On Government Sanctioned Assassinations

Bruce Schneier has a link to an interesting piece [New York Times so you might hit the pay wall and be unable to read the article] talking about Obama’s recent authorization to kill an American citizen. The article doesn’t get into the politics so much as explain why targeted killings of terrorist organization leaders is a bad idea:

Particularly ominous are Jordan’s findings about groups that, like Al Qaeda and the Taliban, are religious. The chances that a religious terrorist group will collapse in the wake of a decapitation strategy are 17 percent. Of course, that’s better than zero, but it turns out that the chances of such a group fading away when there’s no decapitation are 33 percent. In other words, killing leaders of a religious terrorist group seems to increase the group’s chances of survival from 67 percent to 83 percent.

The data is referenced from this study [PDF]. Needless to say killing the leader more often than not increases the likelihood of the organization surviving. That makes sense considering these organizations believe they are being targeted by their enemies and seeing a demonstration of such is going to strengthen their resolve.

Somebody’s Clever Plan Wasn’t Thought Through Very Well

Every Day, No Days Off informs us that some marketing people don’t think their clever ideas through all the way:

A marketing stunt to promote a video game sparked an armed police callout after an actor pointed a fake gun at terrified pubgoers in Auckland’s Viaduct Basin.

About 20 revellers drinking outside Degree bar dived for cover after the promotions worker threatened them with a black imitation pistol about 8pm on Friday.

I can’t quite put my finger on it but something seems wrong with that promotional idea.

Hey Women These Earthquakes are Your Fault

No seriously they are. Undeniable proof has been brought forth on Dvorak Uncensored tying women to the recent rash of earthquakes:

Women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes, a senior Iranian cleric has said.

Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi’s comments follow a warning by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that a quake is certain to hit the capital Tehran and that many residents should relocate.

In a prayer sermon, the cleric said: ‘Many women who do not dress modestly… lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes.’

How can that string of cause and effect be denied? I dare you to find a scientist who can prove that wrong!

Improving the Glock Trigger

Uncle has a link to an article in Shooting Illustrated on how to improve the Glock trigger without any machining. It might be an interesting thing to try out for those of you who have trouble with Glock triggers. Considering the first thing I do when I purchase a new Glock is to throw an NY1 trigger spring in I don’ think this article applies to me.

What’s Their Purpose

Bitter over at Snowflakes in Hell pointed out another idiotic assortment of dribble that is trying to be passed off as a study. The adamantly anti-gun organization Violence Policy Center has released another one of their Google searches studies. This time they are “proving” that the NRA and its members are dangerous anti-government terrorists. The article advertising this study leads me to ask the question, what exactly is the Violence Policy Center’s purpose?

From what I gather through this article its not so much an anti-gun organization but a pro-government organization. Let’s look at some choice quotes:

The study offers examples of the NRA’s anti-government language, details NRA marketing to Tea Party supporters, and reveals links in nine states between NRA State Election Volunteer Coordinators, the Tea Party movement, and other factions of the “Patriot movement.”

Let me get this straight. You’re supposed to be afraid of the NRA and its supporters because some of those members are part of the tea party movement? Let’s jump into the way back machine here and remember what the original tea parties were about. They were about taxes. People attending these tea party events felt the government was stealing too much of their money in the form of taxes. They were (still are) paying more and want to pay less. Eventually the mass media tried spinning these events as anti-government movements and organized political parties (they were merely events at first). And now the tea party “movement” isn’t just about taxes but wanting small government in general. What’s wrong with that? A desire for small government was the basis on which this country was founded. Let’s rip into some more quotes:

The study finds that, echoing the language of the resurgent Patriot movement, the NRA routinely presents the election of Barack Obama as a virtually apocalyptic threat not only to gun ownership, but to the future of the United States itself.

Most people who vie for small government present the election of Barack Obama as a threat to the future of the United States. He’s the classic “progressive” big government guy which was made very apparent by the fact he did everything he could to ensure the mandatory health insurance bill was passed. Once again it seems that the Violence Policy Center is jockeying itself to be a pro-government organization instead of an anti-gun organization. But there’s more:

In a December 2009 direct-mail letter echoing the language of both the Tea Party movement and the Oath Keepers, the NRA urges the reader to join an “army whose highest allegiance is not to any individual or any political party but only to the cause of freedom.”

Are they seriously trying to spin this as a bad thing? So according to the Violence Policy Center the idea of our military having their allegiance to the concept of freedom is a bad thing? In my book that’s a great thing. I love the idea that of the army ignoring illegal orders such as confiscating guns from the sovereign individuals of the United States. I love the idea of our military refusing to enact marshal law. If that’s what our army is about I’m all for it. I guess the Violence Policy Center doesn’t feel the same way and believe our military should blindly obey the commands of our governing officials even if those orders violence the very Constitution this country was created on. But hey they’re not done yet:

The organization now also markets NRA clothing products emblazoned with the Gadsden “Don’t Tread on Me” flag, which has become the symbol of the Tea Party movement. The description for the NRA Gadsden tee shirt reads: “What goes around comes around. In the late 18th century, oppressed American patriots voiced their defiance of tyranny by exclaiming, ‘Don’t Tread on Me!’ Perhaps it’s time once again for Freedom-loving citizens to rally ’round the legendary slogan of the famous Gadsden flag.”

The Gadsden flag isn’t the “symbol of the Tea Party movement” but the symbol of those wanting smaller government. In fact according to this implication the Navy should be considered terrorists as they fly the Gadsden flag to this day.

I think the Violence Policy Center needs to take a look at what their real purpose is. It is becoming more and more obvious their position is the ensure government can do as it pleases without any restriction. After all we need to ban guns because members of the NRA hold libertarian ideals! Oh the humanity! There are people who believe that government shouldn’t be interfering with their everyday lives! What will they think of next?

No More Nerf Gun Fights

At least in Illinois. Days of our Trailers let us know that the city of Charleston, Illinois has decided kids having fun should be illegal and hence have banned the discharge of toy guns:

“WEAPONS: A. Discharge of Weapons: It shall be unlawful to discharge any firearm, air gun, BB gun, pistol, cannon, toy gun, bow, mechanically drawn bow, or any type of mechanical device projecting pellets, arrows, missiles or projectiles, leaden or otherwise or any other type of missile excepting in a regularly established shooting gallery or unless fired or discharged for ceremonial purposes with a weapon that may cause a report but does not deliver a projectile capable of causing serious injury and with the approval of the Chief of Police; provided, that this subsection shall not be construed to prohibit any officer of the law from discharging a firearm in the performance of his/her duty or for training purposes at an authorized police training facility; nor to any citizen for the discharge of a firearm when lawfully defending his person or property.”

If something could possibly be used in any manner to have fun we need to ban it immediately!