Wednesday Highlights

Good talk talk talk day, eh?

  1. Apparently there is a filibuster going on … approval here
  2. Droney lawers discuss as well.
  3. More grist for the drone conversations. Woops.
  4. So, why do liberals trust Obama with the power to kill whomever for whatever reason. Trust. Why trust? Beats me. Ask a lib.
  5. In a discussion on phone regulations … this was firmly denied. Alas, data seems to indicate otherwise.
  6. A book to lead you back to the garden.
  7. So, why oh, why did Obama cut what he did for the sequester? He cut aid to babies … and here’s why. His goal is government growth, nothing more, nothing less.
  8. Wait wait, what day is it tomorrow? Oh, my.
  9. Statistics and bunnies.
  10. Talking Turkey, not turkey.
  11. Think about this too hard out loud and you’ll be accused of racism.
  12. The first word is the most important. Happy is good. Remember that.
  13. Snort. Don’t click through with anything in your mouth. You were warned.
  14. Grist for talking about evil, ethics, and such. Did Josef think he was acting unethically or not? Or did he follow an ethical code with which you happen to disagree strongly?

Tuesday Highlights

And so it goes, another world leader steps off the stage.

  1. Not that way however. Yikes.
  2. A climate question.
  3. A book noted.
  4. Liturgy.
  5. If you don’t laugh, your having a really really bad week.
  6. Someday we’ll find out what the Obamacare supporters were smoking when they supposed longer hours, more uncertainty, less pay would attract more the field.
  7. They will, however, insist it wasn’t this.
  8. A question is posed. Woops, that was a follow-up. Start here.
  9. merica.
  10. Won’t be sold here.
  11. Matrix and cellular automata have some challenges.
  12. Thoughts on nuclear Iran. And … why you really really need to read that last linked post.
  13. Our un-serious President. Alas. Don’t look at me, I didn’t vote for him.
  14. And to finish off, what hard riding man puts on his shelf. Wow.

Monday Highlights

As I noted, I’m switching to evening links, ’cause I’ve got to hit the road before 5am every morning.

  1. Job applications.
  2. Applications with merit or not?
  3. Doodles applied. Some hit, some miss.
  4. Ah, history. If only Western Christians hadn’t put their stock in this guy instead of Augustine (they were contemporaries and left approx the same quantity of writings). A good fraction of why I’m Orthodox today is due to the writings of John Cassian.
  5. The strange fruits of googling oneself.
  6. Sequester and our Presidents (most) recent attempts to re-write history.
  7. Energy bar, paleo style.
  8. Snerk. Jedi mind meld indeed.
  9. So, packing for the archipelago yet?
  10. Putting Genghis in context. Wow.
  11. Holding doors.
  12. Science fiction author looks ahead.
  13. The tribal left. And yes, you’d likely be able to find evidence o the tribal right, that that’s the assumption isn’t it? That tribalism is all on one side of the aisle.
  14. A million mile goober.
  15. Still not a fan of cats.
  16. We’re watching and waiting.
  17. Duck and Cover.

Category Errors Considered

Note: I started writing this with the notion that the category error alluded to below was a mistake and a sidelight hiding behind the issues being argued. As I continued in writing I have come to believe that the category error is both the primary reason for the arguments and further is a fundamental problem which is well known.

Much wroth, fury, words, and accusations of ignorance, bigotry, and perversion have crossed from both sides in the recent decades long struggle by various factions in the debates about marriage and who might be married rightly. A few observations

  1. Defenders of SSM remark that this sort of marriage is private and affects none outside of the marriage. Yet, if this were so, then why would not civil unions suffice? The logical answers is because this reply is a lie. It does in fact affect others and in this lies a category error to which I alluded in this essay’s title.
  2. To read the papers and hear the debates this is an important issue. Yet, why is that? Why is that more important than other issues. As that famous statistician Bjorn Lomberg  pointed out that getting vitamin supplements to the third world would saves tens if not hundreds of millions of lives (and would be cheaper and more effective than most of the aid we send to the third world), world-wide millions are affected by human trafficking indeed the numbers trafficked within the states is comparable to those affected by SSM … and those affected are mostly well educated affluent couples. Yet what debates are heard? 

How are these issues a sidelight issue and the other a hot button issue? I suspect my  I offer it is because those entrenched against SSM are also committing that same category error. What is the error of category to which I allude? Simply the following, laws and lawmakers are not our spiritual guides. Note, the use of the term “spiritual” is not the normal one, but one which I will continue in this essay and perhaps in further essays. 

So let me digress for a moment. Spiritual? What is that? In the introduction to Dimitru Staniloae’s book (Orthodox Spirituality), it is pointed out that in the EasternChristian doctrine, your spiritual life and its tending is perhaps better translated as your ethical life and its care. Spiritual health and ethical well being are synonyms. 

What is legal or not and what is righteous (in good spirit or a good moral/ethical decision) are independent. This is a founding principle of American jurisprudence. (Or is it?) It certainly is the assumption now. Mr Daschle defended a Senatorial philandering colleague by pointing while he while he was dishonest he didn’t break any laws. The correct reaction to this is that the colleague got his priorities exactly backwards, i.e., it is more important to be ethical than stay on the right side of the law.

Laws are not ethics. Laws and what lawmakers conspire to create has very little to do with ethics and instead its primary purpose is to provide a framework. This framework provides so that peoples may live harmoniously alongside each other in an ordered way.  So that, when conflicts between people arise, there is an orderly way of handling those same conflicts. Personal ethics overrides and sits over the law. For the most part, there is no conflict, most of our choices, our ethical decisions do not lead us toward choices which are illegal. Where they do, it is right, it is correct to choose the ethical over the legal. On the other hand, there are things you may do legally which however are not ethical. Even where there is no conflict, normally ethics binds our actions tighter than the law.

Solzhenitsyn warns that this separation that is part of modern Western democracies (and was part of the former Soviet state) is an error. That itself is an interesting counter point. So it seems likely that this why this debate is important is not what it is about, but sort of the issue is the ground on which it is being made. What is at stake is perhaps not about the particulars of whether certain young dinks (dual income no kids) can have their relationship legalized or not but really what is being debated here and in other forums is whether law should be neutral or be admitted to have spiritual (ethical) content or should it not. Kant (and our founders) explored law devoid of ethics, can a safe lawful republic of demons (not angels) be constructed or not. Perhaps it can. Perhaps it can’t. The question at hand is should it? Recall the Ratzinger/Habermas debate, debating whether a democratic society can be constructed and sustain itself independent of religion, i.e., “does it need things outside itself to sustain itself.” Ratzinger and Solzhenitsyn think not. Bertrand de Jouvenal pointed out in his meta-political science musings about what he termed Babylon (the large multicultural state) envies the unity of the small state. My reading of Solzhenitsyn (and Jouvenal) is that a solution exists. If the larger federal state limit itself to promoting commerce and unity between smaller entities within itself, while foster their ability to form strong local identity, laws and praxis then you could have the best of both worlds. You can find local loyalties and ties and bonds within the framework a larger multicultural state.

Both sides of the cultural debate miss this point. Both sides wish to apply the same laws and sensibilities in artists boroughs of San Francisco, in Amish villages in Ohio, in rural Lutheran Wisconsin, and so on. Why? Why try? It seems wrong to insist that behavioral norms universal.

Locally laws can be tied to spirit. Federally, the are not, but there they run to the Habermas separation of Spirit and law. It seems to me laws about birth, death, marriage are those which the federal level should keep its hands away, to set aside for local regions to coin their own practices, to tie their own view of ethics and spirit what is allowed, to what is righteous in their region.

Instead of insisting that laws be spiritual or devoid of spiritual considerations is wrong. Federal laws laws which bind us all, might be best be light and aim only to promote commerce, unity, and ease frictions. Local laws … let them tangle and wind the ways the local choose. That is, after all, nothing more than freedom.

Travel

OK. I’m back on the left coast, working very very early hours (well, not so early today as my flights got me to my hotel kinda late to get up early today). Links will be posted evenings for the next two weeks. I’ll try to keep up with comments.

Oddly enough, I learned on the flight over I need to get back to essay posting. I started an essay and half-way through it I’d argued myself out of the thesis I’d started with. Essay writing gets me thinking about issues more clearly and more of that is needed. So, perhaps that’s good news.

Wednesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. So what are the Supremes up to?
  2. Massachusetts lawmakers have no clue. If you can’t imagine how teenage kids might abuse that law … your ignorance is historic.
  3. On the Pontiff’s retirement.
  4. Heroism noted.
  5. A critic of statistics not noticing that many of the new gun laws proposed also call out rifles so the statistics is apter than he pretends, cf “assault” rifle bans which don’t actually ban assault rifles which are already illegal but just ordinary semi-automatic rifles. Reminder to Mr Darrel, an actual assault rifle as defined is an automatic (not semi-automatic) carbine.
  6. Playing with automatic translator fixed points.
  7. Absolute legal immunity? Sounds like a recipe for abuse, kind of like giving free reign to young teenagers in showers and bathrooms.
  8. History and the “Great White Fleet.”
  9. More details on the kill list mechanics. Similarities to this are of course accidental.
  10. Sequestration and the TSA … whose “cuts” amount to a 11% increase in budget. Wow. Radical deep horrible cuts. Not.
  11. Remember the promises the President made about lobbying and money? One wonders about the silence of the lambs on the left?
  12. Crises and Church considered.
  13. A view from the sidelines on the GOP sequester thinking. I would add to #1 that “massively wasteful” is missing the point, it’s massive spending on things outside of what the government’s purview that is the problem. Healthcare for example, is not a thing the federal government has a call to address at all.

Tuesday Highlights

Good morning, and sorry about not posting links yesterday.

  1. To be or not to be.
  2. Hear hear.
  3. The dangers of spell check on an unfettered US budget.
  4. Debt and out of control spending. Money supply and created value are unconnected, who knew?
  5. Gosh, cut 1-2% out of the budget and what sorts of screaming do we get. You’d think that the Administration would realize they have control over what spending gets cut and what doesn’t so that actual critical things wouldn’t have to be cut. Apparently air traffic control and defense are not critical. And look at how savage those cuts are. Another view.
  6. In a word, no.
  7. Golly, why just kill the unborn and the elderly. Let’s move on the inconvenient as well.
  8. The fate of Cassandra.
  9. From the Oscars.

Dr Freud Sketched to Eastern Sensibilities

Dr Freud famously sketched the person as consisting internally as ego, super-ego and id. In Eastern Orthodox tradition you find discussions of nous, spirit and soul. Nous is your intellect, your soul motivates you to action … and the spirit is your moral sense and decision making processes. Not entirely dissimilar to the Freudian breakout (and my definitions are inexact … as all such definitions by necessity are). Take that in conjunction with the difference in personhood on East/West and there’s grist for some thought (again rougly West locates person in attributes of the individual and the East personhood is defined by his/her relationships).

In part this means “spirituality” in the Eastern lexicon has very little to do with new age touchy-feely notions … but something completely different. Of what relevance.

Well, Lent begins in mid-March for the East, and I’m going to read this book for Lent. I’ll be blogging about my progress through it and this difference noted came from the introduction.

Friday Higgslights

Good morning.

  1. Drone tactics.
  2. On going into that sweet night.
  3. Speaking of which.
  4. Fiber filled diet advice.
  5. Gun discussion advice.
  6. To power your electric car?
  7. To be honest, for myself, I never understood paying more than nominal “speaker fees” and why you would ever want to pay anything more than a reasonable hourly wage to anyone, much less the person suggested in this link.
  8. The way to counter the “imagination fallacy”, which is a more common rhetorical method than one might suggest.
  9. A flashlight with a little more.
  10. Coming soon to your phone.
  11. Ooooh. That’s really really not going to be in my price range. Rats.

Rsday Highlights

Rrrrr.

  1. Possibly my wife’s future runabout, you know for us non-anthro global warming activists.
  2. Pretty as a picture, come to think of it … it is actually a picture.
  3. Siris, err Brandon, talks guns.
  4. Interesting new product for ya.
  5. Why is the US 2nd world regarding phone tech? Oh, wait … dy’a think it might be regulatory strangulation? Gosh.
  6. Conservative views on racism.
  7. I wonder (historically speaking) what “court” meant. Court as a thing to me doesn’t sound like great fun.
  8. Never give up hope.
  9. An economist talks about Obamacare.
  10. Privacy and file deletion.
  11. Budget cuts and numbers noted.
  12. Mr Biden’s ill considered advice.
  13. Those large ammo purchases by the government … just graft … never mind. See, always the Chicago way.
  14. Is this about the relationship to the left with the arts?
  15. Somebody needs to remind this author that the great majority of scouts are 11-14  … and kids that age are not exactly “already are” anything in particular regarding sex.

Wednesday Highlights

Hello all.

  1. How to reign in the Norks. China?
  2. Polycarp.
  3. Is this another response the “to bad I’m not Emperor” meme?
  4. This seems to be a straw man argument … I mean, who is arguing otherwise?
  5. This link was down earlier, but will hopefully be back … why women at the frontlines might not be wise.
  6. 10 billion insuring 10 trillion … innumeracy at large in finance.
  7. A better “it’s for the children” thing. OK OK. I don’t like the word “thing” there. What might be better?
  8. Ice.
  9. Cheese is a problem there … but there are two kinds of people out there, those who eat anchovies and those who don’t. Most people, unlike myself, are in the second category.
  10. Liberals don’t want people with training. Apparently.
  11. Mental exercise for today, recast that short essay as minimum productivity limits not as a wage limit.
  12. What evidence? Seriously. Evidence? Where?
  13. Obama’s personal view on guns.
  14. Yikes.

 

Tuesday Highlights

Good morning ty’all.

  1. Dating, faith, and global warming.
  2. For you cuda users … (with spare cash).
  3. Gun talk.
  4. More here.
  5. B&P talk about raising the minimum productivity floor here and here.
  6. More here.
  7. How many takes was that dya think?
  8. Pining for ARexx without knowing it (wiki here).
  9. Act now … before the gig is up.
  10. What’s your explanation?
  11. Raising taxes … leads to moving on out.
  12. Evolution and EDAR.

Monday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Duh. It doesn’t matter, carbon taxes are an indulgence offering and a way to keep the poor down … the effect on climate is not relevant to its fans.
  2. Looking at spin and Mr Holder.
  3. For y’all who think that government isn’t good at anything, a counterexample.
  4. Ct-thinking about Cthulhu.
  5. From China, here and here.
  6. Bayes theorem and sitting on the can vacillating for half a year.
  7. Death and the blogger.
  8. Yankee independence is apparently not the way to go reading the tea leaves from the state of the onion speech.
  9. No. We don’t say that. We just tiredly remark that “not an Emperor” is a feature not a bug.
  10. Stereotyping.
  11. “Greater” … nope. Greater than one? Probably not.
  12. Drones. Not unrelated.
  13. After Mr Chu.
  14. On guns. Grist for the mill.
  15. Good idea or not?

Friday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. So, selling to oligarchs I guess. Seems to me the small town gun store in the US is slightly, err, more prosaic.
  2. Hayek and Obamacare.
  3. This brings up a (slightly) more serious question. Saltpeter, as every pirate knows, was fed by Captain Treach to his sailors as a anti-viagra agent so they would just get drunk in port and he could get his ship back out. The question is … if you favor the background check thing for guns … why do you not also favor background checks before guys could have saltpeter-free food so prevent rapes (which are far far far more common than the occasional mass shooter).
  4. Everybody’s seen videos of the near-to-Moscow meteor. If you haven’t, go here for 5.
  5. More attempts to tamper with your freedom of association.
  6. Yikes.
  7. Advertising.
  8. NYTimes and standards of reporting accuracy.

Have a good weekend!

Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. The President’s 2nd Amendment remarks noted.
  2. Education and results.
  3. Rotten to the core.
  4. So, what is liturgy?
  5. And speaking of churchly things, how about why Lent?
  6. Zeitgeist = angst?
  7. Whatever your notion of abortion and birth control, uhm, any sane view of goverment as limited puts this as a thing government should not pay for or do.
  8. Speaking of ethical dilemmas … here’s one for ya.
  9. Let’s see we have a President who in school specifically notes that he sought out Communist and Socialist teachers … seems to me the speaker is wrong, Mr Obama called himself that first.
  10. Some more discussion of raising the minimum productivity floor. When I asked for explanation how the President feels this is a “middle class” offering … I got nada. Gosh, that’s a surprise.

Wednesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Well, I had PBJ today because it’s Wednesday (normal time Wed/Fri fast) .. Lent doesn’t start for me until Cheesefare on the evening of March 10.  So … why does the East begin Lent on a Monday and the West on a Wednesday and both count 40 days to Pascha/Easter. Well, because the West doesn’t count Sundays as part of Lent but the East does … but the East doesn’t count Holy week as part of Lent. Got it? What I forget is whether the East includes Lazarus Saturday (before Palm Sunday) as part of Lent or not … and one might note that the Lenten fast for the Orthodox continues (of course) through Holy Week.
  2. Fer the Ms Palin fans.
  3. Doctor or not … for myself I could not really care less if you call me Mr or Dr (and yes, I do have a PhD thing in Physics)
  4. That Chicago way.
  5. Awe noted. Hmm, anything like the Psalmist noted the fear of God as the beginning of wisdom? How much modern man has learned, eh?
  6. Fear or the lack thereof.
  7. Notes for future gang wars.
  8. Shame and armor.
  9. So, why on earth does our President think the “middle class” has any relevance to the minimum wage? And that’s an interesting take on min-wage, not as a wage limiter but a productivity minimum.
  10. Debunking (most of) some silliness around the alleged dearth of geniuses.
  11. What you don’t want to see in the morning when you go out to your car.
  12. Demographic shifts that you don’t hear much about.
  13. So much fun might be had coming up with geekish instead of macho handles, so Maverick  and Goose becomes pocket protector-ized and pencil-necked?
  14. What will be needed for when revolution hits.
  15. Duh. Truth to power becomes Stating the obvious to power.

Tuesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. So, Mr Obama has some magical mythical pathway to a nuclear weapon free world, … how’s this fit in?
  2. Cantor ism?.
  3. It is very likely, alas, that the criteria used by liberals which judge most of the GOP as racist, tar your hero such as well.
  4. Epistemic closure and some symptoms.
  5. A reminder for the POTUS state-of-the-onion speech.
  6. When a thing which isn’t happening is discussed over whether that’s a problem.
  7. Ya think?
  8. A drone discussion.
  9. Drones here too.
  10. Why? What is simpler than cui bono?
  11. Jackboots next?

Western and Eastern Easter/Pascha calendars are very far off this year (Eastern Lent begins at sunset on March 10) … I wish the best for everyone who begins their Lenten fast tomorrow, may your journey be fruitful.

Monday Highlights

Good morning

  1. A conspiracy theory considered.
  2. Yah, and what will we find out in the coming months and years. Betya waterboarding will come back … this time liberals will be defending it.
  3. Of life and freedoms.
  4. Another reason for the dismal label, a thing is and it isn’t.
  5. I suspect the real reason for the contraception kerfuffle is to act as distraction from other follies.
  6. Death, space, and an argument recalled.
  7. SSM and an argument against it outside of religious reasonings.
  8. Anti-drug adverts done right.
  9. High capacity mags.
  10. Microsoft suckage.
  11. A plane (not plain) contest.
  12. Border incursions.

Friday Highlights

Well, last weekend we saw “Parker” … and subsequently I’ve downloaded and read two (and am reading a third) Westlake/Stark/Parker books. Daughter #2 wants to see “Warm Bodies” which may be in the offing. On to links

  1. Fancy words don’t make it right.
  2. Need’n a little nuclear power, eh?
  3. Back up a minute, I know you “can’t joke about” that there, but why? And if you figure it’s an infringement, how to stop it?
  4. One of Mr Obama’s most effusive fans realizes he’s been mislead. For the one-liner retort.
  5. Talking drones.
  6. Although I’m more in agreement with this.
  7. Yikes.
  8. Now that’s dumb. Penises, not men, rape women (and criminal insanity, social rage and all that have nothing to bear on that). Cars, not drunk drives kill (social irresponsibility has no bearing). Geesh.
  9. ‘Cause graft is the Chicago Way, duh.
  10. Well, for anyone who doesn’t think there’s an education bubble … think again.
  11. I for one, always hated riding a ITT in a crosswind.
  12. Remember Ms Clinton’s 3am advert?
  13. 3 for Obamacare, here, here, and here.

Thursday Highlights

Well, we made it to Thursday without too too much of the embarrassing theatrics, eh?

  1. Now that is quite striking.
  2. Ooooh, let’s try to open old wounds.
  3. Theology, anthropology and political science all rolled in together. Whaddya get out? The Constitution.
  4. Obamacare estimates.
  5. If that is not satire, then there’s another reason to call it the dismal science.
  6. Never happen. As soon as the Democrats cotton that legalizing polygamy will end the inheritance tax … they’ll be dead set against it.
  7. Not an AR. This.
  8. Inconsistency.
  9. Remembering Plato apparently fondly.
  10. Gosh, remember just earlier this week … I linked charts indicating corporate “sitting on cash” is a myth, makes the title tag-line ironic, eh?

Wednesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. I’m seeing a lot of dog (not) barking with regards to the left’s defense (or more to the point their lack of same) of Mr Hagel. 
  2. A quiet retraction.
  3. Kinda obvious, eh?
  4. That worked out real well.
  5. My first thought was taxes … not investors.
  6. Maybe it’s this?
  7. Interesting hermeneutical divination on the word imminent. More here.
  8. Anthro-warming skeptics note warming.
  9. Woops.
  10. Obamacare and contracteption … following the money trail.
  11. A smaller nation doesn’t shy from calling a spade a spade.
  12. Now there’s a really dumb excuse. (do you think there would be applause if a Congress-critter said “I coudn’t print it … so I’m passing out pdfs on USB sticks).
  13. Cinema.
  14. Green and anti-warming hype is more about indulgences than actually changing the world.

Tuesday Highlights

Good morning to y’all!

  1. Newsflash, some fired employees are disgruntled.
  2. Duh.
  3. Having taught two daughters to drive stick … it’s really not that hard. I suspect fictional exaggeration.
  4. Same sex marriage.
  5. Hmm. Not impressed with US foreign policy I suspect.
  6. Pretty pistol … one slipped past quality checks however.
  7. Chronology of drone strike procedures, aka how we changed in our ways of committing undeclared acts of war.
  8. There’s a slang term for that, “short eyes” … the answer isn’t covering the girls … its jailing the pervs (and in a place were short eyes is a de facto death sentence by fellow convict for the convicted). Remember the movie “Stick”?
  9. So, now everyone knows about Richard III. Here’s an excellent book on his life by one of the best writers of English historical fiction in the stacks.
  10. Hence …. dismal science.
  11. Heh … and we have found the heel to fill it.
  12. Uh. Riiiight. ;)
  13. Don’t worry, the liberal elite think SSM is more important (even though the numbers affected are basically on par).

Monday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Blaster?
  2. Well, in the Super-Bowl I liked two ads, this one and this one.
  3. What is being taught here?
  4. Meta links via Brandon.
  5. “No doubt” indeed. There are two ways to tackle runaway deficits, cut spending or raise more in taxes. Alas, studies show only the former works to actually cut deficits.
  6. How not to make an argument … present Stalin as a positive example for your side.
  7. Someone is unaware that fiscal libertarians can be as reflective as the next guy.
  8. A questionable vehicle.
  9. I too was confused on why he pretends that’s hard (and btw java’s “jar” command has pretty much the same options).
  10. Not for whittling.
  11. Praise for Mr Boehner.
  12. Trading and causality.

Super Bowl Comments

Well so far not much (close) game, we’ll see if SF can make it a game in the 2nd half. First ad was on that got me to laugh (the Forte robot girl ad).

I had a mild preference for the 49ers. I liked Jim H. as a quarterback for my Bears … and the 49ers young quarterback seems a gifted athlete who will be good to watch for some years. On the other hand, I enjoyed the Blind Side movie so Mr Oher is a person to root for.

Anyhow … enjoy.

Friday (and Thursday) Highlights

Good morning. It’s zero out here in the Chicago south suburbs … bracing is what that is.

  1. The first sentence seems to be the hypothesis for what follows … do you think it’s true (in both respects … that is, it it true and does Mr Obama believe it to be true)?
  2. A short film.
  3. The patron saint of … what?
  4. Gun run.
  5. Doncha hate when that happens.
  6. Better bike news.
  7. So … when you consider that the left wants to put stiff restrictions on what is allowed in the Constitution … well, that doesn’t happen with other stuff like religion, the press, and speech (remember the Volokh series on speech on college campuses) Right? Oh, never mind.
  8. More on the press here.
  9. Profiling and the assault ban.
  10. Apparently my notions of what is tactically suggested is outdated, but I’ll bet Mr Biden didn’t know that either. And I still contend a semi-auto shotgun in Sandy Hook wouldn’t have had a better outcome.
  11. Corporate cash holding growth explained.
  12. No. Duh. And the guy who ruled yes must be an idiot.
  13. Remember the claims that Obama has reduced the deficit? … Not so you’d notice.
  14. No names and why.
  15. Why we don’t want Uncle Sam minding more of the store.
  16. For the super bowl .. I really like Mr Arkush when he’s on the radio … he write pretty well too.
  17. Snerk. (So … am I a terrible person ’cause I found that amusing)?
  18. Chick-Fil-A and football.
  19. From a communist on guns. And the left (TPM?) has been touting the “armed citizens” can’t stand up to modern trained soldiers. Right. That’s a straw man. But a politician has to go out in and face his public.

Wednesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Plotting retirement.
  2. For those who suspect, just suspect mind you, that cyclists are just a tad different.
  3. Gosh, do you wonder why such stories aren’t in the mainstream?
  4. Ze French in Mali.
  5. Oh, and for when “just a flashlight” isn’t quite enough.
  6. OWS demographics, what the right knew all along … did the left?
  7. Well, you may have quibbles with the President’s Holocaust statement … but at least he didn’t try that.
  8. Woops.
  9. Interesting. Say irrigation was shown to be a larger factor in global warming CO2 from burning hydrocarbons … what then? Would the greens still be agin it?
  10. Heh.
  11. Taking your game seriously.

That Assault Weapon Ban

Is a straw ban. Everyone (except possibly a few nuts) is fully in favor of an actual assault weapon ban. Assault weapons have always been illegal. The problem is what an assault weapon actually is and what it is not. An assault weapon by definition is a automatic-fire capable carbine with a quickly replaceable magazine. These are illegal. Always have been. A single shot semi-automatic rifle is not a assault rifle. A full length rifle is not an assault rifle.

What the knuckleheads in Congress call an “assault weapons ban” is a “scary looking rifle ban” … which alas has the kindergarten sound that it deserves but want to avoid.

This has been a PSA from your friendly neighborhood blogger.

Tuesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Redemption and a Tolstoy masterwork.
  2. Ms Austen.
  3. Unicorns and the left’s energy policies.
  4. Gun control and those far right nuts in, uhm, Massachusetts?
  5. You know, ’cause we’re at war with them too.
  6. History made simpler.
  7. Our Administration’s financial shenanigans … or put simpler … making sure of your landing pad for after your time in office.
  8. A man and his witness.
  9. Underreported!? or just plain ghastly.
  10. Why not to leave Afghanistan too quickly.
  11. 6 scenarios.
  12. A North American bishop installed.
  13. From the sun-never-sets-on … to lack of pride as a method.
  14. Well, the first step in letting history repeat is to insist that those circumstance were insane, senseless, and incomprehensible. And interesting tactic for a person who is claimed has a special ability to understand others.

Monday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Media bias … 1k people gather that’s news (if it’s a liberal cause) 500k gather … not news because it’s not a liberal cause. 
  2. Or maybe it’s not bias.
  3. Not Carbon … whoops.
  4. Police tech.
  5. Deceit and election tactics.
  6. What do you have to lose?
  7. Government motors … not doing so well strategically speaking.
  8. On safety netting.
  9. Some notes on the much abused anthropic principle.
  10. Newsflash, museums have been doing that for 40 years.
  11. An accusation of liberal racism.
  12. Apparently I’m ornery. Certainly there are day’s on which my girls would concur.
  13. Pretzels in Congressional testimony.

Friday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Some history.
  2. Assault weapons for which the left wants no state controls.
  3. Heh.  Oh, and heh.
  4. Not noticing that Texas gun violence is lower than Chicago’s, which has some of the most stringent gun laws in the country.
  5. Slipping off the White House talking points.
  6. The oldest (working) computer.
  7. Better than gun control, gun advice.
  8. Obama’s shower bully and race.
  9. ’cause Mr Biden thinks a double-ought 10 gauge pump action would have done lots lots less damage in Sandy Hook.
  10. Apparently all you have to do is change the name of your gun to be legal if you’re a manufacturer.
  11. And … an assault weapon ban and Sandy Hook? No effect at all. No such weapon was used. Oops.
  12. “He can see the other side” … does anyone have smidge of evidence to back that up? Or is just like the “he’s really smart” … with no evidence claim?
  13. Graft is profitable. Always has been.
  14. More State stupidity.
  15. On a statement made at the inaugural address.
  16. Inclusion.

Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Confused about the nature of religion, worship is public and communal.
  2. Speaking of confused, one school is quite so.
  3. Mandates.
  4. (not) acting alone.
  5. Cultural movement, regress or progress (or even sustainable)?
  6. A boy to note.
  7. Drunk drivings vs suicides.
  8. Noting silliness on the gun control front.
  9. Lies of 2012, some of the more notable noted.
  10. At this point … does it matter (if we were shown to be inexperienced stupid boobs), well maybe maybe not, but shouting doesn’t prove anything?
  11. For those who reject, … uhm, genetics.
  12. Der Speigel and climate change.
  13. The “assault weapon ban” and Sandy Hook.

Wednesday Highlights

Good morning

  1. On abortion and ethics.
  2. Optimism?
  3. A day remembered.
  4. Regulatory silliness down under.
  5. So, explain why a gun like this needs tighter regulations.
  6. And a hammerless single action.
  7. I’m not seeing the coming revolution notion.
  8. Snerk.
  9. Blind spots.
  10. Signing up and is the question of “who” is the Executive relevant?
  11. Ethics and God.
  12. As the US moves to “more corruption” … another state struggles with fighting its own.
  13. Is there a crisis?

Cars, Guns, and Civil Society

Lots of silliness has ensued in the weeks following the shooting in Newton, CT. Gun advocates suggest putting TSA-like agents in every school (as if schools aren’t expensive enough), gun control advocates suggest restricting “assault weapons” (a fictional category for semi-automatic rifles) and “high capacity magazines” (as if the 1-2 seconds to swap magazines would really make a difference) and basically making it far harder to obtain guns (against for example, peer reviewed academic studies showing that the elasticity to gun availability is .1 to .3 out of the 50-60 gun related deaths per 10k people per year.  As much posturing as we have on this matter, if the time the President and his Renfieldian co-conspirator Biden have wasted giving speeches on gun control more children have died in auto accidents than did in the incident they pretend is motivating their interest in gun control. But do they go after drivers and car safety? Nope.

Frequent commenter Boonton has suggested stopping gun violence by tying the liability (financial) for any gun violence to the gun owner …. the economic study above suggests the actuarial costs of such a tie would be about $10/year if you own a gun for his suggested $100k payout. The higher cost to that suggestion is figuring out how to actually reliably track the ownership trail for the millions of guns out there not to speak of those purchased in the future. That will change … what? Offer a public notion that were-guild is legal notion whose time has come?

There are those who would suggest that gun ownership is part of a former age and that modern man doesn’t have any call for guns. There are two problems with that suggestion. It suggests that the person who says that has never ever ever lived in rural America. Get out out of your current aviary and take notice that the majority males and many females living outside of cities are avid hunters. The second problem is akin to the Sudan vs Congo problem alluded to above. In the Sudan 10′s to a few hundreds of thousands of people were killed in a genocidal spasm of violence. In the Congo over the last decades millions  have died. Which got the angst and notice in the press … the Sudan not the Congo. What kills Americans (besides lack of exercise)? Cars. Automobile deaths dwarf those by gun violence by orders of magnitude. But do we have hue and cry for limiting automobile speeds to under 30 mph? Do they cry for immediately restricting cars to be only driven by state licensed professional drivers in state owned and operated vehicles? Nope. So those who decry “more gun control” need to explain why “more car control” is not a higher priority, many orders of magnitude more die that way …. so you’d think that would be were the legal and social action would be driven. But no, this is just like you’d think that the violence in the Congo would get more notice than the Sudan and Darfur was noticed. So … if you think you don’t have any call for guns in the modern age, well some people disagree and exactly the same argument you’d pretend to use to explain why you can buy a car that you prefer and drive it at more than 25-30 mph the argument exactly paralleled that you have to turn around and (hypocritically) argue applies to your desire for driving fast but not to someone else who wants to do something that you do not.

But … that begs the question. Lots of people (if not most of the people) suggest stupid things on both sides of the argument (although to be truthful, post Newton, more of the errant stupidity comes from the control/restrict side of the aisle …. however suggesting putting TSA-like guards in cash strapped schools is pretty dumb in itself). Can some intelligent suggestions be made?

Where do we see gun violence of the unwanted kind? We find gun violence in sporadic random mass shootings (like Colorado, Ms Giffords, and the recent Newtown shooting), armed robberies and muggings, some assaults and rapes, in home invasions, gang violence, suicides, and in some crimes of passion.  If there were no legal access to guns, it is likely that gun usage in the suicides and crimes of passions would fall slowly over the years as gun ownership slowly dropped. Gangs and drug traffickers aren’t obtaining their guns legally and for that matter lots of them aren’t using guns (such as fully automatic guns) which are available anywhere legally now.regions in which gun ownership is close to 100% of the population don’t have much higher gun violence (and in many places it is lower). Clearly possession isn’t the problem. Like cars (and say impaired by drugs or inattention) …. the bigger problem is intentional misuse by a very very small minority. As an aside the liberal (urban) plea for gun control and less guns in general sounds a lot like the liberal insistence that government tax us to provide charitable services (which only makes more sense if you are a standard liberal who does not (willingly) give to charity in any real measure) … that is the urban liberal is against guns because he isn’t safe with them … and figures everyone else is just like him.

So we have a variety of issues to solve. How are might these individually be addressed? Let’s quickly run this list of problems and suggest ways to ameliorate them:

  • Random mass shootings and many assaults, muggings and rapes might be solved (as suggested elsewhere) by more, not less people who carry and are trained in the use of firearms. Specifically, if the President and his cadre of liberal intelligentsia instead of moving against the presence of guns in our society tried to push that more and more of our women carried and had training … it would be a lot harder for mass shooters to get much traction. Much like the Darwin award contestant who tried to use a pistol to hold up a gun store (and got shot by a number of customers) if those schoolteachers were armed, it is quite likely that either the shooter wouldn’t have even tried or that he wouldn’t have been able to continue his rampage for so long. One of the TPM anti-gun crusaders pointed out that if you pull a gun in the presence of an active shooter that you become a target. Yes. But if 10% of the movie theater audience does so … there is no longer one target … and the odds of the shooter surviving long become themselves long. Arming our girls is the solution to both the danger of unstable mentally ill white boys and to the alleged rape epidemic and violence against women in general. 
  • Legal-to-purchase (non-automatic) Guns and fully automatic weapons in the presence of gangs are, in my view, a lot like trying to solve the “problem” of corporate money in politics. Those with the money want to spend it. It is impossible (as we see) to stop them with regulations. Just so with guns and gangs. How then to proceed? You have two choices … to fight it with greater force (police) or to move to take the profits out of the activities they perform to make their money.
  • It might also be useful to note that magazine limits and caliber limits are not good federal laws. You may want to pretend that no person in Chicago has any need for a .50 caliber Desert Eagle pistol. But … against grizzly bears in the Montana and Alaskan backwoods may still be that same pistol. And “need” is a fuzzy word. Remember, you don’t actually ever “need” to drive more than 25 mph. You just want to. And so too does the Chicago shooter. He might want to fire that .50 cal. So … remember that as you whiz along on the freeway at 70 mph.

Tuesday Highlights

Woo Hoo!

  1. Cool … because they are rare, perhaps in a post-WW-II northern Europe?
  2. Now the left will get to disavow Mr Silver.
  3. Silliness north of the border.
  4. Treaties can do that? And … hierarchy and the Constitution.
  5. Occasionally we need to actually overcome that temptation, that’s the rub.
  6. I wonder if there is a reasoned argument against chivalry and good manners.
  7. Mr Morsi forgets evolution puts him in the same bucket.
  8. How liberal or moderate?
  9. Rhetoric examined. And what the President doesn’t want you to do, he wants it the other way round.
  10. Dan Simmons (in his Illium/Olympus books) argued that androids were in Homer’s Iliad. Hephaestus constructed them to assist him.
  11. Ethics meets economics … or does it?
  12. Perhaps a better start for a discussion about dignity and human life than abortion.
  13. Predictions.
  14. Drugs in the modern world.

Ahm Back

OK. Regular blogging will return tomorrow … and later tonight I’ll finish and publish the gun control article I wrote half of two weeks ago flying here, I didn’t finish it on the plane … and didn’t have time to finish it until tonight.