I was sitting here last night remembering that I'd started this odd little blog enterprise sometime last January. I checked my stats, and darned, if it wasn't January 9th. I told 3 people about this thing, and I've grown to tens and tens of followers.
This is post 217. Yes, My blogfather, JayG, probably does that many in a month but hey. He's had more practice.
I got to be an invited guest on B&B Guns -- how cool is that??
Oddly enough (to me, at least), the post that showed Sweet Daughter shooting her pellet pistol and my pellet rifle is my "greatest hit" with "For all the camouflage people" coming in second, and the Retractor post a respectable third. Thank for the linky-love everyone, or I'd still be sitting here with 3 readers. *grin*
This is the part where I'm supposed to talk about all the cool people I've met, blah blah blah, but it's true. I've never met a group of people I'd rather be associated with than y'all.
To begin my second year on the interwebz, if you've got me blog-rolled and I don't have you on my list, let me know and I'll return the favor. And to those of you that actually have me listed under "Gun Blogs", God bless your pointed little heads. *grin* I'll try to do better.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Reboot
I’ve been rather out of sorts the past few days, and Sweet Daughter has picked up on it and been responding in kind. I’ve been trying really hard to be the responsible grown-up, but I wasn’t doing as well as I would have liked. Well, today was errand day, and SD and I got up, make our shopping lists, got breakfast and got ourselves buckled into the car with only slightly foul moods and without spilling any blood. (Juice was spilled. Epically. But that way my fault and did not improve my mood.)
As we were pulling out of the driveway (both of us scowling a bit), I asked if she wanted some “rock star music”, as she calls it. She nodded in the affirmative, and “Vital Idol” started to play. We didn’t talk (and antagonize each other further) but listened for a while. After about 20 minutes, SD said “Mama? Can you put the first song on ‘repeat’?”
“What, you want ‘White Wedding’ on repeat? What’s special about that one?”
“He says ‘shotgun!’”
And with that, we fist-bumped, grinned, turned the volume up a bit and proceeded to have a much better day.
As we were pulling out of the driveway (both of us scowling a bit), I asked if she wanted some “rock star music”, as she calls it. She nodded in the affirmative, and “Vital Idol” started to play. We didn’t talk (and antagonize each other further) but listened for a while. After about 20 minutes, SD said “Mama? Can you put the first song on ‘repeat’?”
“What, you want ‘White Wedding’ on repeat? What’s special about that one?”
“He says ‘shotgun!’”
And with that, we fist-bumped, grinned, turned the volume up a bit and proceeded to have a much better day.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Restoring the 10th Amendment Balance
Guest post from Shorter Half (a.k.a. Geodkyt)
I think it is difficult to argue that the balance of power in the United States hasn’t gotten out of whack. Whether you’re a liberal who feels that Chimpy McBusHitler and Darth Cheney abused the system to install an Imperial Executive who ruled by fiat and ignored the law; a conservative who feels the same about almost all Democratic presidents since Comrade El Presidente for Life FDR wheeled into the Oval Office*; or a guy who spent $30,000 Rogaining himself into a Wookie birthday suit, calls dollar bills “Federal Reserve Notes” that aren’t actually “dollars”, feels that the tipping point was when Washington decided to crack down on moonshiners, and proclaims that a standing army larger than the faculty at West Point is militaristic tyranny; there is a general feeling the system is badly in need of an overhaul.
Quite a few people have discussed the idea of a Constitutional Convention to “hit the reset button” on our democratic Republic**, to restore the ideals of the Founding Fathers.
Others (less radical) have proposed simply repealing the 17th Amendment, giving the control of senatorial selection back over to the legislatures of the several states (who could, if they wish, choose to select their senators by popular vote.)
Some think we need a recall procedure or term limits on the judiciary, including the Jedis of SCOTUS.
Let’s go over these options for a minute ...
Constitutional Convention? Look, you (regardless of political leanings) almost certainly think of yourself as a reasonable, responsible person. It’s those other guys who can afford (because they have no life and plenty of rich, uninhibited, power hungry nuts just like them to underwrite their living expenses) to sit around, day in and day out, arguing for months about the shape of the table, until all the reasonable, responsible people have had to go home. So, imagine a constitution written from scratch by the most bitter, partisan, and nutball types on the opposite end of the political plane from you. A Constitutional Convention is a last resort, suitable for a post-revolutionary period, or when you realize the government you just created is completely unsuitable to your needs.
Repeal the 17th Amendment? Well, it would likely restore some of the 10th Amendment balance that’s been lost – appointed senators who do not have to stand election may well be more directly responsive to the legislature that appointed them, and look out for the perceived interests of their state rather than public opinion. Of course, this overlooks the fact that the legislature itself has to stand election. Another difficulty is it simply isn’t going to happen – 2/3rds of both houses of Congress plus 3/4ths of the states are not going to vote to strip the American people of their direct election of Senators. (In all honesty, while I am in agreement that the 17th Amendment was a mistake in that it effectively gutted the 10th Amendment, I prefer to err on the side of the ballot box.)
Term limits and/or recalls for the federal judiciary? Maybe recalls of some sort, the same procedure to recall Sotomayor can be used to recall Thomas. As for term limits, what is a judge to do when he is running up against a Constitutional limit on his career? If he’s a crappy enough judge that you don’t want him on the bench, are you really getting warm fuzzies about the thought of him looking forward at his post-judicial career and figuring he better not offend any future employers, like any Congressman turned lobbyist?
Well, I was at the local Tea Party meeting, when this little gem of an idea was announced:
The Repeal Amendment
"Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed."
Note what this proposed amendment doesn’t do –
• It doesn’t give the state legislatures the ability to create federal law.
• It doesn’t give the state legislatures the authority to override courts decisions they don’t like.
• It doesn’t alter the Constitution every time the people wish to stop something stupid.
• It doesn’t strip away any democratic procedure.
• It doesn’t allow individual states to just pretend to ignore federal laws they don’t like.
• It doesn’t permanently prevent the law from being reenacted if the people decide they prefer it after all.
• It doesn’t risk the complete reorganization of the Constitution.
• It doesn’t create an additional incentive for judges to issue biased rulings to set up his second career.
All it does it give the several states a veto. If a federal law or regulation is so abhorrent that 34 out of 50 state legislatures all reject it, chances are it was a bad idea. Since Congress can vote to reinstate the law under the usual legislative procedures if they feel the state legislatures are out of touch, all it really does is force everyone to slow down and take a second look at it.
Is it perfect? Probably not. For example, it could be worded so that the repeal would have to be overridden in the same manner as a Presidential veto ... but then, this amendment is unlike a veto as it can be used on laws already in effect, and it can be used on non-legislative regulations. I’d rather have this than risk swinging the pendulum so far over we have reduced the federal government to a shell of impotence, like the Confederate States of America, Articles of Confederation, or the Polish Parliaments of the 17th and 18th Centuries. Likewise, I wouldn’t mind being able to veto Senate confirmations or ratifications – but since confirmations and ratifications generally take effect immediately, just how long should treaties and officials such as federal judges be held vulnerable to a ex post facto veto?
For more details, I can recommend the WSJ article, The Case for a 'Repeal Amendment'.
* Well, except for Carter ... even the most rabid Dittoheaded Pajamahadeen sworn to the eternal service of Ronaldus Maximus will readily proclaim that Carter wasn’t even competent enough to function as an effective autocrat.
** Yes, the capitalization style is deliberate – North Korea is a Democratic Republic, Nancy Pelosi wants a Democratic republic – this nation is a Republic whose representatives are chosen by the people (democratic).
I think it is difficult to argue that the balance of power in the United States hasn’t gotten out of whack. Whether you’re a liberal who feels that Chimpy McBusHitler and Darth Cheney abused the system to install an Imperial Executive who ruled by fiat and ignored the law; a conservative who feels the same about almost all Democratic presidents since Comrade El Presidente for Life FDR wheeled into the Oval Office*; or a guy who spent $30,000 Rogaining himself into a Wookie birthday suit, calls dollar bills “Federal Reserve Notes” that aren’t actually “dollars”, feels that the tipping point was when Washington decided to crack down on moonshiners, and proclaims that a standing army larger than the faculty at West Point is militaristic tyranny; there is a general feeling the system is badly in need of an overhaul.
Quite a few people have discussed the idea of a Constitutional Convention to “hit the reset button” on our democratic Republic**, to restore the ideals of the Founding Fathers.
Others (less radical) have proposed simply repealing the 17th Amendment, giving the control of senatorial selection back over to the legislatures of the several states (who could, if they wish, choose to select their senators by popular vote.)
Some think we need a recall procedure or term limits on the judiciary, including the Jedis of SCOTUS.
Let’s go over these options for a minute ...
Constitutional Convention? Look, you (regardless of political leanings) almost certainly think of yourself as a reasonable, responsible person. It’s those other guys who can afford (because they have no life and plenty of rich, uninhibited, power hungry nuts just like them to underwrite their living expenses) to sit around, day in and day out, arguing for months about the shape of the table, until all the reasonable, responsible people have had to go home. So, imagine a constitution written from scratch by the most bitter, partisan, and nutball types on the opposite end of the political plane from you. A Constitutional Convention is a last resort, suitable for a post-revolutionary period, or when you realize the government you just created is completely unsuitable to your needs.
Repeal the 17th Amendment? Well, it would likely restore some of the 10th Amendment balance that’s been lost – appointed senators who do not have to stand election may well be more directly responsive to the legislature that appointed them, and look out for the perceived interests of their state rather than public opinion. Of course, this overlooks the fact that the legislature itself has to stand election. Another difficulty is it simply isn’t going to happen – 2/3rds of both houses of Congress plus 3/4ths of the states are not going to vote to strip the American people of their direct election of Senators. (In all honesty, while I am in agreement that the 17th Amendment was a mistake in that it effectively gutted the 10th Amendment, I prefer to err on the side of the ballot box.)
Term limits and/or recalls for the federal judiciary? Maybe recalls of some sort, the same procedure to recall Sotomayor can be used to recall Thomas. As for term limits, what is a judge to do when he is running up against a Constitutional limit on his career? If he’s a crappy enough judge that you don’t want him on the bench, are you really getting warm fuzzies about the thought of him looking forward at his post-judicial career and figuring he better not offend any future employers, like any Congressman turned lobbyist?
Well, I was at the local Tea Party meeting, when this little gem of an idea was announced:
The Repeal Amendment
"Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed."
Note what this proposed amendment doesn’t do –
• It doesn’t give the state legislatures the ability to create federal law.
• It doesn’t give the state legislatures the authority to override courts decisions they don’t like.
• It doesn’t alter the Constitution every time the people wish to stop something stupid.
• It doesn’t strip away any democratic procedure.
• It doesn’t allow individual states to just pretend to ignore federal laws they don’t like.
• It doesn’t permanently prevent the law from being reenacted if the people decide they prefer it after all.
• It doesn’t risk the complete reorganization of the Constitution.
• It doesn’t create an additional incentive for judges to issue biased rulings to set up his second career.
All it does it give the several states a veto. If a federal law or regulation is so abhorrent that 34 out of 50 state legislatures all reject it, chances are it was a bad idea. Since Congress can vote to reinstate the law under the usual legislative procedures if they feel the state legislatures are out of touch, all it really does is force everyone to slow down and take a second look at it.
Is it perfect? Probably not. For example, it could be worded so that the repeal would have to be overridden in the same manner as a Presidential veto ... but then, this amendment is unlike a veto as it can be used on laws already in effect, and it can be used on non-legislative regulations. I’d rather have this than risk swinging the pendulum so far over we have reduced the federal government to a shell of impotence, like the Confederate States of America, Articles of Confederation, or the Polish Parliaments of the 17th and 18th Centuries. Likewise, I wouldn’t mind being able to veto Senate confirmations or ratifications – but since confirmations and ratifications generally take effect immediately, just how long should treaties and officials such as federal judges be held vulnerable to a ex post facto veto?
For more details, I can recommend the WSJ article, The Case for a 'Repeal Amendment'.
* Well, except for Carter ... even the most rabid Dittoheaded Pajamahadeen sworn to the eternal service of Ronaldus Maximus will readily proclaim that Carter wasn’t even competent enough to function as an effective autocrat.
** Yes, the capitalization style is deliberate – North Korea is a Democratic Republic, Nancy Pelosi wants a Democratic republic – this nation is a Republic whose representatives are chosen by the people (democratic).
For those who haven't met Shorter Half
You may recognize him as commenter Geodkyt, and occasionally as Rick R. But this pretty much sums him up:
Luckily he has been taught the universal sign for "time out" where your two hands make a "T". This allows you to redirect and/or refine your question. Even Sweet Daughter has been taught this valuable trick. We joke about the time SH's little sister asked him about how the American Revolution began. I think she was looking for the whole Lexington/Concord thing. SH started with the Seven Years War.
EDIT: SH says he actually went back to the War of Spanish Succession.
Luckily he has been taught the universal sign for "time out" where your two hands make a "T". This allows you to redirect and/or refine your question. Even Sweet Daughter has been taught this valuable trick. We joke about the time SH's little sister asked him about how the American Revolution began. I think she was looking for the whole Lexington/Concord thing. SH started with the Seven Years War.
EDIT: SH says he actually went back to the War of Spanish Succession.
Monday, January 3, 2011
And Sarah Brady weeps bitter tears
We got to ring in the New Year in North Carolina with Michael W. (and his lovely wife) from Doin' the Time Warp, and John and his daughter, "Sunshine", from Tales from Left Field. Much merriment was had, much fantastic food was consumed, and much wit was bandied about. But most importantly, we brought two new shooters into the fold -- Michael's niece and Sunshine. Go over to John's blog and read all about it. I hope I'll have pictures to add tomorrow.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Zombies for the win
I forwarded Tam’s zombie target post to a handful of people so they could read both it, and the awesome comments.
Bitter Young Guy at work responded with:
Agreed…. Wow…Zombie targets are juvenile?? Let me tell you something…
Girlfriend…who has just gotten into shooting, was so tickled by her zombie target that she told her (anti-gun) girlfriend who loves zombie movies. Anti-Gun Girlfriend now wants to go to the range for fun. “Just once, to try it”.
If that’s what it takes to get “closed minded” people interested in gun safety, so be it.
Amen.
Bitter Young Guy at work responded with:
Agreed…. Wow…Zombie targets are juvenile?? Let me tell you something…
Girlfriend…who has just gotten into shooting, was so tickled by her zombie target that she told her (anti-gun) girlfriend who loves zombie movies. Anti-Gun Girlfriend now wants to go to the range for fun. “Just once, to try it”.
If that’s what it takes to get “closed minded” people interested in gun safety, so be it.
Amen.
Unusual holster bleg
A good friend of mine asked the following question, and since this is SO out of my realm of expertise, I thought I'd pass it on and ask y'all.
Daughter got an Airsoft pistol for Christmas and I accidentally got her a right-handed holster for it. I like UTG holsters but am having a hard time finding one for a leftie. Granted I have only looked on Amazon.com and airsoft.com and the one she really likes is right-hand only - the UTG Special Ops Leg Holster in Army Digital Camo. I found one by Taigear but it is solid black and does not have an extra pouch for the ammo. Any suggestions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)