Vision, This Man Had It

When it comes to the technology field we get some great predictions and quotations. For instance take this article written in 1995 for Newsweek:

After two decades online, I’m perplexed. It’s not that I haven’t had a gas of a good time on the Internet. I’ve met great people and even caught a hacker or two. But today, I’m uneasy about this most trendy and oversold community. Visionaries see a future of telecommuting workers, interactive libraries and multimedia classrooms. They speak of electronic town meetings and virtual communities. Commerce and business will shift from offices and malls to networks and modems. And the freedom of digital networks will make government more democratic.

Baloney. Do our computer pundits lack all common sense? The truth in no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works.

That’s what I call a visionary! Oh and:

Then there’s cyberbusiness. We’re promised instant catalog shopping—just point and click for great deals. We’ll order airline tickets over the network, make restaurant reservations and negotiate sales contracts. Stores will become obselete. So how come my local mall does more business in an afternoon than the entire Internet handles in a month? Even if there were a trustworthy way to send money over the Internet—which there isn’t—the network is missing a most essential ingredient of capitalism: salespeople.

Yeah there’s now way that online shopping thing could catch on. Never!

The Starbucks Drama Continues

Anybody following any gun rights sites as of late knows there is an ongoing drama fest with Starbucks. The drama is being create by the mostly irrelevant Brady Campaign Against Good Ideas. The Brady Bunch want Starbucks to ban weapons from their establishments while Starbucks doesn’t want to get involved in this debate.

Joe Huffman makes a good point in this debate. The best thing we pro-gun people can do is quietly go about our business, patronize Starbucks, and not make an issue of this. Let’s show the Brady Bunch how irrelevant they really are and ignore their little whine fest and let Starbucks have their wish of staying out of the gun issue.

Quote of the Month

Just a funny thing that happened this weekend. It was one of my friend’s birthdays. This friend is also adamantly anti-gun. Of course the topic of guns briefly came about and eventually the following paraphrase was said:

Burg I’m not going to debate you. You argue with facts and I’d need to prepare for a debate with you.

That made me feel pretty good. Remember kids learning your facts is important because anti-gunners don’t know what to use to combat such terrible things. They need time to prepare for such frontal assaults.

Yes this is a pretty pointless post but hey it’s my site and I get to make pointless posts if I want to.

Why I Prefer Common Guns

Many people prefer esoteric guns. These people like having unique guns for various reasons, myself included. For instance I have a SPAS-12 which is kind of a rare breed. It’s fun and a blast to bring out to the range because it’s a very good conversation starter. But when it breaks finding parts and information is almost impossible. Right now it won’t feed shells out of the tube and the gas ring is defunct. Thankfully I found out the same gas ring used on Remington 11-87 shotguns will work on the SPAS-12 but the other problem is harder to diagnose and finding parts is a problem.

This is why I primarily like having common guns. For instance if a part breaks on my Glock I can easily find a replacement. The same goes for my AR-15 and AK-47. To top it off not only can I easily find parts but I can parts for a reasonable price.

Anyways my advice is if you only have a few guns and don’t plan on expanding your collection much further make sure you have some common guns. Sure that fancy SPAS-12 looks cool but you aren’t going to be able to walk into your local gun store and get a replacement part should you need one.

Truth About Guns Mentioned in Latest JPFO Alert

Well guys it appears as though my podcast has hit the big time. I’ve been mentioned in the latest Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership e-mail alert. Of course the mention was entirely inadvertent. Here is an exert from the alert:

ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America’s Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

March 5th 2010

JPFO ALERT: LAMPOON A LEFTIST

We recently received an article from -The truthaboutguns.com
http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/03/robert-farago/jewish-gun-ownership-up/

It takes to task a sloppy and incomplete article by a leftist
Israeli newspaper about gun ownership.

Share it with an anti-gunner this weekend. You will be glad you
did.

So an accidental space between “The” and “truthaboutguns.com” nabbed me some free publicity. And I did check to ensure I had my domain before the other site and it appears as though The Truth About Guns started in February of 2010 while I started in 2009 so I have precedence. Does that matter at all? Not in the slightest to me but it’s always nice to be in a position where I don’t have to worry about changing my URL due to possible legal issues.

Either way I just thought that this was funny and I’d share it.

Some People Don’t Get Private Property

I’m been harping about Representative Paymar’s attempt to destroy the property rights of gun owners here in Minnesota. Well since my place of business gets a subscription to the Star Tribune I thought I’d check the Letters to the Editor section and see if anybody wrote about it. Two people did and they obviously don’t understand private property either. The first was written by Stephen Harlan-Marks of Robbinsdale:

Before gun lovers get the idea that state Rep. Michael Paymar’s gun show bill would take rifles from hunters or even handguns from those who feel they need them for protection (“Effort to tighten Minnesota’s gun law getting folks riled up,” March 3), let’s be clear about the bill’s objective. How many Minnesotans think anyone who wishes should be allowed to walk into a gun show and buy 10 AK-47s without a background check, much less a look at the terror watch list? I can’t imagine anyone needing sort of firepower to shoot pheasants or even to ward off a would-be burglar.

The second letter was penned by Peter Clark of Roseville:

Interesting and shocking: On the front page, an article about how upset some people would be if they had to get a permit to buy a gun at a gun show. Then on the first page of the Twin Cities section, the headline “‘Please don’t kill nobody else'”. Maybe gun advocates should pause and think about what they would say if one of their family members were shot down. Remember, guns don’t kill people — people with guns kill people. Thank you, Rep. Paymar, for wanting to set things right. It’s far too easy to get guns today.

So to counter the ignorance I sent the following letter:

After reading a couple letters to the editor dealing with Representative Paymar’s “gun show” bill I believe several facts need to be stated. First and foremost this bill isn’t about gun shows it’s about private sales. Here in Minnesota if I want to sell a firearm, my personal property, I may do so without going through a federally licensed dealer. Paymar’s bill is an attempt to eliminate that right. Private individuals are not allowed to use the FBI’s NICS background check system therefore, if this bill passes, anybody in Minnesota who wants to sell a firearm would have to pay a federally licensed dealer to perform the background check and do the transfer.

The reason gun shows are brought into this is because people will go to gun shows to sell their firearms. However a massive majority of people selling firearms at gun shows are federally licensed dealers and therefore must perform background checks. Additionally a private individual can only sell so many firearms before the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) considers that person to be “in the business” and thus must obtain a federal firearms license. So you will not have private individuals selling “10 AK-47s” at a gun show.

Let’s look at a few other facts. The ATF did a study where they concluded that less than 2% of firearms obtained by criminals were purchased at gun shows. Furthermore background checks do not prevent anything. The killers at Virginia Tech and Fort Hood both used legally purchased firearms from federally licensed dealers. This means background checks were performed on both killers.

Finally the number of guns being purchased by Minnesotans has skyrocketed while our rate of violent crime has been plummeting. In this environment why is there a need to add further government interference and burden to the lives on Minnesotans?

Of course being the paper’s nickname is the Red Star for a reason I doubt mine will ever get printed.