Month: May 2010

I Don’t Like this One Bit

Joe Huffman brings up a scary decision that just made it’s way out of the Supreme Court. The case that was just decided pretty much gives the government power to incarserate you indefinably. Of course this case involved a sex offender which is why speaking against the ruling will automatically get you hatred from your peers but alas I could care less so here we go:

In a broad endorsement of federal power, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Congress has the authority under the Constitution to allow the continued civil commitment of sex offenders after they have completed their criminal sentences.

Yes that’s right even though you’ve completed your sentence handed down by a judge after conviction by a jury the federal government can chose to extend your punishment after the fact. The very scary part here is the fact the extension of punishment doesn’t even have to pass muster with a jury but only a judge:

The federal law at issue in the case allows the government to continue to detain prisoners who had engaged in sexually violent conduct, suffered from mental illness and would have difficulty controlling themselves. If the government is able to prove all of this to a judge by “clear and convincing” evidence — a heightened standard, but short of “beyond a reasonable doubt” — it may hold such prisoners until they are no longer dangerous or a state assumes responsibility for them.

We all know phrases like “beyond a reasonable double” and “clear and convincing” translate into “whatever the fuck we want” when spoken by the federal government so neither of those two clauses fill me with confidence. Likewise a single judge could very well decide that you stay in jail for life even if you were only sentenced to 10 years.

So now we come to the big problem what to do with people in prison whom are still deemed a potential threat to society? In essence in order to keep such a person in prison we have to give up some of our liberty to the government. I’m a big believer in Benjamin Franklin’s quote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Personally I don’t believe the risk of losing any liberty could possibly outweigh the potential danger of releasing a prisoner even if they are dangerous.

Of course I’m not one to just complain without offering some kind of potential solution so here it is. If a person is charged with a sex offense (a real one not a bullshit one like taking a piss in public) make part of the punishment committing the offender to a mental facility where he or she can receive treatment and can not be let loose until a psychological evaluation has been passed (and by passed I mean judged by a board of psychologists chosen in a similar manner to a jury not a single doctor). Obviously it’s not a perfect solution but it would offer two things: a method of ensuring a dangerous person is not released into society and the said dangerous person can get treatment for their problem which simply imprisoning them doesn’t accomplish.

But simply stating somebody is a possible danger to society and keeping them locked up indefinably even though that goes beyond the handed down punishment is a violation of essential liberties. This type of power is far too dangerous to hand to the federal government, an entity that has proven itself time and time again they don’t give a shit about your rights.

Who Remembers The Old VHS

No not that VHS, this VHS. Well the Croats puts out a video demonostrating their new assault rifle which can be found over on The Firearm Blog.

Overall it looks cool although doesn’t seem to bring anything too revolutionary to the table. Of course that is until you realize it’s being produced by a nation who generally had more experience in combloc weapons than NATO weapons so this is a completely new endeavor.

For those of you who don’t know much about the VHS it’s a rifle being produced by the same company who gave us the HS 2000, better known in America as the XD, handgun. As an owner of a said handgun I must say if they can make a rifle even half as good as the HS 2000 I will be very impressed. Of course I’m doubting anybody is going to import a semi-automatic version of this new rifle since it’s mostly a clone of other things already on the market.

Oh My God Signs Kill

Apparently advertising can cause suicide! Every Day, No Days Off brought up a quote from a hack individuals claiming to be a counselor that really struck me as well researched and reasonable:

Year after year, I have been disgusted with the blaring and offensive gun show billboards that show no respect to women and millions of victims of violence. I have been disturbed by the plethora of “Buy & Sell Guns” signs littering our streets when the gun show comes to town.

And now the offending stupidity:

It’s a lot easier to pull a trigger than it is to use alternative, and often less successful, means. Putting “guns, knives, and machine guns for sale” advertisements in people’s faces – especially those who are feeling hopeless, or worse yet, angry – is a recipe for death. So stop the suggestive selling because the bottom line is, you don’t know who’s responding to your advertising and what your ads may “trigger.” Or alternatively, expect that people will die, and don’t be surprised by it.

Yes obviously my last statement was sarcasm. I like how this individuals said it’s easier to pull a trigger than to use alternative methods. You know there are a lot of drugs you can take that will kill you silently and with far less room for error (no I’m not talking Tylenol, if you want to kill yourself using that be prepared for a very painful and lingering death). So by this person’s “logic” we should ban all pharmaceutical advertisements because people can kill themselves via overdosing on drugs. Fuck we need to pan automobile advertisements to because some suicidal person may decide to buy one and ram it into a wall (of a school containing teh childrenz of course) at 100 miles per hour.

What this really comes down to is the moron who wrote this doesn’t like guns shows and therefore believes they shouldn’t be allowed to advertise (and I’m sure if you ask the individuals will state they should be outright banned as well).

3D Printers

There are several technologies I absolutely adore and 3D printers are one of them. 3D printers are devices that can make objects from a design file using a series of printer heads to slowly piece the object together from raw material. For instance you could make a Glock pistol frame from strings of plastic by melting the plastic which would be ejected from the printer heads in the desired form. I didn’t realize how far this technology had come along until I found out the made Robert Downy Jr.’s Iron Man armor for Iron Man 2 using such a device.

The suit parts were constructed using 3D printers which made fabrication as simple as designing them on a computer. Likewise they were made to fit Downy’s body making them more comfortable to wear on set.

I got excited about this technology when it was used in Daemon and Freedom(TM) by agents of the Daemon to construct pretty much everything they used. Of course the 3D printers used by Daemon agents were able to use metal dust to construct objects that plastic just wouldn’t work for (such as machine parts for their automated vehicles). Having such devices in your household would be a huge boon. Just imagine being able to construct a 1911 frame out of metal dust (Oh that would make the anti-gunners shit themselves endlessly). Or maybe construct replacement parts for your vehicle. So long as you have raw materials around you could conceivably create anything you want or need.

Currently this technology is pretty pricey although there is a project called MakerBot which is an open specification for creating such machines. MakerBots can currently made almost anything that is within 4″x4″x6″. Obviously that’s not very practical yet but it most certainly will become more advanced and cheaper as time goes on, that’s the benefit of technology.

Frankly this technology is practically limitless in it’s potential. I’m glad to see it’s advancing pretty fast.

Brady Bunch vs. NRA Events

The Truth About Guns has a nice post up comparing the NRA convention to a Brady Campaign shindig. Let’s see all members of the NRA get to attend the convention at no cost (besides that of the membership) while the Brady Bunch want:

RSVP:
Sponsorship Levels
James S. Brady Council Table – $25,000
Power Table – $15,000
Benefactor Table – $10,000
Patron Table – $5,000
Sponsor Table – $3,000
Sarah Brady Activist – $1,500

Those who purchase tickets for $1,500 and above are invited to attend a special VIP cocktail reception with honoree Helen Thomas, Jim and Sarah Brady and Brady President Paul Helmke.

Individual Tickets
Friend Ticket – $500
Supporter Ticket – $250

Holy Hell! I guess when you’ve only got a handful of members you really have to milk them for everything you can get just to pay the bills. In this case the NRA certainly, excuse the pun, give you more bang for your buck.

Hey News Outlets We Need to Talk

Right now you’re reading a blog. You’re probably doing this for one of two reasons: mass media sucks and they don’t report 90% of the important details in a story or you just like your news delivered with an appropriate amount of sarcasm and foul language. On this site I try to correct the first problem by providing links to important details (for instance the actual bill if I’m talking about a law) while also ensure you get your file of foul language.

Sometimes the first item isn’t very easy. It’s not easy because most media outlets leave our very important details (which is why the first item I listed exists). Because of this I have a couple of simple demands to make.

First when a story is talking about a bill I want to know the name of the bill along with the senate and house bill number so I can go read the bloody thing. Simple enough isn’t it? I want to see what’s actually in the damned bill instead of taking some “journalists” word for it. This would help eliminate a majority of the hysteria that floats around with currently pending legislation. Yes I know it’s all written in legalese and I’m not a lawyer but I’m a pretty smart guy and can gleam most of the information I need out of it.

Second when a story is talking about a court case give the named of the fucking court case. This is also pretty simple. For instance is John Q. Public is suing Jane Q. Private please make a reference to the case John Q. Public v. Jane Q. Private. I want to see what’s going on with the court case from multiple sources and having the actual name of the case would be beneficial.

That’s it those are my only demands. Why are either of these things so hard to do? At most it will add a few extra bytes to the size of the story and honestly bandwidth, even for people on dial-up, isn’t going to be negatively impacted by a few bytes.

Funniest Thing I’ve Seen All Year

So the NRA convention was this weekend and last I heard about 70,000 people were expected to show up. Well one thing is for certain when us gunnies have an event the anti-gunners are going to be there to protest. So how many protesters did they managed to assemble for this huge national convention? About ten.

Let me be the first to humbly say, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh God my side hurts from laughing so hard!

*ahem* That is all.