The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
Countertop has decided to give the virtual finger to Blogger and start up again with a WordPress blog. I will have to adjust my link to his new location.
I like WordPress, but there can be problems with running the MySQL back end on your TV’s DVR. It’s also a problem if you kick the trip button on the surge strip and reset your time several weeks into the future. But these problems can be mitigated by not hosting your blog on whatever computers you have scattered around your house.
I alluded to the fact that the gun ban movement was desperate to keep gun control on the radar screen. What I suspect has been happening, is the anti-gun folk expected the Democratic Congress to give them some real traction on their issues, and, are now finding themselves shut out, with a few sympathetic ears in the leadership, but a leadership who nonetheless aren’t willing to do anything. This has thrown them into a bit of a panic. While I don’t think we can safely call the Democrats our friends on the gun issue yet, far from it, I do think it’s good to point out when some Democrats do things that warrant our praise.
Sure, we have two faced Democrats, like Ed Rendell, who have a long and glorious history of doing everything they can to crap all over our right to bear arms, then suddenly give lip service to us to win elections, while undermining us behind the scenes. To be fair, we have more than few Republicans that fit into this category as well. But we do have some Democrats that are really on our side. Max Baucus of Montana is a good example of a Democrat who is willing to take up leadership positions on outdoor sporsman’s issues and work to preserve our rights. I point you to this press release by Max Baucus, where he announces he’s heading up the Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus along with Mike Crapo (R-ID):
2nd Amendment Protection: Baucus said he will fight any attempts to erode Montanans rights to keep and bear arms.
Now, we’ve heard this line from Democrats before. We should be skeptical of any Democrat who says this, and doesn’t put his money where his mouth is.   One could point out that the CSC is mostly a pro-hunting caucus rather than a pro-gun caucus, and this would be true. But he’s cosponsoring S.388, the National Reciprocity Bill, and that speaks loudly.
I may have problems with Democrats on other issues, and even the National Reciprocity Bill I oppose as it’s currently drafted because of federalism concerns, but I think it’s good to highlight Democrats who are willing to fight for us and thank them for their support.
For those of us in the gun blogosphere, I think it’s important to highlight another reason to loathe the politics of Ed Rendell. Let’s see what Ed hast to say on guns:
“I believe with all my heart that we need more gun control†– Press Conference 10/3/2006
“I believe with every ounce of feeling that I have that there are far too many guns.” – Reason Magazine 7/1998
“I just can’t say publicly what we want to do, we have to take these things slowly.” – Overheard conversation with an anti-gun activist while running for Governor.
“What I’m going to try mostly to do is convince the legislature to let Philadelphia have the right to pass its own gun laws. We had that, when I was mayor, up until 1996 – then they took it away from us. I’d like them to give us that right back,” [Sebastian: It was taken away because the city tried to pass its own assault weapons ban and wouldn’t issue carry licenses]
“The sheer cost of defending these suits would be hard on the gun industry”.
“The impact of so many cities’ filing suit all at once would be monumental for manufacturers. . . . They don’t have the deep pockets of the tobacco industry, and it could bring them to the negotiating table a lot sooner.”
“I might sue the entertainment industry for glorifying gun violence.”
“I favor the one-gun-a-month legislation that’s passed in Virginia and South Carolina, which limits handgun sales to one gun per month”
“I thank the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence for their continuing support and their commitment to making Pennsylvania a safer place to live.”
“Neither the City nor the State are in the business of selling weapons; we are in the business of confiscating them.” Letter to a Pennsylvania resident, December 7, 1993
“To the people of Philadelphia, guns aren’t used for sport, guns aren’t used for recreation. Guns aren’t even very successfully used for protection. Guns are used for killing people.” ABC Nightline, May 26, 1998
“Rendell said that, as a city prosecutor, he had never seen a defensive gun use, and that as far as he was concerned, he had never heard of a defensive gun use. He said that he didn’t believe they occurred.” – John Lott relaying a confrontation with Rendell in 1999
And yet Rendell likes to say:
“There is nothing that I want to do to take a gun away from a hunter or a law-abiding citizen.”
Pardon me if I think you’re full of shit, Ed.
I am not going to agree to raise sales taxes to cover a property tax reduction. Don’t we have a big surplus right now? Ed Rendell is a tax and spend liberal. How did this guy ever paint himself as a moderate? I’ll take a property tax reduction from the surplus, please.
In Philadelphia, where the city takes an additional penny in sales tax, the overall rate would go from 7 percent to 8 percent. That would rival New York City, where state and local sales taxes add up to 8.375 percent.
Rendell’s proposal would bring Pennsylvania in line with New Jersey, which raised its sales tax last year to 7 percent.
Oh yeah, imitating New York and New Jersey. Where do I sign up? Because Pennsylvania just really needs higher taxes. Thank god for term limits, but I have to deal with this crap for another four years!
The two weeks leading up to the Super Bowl have given those who follow football and sports in general a deluge of articles and interviews filled with statistics and predictions. Examples are here, here, here, and here, and those were just the ones I could come up with in a five minute span. Sports talk radio and television has been filled with talking heads saying how the Indianapolis Colts will play one way and the Chicago Bears will employ such-and-such a strategy. The stations must be desperate for content, because this is a complete waste of time. History has shown us that such detailed predictions about the Super Bowl, aside from which team will emerge victorious, usually turn out to be completely wrong.
Consider the Patriots / Panthers Super Bowl in 2004. Both teams were known for their defensive prowess, and thus, TV talking heads and writers predicted a defensive struggle. For the first and third quarters, it was just that – no points were scored. However, in the other half of the game, it was an offensive shootout. The teams put up a combined 24 points in the second quarter and 37 points in the fourth. The defenses were so brutally physical in the odd-number quarters that they were worn down in the even-numbered ones.
The Super Bowl in 2003 had a similar feel to this year’s. Both teams were considered excellent. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers were the defensive powerhouse whose offense was spotty at best. The Oakland Raiders offensive attack was tops in the league. Many predicted a close game with Oakland coming out on top, however, Tampa Bay’s defense intercepted Oakland QB Rich Gannon five times in a 48-21 blowout.
I myself predicted that the Philadelphia Eagles would get blown out in 2005 by the New England Patriots. Aside from the fact that I was right about the Patriots’ victory, I was wrong on all other counts.
I subscribe to the old school theory that all teams expound but very little actually put into practice: that championships are won with defense, running, and special teams. While a good air attack makes for exciting football, it is mitigated by those other three elements. A good defense speaks for itself – it prevents yardage and points. A quality running game controls the clock, keeps passing-oriented offenses off the field, and keeps your defense well-rested. Good special teams play keeps passing offenses deep in their own territory, forcing them to go on long drives and increasing the possibility that they will make mistakes to a good defense.
So, instead of writing a long winded column on how Peyton Manning must utilize the play-action fake and go deep to his tight end down middle of the field to beat the Bears cover-2 defense, I will say this: whichever team plays the best on defense, runs for quality yards, and makes the important plays on special teams will win the game. Other than that I have absolutely no idea who is going to win. They’re both good teams who deserve to be there.
Make some good food, get together with some friends, partake of a few beverages of choice, and enjoy a modern American tradition, even if the only sources of entertainment are the commercials and the halftime show.
I found some better video of the Boston Bomb Scare press conference in case anyone missed it:
** The video which once appeared here was removed by youtube. **
I’ve taken a few pot shots at Ed Rendell on this blog, and certainly will take many more, but I feel like I should say some good things about him in the tradition of “If you don’t have something nice to say…”, etc. I will say that Ed Rendell passes the douche test. What is the douche test? It’s pretty simple “Would you go out and have a beer with the guy?”. Ed Rendell passes. Who wouldn’t pass? John Kerry, definitely. Joe Biden. Al Gore. Probably Hillary Clinton too, but Bill passes.
Another thing I will say about our Governor, he’s a shrewed politician, and I think could have a shot at being a presidential candidate if he chose to run. He’s managed to successfully paint himself as a moderate despite a pretty liberal record. As governor, he’s kept mostly quiet on issues that could get him in trouble, and I’m happy that on a few issues, he seems to lack the nanny gene that a lot of liberals seem to have expressed in abundance. And while I think his record contains a strong element of luck, he has a lot of accomplishments he can tout.
Plus, I will admit, this is pretty admirable behavior, from his Wiki page:
The mass snowballing of former Dallas Cowboys coach Jimmy Johnson is often attributed to Rendell. As the story goes, Rendell wagered twenty dollars that the person sitting next to him could not hit Johnson in the head with a snowball at an Eagles-Cowboys football game at Veterans Stadium. The incident ‘snowballed’ and resulted in many fans hurling snowballs at Johnson.
OK, so there’s my nice Ed Rendell post. But I really don’t like the guy’s politics, so back to bashing from here on out :)
I won’t do regular cat blogging because I don’t own a cat, and I think cat blogging is stupid, but I thought this was amusing and creative:
At first I thought maybe this was part of Ed Rendell’s new energy plan. I think I could probably make a kid sized one that could solve the problem of childhood obesity. If Ed wants to pass another new tax on fast food, I’d be happy to collect some tax grant money and get right to work on the problem!
I know there are folks out there who think carrying in anything other than leather to be an abomination in the eyes of God. I got my carry license when I was 28 years old, which, I’m sorry to say, was five years ago, and I’m up for renewal this year. I went through the typical drawer full of holsters that didn’t work for me, along with the awkward phase where you always thought people could see your pistol.
I eventually settled on the Galco Royal Guard, in-waist-band holster. This worked pretty well for me, but I could never get over the fact that it added some significant dimension to my Glock. I decided at some point that it would be worth it to try a Kydex holster.
I started off with a Comp-Tac Pro Undercover holster. The first time I did a practice draw out of the kydex, I almost lost control of my grip, because kydex provided much less draw resistance than leather. Once retention is broken, the pistol comes clean out. After a few tries, I decided I really liked how the draw felt. The downside to the Pro Undercover was that the belt loop, after repeated removing and adding, kept breaking off. I went through two of them before I decided to give Sidearmor’s Glock IWB holster a try. The sidearmor holster is pretty good, and I like the fact that you can swap out the belt loop. My only complaint is that, unlike the Comp-Tac holster, you have to undo your belt to remove the holster, since the loop surrounds the belt. I like to take my holster off with the pistol still in it for storage in the drawer at night.
I’m really liking Comp-Tac’s Infidel line, and I think I might have to order one. It seems to combine the features I like about the Sidearmor holster with what I liked about the Pro Undercover. The Comp-Tac people were always prompt and friendly too. I had my holster in a matter of days.
Both Comp-Tac and Sidearmor make great holsters. I would recommend you try them if you’re thinking of switching to Kydex. I know a lot of people won’t carry in anything other than leather, but I’m never going back. The slim profile, combined with an easy draw, easy reholstering, and good support make it superior in my view.
Comments are broken for some reason. I have no idea why. Time to dive into source code.
UPDATE: Comments are fixed. I kicked the power cord out for my machine Wed night and the time somehow reset to Feb 20th. Apparently WordPress’s spam feature get confused if it shows comments in the future. I had to go into MySQL to reset all the Feb 20th entires to Feb 1st as they should be. I think I need to get a decent SQL editor so I don’t have to do crap like that by hand.