Tag: You’re Doing it Wrong

Italy Makes Large Cash Transaction Illegal

For those of you who pay attention to world news you’ve already heard that Italy has implemented a series of austerity measures. One of these measures I find especially egregious:

Measures to fight tax evasion will be strengthened, including a limit of 2,500 euros on cash transactions

What am I supposed to do if I want to buy my friend’s $5,000 vehicle? Since cash is out do I have to wait for them to get setup to accept credit and debit card transactions? Perhaps we’ll have to insert a middle-man such as an auto dealer in order to complete the transaction now. Is the legality of the transaction based on the worth of the object(s) being sold or the method of trade being accepted. If it’s based on the worth of the object(s) this becomes a big deal since all large value transactions between individuals (selling your automobile for example) will basically be illegal as most individuals are not setup to accept credit and debit cards. On the other hand if this is based on the method of trade being accepted (euros in this case) than this isn’t too big of a deal since both parties could agree to transact using something of value like gold and silver.

This austerity measure also assumes Italy’s problems have stemmed from lost tax money due to minor transactions between individuals going unreported. I can tell you right now that’s not the problem. As this isn’t the problem I’m betting money this austerity measure is being put into place so the government can keep and eye on what people are purchasing and use that data in enacting future legislation.

Stop Me if You’ve Heard This Before

If I had a dime for every time I’ve heard somebody start a statement with, “I’m a gun owner but…” I’d probably be very wealthy. I’ve never actually heard anything intelligent comes after that well-known opener either and this is no exception:

I am about as pro-firearms as they come; I am an NRA member, target shooter and hunter, and speaking as a student with a concealed firearm permit, I still believe this campus is not the place to be carrying. There is absolutely no reason to carry a concealed firearm

on-campus.

His argument? Well… it’s downright idiotic:

The one thing no one should ever sacrifice is safety. Events such as the shootings at Virginia Tech and Penn State are very rare. But they arose, because people did not follow university rules and precautions.

That’s right, Virginia Tech and Penn State were results of people not following university rules and precautions. If only the murdering sons of bitches would have obeyed the rules and not brought guns onto campus everything would have been swell those days. Maybe the murderers didn’t know they weren’t supposed to bring guns on campus; I’m sure they would have returned home upon seeing a sign informing them that the campuses were gun-free zones.

Idiot, dumb ass, retard, moron, and fucking dip ship all seem inadequate to explain the level of stupidity this person’s statement emanates. Were that the only statement he made it wouldn’t be so bad but he keeps piling on the stupid:

One point to think about is if, and a very big if at that, permits were to be issued specific to University Park grounds and a situation occurred in which there was a shooting on campus the campus would turn into the Wild West. Practice is one thing that many amateur shooters lack and a crowded campus where all hell breaks loose would be a time when every inch of accuracy matters.

The problem with the “Wild” West is that it wasn’t very wild. I would also submit the fact that no shootout would likely occur for two reasons: dead people don’t shoot and most of the bastards who’ve shot up schools ended up offing themselves the second resistance arrived. Were a person with a carry permit able to shoot the murderous gunman the situation would be concluded in short order and if the permit holder was unable to get a clean shot the situation would likely be concluded shortly anyways as the murderous gunman took his own life in an act of sheer cowardice. Obviously logic wasn’t the strong suit of the person who wrote this article though.

But to ensure further protection. I think anyone wishing to carry a concealed firearm should be required to pass a vision and shooting test. The shooting test should include both moving and stationary targets. Through these added precautions, we could be assured that we are placing firearms in skilled hands.

What the author is really saying is that those with poor vision should be prohibited from defending themselves. It seems the author believes people with poor vision should be removed from the gene pool less they breed and are able to pass their genetics of poor vision onto their offspring. Maybe the author was a fan of eugenics. Furthermore he believes everybody should be required to receive training for unlikely scenarios before they are granted the privilege of exercising one of their supposedly Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Why do I say training for situations involved stationary and moving targets is an unlikely scenario? Because a large majority (83.5%) of self-defense situations involving a firearm require only the presentation of the weapon [PDF]. It’s good to be training in handling a vast number of potential scenarios but such training should not be mandatory.

If a situation would arise on campus when students had the right to hold concealed weapon it would be absolute nightmare. But the people to bring calm to a situation like this shouldn’t be students or staff members — the people to calm the situation would be the emergency responders.

Yes the emergency responders should be the ones to bring calm to the situation, you know when they get there anywhere between 10 and 30 minutes after somebody makes the initial call to 911. The reason body counts get so high at many of these shootings is due to the amount of time it takes emergency responders to actually respond. What the author doesn’t realize is that instant teleportation technology is not something we have access to yet so anybody wanting to get from one point to another (let’s say from a police station to a college campus) have to physically make the trip. Usually this involves hopping into a car and driving there but one could also walk if they so chose.

We have emergency responders for a reason: protection and safety. It is their job and we have to stand behind them. At any point a responder could lose their life. Each one knows the risk, but they accept it because they have taken an oath to protect the citizens.

Emphasis mine. It seems that while the author realizes emergency responders may lose their life at any point college students and faculty members will remain entirely unharmed.

No matter what form of emergency the first step is to size up the problem; the better the size up of the problem faster the emergency will get solved. If the responders can not figure out who and what the problem is ultimately a life of Penn Stater might be lost.

If the responder can figure out who and what the problem is ultimately a life of a student or faculty member might be lost. Emergency responders usually don’t respond until there has been an emergency meaning it’s likely somebody has already been shot before 911 is even called. The sooner the situation is dealt with the smaller the window of opportunity for the murder. Allowing faculty members and students to legally carry firearms can drop the response time of mass shootings dramatically as there are personell on campus capable of ending the situation.

Steven Marsh is a junior majoring in agricultural systems management. He is a member of the National Rifle Association and a volunteer firefighter and emergency medical technician. Email him at sfm5089@psu.edu.

What that footnote should have said is, “Steven Marsh is a junior majoring in a career track that doesn’t study self-defense situations in any sense. He is a member of the National Rifle Association and a volunteer in two types of emergency response that don’t directly deal with ending mass shooting scenarios. Basically he may be very intelligent in agriculture systems management, firefighting, and emergency medical fields but he knows little, if anything, about self-defense scenarios. Email him at sfm5089@psu.edu.”

There is nothing wrong with being ignorant on a subject but there is much wrong with being ignorant on a subject and having a strong opinion regarding it.

Because the Track Record for Disarmament is So Good

It’s obvious that some people do not research history. While it’s not bad in any way to remain ignorant on a topic it is bad to have an opinion on topics you’re ignorant of. Take for instance Alex Wagner who has an opinion on the Second Amendment that demonstrates an utter lack of history:

Bill Maher, HBO: “Let’s ask Alex. What would you change in the Constitution?”

Alex Wagner, Huffington Post: “Well, I’m going to be pilloried for this. I think get rid of the second Amendment, the right to bear arms. I just think in the grand scheme of the rights that we have; the right of assembly, free speech, I mean, owning a gun does not, it does not tally on the same level as those other Constitutional rights. And being more discreet about who gets to have a firearm and right to kill with a firearm, I think is something that would be in our national interest to revisit that.”

It seems Alex is unaware of the history of gun control and how disarmed people are at the total mercy of their government. When you’re are the complete mercy of your government few options exist when that government decides you are no longer fix to live.

Alex’s quote also demonstrates the fact that many do not view the Bill of Rights as a list of rights but government granted privileges. If this is the case then what grounds exist for any supposed right? Does the government get to decide if we have the freedom of speech and assembly? Can the government just decide to get rid of protections against illegal search and seizure? While the answer to both questions is technically yes it should be no as the spirit of the Bill of Rights was to grant protection from government of certain activities.

Also where the fuck does the Second Amendment grant somebody the right to kill? Alex said, “And being more discreet about who gets to have a firearm and right to kill with a firearm…” yet I don’t see anywhere in the wording of the amendment that grants such a right. It appears as though Alex is either illiterate or hasn’t actually read the wording of the Second Amendment. If the first case is true than I can understand where many of her beliefs probably stem from and if it’s the second case she shouldn’t be talking about the Second Amendment in any regard whatsoever.

A Personal Pet Peeve Regarding Legislative Activism Sites

During the couple of years I’ve been blogging one thing I’ve tried to avoid is writing posts advocating legislative action without linking to the actual bill under consideration. Honestly it irritates me when somebody demands people vote for or against a piece of legislation without linking to, or at the very least explaining, the legislation in question. As you can imagine this pisses me right the fuck off:

For months we’ve been talking about tomorrow: Election Day. We’ve been telling you how much is at stake for Ohio workers and their families. We’ve show you how unfair, unsafe and dangerous Senate Bill 5 is to our communities. And now, the time to act and repeal Senate Bill 5 by VOTING NO ON ISSUE 2 is upon us.

Tomorrow is your last chance to vote against Senate Bill 5 with a NO vote on Issue 2. Polls across the state will be open from 6:30am to 7:30pm. Click here to find more information on your polling location.

We expect long lines as voter turnout is expected to be high. Make sure to schedule time in your busy day to get to the polls and VOTE NO ON ISSUE 2. Tell out-of-touch politicians and their Wall Street cronies that you stand with Ohio’s public workers.

Click here to get more information on your polling location.

Tomorrow’s vote will come down to people like you. Without your support, we could wake up on Wednesday knowing that our communities will be less safe now that firefighters, police officers, and nurses are no longer able to bargain for the safety equipment they need to protect themselves as they protect us.

Get ready to vote tomorrow by clicking here.

After reading that do you have any clue what the fuck “Issue 2” says or purports to do? Why should I vote against it? What would “Issue 2” do if passed? Why isn’t there a single link explaining this piece of legislation on the post demanding people go out and vote against it?

Obviously I don’t life in Ohio and thus don’t care much what legislative issues are under consideration there. With that said I really wanted to point out this complete lack of information because somebody linked to this in a chat room I frequent asking that we do as the linked material advocates. Even if I lived in Ohio I wouldn’t be motivated to vote against “Issue 2” from the material presented in this link because the link doesn’t present any material.

Honestly I don’t care enough about Ohio’s politics to even bother digging up what “Issue 2” is. Judging by the lack of information presented on that site I’d be tempted to vote yes on it just because those urging people to vote no aren’t presenting any information, which makes it appear as though they’re hiding something. Here’s a pro tip for those advocating legislative action: ensure a link to the legislation under question or a very detailed summary are readily visible on the site so those who know nothing about it can seek information quickly.

Don’t Celebrate our Leaving Iraq Yet

The Obamessiah announced that we are finally leaving Iraq after ten years of occupation. It seems awfully convenient that this happened so close to election season but as Ron Paul points out leaving now was only logical:

First and foremost, any form of withdrawal that is happening is not simply because the administration realized it was the right thing to do. This is not the fulfillment of a campaign promise, or because suddenly the training of their police and military is complete and Iraq is now safe and secure, but because of disagreements with the new government over a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). The current agreement was set up by the previous administration to expire at the end of 2011. Apparently the Iraqis refused to allow continued immunity from prosecution for our forces for any crimes our soldiers might commit on Iraqi soil. Can you imagine having foreign soldiers here, with immunity from our laws and Constitution, with access to your neighborhood?

Basically we’re leaving because the Iraqis have decided to prosecute our troops for crimes they commit while in Iraq. Even with this fact considered though I don’t think we can really claim to be leaving Iraq:

Some 39,000 American troops will supposedly be headed home by the end of the year. However, the US embassy in Iraq, which is the largest and most expensive in the world, is not being abandoned. Upwards of 17,000 military personnel and private security contractors will remain in Iraq to guard diplomatic personnel, continue training Iraqi forces, maintain “situational awareness” and other functions. This is still a significant American footprint in the country. And considering that a private security contractor costs the US taxpayer about three times as much as a soldier, we’re not going to see any real cost savings. Sadly, these contractors are covered under diplomatic immunity, meaning the Iraqi people will not get the accountability that they were hoping for.

Our embassy there is the largest one in the world. Why we need such a massive complex for diplomatic ties is beyond me but it certainly makes one hell of a good military base if it can store 17,000 military personnel. It’s almost as if we wanted to leave a giant staging area in the country in case we needed to invade Iran a neighboring country.

While our “leaders” claim we’re leaving Iraq remember it’s still going to be a giant money sinkhole with plenty of American military personnel needing housing, food, and water.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Lying About Membership

You know you’ve become a true anti-gun organization when you start lying about anything and everything. Miguel points out that Mayors Against All Illegal Guns (MAIG) is lying about their membership, probably in an attempt to make themselves look larger than they really are. While Mayor Perry Knight of Bowling Green, Florida is listed as a member of MAIG he wasn’t aware of that fact:

There seems to someone outthere who just decided my name should be added to this list. I do not support anything these folks are trying to do. I have asked repeatedly to have my name removed yet they ignore me. If I could ask you for your help by clearly an plainly stating that I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS . I am a gun owner an avid hunter. thanks for your inquiry an wish you well. Perry Knight

Good on you Mayor Knight for explicitly stating you do not support this organization. Those of us in the gun community will do our best to help you clear this blatantly undeserved blemish from your record by getting the word out.

How Much Did This Acronym Cost

The amount of time that is spent by our government coming up with retarded acronyms must be astounding. If you thought Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, or USA PATRIOT, Act was bad wait until you get a load of the new name for the formerly PROTECT IP Act:

Oh, and because PROTECT IP wasn’t enough of a misleading and idiotic name, the House has upped the ante. The new bill is called: “the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act” or the E-PARASITE Act (though, they also say you can call it the “Stopping Online Piracy Act”).

Emphasis mine. Somebody in Washington D.C. is getting paid to come up with this shit. Our tax money is being spent to come up with catchy fucking names to make bills sound more appealing and thus get popular support when it goes to pass. These are probably the same fucks who were paid to come up with the PROTECT Act which is a backwards acronym for Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today.

If those idiots in Washington spent half as much time educating themselves on the subjects they’re passing laws against as they do coming up with stupid acronyms we may have a free country built on liberty instead of a fascist state.

Oh, and you know what else? The PROTECT IP E-PARASITE Act is still a horrible piece of shit. You can’t polish a turd and expect anything other than a turd when you’re finished.

Loaded Gun Makes it On a Plane

Congratulations Transportation Security Administration (TSA), your goal of ensuring no firearms make it onto the plane has failed spectacularly:

Airport security officials at Los Angeles International Airport failed to detect a loaded handgun that was contained in a traveler’s checked bag Sunday, according to several law enforcement sources.

An airport ramp crew discovered the loaded .38-caliber handgun Sunday after it tumbled from an unzipped compartment in a duffel bag they were loading onto Alaska Airlines Flight 563, according to the sources. The aircraft was leaving the terminal at LAX at 8:15 a.m. Sunday, bound for Portland, Ore.

Workers called Los Angeles Airport Police to report the discovery. The owner of the gun was questioned at the LAPD’s Pacific station and released and allowed to board a later flight to Portland. The gun was turned over to Los Angeles police, the source said.

Bang up job boys. Even with your metal detectors, luggage scanners, pat downs, naked body scanners, water bottle confiscators, and other pointless security theater you missed a loaded firearm that would set off any cheap metal detector. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with firearms being in airplanes and in fact I advocate pilots, at the bear minimum, be armed. But when your mandate is to prevent weapons from getting onto planes and you’re trying to further crawl up our asses by establishing checkpoints on highways I’m going to call you on being complete fuck ups.

By the way a tip of the old hat goes to Victoria for sending me this story.

That’s Not Helping Your Cause

There are many ways to garner support for a movement; you can appeal to peoples’ sympathy, education the masses, or provide charity to those in need. One thing is for certain though, making live miserable for the average person is only going to generate resentment and hard feelings. It appears that a portion of the OccupyMN participants have decided that support is overrated and instead decided making life miserable for commuters was jolly good fun:

Seven OccupyMN demonstrators have been arrested for blocking traffic today after refusing to leave tents set up in the middle of the intersection of 6th Street S. and 3rd Av. S.

Yeah, because blocking an intersection with tents is such a grant idea. While those hauled off by the police probably think they were making a statement and people will flock to their aid after seeing peaceful protesters arrested the reality is far different. By blocking traffic these protesters have made themselves noticeable pains in the ass for the average person who probably hadn’t taken sides yet. When you become a pain in the ass people want you to go away so getting arrested in this case will probably be met with cheers instead of outrage by average commuters.

Civil disobedience only works if you have a large enough number of people on your side. Smoke outs work well because most people see little reason why somebody smoking marijuana should spend time in jail at taxpayer expense. This is because most people haven’t been negatively affected by somebody smoking marijuana. On the other hand if somebody was mugged by a person who just toked up there is a high chance the victim will develop a resentment towards marijuana smokers.

I’ve said many times that I’m glad to see people pissed off enough to make a statement. With that said if you’re going to make a statement you should probably try to make a positive one less people start becoming OK with the idea of cops in riot gear marching into your occupation launching tear gas and beating ass with batons.

I’m a Scientific Anomaly

When I was a teenager I listened to heavy metal, played violent video games, watched violent movies, owned firearms, and spent large amounts of time talking to people on the Internet. According to all of the studies that keep floating around I should be a violent antisocial psychopath who shoots other people. Well now it appears I should also be depressed and suicidal:

TEENS listening to head-banging heavy metal music are at risk of depression and suicide, a study reveals.

The Melbourne University paper says early intervention at schools is necessary before behavioural problems start.

Dr Katrina McFerran’s study spanned five years and found heavy metal music led to mental illness in some teens aged between 13 and 18.

“Most young people listen to a range of music in positive ways; to block out crowds, to lift their mood or to give them energy when exercising, but young people at risk of depression are more likely to be listening to music, particularly heavy metal music, in a negative way,” she said.

Either I’m the biggest fucking scientific anomaly on Earth or these studies are complete and utter bullshit.