Press "Enter" to skip to content

Friday links


  1. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty January 23, 2015 7:31 am

    “My Old Dead Drunk Self.” My mother was an alcoholic and found sobriety through AA when my sister and I were quite young. She never thought the endless indulgence in talking about the “bad old days” served any purpose and quit going to AA meetings in a short time. Once she was sober and confident in herself, she moved on to life and independence and we never heard another word about it.

  2. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau January 23, 2015 9:05 am

    [In November 1972, the Johnson family sold their five acres of shoreline to the federal government for $79,200 and signed a 40-year lease that permitted a narrow range of business options, such as “the interpretation of oyster cultivation to the visiting public,”…]

    I don’t know about this one. Seems to me the die was cast back in 1972, and they really didn’t have a legal leg to stand on. Moral of the story is, don’t sell your land to the Federal government! They have more lawyers than you do, not to mention, owning the judge…

    [We, the People of the state of Washington, are no longer allowed to exercise our rights in a building that We own, while viewing the proceedings of the people We elected.]

    Ah, the old chestnut, “the government works for us”. I think that letter is a good idea – always useful to communicate to the enforcers what is going to happen – but the premise is incorrect. The reality is, that people are going to bring their guns there, and the cops will be faced with a choice. And the people will too. Will the cops throw these people in jail, using deadly force? Will these people respond with deadly force? I hope everybody thinks this one through.

    My guess is the cops will blink first. However small the chance that there will be an actual battle, they still want to go home to their families in the evening. There will be no downside for the cops to let the event go as planned, while there is a chance for a significant downside if they don’t.

    [Expanding dependency requires erasing Americans’ traditional distinction between the deserving and the undeserving poor.]

    George Will, always an apologist for big government. Welfare is OK as long as the recipients are “deserving” enough!

  3. Mike
    Mike January 23, 2015 3:03 pm

    I read you there (@ ZP), I comment here…I will be sharing the ZP link via FB shortly, though, as I’m hoping that both the article and the comment by Y.B. ben Avraham re: Altmeyer’s book on authoritarians (1) will give a couple specific people something to chew over.

    It’s rough reading. Tougher when you identify some of the traits you don’t like in yourself, and tougher still when you identify some of the traits you don’t like in others but realize that you need to let it go.

    The observation that “I believe that until we impact this phenomenon, we will be re-fighting these battles for individual liberty forever” (Y.B. b. A. in the comments over @ ZP) is astute, and needs to be contemplated.

    The carrot/stick thing (2) is something that people need to consider as well, both from the perspective of someone fighting for gun rights, but also from the perspective of someone fighting AGAINST gun rights…Especially in relation to the RWA scale that Altemeyer developed, and ESPECIALLY in relation to subsequent findings (take them for what they’re worth) that there is no corresponding Left Wing Authoritarianism scale. (3)

    MBV is a “stick.” (And good thing that he is.) Gottleib is obviously a “carrot.” Think about where a midpoint on the scale between the two lies, based on the number of people that support the various positions along it, and I think you’ll get a fair idea of what “we” think the end goal should/can look like.

    Now, think about the opposition, and let’s start with Bloomberg. Stick? Nope. I think he’s more carrot-y. Who’s on the stick-y end? Watts. Feinstein. The idiot who suggested that kids should take their parents’ guns to school to turn them in. (4) One Mr. Gerald Ensley who has included his contact info at the link. (5) Of course, the sticks advocating seizure aren’t going to be the ones enforcing it, for the most part…But they’re there.

    A few conclusions, here.
    1) If this gets “solved” peacefully, it’s going to happen with an endpoint that is truly a compromise. Nobody’s going to be happy with it, but eventually they may come to accept it.
    2) I think the compromise is going to be significantly farther toward the restrictionist end of things than the midpoint – Even the staunchest of rights advocates I know does not support allowing prisoners to be armed, yet the nutbag end of the restrictionist spectrum would certainly disarm prison guards.
    3) If it doesn’t get solved peacefully, there’s going to be a lot of blood. And the general public’s opinion is not going to fall with the people shooting “grassroots organizing soccer moms who’ve lost children” when there are “crazed armed insurrectionists” to be shot. And when that popular opinion war is lost, there’s little left in the way of civility to salvage a country.

    This is entirely too much thinking for a Friday.

    (1) –
    (2) –
    (3) –
    (4) –
    (5) –

  4. LarryA
    LarryA January 24, 2015 9:15 pm

    The problem I have with the “sticks” in Washington is that they’ve made an error in target selection.

    Did the WA Legislature pass I-594? Nope. In fact, Bloomberg Inc. deliberately bypassed the Legislature because it wouldn’t pass a background check bill. Why are the Open Carry folks demonstrating against a Legislature that’s already on their side?
    We, the People of the state of Washington, are no longer allowed to exercise our rights in a building that We own, while viewing the proceedings of the people We elected.
    Um, not exactly. The gallery is for viewing the proceedings. From what I’ve read legislatures have had problems with people wanting to demonstrate in the galleries, and have thus banned things like signs, and backpacks that can hold things to throw down onto the floor. (Tampons, in one case.) In WA the legislature banned guns used for such demonstrating, but observers can still concealed carry.

    Yes, there’s a time to “communicate to the enforcers what is going to happen.” But it’s not when they’re your allies.

  5. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau January 25, 2015 7:21 pm

    I didn’t address the wisdom of bringing guns into the gallery, but only what happens when someone does, as is apparently the plan.

    I wouldn’t call the legislature “allies”, either. On occasion they do slow down on their impositions.

Leave a Reply