Tag: You Can’t Cure Stupid

An Interesting Observation

I’ve been thinking and have made a rather interesting observation. Since the uprising in Tunisia there have been political dissent in several countries in the Middle East including Egypt, Libya, and Syria. In each case the people have finally become fed up with the actions of their government, drawn a line in the sand, and old those in power to get the fuck out. The actions of these political dissidents have been directed almost exclusively at the government which they hold grievances against.

Meanwhile in the United Kingdom (UK) events unfolded that caused a great deal of anger in the people towards their government, which sparked uprisings in the form of riots. Unlike the uprisings in the Middle East that have been directed towards the offending governments the uprising in the UK is being directed at private businesses, homes of private individuals, and other people who had nothing to do with the offending actions of the government.

Anti-Gunner Idiocy on Parade

Sometimes I come across an article full of so much bullshit and stupidity that I have to actually take a few minutes to re-read it and see if it actually says what I thought it said after the first reading. Uncle pointed out one of those articles dealing with the recent massacre in Norway. It’s not good to make your entire article irrelevant in the first paragraph but this one did exactly that:

DEEP IN his 1,518-page manifesto, Anders Behring Breivik, the man accused of killing 68 people at a Norwegian youth camp last month, explained how he acquired the ammunition that he used in the attack: “10 x 30 round magazines – .223 cal at 34 USD per mag. Had to buy through a smaller US supplier (who again ordered from other suppliers) as most suppliers have export limitations. . . . Total cost: 550 USD.” He says he could have purchased the clips in Sweden, but they were cheaper through the U.S. supplier.

Emphasis mine. The article goes on spewing idiocy relating to gun laws in the United States but it’s completely irrelevant because Breivik could have obtained his 30-round magazines even if they were illegal in the United States. Why write an article implying that restricting 30-round magazines in the United States would have prevented Norway’s tragedy when the killer would have simply ordered the magazines from another country? You don’t nothing more than annoy a great number of electrons in writing your argument and making it completely irrelevant right from the word go.

Mr. Breivik’s claim is sadly believable, even though Norwegian officials have not confirmed the details.

I’m quoting this because it’s important a little later on, keep it in mind.

U.S. gun retailers can sell merchandise overseas and do not need to obtain an export license if the value of the goods being shipped falls below $100; sellers can avoid the licensing requirements — and buyers can avoid the additional costs — by breaking up the order into smaller shipments. U.S. law enforcement officials should determine whether the transaction was legal.

Once again the emphasis is mind. The author of this opinion piece seems to be making an argument without actually understanding how the legal system in the United States works. Law enforcement doesn’t get to determine what is legal and what isn’t, that’s done by our lawmakers and judges. The federal government (which is the only one that matters as this transaction was international and thus fall sunder federal regulations) has three branches with the legislative branch (Congress and the Senate) making laws with the judiciary branch determining whether or not those laws are constitutional if passed. Law enforcement is only tasked with enforcing the laws the legislative branch has passed and the judiciary branch hasn’t invalidated. They don’t get the determine jack shit.

Regardless of where Mr. Breivik obtained his weapons, the events in Norway should serve as a reminder of the absurdity of producing and selling such products.

Remember when I said that one quote would be important, well here’s the reason. The author is basically saying, “I have no clue if any claims I’m making in this article are true but damn it I don’t like 30-round magazines so I don’t fucking care. I also sodomize myself with a retractable baton.” OK I may have added a bit of editorial creativity somewhere in that paraphrase but the basic idea is true. The Norwegian government hasn’t actually come forth with any information related to the weapons used by Breivik. If his manifesto is accurate then we also have to ban a bunch of currently available chemicals as he used easily available components to build is bomb. Oh, and the next line is just fucking classic anti-gunner malarkey:

No self-respecting hunter would use such exaggerated force to take down a deer.

No self-respecting hunter would use a 9mm handgun to take down a deer. The 9mm isn’t a hunting round, it’s a self-defense round. Deer are critters of some size and using a 9mm is inhumane as it’s likely to injure but not kill the deer which is an outcome self-respecting hunters don’t want. Hell the .223 rifle that was being used by Breivik isn’t even a round that most deer hunters would consider acceptable for the same reason they don’t consider the 9mm acceptable. Finally, the right to bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

These magazines too often find their way into the hands of deranged individuals, transforming them into efficient killing machines. In Tucson earlier this year, Jared Lee Loughner relied on high-capacity magazines to tear off 31 shots in a matter of seconds, killing six people and seriously injuring 13 others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.).

So you have two data points and all of the sudden these 30-round magazines are a plague unto the Earth? If we’re going to ban items based on whether or not a couple of people were able to successfully use them to harm others we need to get out there and ban automobiles, knives of all types, fertilizer, anything that can be used to start a fire, shovels, axes, etc.

There was a brief period of sanity in this country when high-capacity magazines were prohibited as part of an assault weapons ban. That ban expired in 2004; a Washington Post review of Virginia records showed that the number of high-capacity magazines used in crimes jumped dramatically in that state after the ban lapsed.

The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Unified Crime Report also shows that violent crime itself has been dropping. This drop includes a decreases in the number of homicides where firearms were used as the murder weapon. So using the author’s “logic” we can say raising the ban on standard capacity magazines actually caused a drop in violent crime (no I don’t actually believe that, I’m just pointing out the stupidity in the author’s argument).

Some people are dumb, the person who wrote this opinion piece is just plain stupid.

And By Misconception You Mean Anybody Who Disagrees With You

The Red Star recently asked it’s readers (all five of them) what they believed should be changed about the Letters to the Editor section. Needless to say the submissions were interesting to say the least:

What makes the most sense to me would be to put the letters based on misconception in a special section, or not to publish them at all.

I often cringe when the Star Tribune publishes such letters, because I think it inevitably implies a stamp of approval to some extent of that underlying misconception. But I do think it is useful to know what people are thinking, thus my idea for a special section, despite the obvious difficulty for the Star Tribune to relegating such letters/readers to a “dunce section.”

If the Strib doesn’t have the heart/spine to do that, I feel not publishing would be best, and let those other opinions come out in readers’ commentary online.

Long live the Star Tribune! Thanks for all the good work.

JIM DUSTRUDE, MOUND

What Jim is really saying is, “Anybody who disagrees with me is obviously wrong and thus should be relegated to a special section or simply not published at all. Also I like to sodomize myself with retractable batons.” OK maybe he didn’t say that last part but he did say the first part.

Guess what asshole? Just because somebody disagrees with you doesn’t mean their opinion is based on misconceptions.

I think that the foremost consideration needs to be realization that publishing a letter lends credibility to the ideas expressed therein, simply because most people will assume that the Star Tribune would not publish nonsense. An immediate follow-up to that is that the Star Tribune only tarnishes its reputation by publishing nonsense, because a significant number of readers will recognize nonsense when they see it.

Publishing letters at random or even selecting representatives of all points of view just leads to a meaningless cacophony. I understand that the newspaper cannot referee every letter that comes in, but I think best effort should be made to filter out blatant nonsense.

I also understand that the purveyors of nonsense will accuse the Star Tribune of editorial bias. To those, I recommend that the Star respond that freedom of the press only applies to people who have presses.

DAVID PERLMAN, NEW HOPE

David is also suggesting that opinions that don’t agree with his beliefs shouldn’t be published. Hell he flat out says publishing a representation of all sides is a bad idea. Can you tell that the Red Star is read mostly by statist pricks who view themselves as being beyond the possibility of error? Thankfully not all is lost:

Isn’t it interesting that some people don’t think anything is worth printing if it doesn’t agree with their own views? I personally enjoy reading some of the more ridiculous (my perception) letters, as it gives me some sense of who else is out there — pretty scary sometimes, but necessary for one’s own survival strategies.

I do notice, however, that several contributors’ names pop up rather frequently. If there are so many submissions on a daily basis, surely these favored few could be put on the back burner for awhile in favor of others.

JEANNE TORMA, MINNEAPOLIS

Although Jeanne is basically saying, “I like to read letters from people who are wrong because it further cements my belief in being right.” at least she’s not for simply censoring everything she disagrees with.

Obviously the Red Star is free to do whatever it pleases, just as I’m free to do whatever I please on this site. But it’s comical to read letters from people who flat out state that they want letters that disagree with their believes to be thrown in the trash instead of published. Maybe the Red Star could hire these people and start a council to determine what letters should and shouldn’t be published. The paper could even give this council a catchy name like the Paper Soviet. They could even start witch hunts to weed out council members who aren’t “true” soviets.

You Reap What You Sow

I’m not against the concept of unions as I believe anybody who wants to voluntarily join together with others is a right. What I am against though is when unions use the government’s monopoly on force to make companies comply with the demands of unions. Here’s how I see it, you’re more than welcome to start a union to fight for increased pay, benefits, and conditions just as the company is more than welcome to fire all of your asses if your demands are too high or you’re not willing to negotiate. The concept is called free association, I can choose to associate with you and you can choose to associate with me but neither of us are required to associate with one another.

There are union protests going on at several American Crystal Sugar because the company finally got fed up with the union’s demands and dumped them for non-union employees:

The union representing sugar beet processors says more than 1,200 employees were turned away from entering seven American Crystal Sugar plants in Minnesota, North Dakota and Iowa Monday morning.

The current labor contract expired at midnight Sunday after production workers overwhelmingly rejected the company’s final offer Saturday.

Replacement workers arrived in vans before dawn. In East Grand Forks, security guards were posted at the plant entrances and a line was spray painted outside the doors — a line union employees were told not to cross. WDAZ-TV reports about 120 union workers showed up about 6:15 a.m., but were turned away. Some stayed to picket the plant.

[…]

After the union rejected the company’s offer Saturday, American Crystal Sugar Vice President Brian Ingulsrud said the union rejected a 13 percent pay increase over a five-year contract plus a $2,000 signing bonus.

Negotiations require both sides to give to reach a mutually agreeable solution. Although American Crystal Sugar man an offer to increase the wages of union workers by 13% in a time of economic hardship (plus a $2,000 signing bonus) the union decided that wasn’t enough and refused to accept the offer. Here’s the other thing about negotiations, your side has far less power if is willing to walk away and they will walk away if they find you’re demands are too high. American Crystal Sugar found the union’s demands to be unreasonable and thus game them the finger and hired new employees who are likely to cause fewer headaches.

Of course the union claimed that the negotiations are not about pay but on granting the union a monopoly on labor:

“These negotiations are not and never have been about pay,” Riskey added on Saturday. “The company’s offer still has major loopholes allowing non-union contractors to replace union workers and makes health insurance unaffordable. Any raise is meaningless if our health care costs increase even more or if management can eliminate our jobs and replace us at will.”

What company is going to accept terms where they’re unable to hire non-union employees? That’s basically asking the company to tie their hands behind their back during future negotiations. If I owned a company I would never agree to terms that prevent me, the owner, from running things as I damn well pleased. In exchange for not having to deal with such nonsense I’d ensure I paid my employees well so I wouldn’t have to go through the hardship of hiring and retraining new people constantly.

The union is literally saying that they want a monopoly on hiring employees for American Crystal Sugar. I understand why the whole lot of them were replaced although I’m sure if union employees were willing to leave the union and return to work American Crystal Sugar would have no issue rehiring them (although the union might break that employee’s kneecaps). I also love the final part:

Health costs would go up an average of about $1,000 per employee, which is significantly less than their pay increase, the company said. The union says their out-of-pocket health care costs, on average, would more than double.

You wanted your “free” government provide healthcare and now you got it, and you’re going to have to pay dearly for it. Welcome to government interference in the market, the more power you give the government the higher the cost of providing goods and services in that market. The national unions strongly supported the Health Insurance Company Enrichment Act and are now reaping what they sowed. Sadly they made sure all of us got fucked along with them.

An Anti-Gunner Goes To a Gun Show

Anti-gunners are a unique breed, they rant and rave about a device that they usually know nothing about. Sometimes an anti-gunner feels the need to attend a gun show because there are no anti-gun shows. The author of this article decided to attend a gun show and her ignorance is gloriously displayed in the article:

They’re eager to get new members today, but not so eager to talk to me once I pull out my microphone.

NRA REPRESENTATIVE: I’m sorry. We don’t do media.

That’s the basic attitude I get even when I enter the large grey exhibition center.

SUPERVISOR (over radio): Who is she with?

SECURITY GUARD: KALW Public Radio.

SUPERVISOR (over radio): Copy. Let me check.

Why all the concern?

Why the concern? Because gun owners are used to having everything they say or do used against them by popular media. There isn’t anything we can possibly say to the anti-gun dominated media that won’t be twisted to fit their desires so we’ve just decided to stop saying anything. And there was this amazingly ignorant statement made by the author:

In case, you’re like me and your knowledge of guns is limited to whatever you’ve seen in movies or on TV, the “AR” in AR15 stands for “assault rifle.” They’re massive, Rambo-style guns.

The “AR” in AR-15 stands for Armalite, the company that first manufactured the AR-15. As the AR-15 was the 15th model of firearm manufactured by the company they called it the Armalite Model 15, or AR-15 for short.

Also AR-15s are not massive Rambo-style guns. I would venture to say many AR-15s are actually much smaller than most rifles considered by the anti-gun media to be of a hunting purpose. You can build some amazingly small and light AR pattern rifles. Of course, being anti-gun, the author jumps on a statement made by one of the dealers:

MAIDA: This is an 1887 – so probably cowboy age – revolver. This is pretty old, too. This is from the mid-1800s.

DILLING: That’s really small.

MAIDA: It’s a little … They would call this a gambler’s derringer, because unlike what people think about the Old West, you had to check your guns.

Even in the Wild West, they had rules about guns.

It was that the Wild West had rules about guns, the property owners did. If a property owner didn’t want you in your establishment with a gun strapped they told you to check the piece. These weren’t laws but private property owners decided what they would and would not allow people entering their property to do. Personally I have no problem with such things because a property owner should be allowed to set whatever rules they desire as it’s their property. Likewise if I don’t like their rules I can go give my money to their competition down the streets.

But I’m left wondering – why would that love of guns extend to wanting to own a tactical military rifle? I ask around, but find that even in a warehouse full of people aspiring to be straight shooters, it’s hard to get a straight answer.

It’s hard to get a straight answer because people who are opposed to gun rights generally don’t understand freedom in general. The reason I want to own a “tactical military rifle” is because I like them and I bloody can own them. It’s the same reason I drive a Ford Range instead of a small car, I like the Ranger. Because I want to own something is a perfectly justifiable reason because I put my labor and effort into obtaining that thing I wanted.

I don’t need to prove a need to own something and I don’t need to justify what I want to anybody by myself (and if you’re married, to your wife). The fact of the matter is I exchanged my labor with somebody else in exchange for something I wanted. Usually that something I traded for was money (well Federal Reserve notes technically) because it’s a general purpose item that I can exchange for many different things I want. If I want to use some of that money to buy an AR-15 then there should be nothing stopping me from doing so because it was my labor that allowed me to obtain that rifle. The product of my labor is mine and I have no reason to justify why I want whatever that product is.

Anyways that is the kind of dribble you get when anti-gunners go to gun shows.

Another Idiot That Doesn’t Understand Economics or Crime But Wants to Meddle with Both

There is stupid and then there is extremely stupid. Joe Huffman found an example of the latter in the form of a person named Otis Rolley who thinks adding a $1.00 tax to each bullet [PDF] will help reduce gun crime:

Reducing the violence in our neighborhoods will take a full commitment from the Mayor’s office, the police, neighborhood and community leaders, and faith leaders. It will take a partnership across the city.

To do this, as Mayor, Otis will:

[…]

— Impose a $1 per bullet tax on all bullet purchases in the city;

[…]

Impose a $1 per bullet tax. It is undeniable that we have to do more to reduce the devastating impact gun violence is having on our community. While the courts have consistently ruled against significant gun control legislation, there is still a way to decrease crime: substantially increase the cost of its’ commission.

Increasing the cost of guns won’t work because many criminals don’t purchase new guns and they can be borrowed or even rented in some areas. Therefore, as Mayor, Otis will move to impose a $1 per bullet tax (or about $50 per pack). That will increase substantially the financial cost of committing a crime and, unlike guns, bullets cannot be shared after their initial use. This will also dramatically cut back on the random firings that too often happen around holidays and celebrations.

That is a lot of herp derp to put between two blockquote tags. Here’s what Mr. Rolley’s plan will accomplish:

— Punishing legitimate gun owners who wish to do business in the city by buying ammunition;
— Punish stores selling ammunition;
— Nothing else;

Mr. Rolley doesn’t understand the basic concepts of economics or crime. First you have the economic issue that this type of city-wide tax would cause. If a box of ammunition in Baltimore costs $50.00 more than anywhere else due to such a tax gun owners are just going to buy their ammunition outside of the city (either by traveling or, more likely, ordering it online). What this tax would effectively do is drive business out of the city and that’s normally not considered an acceptable economic goal to most people.

Then you have the whole concept of crime. Criminals have the same options available to when it come to purchasing ammunition elsewhere but they also have another option, theft. If somebody is willing to commit a violent crime chances are they will have no problem going down to the local Wal-Mart and stealing ammunition. There is a large disparity between stealing and murder but chances are pretty high that a person willing to commit the former will also be willing to commit the latter.

And there is always the fact that ammunition can be manufactured. Many gun owners, myself included, also reload ammunition for a hobby and it may come as a shock to anti-gunners but bullets can be cast out of melted down lead. It’s true. You can go around town stealing wheel weights off of peoples’ cars, melt them down as they’re made of lead, and cast them into bullets. In that case Mr. Rolley’s proposed tax idea would lead to people making their own bullets and a epidemic of shaky cars. Lead can also be found in other places like fishing supply stores so even banning properly balanced wheels won’t stop this clever workaround.

Buy Your Snow Blowers Now

There are a lot of people complaining that they can’t find air conditioners for sale anywhere in the Twin Cities area. Guess what? You should have purchased an air conditioner before the heat wave hit, not during. I’m a man who believes in being prepared and thus I usually buy things before I know that I’ll need them. Many people, on the other hand, seem to avoid planning ahead and thus buy things when they need them. The latter people often cite that buying something ahead of time is a gamble since you may never need it but when the weatherman tells you a week ahead of time that it’s going to be 95 degrees outside with very high humidity it’s no longer a gamble with odds in your favor.

If you need a device to handle something that will affect many people at the same time waiting until the last minute is a stupid idea. Waiting until the last minute means you’re going to be competing with everybody else to get your desired device. This fact should be apparent to anybody who waited until the first big blizzard to purchase a snow blower. After the first blizzard hit in Minnesota there wasn’t a snow blower to be had anywhere.

Thus it’s a good idea to get a snow blower now as they’re easily obtained and likely cheaper as there is little demand for snow blowers during a heat wave. Winter is the time to buy your air conditioner as it’s easily obtain and likely cheaper. I’m glad I have a father who taught me this. Do you know what he did when power went out during one of the blizzards last year? He plugged in his big ass generator and kept the heat going because he was smart enough to buy one before he needed it. Hell his generator can keep the air conditioner running in his home of power were to fail during this heat wave.

Do you know what else is good to have available to you? Extra food and drinking water. Did the last blizzard leave you stranded at home unable to get to the grocery store? Did it cause your water pipes to freeze and burst leaving you in need of drinking water? Neither problems are problems if you did your work and prepared ahead of time.

My advice to everybody is this, don’t wait until the last minute to prepare yourself for a future scenario. Get what you need before you need it and when it comes time that you need it you’ll have it and be happy.

This has been a public service announcement from your friend Christopher Burg.

Southern Poverty Law Center at it Again

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a very special organization that likes to blame all of society’s ills on “right-wing” groups. This time they’re claiming that hate groups are sprouting up everywhere and it’s all because “right-wing extremists” hate Obama:

Hate groups and other groups on the far right – so-called Patriot groups which vow to resist the encroachments of the Federal government, and anti-immigrant nativist groups – are tracked by the Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC).

“In the fall (autumn) of 2008,” says the director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project, Mark Potok, “we started to see an explosion in hate groups, but more generally in right-wing groups of general types.”

I removed the link embedded in the BBC story because I have a firm policy against linking to complete fuckwads like the SPLC. Anyways the SPLC has been claiming that “right-wing extremists” are terrorist organizations but make no mention of left-wing groups such as Greenpeace of the Animal Liberation Front. Apparently it’s only bad if you murder people for “right-wing” causes although I personally believe it’s wrong to murder anybody for their beliefs. Alas considering some of their other “reports” I’m not surprised that they’re claiming a rise in these groups is due to the election of Obama. After all if there is a rise it’s completely implausible that it’s due to economic instability causing people negatively affected to look for somebody to blame. Nope that idea is just silly.

But Mark Potok is concerned.

“I think we are in a very similar period as we were in the run-up to the Oklahoma City bombing,” he says, “as far as a bombing or an attack like that, whether that will come, we don’t know.

“We are very close in numbers to the numbers we had at the very peak of the militia movement.”

First of all the statement made by Potok is dubious at best because we have no idea what the peak numbers in the “militia movement” were. What the fuck was the “militia movement” anyways? I remember no news articles talking about a massive uptick in militias besides those put out by the SPLC.

If there was a sudden and noticeable uprising in hate crimes (using the government’s definition of the words) I’d have expected it mentioned by various law enforcement agencies (that seems like something the Federal Bureau of Investigations would be all over).

Second of all calling groups of violent individuals right-wing is a misnomer. Crazy people are crazy regardless of their beliefs. What right-wing ultimately means is that you’re conservative. Being racist is entire separate from being politically conservative. Just because you believe the size of government should be reduced doesn’t mean you hate Jewish people, it means you want the size of government reduces.

The SPLC ties everything ill they mention to “right-wing extremists.” Yet most people who I know that identify themselves as right-wing have a strong devotion to law and fixing the currently established system by voting for “representatives” who advocate small government. I would think, being an active member in the gun community, that I know a large number of people who identify themselves as right-wing. It seems to me if a majority of people who are right-wing wanted to violently overthrow the government I’d know at least one person in favor of that solution.

In fact most of the people I know who advocate violence against the government are anarchist of the socialist persuasion (once again not all anarchists of the socialist persuasion advocate violence, I just know a few who do). These individuals are strongly left-wing as they believe in establishing a socialist society. Yet these people are never mentioned by any SPLC reports which indicates a bit of bias on their behalf.

What I’m really curious about is what recommendation will the SPLC to six this “problem” (in quotes because I see no evidence that this problem actually exists). I’m betting they’re going to urge the government to further crack down on “right-wing extremist” groups. Once again nobody is likely to listen to them besides those who believe the conflict in American is truly between left and right and thus feel the need to demonize the other side. Still if this report is being mentioned on the BBC is likely that it’ll be appearing in American news sources soon.

And These Are the People Charged with Protecting the People

When you have scumbags like this “protecting” people who needs criminals:

Any residents of St. Helena Parish caught riding around the parish with assault weapons will be arrested, Sheriff Nat Williams warned Tuesday.

“As far as them riding around with an assault rifle, it will not be tolerated,” he said. “Somebody with an assault weapon is no different from a criminal and will be treated the same way.”

Did you get that? If you carry an “assault” weapon you’re no better than a person who breaks into somebody’s home and steals all of their stuff. See Sheriff Douche Bag is a bit peeved because he’s facing competition in the intimidation field:

Some residents of the parish’s 6th Ward, angered by a rash of recent break-ins, have conducted informal patrols, sometimes while armed with AR-15 semiautomatic rifles, the civilian version of the U.S. military’s M-16.

Since the police haven’t been capable of reducing crime to the satisfaction of the people a different solution was enacted. Namely a group of people have decided to perform their own patrols and smartly decide to arm themselves. Of course the government likes to maintain its monopoly on violence and are none to happy with the idea of little serfs walking around trying to keep their neighborhood safe:

Williams and other officials met with leaders of the ward’s newly formed Community Watch on Tuesday morning to let them know that those doing the patrolling did not need to be heavily armed.

If that’s the case then why do the police need to be heavily armed? These people aren’t walking around because they wish to enjoy the fine evening air, they’re walking around because the crime has increased to a point that they believe something needs to be done. As these people are performing the duty of police officers (because it seems the police can’t do it) they could potentially face the same situations as police officers, that is some criminal scumbags attacking during the patrols.

The police always claim they need better weaponry because they’re outgunned by the criminals. The people patrolling the afflicted area are simply taking what the police have learned over the years and making sure the same mistakes aren’t repeated.

Sheriff Williams is nothing but incompetent authoritarian scum. The inadequacies of his department lead private individuals to work together in common defense (a great thing). Being an authoritarian though Mr. Williams is angry that somebody else is walking the streets in an attempt to reduce crime. I’m sure Mr. Williams sees the very act of people outside of his department trying to reduce crime as a lack of respect for his authority and feels it must be stopped at all costs. Well fuck that guy.

If people are attempting to correct the department’s inadequacies then they should be allowed to protect themselves equipment equal to what the police have. Hell since the people paid for the polices’ weapons those going out on patrol should be able to checkout defensive weapons from the police station itself.

I’d also like to throw out some major dibs to the author of this story for the following paragraphs:

Both the M-16 and the AK-47 rifles are capable of full automatic and semiautomatic fire, but special licenses are required to possess fully automatic firearms in the U.S.

True assault rifles are capable of being operated in fully automatic and semiautomatic modes, at the user’s option. They are designed for, and used by, military forces, but they also are used by some law enforcement agencies.

Thank you for being a moral author instead of one that makes false claims that people are walking around with machine guns. You are a good man Faimon A. Roberts, author of this article. I hope others can learn to follow your example when writing firearm related stories.

Should We Fear Global Cooling Now

Global warming is the single largest threat to the human race! It’s going to kill us all! Won’t somebody use a monopoly on the initiation of force to make polluters stop before the turn the Earth into a second sun? Wait… what’s that? There is a new study that is talking about the cooling affect of Asia’s pollution? Well what the Hell? Obviously somebody is wrong somewhere:

The paper raised the prospect of more rapid, pent-up climate change when emerging economies eventually crack down on pollution.

World temperatures did not rise from 1998 to 2008, while manmade emissions of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuel grew by nearly a third, various data show.

The researchers from Boston and Harvard Universities and Finland’s University of Turku said pollution, and specifically sulphur emissions, from coal-fueled growth in Asia was responsible for the cooling effect.

Can’t you people make up your minds? When I started school I remember hearing how the next ice age was imminent and it was implied the human race would be devastated. After a while the problem became acid rain which was going to eat us all alive in five years if we dared to step outside. Then it became global warming climate change global climate disruption. Now we’re going back to the threat of a new ice age again? Seriously can you prophets of doom and disaster please make up your fucking minds on what apocalyptic scenario we’re going to be facing during the end times?

How about this for a wake up call? We don’t understand our planet well enough to know what is and isn’t normal. This doesn’t apply only to weather but to every aspect of our planet’s ecosystem. On top of that anthropomorphizing these end of times scenarios speaks most to our overly inflated egos. We claim the human race is responsible for everything yet lack any solid scientific evidence that demonstrates most of these claims. I’m waiting for the day when research has demonstrated that there is a 99% chance that aliens exist because they are using a global heat increasing decreasing death ray to wipe us all out.

Before we start demanding the government use violence for force people to reduce specific types of pollutants maybe we should first ensure we have a proper understanding of what is going on.

Let me also bring up a final note before some asshole comments about how I’m not properly understanding the story and its implications. Much of my writing is semi-satirical and over-exaggerated on purpose. I realize many of the statements I make are over-simplifications but that’s not from my lack of understanding research papers and articles but because I’m trying to make a specific point. In this case that point is the science is still undecided when it comes to human involvement in climate yet people are asking governments to use violence to force people to reduce the output of specific chemicals.

This article has little to do with the topic of climate-whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-call-it itself. If you want that type of content read Borepatch as he often posts very good articles involving that topic. There I just saved you a ton of typing you were about to do because you felt somebody was wrong on the Internet. Feel free to post a thank you for reducing the amount you needed to type though.