COBRA for employees laid off from work
- Low cost option for the self-employed
I would be happy to connect you with the company director, participating doctors and even patients for interviews to learn more about the network and its benefits.
Bob G
TOR here: I got this email after my health care post. Unsure exactly what to think I asked for a bit more information. They promptly replied and I sort of sat on it for a few days. Below is their reply.
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your interest in the No Insurance Club. Here is some info for your readers.
"With the health care crisis picking up steam, we found an option that may become more popular as time goes on, Cash! Yes the old fashion way of paying for prevention. The No Insurance Club http://noinsuranceclub.com has created a way for people to see a doctor up to 12 times a year, get 20 tests and services like EKG, Steph, Physicals...for $480 per year. No Deductibles, co-pays or premiums.
They also have $15 full panel blood test, $75 mammograms, $4 generics in the doctors office in some locations.
All the doctors are board certified. You can pay the doctor directly, or online.
For a brief overview here is an intro video:
http://noinsuranceclub.com/
or call them at
(480) 558-5000
If you needed anything else Ryan let me know,
Thanks,
Chad H
TOR here: I thought you guys might be interested in this program. If nothing else I figure that if folks take the time to write me I can take the time to copy/ paste and or reply to them. I have had no dealings with these folks other than exchanging emails. Insurance and various health care programs are a very big deal and there are all sorts of ins and outs. I do not feel anywhere close to qualified to evaluate a program like this so I am not going to even try. It would probably be fair to say that choosing individual health care is a complicated issue and it would be wise to consult someone who knows about these things. Your decisions have major implications.
Got an Email
Hi Ryan,
Excuse my language but it's a total crock of s**t that the Senate couldn't get that Amdt. 1618 passed. Those two Republican senators that caved should be well...shot, actually. :-)
Anyhow, I'm not writing to you to rant. Instead, I'm writing to you because I'm part-owner of Lucky Gunner Ammo. It's located at LuckyGunner.com and the site specializes in
carrying in-stock ammo that's ready to ship at good prices. If you
would, please have a look at it.
A couple libertarian (small "l") friends of mine back in Knoxville and
I launched the site several months ago after Obama won the election.
These friends of mine were noticing how hard it was to get any ammo
and wanted to do something about it so they tapped some of their
connections in the gun industry to help setup a site that listed and
carried ONLY in-stock ammo. As you can imagine, the response has been
really positive.
As such, I know you and your two friends are also into the survivalist movement like me and my buddies are. That's why I wanted to see if you folks would be willing to throw up a link to Lucky Gunner Ammo under your Blogs We Read section...? I know we're not a blog but we do carry a lot of different ammo so I'm sure your site's visitors would find value in finding a resource that actually had ammo in-stock when it's listed on the website.
Thanks in advance and keep up the good fight,
Brian Redacted
LuckyGunner.com
TOR here: I couldn't turn down three friends who started a blog, not that I really turn anyone down who asks for some linkage loving. That you only carry in stock ammo is a big plus. I think we have all heard a horror story about someone who buys ammo and those asshats don't actually have the darn ammo (though they said they do) but already took your money. I currently don't have a section in the links for places to buy stuff though from time to time I do mention companies I have had positive experiences with. In the near future that may well change.
If these guys have something you want at a fair price (always check a couple places to get an idea) then by all means give them some business. For the sake of full disclosure I have never done any business with these folks and have not received anything from them.
Excuse my language but it's a total crock of s**t that the Senate couldn't get that Amdt. 1618 passed. Those two Republican senators that caved should be well...shot, actually. :-)
Anyhow, I'm not writing to you to rant. Instead, I'm writing to you because I'm part-owner of Lucky Gunner Ammo. It's located at LuckyGunner.com and the site specializes in
carrying in-stock ammo that's ready to ship at good prices. If you
would, please have a look at it.
A couple libertarian (small "l") friends of mine back in Knoxville and
I launched the site several months ago after Obama won the election.
These friends of mine were noticing how hard it was to get any ammo
and wanted to do something about it so they tapped some of their
connections in the gun industry to help setup a site that listed and
carried ONLY in-stock ammo. As you can imagine, the response has been
really positive.
As such, I know you and your two friends are also into the survivalist movement like me and my buddies are. That's why I wanted to see if you folks would be willing to throw up a link to Lucky Gunner Ammo under your Blogs We Read section...? I know we're not a blog but we do carry a lot of different ammo so I'm sure your site's visitors would find value in finding a resource that actually had ammo in-stock when it's listed on the website.
Thanks in advance and keep up the good fight,
Brian Redacted
LuckyGunner.com
TOR here: I couldn't turn down three friends who started a blog, not that I really turn anyone down who asks for some linkage loving. That you only carry in stock ammo is a big plus. I think we have all heard a horror story about someone who buys ammo and those asshats don't actually have the darn ammo (though they said they do) but already took your money. I currently don't have a section in the links for places to buy stuff though from time to time I do mention companies I have had positive experiences with. In the near future that may well change.
If these guys have something you want at a fair price (always check a couple places to get an idea) then by all means give them some business. For the sake of full disclosure I have never done any business with these folks and have not received anything from them.
Quote of the day 2- Guiliani on Healthcare
"This health care thing worries me even more then all of the spending because this will be very hard to undo if you do it wrong. You put 30-40-50 million people on this government insurance program you're not going to be able to undo that."
-Rudy Guiliani
On Fox News about 30 seconds ago. I have little to say on this. He is right and I think it speaks for itself.
-Rudy Guiliani
On Fox News about 30 seconds ago. I have little to say on this. He is right and I think it speaks for itself.
quote of the day
"Only our federal government at a time of an emergency could buy cheese by the ton and pay more."
-Glenn Beck
Apparantly they have never heard of costco.
-Glenn Beck
Apparantly they have never heard of costco.
joke of the day
An old Italian lived alone in New Jersey. He wanted to plant his annual tomato garden, but it was very difficult work, as the ground was hard. His only son, Vincent, who used to help him, was in prison. The old man wrote a letter to his son and described his predicament:
Dear Vincent,
I am feeling pretty sad, because it looks like I won't be able to plant my tomato garden this year. I'm just getting too old to be digging up a garden plot. I know if you were here my troubles would be over. I know you would be happy to dig the plot for me, like in the old days.
Love, Papa
I am feeling pretty sad, because it looks like I won't be able to plant my tomato garden this year. I'm just getting too old to be digging up a garden plot. I know if you were here my troubles would be over. I know you would be happy to dig the plot for me, like in the old days.
Love, Papa
A few days later he received a letter from his son.
Dear Pop,
Don't dig up that garden. That's where the bodies are buried.
Don't dig up that garden. That's where the bodies are buried.
Love, Vinnie
At 4 a.m. the next morning, FBI agents and local police arrived and dug up the entire area without finding any bodies. They apologized to the old man and left. That same day the old man received another letter from his son.
Dear Pop,
Go ahead and plant the tomatoes now. That's the best I could do under the circumstances.
Go ahead and plant the tomatoes now. That's the best I could do under the circumstances.
Love you,
Vinnie
Vinnie
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Travel, Life and Security
I am in the process of out processing right now. Lots of lines and paperwork and fun times. This area has been pretty good to us but I am ready to get into a more settled position.
I/ We have done some thinking and talking about exactly how much to share about the upcoming move. Decided that saying absolutely nothing would not be practical as tid bits of everyday life slip into here anyway. Saying Europe would not make any real sense because aside from the 173rd Airborne in Italy and a few people here or there it basically means Germany anyway. I am not going to say more than that, tis my compromise. If you pick up more by putting pieces of stuff together please keep it to yourself. I would be bummed to reject a great comment because it mentioned in passing where I am.
We are moving to Germany. I put it on my wish list back in the day and never thought they would actually give it to me, turns out they did. The move is going to be significantly more complicated then say throwing our stuff into two cars and driving across the country. This is going to be exciting and interesting.
I am pretty excited about the whole thing though somewhat apprehensive. Wish I could take some guns but other then that I think it will be fun. Wifey is excited about the travel opportunities though apprehensive in general and disappointed that finding work might be difficult to impossible. She is concerned about jumping through all the right hoops and stuff for getting the cats there without it costing wads of cash and them sitting in quarantine. Also the Anti Terrorism briefing kind of freaked her out.
I really want to go to Switzerland and Wifey wants to go to Paris. She has some family in England so that will be cool. To be honest I can't think of a place I don't want to go. We plan to travel as much as time and finances allow. Since we will already be there it seems like a lot can be done on weekends (especially 3-4 day passes) and if you want at fairly reasonable cost.
Anyway that is all for now.
I/ We have done some thinking and talking about exactly how much to share about the upcoming move. Decided that saying absolutely nothing would not be practical as tid bits of everyday life slip into here anyway. Saying Europe would not make any real sense because aside from the 173rd Airborne in Italy and a few people here or there it basically means Germany anyway. I am not going to say more than that, tis my compromise. If you pick up more by putting pieces of stuff together please keep it to yourself. I would be bummed to reject a great comment because it mentioned in passing where I am.
We are moving to Germany. I put it on my wish list back in the day and never thought they would actually give it to me, turns out they did. The move is going to be significantly more complicated then say throwing our stuff into two cars and driving across the country. This is going to be exciting and interesting.
I am pretty excited about the whole thing though somewhat apprehensive. Wish I could take some guns but other then that I think it will be fun. Wifey is excited about the travel opportunities though apprehensive in general and disappointed that finding work might be difficult to impossible. She is concerned about jumping through all the right hoops and stuff for getting the cats there without it costing wads of cash and them sitting in quarantine. Also the Anti Terrorism briefing kind of freaked her out.
I really want to go to Switzerland and Wifey wants to go to Paris. She has some family in England so that will be cool. To be honest I can't think of a place I don't want to go. We plan to travel as much as time and finances allow. Since we will already be there it seems like a lot can be done on weekends (especially 3-4 day passes) and if you want at fairly reasonable cost.
Anyway that is all for now.
This Would Be Great
U.S. Senate To Vote On National Right-To-Carry
Reciprocity Amendment Early This Week
Contact Your U.S. Senators TODAY And Urge Them To Support Your Right To Self-Defense by voting YES on the Thune-Vitter Amendment!
July 21, 2009
The U.S. Senate is now considering the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1390). As a part of the consideration of that legislation, Senators John Thune (R-SD) and David Vitter (R-LA) will offer an amendment this week to provide for interstate recognition of Right-to-Carry permits. There is a very high likelihood of a Senate floor vote on this important and timely pro-gun reform between now and Wednesday.
Now is the time for Congress to recognize that the right to self-defense does not end at state lines. Under the Thune-Vitter amendment, an individual who has met the requirements for a carry permit, or who is otherwise allowed by his home state's state law to carry a firearm, would be authorized to carry a firearm for protection in any other state that issues such permits, subject to the laws of the state in which the firearm is carried.
Contrary to "states' rights" claims from opponents who usually favor sweeping federal gun control, the amendment is a legitimate exercise of Congress's constitutional power to protect the fundamental rights of citizens (including the right to keep and bear arms and the right of personal mobility). States would still have the authority to regulate the time, place and manner in which handguns are carried.
Expanding Right-to-Carry will enhance public safety, and certainly poses no threat to the public. Criminals are deterred from attempting crimes when they know or suspect that their prospective victims are armed. A study for the Department of Justice found that 40 percent of felons had not committed crimes because they feared the prospective victims were armed. The Thune-Vitter amendment recognizes that competent, responsible, law-abiding Americans still deserve our trust and confidence when they cross state lines. Passing interstate Right-to-Carry legislation will help further reduce crime by deterring criminals, and -- most important of all -- will protect the right of honest Americans to protect themselves if deterrence fails.
The Thune-Vitter Amendment represents a giant step forward in the protection of the basic right to self-defense. Its passage will recognize that the rights of law-abiding Right-to-Carry permit holders should be respected, even when they travel outside their home state.
Gun control groups, including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" are running ads trying to scare your lawmakers and the American people into opposing this crucial Right-to-Carry reform. It is critical that your U.S. Senators hear from you immediately.
Please be sure to contact both of your U.S. Senators today, and urge them to cosponsor and support the Thune-Vitter interstate right to carry recipocity amendment. E-mail and call them immediately!
To find contact information for your U.S. Senators, please click here, or call (202) 224-3121.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[Most Recent Charts from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_4.gif)
![[Most Recent Charts from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_usoz_4.gif)
Posts
Build Muscle.
Build Endurance.
Improve the SHAPE of your body.