Guard Dog

It IS moot. It's a discussion on an internet forum. And an entertaining one. If you want to talk actual facts and have near 0 concern of ever having "the man" kick down my door to take my firearms, or much of anything else. So asserting the willingness to defend to the death my material possessions, in which I was being genuine you should know, really is writing a check I know will never be cashed. I will admit that was a concern for a long time. Heller & MacDonald set that fear to rest, likely for the rest of my life. I really do not have any more affection for my firearms than I do for any other thing I own that does not run to greet me when I get home. I do have a pretty big collection. Eight pistols including the aforementioned Colt .32 which will never be fired again. I have 10 rifles including a Taylor Arms replica of a Missouri River .50 Hawken muzzle loader. It is also for show although unlike the Colt it is a functional weapon. With the exception of a Browning 10mm and a Ruger SR-22 none of them are semi-auto. None of the rest would look out of place at the OK Corral or in 1917 France. So I have nothing to fear from any kind of assault weapons ban. Now, I do draw a huge distinction between one man defending his home from whatever and someone who carries a weapon into a public place and shoots people who cannot harm him. It is a problem to me that we live in a country where doing nothing can become a criminal act. But that is a philosophical argument because the world and country are what they are. The flaws of the United States system of governance are many and don't outweigh it virtues. But it is a hell of a lot closer to a tie than it should be. I am not actually opposed to an "assault weapons" ban. However such a ban MUST be clear about the definition of an assault weapon. That means such a bill must be written by people who actually know a thing or two about firearms and don't get hung up on cosmetics and factors that don't affect the performance of the weapon. It also must be so clear even someone as dumb as a police officer can properly interpret it. To simplify I'd suggest a complete ban on new sales of semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines. That is it. Simple and clean. It should grandfather in all legally owned weapons and ban new sales. In the short term it won't help. Long term it might.

Asteroids, Defender, Berserk & Frogger were my favorites. I loved the way those old arcades sounded. Heh, now we DO sound old.

Phaw, back in my day we played Pac Man, Q-Bert, Dig Dug, & Donkey Kong. Games cost a quarter, not $500 for the console and $60 per game. And we went to mall, the 7-11, or to Pic-N-Save to play them with our friends. Grand theft something, something, Skyrim, Fallout, feh! Defender! Now THERE was a game! Zaxxon and Galaga, Asteroids and Space Invaders... THEY never warped our minds. Now take you X-Stations, and Play Boxes and GET OFF MY LAWN! Damn kids. Ought to be a law. I need to go lay down.

I believe I said everyone needs to calm down. People's political allegiance has taken on far more importance than it deserves. It's actually less important and far less interesting that what sports teams they cheer for. One person voting for the Orange Menace is no more responsible for his election than a person cheering for the the Pats to bet the Rams last February for them winning the Super Bowl. Supporting a different political candidate should not make two people enemies. No more than cheering for different sports teams. It's a huge problem that people think it does. It's an even bigger problem that some those people are hearing that not only are those "enemies" opposed to them politically they are actively working to harm them. They are not and they cannot. But some folks whose wrapper was a little lose to begin are hearing of an imminent threat when there isn't one and do something stupid. Everyone needs to dial is down a few notches.

Huge difference between the two scenarios. In the scenario of the Great Chainsaw Confiscation "they" came to MY home with guns and violence. Had they left me and mine the hell alone there will be no violence. In El Paso he went to a public space and shot people who had done nothing to him. There is NO principle that justifies that. They are by no means near the same thing. And the idea of defending my home and property from people who came to take them by force, be they thieves or agents of the government is arrogance? Well, if this be arrogance then make the most of it.

Disbanded? Umm no. I don't even seriously think they should be disarmed. That was tongue-in-cheek. But taking away their qualified immunity absolutely should happen.

I would be willing to fight as hard over my chainsaw. POS that it is. The point is the principle of the matter. You spent your career arguing over principle. I expect you'd understand that. And thankfully we do not live in a Democracy. There is a great quote attributed to Franklin (no way he ever said it) "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for lunch".

Sure. The Takings clause is a thing. It's not unreasonable to expect to be compensated at fair value however. And that the taking really is for a "public good" rather than a favor to a business that provides bigger campaign donations and potential tax revenue as in Kelo. As for the rest I'll direct you to the last paragraph of my last response. I love my dogs. I love my chickens (apparently because I can't seem to gin up the gumption to eat one of them), i love my friends and family. I don"love" inanimate objects like that. They are legal and mine and like anything else I own and have worked for I won't suffer someone telling me I can't have it. But don't imagine there is some emotional connection to them. There is not.

Interesting article. I agree completely with highlighted quote. What I don't hear from the people advocating gun control is that there is a right to own a firearm. Before we can all have a rational discussion about WHAT firearms can be owned I want to hear political leaders acknowledge what the supreme Court already has: there IS an individual right. Instead what we get is quotes like Diane Feinstein's "Mr. & Mrs. America, turn them all in". To that that answer will always be "f--k you, come take them" Slightly OT on the article I really don't agree with the assertion that firearms are anything other that "neutral tools". IMO that is precisely what they are with the exception of collectibles or antiques. I have a 140 year old cap and ball Colt .32 Navy revolver that will never leave the display case it's in. But I don't really consider that a gun anymore. I am not a sentimental man by nature I guess. To me inanimate objects mostly have an absolute value and serve a specific purpose. I don't think of any of my firearms any differently than my chainsaw or my tape measure. They serve a purpose.

OK, a public health issue. How would that work? There are "red flag" laws in most states now that would permit a court order to seize all of a person's legal firearms for possible metal health issues. Unlike the rest of the justice system the burden of proof of mental stability is on the accused not the state. But even if you accept that is not unreasonably draconian ( I think it is) the problem with it is someone has to report the individual in the first place. Another way to go would be to monitor all social media for "extremist" commentary. Word filters, etc. Then start surveying the people in question. You can see the potential for rampant abuse in that I'm sure. Besides, just what I've posted on this one forum over the years I'd be shocked if I'm not on one "watch list" or another!

Why on earth should I be ashamed? I've never harmed any one. I've never used a firearm for anything illegal. Paper targets, legal game in season, pest control. I've never pointed one at a human being and I don't expect I ever will. Didn't even do it in the military. I am not answerable for the crimes of other people, None of us are. What is my personal responsibility because two miserable pricks I've never heard of over 1000 miles away decided to kill innocent people? Want to stop mass shootings? That part is easy. Change the culture. Tell politicians to stop painting opponents an enemies. Tell Sean Hannity to stop saying Democrats are really communists that want to put them in gulags. Tell Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews to stop insinuating the RNC really a Klan meeting. Tell the NRA that the election of a Democrat will not necessarily lead to "jack booted thugs" (actual words from 1992) "goose stepping" (again actual words) into their homes to take their firearms. Tell ANTIFA that their rhetoric and violence makes them the very thing they say they oppose. Tell Hillary Clinton her fellow americans are not a "basket of deplorables". Tell Obama the people who didn't support him were really racists "clinging bitterly to guns and religion" in fear of people who don't look like them. Tell everyone while many terrorists are muslim few few muslims are terrorist. None of these things will ever happen though. Stoking passions and negative energy is big business now. Because of the internet the reach is farther and too many people like at least one of the two SoBs yesterday really thinks there is a hispanic invasion that wants to make him learn to speak spanish whatever the hell set him off. What we need is to turn down the temperature. We've made enemies of our own people over nothing. That is why it's happening.

I'll ask you the same question I asked James. What solution is there that does not involve the confiscation of private property, at gunpoint no less, of millions of people who have committed no crime? That is tantamount to punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty.

In other news a police officer in Arlington TX goes to do a welfare check on a woman yesterday. As he approached calling out for her, her dog came out and approached the cop. The cop, frighted as he was by a 40 lb lab mix, pulls out his pistol and fires three times from point blank range. And misses the dog. He did hit the woman he came to do a welfare check on though. Killed her stone cold dead. Another job well done by the cops. She would probably be grateful to have been "served and protected". If she wasn't dead. Had that thug in government uniform been a better shot her dog would be dead. I'm sure she'd be happy then right? https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/02/us/arlington-officer-kills-woman-while-shooting-at-dog/index.html Speaking of banning guns we should be disarming these f-----g guys. But government is gonna government.

OK, tell me a constructive way to "ban guns" that does not involve making the private property of millions of people who have committed no crimes suddenly illegal? What do YOU have in mind? If you want to ban new sales but grandfather in existing arms, I'm listening. Of course you are talking about a gun buying spree like no other before that goes into effect. And there are literally millions of them in private hands now. What do you have in mind? Remember any law passed must be enforced. So banning "assault weapons" whatever the hell they are no one can agree, means going and confiscating the ones the owners are unwilling to turn in. I've made it clear what I will do if ever put to such a choice.

I think you're probably right about that. Firearms were less expensive (relatively) and easier to come by in those days as well. At some point between then and now we've passed from acts of petty bullying and beatings to mass murder becoming the means of expression. It's a fair point that the sophistication of firearms today has made the scale of these acts frighteningly larger. But what I am curious about it why the decision to commit murder for this reason (a political motive as opposed to personal or financial) comes so much easier to people today? Is mental illness more prevalent now that it has been? Irrational fear mongering by political figures is not new. Racism, nativisim, nationalisim are hardly new. Availability of firearms is not new. What changed starting in the early 2000's? Between 1891 and ending with Columbine in 1999 there were 17. Since 2000 El Paso is the 23rd (all this according to Time magazine Their timeline ended in 2017, I counted the rest myself). The thing that comes to mind is the ability to effectively network with like minded people that ubiquitous high speed internet access has brought. Anger feeds anger and intensity rises exponentially. Media and political fear mongering is another huge factor. Although also not new. It draws eyes to TV sets, column inches, web sites, and voting booths. It's good business for them to stoke the fire and splash a little gas in from time to time. The effect is also exponentially higher because the internet puts more eyes on it. It also allows people to consume news in bite sized pieces that often causes the stories to be out of context. It would take a concerted effort by political leaders, news commentators, editors, and webmasters to "turn down the temperature" a little. Not holding my breath on that one. I'd love to see Trump give a prime time address from the oval office on TV and tell everyone that the people they see every day on the streets, stores, protests, etc are not their enemies. Political differences are not a life and death struggle. Of course that will never happen either. Not from him. Not from Obama or anyone else either. You are fond of pointing out lost opportunities for real leadership and potential change for the better. The responses to mass shooting in recent years is certainly a series of lost opportunities. Like all the rest the responses to this will be "take away their guns" and "Trump supporters are all racists" and so on. More gas is splashed on the bonfire and another opportunity is lost.

From what I've read you are pretty close to the mark

Followed Cold Creek to the river to do some fishing. Didn't get a nibble. Read a book, took a nap on the riverbank with Sunny & Bella. Watched them splash in the water. Walked back. Going to make some veggie soup and iced tea for dinner and catch the Marlins vs Rays on the radio. Life is good.

Owning a diner is a life sentence if the building is aesthetically pleasing. Or someone just likes the pancakes. If it were me I'd do a Howard Roark on it if they wouldn't let me sell.

Plans for today:

Actually Bruce you know what I love to watch? Don't laugh. It's https://www.dogtv.com/ I've had it for years. I leave it on for the girls when I'm not home. Tommy would actually watch it. And I have to admit there is something almost mesmerizing about it. The video seems a little odd at times because of it's refresh rate (dogs eye see faster than 60 hz so when watching TV they see not just the picture but the blank spaces in between). Sometimes the video is just a swirl of colors and odd sounds, some of which you can't even hear (they can). It really is meant to entertain dogs. But I find it hypnotizing.

Because what is yours isn't really yours if the government wants it: https://reason.com/2019/08/01/neighborhood-activists-would-rather-preserve-toms-diner-than-let-its-owner-retire-in-peace/

I cut the cord today. I discontinued DirecTV. I have just one television and I hardly ever watch it. I still have Hulu, Amazon, & NetFlix so there is still plenty to not watch. SiriusXM has become my primary entertainment. Tonight it's Classic Vinyl, a few glasses of Four Roses small batch, a sunset and then later stars. The older I get the more I have come to realize I prefer life simple. I'd have saved myself a lot of heartbreak and money if I'd only realized it long ago.

A parrot swallows a Viagra tablet. His owner, disgusted, puts him in the freezer to cool off. Later when he opens the freezer, he finds the parrot sweating. "How come you are sweating?" he asks. The parrot replies, "Do you know how hard it is to open the legs of a frozen chicken?"