I got nothing to say, really. Just wanted to use that pun. Story:

Breastfeeding mothers will conduct “nurse-ins” today against Delta Air Lines at more than a dozen U.S. airports.

They are upset because a nursing mother was removed from a Delta commuter flight operated by Freedom Airlines from Burlington, Vermont, to New York last month. A flight attendant asked Emily Gillette to cover up as she was feeding her one-year-old and when she complained, she was asked to get off the plane.

I like my name better. That is all, as you were.

The Washington Post covers the mainstreaming of polygamy.

Valerie and others among the estimated 40,000 men, women and children in polygamous communities are part of a new movement to decriminalize bigamy. Consciously taking tactics from the gay-rights movement, polygamists have reframed their struggle, choosing in interviews to de-emphasize their religious beliefs and focus on their desire to live “in freedom,”

Utah’s attorney general has a policy of not prosecuting felony bigamy. Instead, if people are committing real crimes with real victims (rape, spousal abuse, forced underage marriages, etc.), he’ll go after people on those bases. Good for him.

Some idiot wants to reinstate the draft. This prompted a discussion of whether or not the draft is constitutional based on the 13th amendment’s prohibition of involuntary servitude.

Just thinking but Congress can call forth the militia. And:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

And there’s the second amendment and all of that. Thoughts? Or am I just full of it?

Ok, ok, I struggled with this one. Here’s the story:

Former Attorney General Janet Reno and seven other former Justice Department officials filed court papers Nov. 20 that the Bush administration is setting a dangerous precedent by trying a suspected terrorist outside the court system. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales defended the nation’s handling of the detainees. “What is extraordinary, in other words, is how much, not how little, our law protects enemy combatants,” he said.

I couldn’t decide which bit of smarmy commentary to use, so I’ll use both. Which comment should Uncle have made:

1 – Janet Reno criticizing the heavy-handed tactics of the Justice Department is like Michael Richards criticizing me for racial insensitivity.

or:

2 – When someone who set people on fire says you’re setting a dangerous precedent, it may be time for some serious introspection.

Decisions, decisions?

Update: Funny. Seems that since Insty tossed a link, some folks think I’m an idiot for using a bit of duality here. Take for instance, this guy:

The link “SayUncle” references is from the National Rifle Association. These are the same yahoos that were screaming that Clinton was going to take all their guns away while decrying the “jackbooted thugs” who sent Elian back to his biological father. They’re the same flavor of nut that blame the US government for Waco and not the heavily-armed apocalyptic religious cultist David Koresh. Now they yawn at the Bush administration’s illegal wiretapping, torture of US citizens and gutting of habeas corpus, while real conservatives blast them.

The NRA copied text from an AP report, so the source isn’t the evil NRA. One click, and you’d have figured that out there, sparky. The NRA referred to the ATF as Jackbooted thugs during Bush 1’s administration after the Ruby Ridge incident (recall Bush 1 didn’t get their endorsement in 92). Those nuts in Congress also concluded that the government shared the blame for Waco because, well, no matter how nutty someone is (and Koresh was nucking futs), it’s not justification for tossing in some incindiaries and driving a tank through the door. Good post, other than getting substantially all the facts wrong.

Them stoopid gun nutz, they criticize because they’re stoopid and they’re gun nutz. Anyhoo, for the slow of mind: This post is a criticism of the heavy-handed tactics of both the Clinton Justice Department and the Bush Justice Department. In case you haven’t noticed, they both suck.

And it does illustrate one of the problems in dealing with the Waco incident. You cannot criticize the heavy-handed actions of the government without being viewed as one who is defending David Koresh. So, to be clear, Koresh was nuts. Koresh had illegal weapons. Koresh is to blame for the deaths of those people. But none of that excuses the tactics used on the compound. Period. I don’t care how crazy you are, it’s doesn’t justify setting the building you’re in on fire.

Update 2: I called this guy an idiot. Having read his response, I don’t think he’s an idiot. He still gets most of his facts wrong but he’s not an idiot. Disingenuous, sure, but not an idiot. Apologies to the Blue Texan.

Update 3: I rescind my apology. Having read his update in which we learn he cannot write in a manner in which one can determine who he is calling a yahoo; that he says I called Reno a blood-thirsty murderer who did it intentionally; and makes the reference to Clinton-hating (see rule #3); and other misstatements, the term idiot stands.

That’s the truth.

Says the gun nut:

Last month, a gunmaker friend of mine was audited for two weeks by the BATFE, who found the usual number of small errors and omissions in 20 years’ worth of 4473s, and two rifles that couldn’t be accounted for. Then next week he was informed that his manufacturer’s license, which was up for renewal, would not be renewed. No reason given. His life’s work and his livelihood, and that of a dozen other people, down the toilet without a word why. Our government at work.

I mentioned this to a friend of mine who is an elected official (Republican) and a Bush supporter (though rapidly running out of patience) and asked if this sort of thing wasn’t odd under an administration that is supposedly friendly toward gun owners. After all, smart bureaucrats take their direction from the top, and a high-handed BATFE was something that we expected to see from Bubba Clinton, not from W.

His answer surprised me.

“There’s a lot of that,” he said. “Not only the BATFE, but the Fish & Wildlife Service is refusing to grant CITES permits without giving a reason, and often in contradiction of their local offices. They’re screwing the hunters, too.”

“Why?” I asked.

“Because Bush isn’t watching the store. He’s so preoccupied with Iraq that these guys are running amok and no one’s stopping them.”

Really? I thought it just ran in the family since daddy Bush ordered the ATF to restrict the importation certain semi-automatic firearms. At first, I thought daddy Bush was just mad about the whole jack-booted thugs comment. But that occurred after the 1989 executive order to ban ugly weapons. And sonny Bush supports the ban on weapons that look like assault weapons. I think it runs in the family.

The Bushes are more Connecticut than Texas.

Gene, being accused of anti-gun bias, writes:

As for just reporting the facts, the program was designed to illicit (sic) comments from my guests. I think we succeeded. Mike Cohen, Frank Cagle and Terry Frank each offered their opinions. If you review the segment, you won’t hear me offer my opinion. I’m simply the moderator.

The email he was responding to was this:

The moderator for this program kept referring to Greg Lambert and Tim Burchett (sp?) as ‘taking the law into their own hands.’ Those two men didn’t take anything into their own hands, – they protected their person and their property within the confines of the law. If they had of taken things into their own hands, they’d have shot those scumbags instead of calling the cops and feeding them cookies. I found the anti-gun bias of the moderator disgusting and disingenuous. But the media is SO far left, I should never expect reporting consisting of just the facts without opinion interjected. Shame on you for allowing this!

So, to be clear, Gene will respond to an angry email that alleges left bias and gets the facts wrong (such as kept referring to Greg Lambert and Tim Burchett (sp?) as ‘taking the law into their own hands.’, which was only said once. I suppose it’s easy to respond when the complainant has their facts wrong. However, when the complaints are factually correct, I hear the crickets chirping. For example, still no addressing the issues of:

Advice from the local press that can get you arrested or killed;

Or that if WATE was correct, Tim Burchett broke the law;

Or that time when a reporter misrepresented the assault weapons ban and then got all hysterical when called on it, while sticking to their original claim that was likely obtained by an anti-gun group.

Or the fact you’ve not done a story on Haslam belonging to an anti-gun group?

I guess if I want responses, I have to act all angry and accuse them of being liberals?

It’s not all bad. I still commend Tim Miller for correcting an error.

When the law means nothing to the Supreme Court, lawlessness ensues:

The state Constitution is a wonderful document, much of which is older than the U.S. Constitution and in many ways superior to the federal one about protecting individual rights and limiting the power of the politicians running state government.

However, the state Supreme Court had been using a small scalpel to judiciously trim this right and that until the current court decided that a chainsaw is better.

“Nationwide, I don’t know any court that has twisted the law like this,” says Bruce Ledewitz, a Duquesne University law professor and constitutional law expert. It’s far worse than the others because this court brazenly bends the law like an obsessive/compulsive contortionist starring in a Mummenschanz stage show.

To wit:

The state Constitution explicitly says, “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.” It’s much better than the Second Amendment. But since the court ignores the text in its rulings in gun cases, it can and has allowed the government to establish rules about gun ownership, Ledewitz says.

And by essentially ignoring the reason for the tax-uniformity clause in the state Constitution (to end favors for special interests), the court says it’s OK to play favorites.

Fight or comply? There’s an article about it herethat got me to thinking. I’ve said before to teach kids to fight back in case of a school shooting. I stand by that. That said, fight back whenever there’s a threat of physical harm (assault, battery, rape, if someone is trying to kill you, if someone is in your house, etc.). But here’s the rub, if it came down to just property, I’d let it go. If someone threatens me for my cash, it’s theirs. If they want my car, it’s theirs. I have insurance. That said, it’d be hard to determine if someone meant me harm or not. But, warranted or not, I would not use force merely to defend material things. It’s not worth it.

Rich relays a tale of a time he was robbed and emphasizes training.

Reader Carl emails:

While reading your latest posts on the anti-gun antics taking place in Knoxville, I was thinking about our courts, and sent the message below to my correspondents. I discovered something interesting, though; a court decision which appears to invalidate the “Interstate Commerce” justification for licensing firearms dealers. I wonder if any of your readers may have knowledge of this?

Quote: A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. Thus, it may not exact a license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce. McGoldrick v. Berwind-White Co., 309 U.S. 33, 56-58, 60 S.Ct. 388, 397, 398, 128 A.L.R. 876
CarlS

—– Original Message —–
Changing Moral Values and Criminal Courts
Moral relativism is nothing new. The courts have practiced it continuously since about, oh, 1936. How else to explain why the Supreme Court once ruled, repeatedly, that every man has a birthright to own and carry firearms without a license, that a state may not impose a charge, license, or fee for the exercise and enjoyment of a religious or (any) right, versus these craven rulings now which emasculate the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth, and other Amendments? Absent relativism, the courts would have to publicly state that a Court was wrong, either then or now. And once they admit the court is not infallible, why should anyone adhere to their rulings?

We have civil and we have criminal courts. Why is right and wrong judged differently in these venues? Why is it that juries most often interpret the law in civil actions, whereas judges do the interpreting in criminal actions? Why is it that judges refuse to allow the words “jury nullification” to be used in courtrooms? Is there another reason why we have “Criminal” courts? Hence my conclusion that any court which does not hold firm to the written Constitution, any court which “interprets” the Constitution, is itself a criminal court. Q.E.D.
Carl Shires

—– QUOTE TO REMEMBER —–
In philosophy, moral relativism takes the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition’s truth. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences. Moral relativism differs from moral pluralism and from value-pluralism — which acknowledges the co-existence of opposing ideas and practices, but accepts limits to differences, such as when vital human needs get violated. Moral relativism, in contrast, grants the possibility of moral judgments that do not such accept such limits.
From Wikipedia

REFERENCE: U.S. SUPREME COURT, MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)
………. We have here something quite different, for example, from a tax on the income of one who engages in religious activities or a tax on property used or employed in connection with those activities. It is one thing to impose a tax on the income or property of a preacher. It is quite another thing to exact a tax from him for the privilege of delivering a sermon. The tax imposed by the City of Jeannette is a flat license tax, the payment of which is a condition of the exercise of these constitutional privileges. The power to tax the exercise of a privilege is the power to control or suppress its enjoyment. Magnano Co. v. Hamilton, 292 U.S. 40, 44, 45 S., 54 S.Ct. 599, 601, and cases cited. Those who can tax the exercise of this religious practice can make its exercise so costly as to deprive it of the resources necessary for its maintenance. Those who can tax the privilege of engaging in this form of missionary evangelism can close its doors to all those who do not have a full purse. Spreading religious beliefs in this ancient and honorable manner would thus be denied the needy. Those who can deprive religious groups of their colporteurs can take from them a part of the vital power of the press which has survived from the Reformation. It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant [319 U.S. 105, 113] if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax – a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. Thus, it may not exact a license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce (McGoldrick v. Berwind-White Co., 309 U.S. 33, 56-58, 60 S.Ct. 388, 397, 398, 128 A.L.R. 876), although it may tax the property used in, or the income derived from, that commerce, so long as those taxes are not discriminatory. Id., 309 U.S. at page 47, 60 S.Ct. at page 392, 128 A.L.R. 876 and cases cited. A license tax applied to activities guaranteed by the First Amendment would have the same destructive effect. It is true that the First Amendment, like the commerce clause, draws no distinction between license taxes, fixed sum taxes, and other kinds of taxes. But that is no reason why we should shut our eyes to the nature of the tax and its destructive influence. The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down.

I’m no lawyer but I’m pretty sure taxing a right is illegal (poll taxes, for example). Thoughts?

A paintball minigun.

At this moment almost at midnight on Monday Michael Richards is going through something I can not describe. It is part confessional part testimony and so many things that are difficult to quantify.

For those that have not heard here is the story.

Tomorrow afternoon or maybe even early this morning this will be on YouTube. It is an unprecedented development that there is now a digital library available for free and is online in just a few hours.

This extension of instant news and knowledge will have a profound affect on everyone’s lives. There are endless possibilities. The great danger is that any mistake a person makes will be captured in a detail never before possible and will last forever. The world just got several billion new cameras and their owners can have any Television program or live event on the Internet in less than an hour.

Update:

In less than the time it took to write this post the video is up here. It is on the Drudge Report in less than eight minutes.

The video mentioned here is now online here. A few notes:

Gene Patterson acknowledges WATE hasn’t covered Haslam’s involvement in this group.

The general consensus shared by the panel (and Glenn and me) is that Haslam didn’t know all the details about the group he joined.

Apparently, Knoxville has been having gun buybacks. A reader and I plan on attending the next one with a fistful of dollars in protest to such a stupid idea.

Would it have killed you folks to acknowledge that some blogger no one has ever heard of broke the story?

Update: Oh, and Frank Cagle said something to the effect of The Kel-Tec is the weapon of choice for about a dozen state legislators. I have one and recommend them. That’d be some cool marketing: Four out of five legislators agree . . .

Fox to run new special: If We Ran The ‘If I Did It’ Interview

Did I do it right?

Betty Bean of the Halls News Shopper has Breaking News on KnoxViews concerning Kane Stackhouse who is the 19 year old that pulled a .25 caliber Beretta Tomcat on Knox County Commissioner Greg “Lumpy” Lambert.

Stackhouse will be charged Tuesday in the Knox County Grand Jury for a murder that occurred ten hours before he drew down on Lumpy Lambert.

This occurred just after Knox County Commissioner Craig Leuthold made a supposedly “humorous” resolution to honor Greg “Lumpy” Lambert as “Quick Draw Lambert” and to make today “Make My Day” day in County Commission.

Knox County Commission Chairman Scott Moore made the comment that Leuthold’s “humorous” resolution was not appropriate.

Tam:

It’s probably Bush’s fault. Or that guy down the street who owns a Hummer H2 (which isn’t really a Hummer at all, just a Suburban with a codpiece…)

In light of some recent postings on Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam belonging to anti-gun group, I was going back through some links. Looks like Tennessee has another mayor that has recently allied himself with an anti-gun group: Shelby County Mayor A.C. Warton. Unlike Knoxville, the Memphis press has covered the issue:

Wharton will travel to Chicago later this week to meet with Mayor Richard Daley to learn how that city plans to fight its own problems with juvenile crime. “Our kids are not going out into the woods and finding an AK-47 under a brick somewhere,” Wharton said. “Somebody’s bringing those guns in here.”

Mr. Mayor, AK-47s are illegal in Chicago and Chicago still ranks quite high when it comes to murder and violent crime. They’re generally illegal in Memphis too.

15 minutes and two phone calls:

It took 15 minutes and two phone calls to 911 to get deputies to respond to an emergency call made by State Sen. Tim Burchett as he broke up a burglary attempt at gunpoint. Now he questions why it took so long for deputies to arrive.

Burchett called it unacceptable. I guess it takes something like this happening to a Senator before it’s looked at.

Terry Frank brought it up on the boob tube:

Gene asked Frank Cagle, Mike Cohen, and me if Mayor Haslam’s alliance with Bloomberg might have an effect if Haslam ran for Governor. We all agreed it would. Cagle said something to the effect that he could envision a 30 second spot and he reminded viewers of Al Gore’s problems in Tennessee over his weak Second amendment stance.

I didn’t catch it but, hopefully, they’ll have video of it soon here.

It’s widely rumored that Haslam has his eyes on higher office (Governor, is what I hear). That’s when this will bite him in the rear. His political opponents in heavily pro-gun Tennessee will point out that Haslam is supporting New York style gun control and that he is affiliated with the anti-gun Joyce Foundation.

This is also the first time I’ve seen Mr. Haslam’s membership in the group discussed in the mainstream media. Thanks to Gene and Terry for bringing it up.

I have yet to hear back from the Haslam person but they did have some pressing matters pop up.

Jeff Cooper is viewed as, basically, the gunnie guru, the father of modern firearms technique, and a host of other things. But he occasionally got it wrong. I submit as evidence the concept of the scout rifle. Seriously, that rifle does nothing great and only does some things OK. He also got Glocks wrong. I know, the 1911 die-hards will tell me why their kung-fu is better than mine. But, I don’t care. The 1911 is a fine weapon. The Glock is too. So is the Sig, H&K, and a host of other combat pistols. It’s a matter of preference, really.

Flavored ammo?

Via Joe, comes this:

My position is that the formation of the Libertarian Party did more to destroy freedom in the United States (and therefore, the world) than any event since. The Libertarian Party acts as a magnet for liberty-minded individuals and has allowed both major parties to drift further from liberty, as the potential Ron Pauls of the world move into a world of endless bickering. The two major parties, freed of liberty-minded voices, move faster towards the ultimate goal.

I can’t disagree.

Cause 911 is a fake life saver:

Throughout the history of 911, problems with 911 have been belligerence of operators, operator skepticism of reporting parties and repeat pranksters, unclear calls without precise locations, various policies on 911 hang-ups, an over-burdening and overwhelming of the system, and general burn-out of operators remaining on the job. As I mentioned in my last piece, some 911 operators have even been found asleep at the console. For many citizens, a placed 911 call simply goes unanswered or is met with a busy signal.

911 is merely a backup, as far as I’m concerned. One should be prepared to deal with things without them but should also be secure in the knowledge that help is on the way. Be prepared because 5 or 10 or 15 minutes of waiting for the cavalry is a lifetime if you happen to be fighting for your life. As evidenced by the examples above, don’t rely on them but use them.

My personal opinion is that the purpose of 911 is to send over some guys to do paperwork and recommend a good carpet cleaner.

The CA:

They are not of one race, one gender, or one generation.

They are of one mind.

It’s time.

It’s time if they live in a gated community in East Memphis or a poor neighborhood in South Memphis.

It’s time if they’re postal workers or preachers, and it’s time if they’re retirees or entrepreneurs.

It’s time if they’ve had guns pointed in their faces while working in a neighbor’s yard during broad daylight, or while working behind the counter of a convenience store in the middle of the night.

For all of them, it’s time.

“I hate to say it,” says Scott Carroll, owner of the Bullzeye Shooting Range on Lamar Avenue, “but business is good.”

So crime pays. Or at least it does for businesses dedicated to helping people protect themselves in a place rated the second-most violent in America, according to the FBI’s national report for 2005. That report showed the Memphis metro area recorded 1,197 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, trailing only Florence, S.C.

Bullzeye is one of several shooting ranges in the metro area that offer the eight-hour training course required by state law to obtain a handgun carry permit. Classes are typically full, and at Range Master on South Mendenhall classes are booked weeks in advance.

“We’re here because of the increase in crime in the city, and for the safety of our family,” says Sheree Hester, a 29-year-old pharmacist taking the course at Range Master with her husband, Ernest.

Good to see more law-abiding folks arming themselves. There was no discussion of penis size as far as I could tell.

Geez, what is with this country lately? Anyway:

Pit bull owners more likely to be criminals

Uh, no. Criminals are more likely to own pit bulls for a variety of reasons.

After quitting smoking, I took up Hot Tamales. Like two packs a day. I’ve now gone over a week without them. Withdrawals include no more sugary film over my teeth and people stop coming by the office to steal a handful.

and men with small brains have blogs:

So, watch out if you’re out shopping tomorrow, they may be lots of men out compensating for their own inadequacies at the local gun shop. No doubt they will have travelled there in their big V8.

Yes, the big cars and guns are a sure sign of a man with a tiny pecker. Such original thought. I mean, it hadn’t occurred to me that so much of who I am is due to having a small penis. That explains the gun safe full of evil black rifles and the truck! It’s so obvious now. I clearly want to have weapons so I can kill everyone. And I like big ass cars so I can contribute to global warming thereby furthering my goal of killing everyone. Because I got a have a small nubbin and everyone must have a bigger member than I. If only I had a massive wang, I’d be a pacifist who drives a hybrid, content with the knowledge that I was adequate. Yes, large cocks make you a pussy. Makes perfect sense. Anyhoo:

My thoughts are that gun ownership might actually teach many that they can be far more anti-social with a gun.

Good ol’ hoplophobia. Ok, sparky, inanimate objects don’t teach much of anything. Well, other than through their misuse. Misuse being the key term there for the obviously well-endowed, small-brained guy.

Update: Oh yeah. Google news now does news alerts for blog entries. That’s how I found this thought-non-provoking bit of stupid. It’s amusing to read anti-gun blogs for the sheer nincompoopery.

Really. OK, sorta kinda.

Another installment of vomit from my mind.

No, Mr. Spam Man, the number one rule of investing is Don’t buy stocks based on tips you get from spammers via email.

Fucking windows. No, not that kind but same to them. New house has a lot of windows. Blinds and window treatments cost a small fortune.

The wife wants to put up Christmas decorations this weekend. God help me. She’s cool with the rule and I told her any decorations not going out will go to the trash.

A particular company that processes data with whom I deal with regularly sends me so much mail that I cannot possibly read all of it. They charge fees per task. Each particular task results in a bill. They send me a bill, for example, for $4. They’re called statements, guys. Get with the 1990s.

To the annoyed lady in the Buick at the 4 way stop: Yes, I know it was my turn to go. You were impatient and angry with me as I did not go but instead motioned you go go. You see, you’re driving a Buick, which is nature’s way of warning other drivers that you’re a danger to them. That and the blue hair. So, I did realize it was my turn. I did not let you go first because I was nice; rather, I let you because I assumed you couldn’t drive.

Speaking of 4 way stops, let’s just dispatch with the real legal rule about right of way and incorporate the way it really is into law: shittiest car goes first.

Plasma TeeVees: Despite being thinner than regular TeeVees, they sure do seem to weigh a lot more. And, despite being thinner, the manufacturers put them in boxes about four times the size of the TeeVee.

Never, ever pull someone’s finger. No good can come of it.

I am no longer amazed by statistical improbability in poker games. You’ll recall my bad beat here. I had two more at the GBR in Reno that cost me about $600. But, last week, I was dealt pocket kings three hands in a row (won one, lost two but still came out ahead). Tuesday night, I was dealt 7/4 three times in a row. Each is probably as likely (though, I’d say two kings is slightly less likely due the fact that up to 8 cards make 7/4 but only four make KK – I could calculate it but that’s no fun) but only one amazed me.

It’s sad that people actually need to be told this. But I guess it beats tattooing Do Not Shake on their butts.