Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Another Idiot Politician Speaks

I do not recall anyone ever asking me to pay taxes.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

The Price of Freedom

The price of freedom is often too high for those who claim to want it. They need to understand that it only works if freedom extends to peaceable actions they disagree with and may not even like. Michael Z. Williamson does pretty good job of summarizing that in The Post in Which I Piss Off EVERYBODY.

He is right. Those who claim to want freedom have to prove it.

Monday, February 11, 2013

Tide as a Black Market Currency?

According to this article, the detergent Tide has become a currency in the illegal drug trade. That is really only a small part of the reasons for it being a popular target for theft but it does illustrate the creativity of the people in the selling end of the illegal drug trade.

Suds for Drugs

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

The Queen James Bible

Buy it at Amazon

James 1 of England is, perhaps, best known for the version of the Christian Bible that bears his name. In 1604, he commissioned a transation from Latin to English to correct perceived probems in earlier translations. This effort certainly helped the spread of Protestantism and, arguably, enabled the further division of Christianity.

When James 1 was crowned king of England in 1603, a common joke amongst the populace was, "Elizabeth was King, now James is Queen!" This was a reference to his personal life which involved several extramarital homosexual affairs. It is ironic then that a new translation of his iconic Bible should appear "...edited to prevent homophobic misinterpretation."

In all, the editors only changed eight verses and they are explained here.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

The Americans With No Abilities Act

Too good to pass up:

President Barack Obama and the Democratic Senate are considering sweeping legislation that will provide new benefits for many Americans. The Americans With No Abilities Act is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

"Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said California Sen. Barbara Boxer. "We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability (POI) to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing."

In a Capitol Hill press conference, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed to the success of the U.S. Postal Service, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has an excellent record of hiring Persons with No Ability (63 percent).

Under the Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million mid-level positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance.

Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees. The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability (POI) into middle-management positions, and give a tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the Americans With No Abilities Act contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the non-abled, banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as, "Do you have any skills or experience that relate to this job?"

"As a non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, Mich., due to her inability to remember righty tighty, lefty loosey. "This new law should be real good for people like me. I'll finally have job security." With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Sen. Dick Durbin: "As a senator with no abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her inadequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation and a good salary for doing so."

Found at "The View From Chaos Manor" by Jerry E. Pournelle

H/T to The Libertarian Enterprise

Another Day in a Gun Free Paradise.

Flash Mob Mayhem: Violent Groups Of Teens Leave NYC Businesses In Ruins.

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — Violent, thieving mobs have been making headlines across the country for the past few years, and now they have hit New York City.

And Maurice Dubois reported in this CBS 2 investigation, the teen mobs have left neighborhoods worried as businesses take matters into their own hands.

Read the rest here.

At the end, the author ask the question, "What do you think needs to be done to stop the teenage mobs?"

I suggest shotguns and buckshot

Monday, February 4, 2013

What I Need to Excercise a Right.

Grant Cunningham raises a good point in his recent essay, The concept of 'need'.

If a prohibitionist asks why we "need" something, he is presupposing that the exercise of a fundamental right is contingent upon showing good reason to exercise that right. The idea that humans have rights simply because they exist is completely bypassed, and the concept that rights are something a government confers upon subjects is cemented in the very structure of the question. By answering, in any form or manner, the question of need we tacitly accept their premise that rights do not exist beyond what someone else is willing to allow. Even entertaining the question plays into their trap.

I agree that letting the antis frame any part of the debate is a bad idea. Do not let your opponent talk about "need" until he or she first agrees there is a fundamental right to effective self defense. Emphasize that "effective" in this case means that the victim will have an equal or better chance than the criminal of escaping the encounter unharmed.

Frankly, I don't think the anti's even care about what you "need" because they don't believe you have any right to resist criminal attacks. That is why they always argue, "Just give them what they want." The "need" argument is just a rhetorical trick to move the debate to a place where we can be attacked. Concentrating first on the civil rights issue gives you more leverage. The anti's don't want to talk about rights because, deep down inside their scabby little souls, they just hate guns and the culture that guns are a part of. I am convinced they seek the deliberate and systematic destruction of the entire unique "gun culture".

Another part of the "need" debate that, I think, works against us is the assertion by some gunnies that a percentage of bullets fired by a defender in a typical self defense scenario will miss their intended target. That may be true and the figure I see tossed around a lot is 70% to 80%. That means, on average, seven or eight of every ten bullets fired will miss.

Now look at that a from an anti-gun point of view.

"Oh My God! You need high capacity magazines so you can miss seven times out of ten? Do you think those bullet are just going to disappear? No, they are going to hit something or someone else. You must be some kind of irresponsible idiot to be willing to endanger innocent bystanders just so you can feeeeel safer."

Unfortunately there have been some recent high profile police shootings where bystanders were injured by stray bullets. These help reinforce the anti-gunners' perception that gun owners are irresponsible loons so be careful.