Atheists in the Three Percent

In a recent posting on leverguns forum the question was asked:

Hmmmmm,... so, you think Christians are forcing Atheists to financially support Christianity?

Yes, I do.

Every time tax money is used to support or promote religious belief, the collectivists are stealing from me to support a belief I do not hold to. That's an aspect of socialism and I want no part of it.

In the Big Picture, there is a reality the God talkers had better face if they want this to end well. A significant minority of the so called "three percent" are atheists. Another minority are pagans. I know of a few gays and some Jews in there too. Get over it.

The only ideological purity test I have for an ally in in the fight against the collectivists is a belief in the rights and liberties that were codified by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and that these rights extend to all sapients regardless of race, creed, color, religion, sexual orientation, etc. I don't give a crap if you're an anarchist, libertarian, atheist or Catholic. Even Baptists are welcome.

You can save your ideological carping for the day after the collectivist boot is shoved back up their own arses or you can look in the mirror to see why you lost.

It Takes a Tragedy

David Michaels writes:

In the U.S., we see an average of one gun-related homicide every 45 minutes, or 32 each day.* These are usually treated as isolated incidents, until a horrific event like the Virginia Tech massacre reawakens the public and strengthens public health advocates who are attempting to prevent gun violence. More

As I was reading the above and some of the comments I was struck by an "Aha!" moment. This guy is not interested in logic or in reason. He wants the criminals to have the upper hand because the fear they cause will give him power over others. He is like the Neanderthal men in The Clan of the Cave Bear who would not let a woman even touch a weapon lest the power of the men be diminished. He secretly imagines himself at the top of the hierarchy and wants to preserve its power at all costs.

Buy a Policy or Go to Jail

According to this and this (PDF), the new House "Health care" bill requires you either purchase an "acceptable" health insurance plan or be subject to criminal penalties.  However, it will be the IRS that will enforce this and they will probably opt for civil penalties whenever possible.  Once the IRS has determined you owe them, the burden of proof is reversed and you have to prove you don't.

Billy Beck emails me (quoted by permission)

They will play bloody hell at attempting to collect one thin dime from me.

*Never*. I will go to prison, first.

"For thirty years, I have cultivated my love of my native land, and I will neither expect nor miss your leniency." (Solzhenitsyn -- "Gulag")

Love 'im or hate 'im you have to admire his determination to live free.

More here.

Giving New Meaning to the Term "Honest Cop"

See video here

Then read David Codrea's commentary.

The more of I see of this kind of arrogance, the less sanguine I am about the situation in the US ending well.

Some Thoughts about Fort Hood

Right now the blogosphere appears to be buzzing with the revelation that the active shooter at Fort Hood -- Major Malik Nadal Hasan -- was one of those dreaded Muslims.  Jeez!

The problem with Hasan was Hasan.  He was miserable. He wanted to die.  He wanted his fifteen minutes of fame by taking people not responsible for his misery with him.  He was an arsehole.

Howard Nemerov has this to add (First responders at Fort Hood: Fox News gets it wrong)

Ron Borsch is consultant trainer for the Bedford (Ohio) Police Department, specializing in tactically training first-responders (bio in previous article). In an email today, Borsch summarized his up-to-date research into how mass murders are stopped:

My latest stats have not changed much, but CIVILIANS lead aborting rapid mass murder at 71%, and with a SINGLE actor initiating the stoppage, and often completing it at 82% of the total.

When police abort rapid mass murder, it is 29%, and with a "Single Officer Lifesaving Others"(C) SOLO at 75% of the total.

The "POSSE" Theory of rounding up a formation of officers to combat a lone (98%) and suicidal (90%) active killer in the precious 1 to 3 "Golden Minutes"(C) of a perishable opportunity has NO tracking history of success that I can find.

[Note: Borsch defines the active killer as “one who commits rapid mass murder, (4 or more intentionally killed). Active Killers typically do NOT negotiate or take hostages.” He defines rapid mass murder as one that occurs in 20 minutes or less.]

How about that.  Civilians stop 71% of  the mass murder rampages and three quarters of the remainder are stopped by a single officer.  This makes sense since it is generally those "civilians" who are the intended victims.  I'll also wager that those civilians who stop an active shooter are either armed or familiar enough with guns to know when the aggressor is reloading and vulnerable.

See also: L. Neil Smith

ATF Admits They Have a National Gun Registry.

A press release from the New Jersey  Democratic State Committee (Also at JPFO) reveals what peaceable gun owners have suspected for a long time: The ATF is building a national registry of firearms and firearm owners.

E-trace is a nationwide database maintained by the ATF that lists a firearm's first purchaser, date of purchase and the retailer from which it was purchased. The information is compiled from police records of gun purchases provided by local departments, but until today was only accessible by the ATF and the police department that provided it.

This comes as no surprise but it's nice to see to confirmed.  Two immediate consequences I see are:

1. The Brady Bill supposedly made it illegal for any Federal agency to build such a database.  The ATF now admits ignoring the law, cementing the perception of it as a lawless agency.
2. Gun owners who hesitated to act politically because, "I don't want to get on a list" can stop worrying -- you're already on a list -- and start acting.

Difference between Pro Gun and Anti Gun People.

Dave Workman's Column of Nov 3 illusrates what I think is a fundamental difference between the gun banner and the gun rights personae.

Ralph Fascitelli, President of Washington CeaseFire intends to exploit the recent killing of Seattle Police Officer Timothy Q. Brenton to promote a ban on so-called "assault weapons." He is quoted by Nina Shapiro writing for the Seattle Weekly as saying,

Maybe this particular [police victim] wasn't killed with an assault weapon, but the next one maybe will be

In the meantime, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is trying to raise money for the Brenton Family Assistance Fund.

In my experience, the believer in gun control sees any death where a firearms was the weapon as a political opportunity. The gun rights defender, on the other hand, sees a tragedy. That difference is not very subtle. To the gun grabber, the individual is a tools and is only valuable in inasmuch as he can further statist controls. The gun rights advocate views each individual -- even gun grabbers -- as a person with value independent of any agenda.