Saturday, October 17, 2009

A vote for the .44 Special

Dick Jones says that, at least for him , the Charter Arms Bulldog in .44 Special works as a carry gun. His argument has its points. The simplicity of the revolver couple with a potent cartridge has much to recommend it to those of us who carry concealed. Unlike Dick, I do worry about the speed of reloads. Yeah, I'm not very likely to have to use it in a self defense situation, and even less likely to have to reload during one. I am not, however, willing to bet my life on the proposition that I will never have to.

Feel free to argue for either side in comments.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

So the Democrats want to use a "nuclear option", do they?

Knowing that their precious health care "reform" would go down to ignominious defeat if they played by the rules, Senate Democrats have decided that they will force the issue through the Senate by treating it in the same manner as budgetary issues. Well, there is a certain logic to it, since it will make health care spending one of the biggest items in an already overly bloated federal budget.

But you know, there is one thing about using a nuclear bomb (as the idiom refers to)--you'd better be damn sure you're way outside the blast radius before it goes off.

I figure Venus will be about right if they pull this stunt.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Dear Republican National Committee

I keep getting mail from you, concerned that "I've left you". Allow me to explain the situation to you in terms that even you can understand.

Until you excommunicate these RINO [insert your favorite term for an illegitimate male or female here] from the party, I'm registered as Independent. GTF over it.

Oh really?

Coming Soon to a Swamp near You

I don't freaking think so.

The world sees the Big O as weak

(Via the Drudge Report)

A top Russian security official says Moscow reserves the right to conduct pre-emptive nuclear strikes to safeguard the country against aggression on both a large and a local scale, according to a newspaper interview published Wednesday.

Presidential Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev also singled out the U.S. and NATO, saying Moscow's Cold War foes still pose potential threats to Russia despite what he called a global trend toward local conflicts.


Sure. let's cancel that expensive missile defense system. Then we can give all of that money to people who are likely to vote for us in 2012.

How's that Change workin' for ya, America?

Counting our chickens

Apparently, we're so good we can do it before they hatch. As the Dow approaches the magical 10,000 mark (again), we get this from the pros at CNBC:

The bigger story may end up being a better holiday shopping season and continued upside in corporate earnings.

It's mid-October, and we're already calling the holiday shopping season a big success. Maybe, maybe not, but I wouldn't be putting my money into stocks just yet.

Edit, 1803: Bloomberg reports "Sales at U.S. retailers fell less than anticipated in September...". This gets you a Dow of 10,000? We are now in that "bizarre alternate reality".

Monday, October 12, 2009

80% of economists...

...are probably wrong.

More than 80 percent of economists believe the U.S. recession is over and an expansion has begun, but they expect the recovery will be slow as worries over unemployment and high federal debt persist.

Foreclosures are up, unemployment is up, retail sales are down for the year. Does that sound like a recovery to you?

My personal belief is that this is far from over. Watch the sales numbers as we come into the fullness of the Christmas shopping season; they will tell the story. Avoid debt, pay off debt, build stores of cash and the necessities of life. If things do get better, then you're well-positioned to take advantage of the good times. If they don't, you're positioned to survive the bad times. Either way, you win.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Don't foul yourselves, anti-freedomites

The N.C. Supreme Court drew national attention a few weeks ago as the country's first court to rule that a convicted felon has a right to own a gun.

Yes, they did, although it really didn't draw much attention outside on North Carolina. Now, at the risk of alienating some of the readership (all four of you), I'm going to tell you that I agree with the ruling. For quite a while I've believed that if someone commits a crime, is caught and is given a sentence, then once that sentence is served, they're done--their debt is paid in full. They should get welcomed back into the community of citizens with all their rights intact.

(I also believe that if they make a habit of that pattern of behavior, then we need to lock them up and throw away the key. We need people to clean up toxic waste dumps and so on. The habitual felon sounds like an excellent candidate for those sorts of positions.)

Others disagree with me, especially those who would use any excuse they can to take away our civil rights. One particular sad little panda at the Brady Bunch is a short step from a major bout of PSH over the ruling:

"I don't think gun dealers should be deciding the constitutionality of gun laws," said Dennis Henigan, vice president for law and policy at the pro-gun-control Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington.

Yes folks, NC Supreme Court Justice Edward Thomas Brady is an FFL holder. Oh my, the sky is falling!

Let's take Mr. Hegigan's idea a bit further. Using his "logic", a justice who owns property could never rule on a case involving property. A justice who belongs to an organization could never rule on a case by an organization. Or as former NC Supreme Court Chief Justice Burley Mitchell says, "I've got a driver's license, but I regularly ruled on cases involving automobiles and driver's rights. If a judge starts recusing over connections that remote, you'll have a judiciary that can dodge every difficult case."

Somehow, I just don't think this would work in our society.

Another sad little panda takes another route to Messy Pants-land:

Gene Nichol, a UNC Chapel Hill law professor, called the ruling "the most aggressive gun rights decision" in the country. "Then you read that the highly-activist opinion is written by a gun dealer and manufacturer," he said. "It sure smells."

Some one at UNC-Chapel Hill who doesn't believe in civil rights he disagrees with. Now there's a shock. Apparently Mr. Nichol, he who professes law at UNC, hasn't heard of a little thing known as "the Heller decision". I bet he's going to be downright livid when he gets wind of that one.

I'll give Mr. Nichol credit for one thing--at least he got closer to an argument that could hold water. However, since the plaintiff lost his rights due to a 2004 action by our wonderful legislature, and Justice Brady apparently didn't get into the business until 2007, it sort of falls flat. Oopsie.

The lesson that should be reinforced here is that "gun control" isn't about guns. It's about control. Those who believe themselves better, smarter and more enlightened than we think that gives them the right to force us to live by their rules.

As one of my favorite fictional characters once said, "I do not hold with that."