The Administration is saying executive orders on gun policy will be coming any day now. It’ll be very interesting to see what they are. Keep in mind that Obama has the ability to ban Glocks, XDs, SiGs and any of the multitude of handguns that come into this country by fiat. My opinion is that he will not go this far, since it will a) likely bring forth a constitutional challenge in the courts, and b) fire up our base. I’m expecting something modest, that the majority of gun owners won’t notice, but that will still piss us off, and force us into trying to undo it. We shall see.
End of the Shuttle Era
The last shuttle launch is today, at 2:50PM. I really wanted to go see one of these launch in person, and was thinking about going to the last one. But it is not to be, and given they are expecting up to half a million people to attend the last launch, I don’t think I’d get anywhere near it without camping out.
Every generation has one of those “where were you” moments. For my parents, it was the assassination of President Kennedy. For mine, it’s where you were when the Challenger exploded. I regularly watched launches when I was a kid, but I’ve paid scant attention to launches since. I suppose it’s only fitting the last one almost got by without me thinking about it.
I don’t mourn the end of the shuttle program. It’s been a boondoggle, and I think NASA’s current policy of encouraging private carriers is the only way we’re going to become a spacefaring civilization. People will go to space when there’s money in it, and will figure out how to do it cheaply. Our manned space program has wasted decades since the end of Apollo. When I was a kid, I thought I’d see men walking on Mars in my lifetime. I think that’s unlikely, and it’s a bit sad that if I do see it, that man will likely be Chinese.
Something that Bothers Me
We watched The Parking Lot Movie the other day on Netflix. Now, I love my Netflix for these oddball documentaries. (That and bad sci-fi, but that’s not relevant to this post.)
But something has nagged at the back of my mind for a while. One of the employees admitted that he would arbitrarily charge different prices to different customers regardless of how long they parked because of judgements he would make on their personal status in life.
I realize that as a parking lot owner, you’re probably not that concerned about lawsuits, but having an employee admit it, and then say that he gave the company all of the extra profits from these duped customers, that just screams bad news all around. There’s just something about that admission that doesn’t sit well with me, even though I don’t think I’d fall into the categories of people the guy would charge double the actual fees.
I do recognize that there are plenty of circumstances where people pay different prices for the same goods or service even from the same company – airline tickets or anything from Amazon are the first things that come to mind. But when there’s a posted uniform rate agreed upon at the time you park and then an employee makes a snap decision that isn’t based on time, service, or demand, but on personal traits he doesn’t like in customers, that doesn’t really seem kosher. Is it lawsuit worthy? At the very least, it seems like it wouldn’t be worth the hassle to park there since you never know when the parking lot attendent will have his panties in a twist over something you may have done that offends him – like breathe.
Another thing that stands out is that they described the hiring process which is essentially, “I know a guy.” Okay, that’s fine. Except there were no female employees at all. God forbid if a woman ever applied for a job there and was turned away. I guess what bothers me is that the parking lot featured (in Charlottesville, Virginia, btw) really put itself out there to advertise shady business practices and a hiring process that may not be on the up-and-up. This doesn’t seem like something most small business owners would actually want to do.
Maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps the parking lot in the movie has had even more business than ever. I admit to being thoroughly entertained by the documentary, I’m just not sure that I actually trust anyone associated with the business not to rip me off even if I play by all of the agreed-upon rules.
Take Us Seriously
I think what Joe Huffman hit on is one of the primary reasons the entire Ezell case has been so satisfying to gun owners:
It was a pleasure to read. There was agreement with so many things we have been saying for decades. That the anti-gun people have dismissed these arguments almost without discussion that to now have a court rule with is an extreme pleasure. Most importantly they explicitly and repeatedly use the First Amendment as an analog to the Second Amendment. I will not restrain from saying, “We and many others told you so!â€
It’s always hard to place exactly what fires people up so much about this issue, but if I had to pick one thing it is not being taken seriously by the media, by politicians, or by any of the powers that be for quite some time, and especially during the 90s, and early part of the last decade.
Imagine you are quite familiar with, and well-educated on a certain pet topic. Imagine the media and all the talking heads on TV love to opine about your pet topic, but continuously mischaracterize things, get things wrong, often times even demonizing you for having an interest in it. Imagine politicians listening to the media and talking heads, and lining up to pass laws that affect you based on their own ignorance of your pet topic. I don’t care what the topic is, that’s a recipe for a high degree of frustration and anger at the people and system that’s doing it.
When I look at our opponents, the ones I have the highest degree of tolerance for are the ones who take the topic seriously. Having an opinion different than my own, I don’t find that remarkably frustrating. While I doubt it will solve the problems they would like, I can at least understand why someone might think universal background checks is a good idea. I can even understand why someone might take the position, as much as I might disagree with it, that the Second Amendment is obsolete and should be repealed.
Take the topic seriously, educate yourself, and come up with good arguments. My chief problem with our opponents is that so many of them are ridiculous figures. Just take a look at CSGV’s Twitter feed, or look at the crazy on their Facebook page. Read japete’s rambling word salad, to see what I mean, or some of the ridiculous arguments Chicago had made and is still making in Ezell. Look at the number of anti-gun bloggers who are creative trolls. Look at figures like Katrina Confiscator in Chief Ray Nagin, or Mayor “Shove a Gun Up Your Butt” Daley. These two guys are total buffoons. They make a pretense of being serious, but they’re not. They disrespect the topic, even for their own side.
I would be the first to admit we have buffoons on our side too, but what I don’t see from the gun control side of things are people who are serious about their topic, arguing passionately, and rolling their eyes or otherwise engaging, educating and challenging the lesser intellects in the movement in an attempt to build a better one; forming a stronger intellectual basis for moving their issue forward. Where’s the folks asking CSGV what they achieve demonizing and denigrating 40% of the US population? Where’s the folks criticizing Brady for flunking Obama when he’s their best hope of hanging onto anything? Where’s the folks asking Joan who’s she’s really winning over, or what intellectual foundation for her movement she’s building by ringing that bell?
This is not the team you’re going to go to the playoffs with folks, if you believe in more gun control. If this were a sport, I’d be at the point now I’d be sandbag it a bit, just to be sportsmanlike, but this is much more serious than that, so let me be the first to say I’m pleased when they need juice the most, we’re facing tired and unskilled second stringers. But even in this current situation, 34-7, end of the 4th quarter and just outside our opponent’s endzone, it’s telling they still don’t take us seriously.
NRA Doesn’t Do Squat for _____________
I actually haven’t heard people say it about this state, but because I know there are so many NRA program supporters out in Arizona, I’ll highlight what NRA has been doing for them lately.
In 2010, the NRA Civil RIghts Defense Fund provided assistance in three cases. Two of them were in regards to personal situations with firearms and the third involved a shooting range.
The year also saw more than $314,000 in grants flow through the state courtesy of The NRA Foundation and the generous attendees of Friends of NRA banquets. (See how many are left? Go to one and the join your fellow Arizona gun nuts for some NRA sandwiches when you win the NRA toaster.) Back to the money. That cash went to 35 organizations that support shooters around the state.
Campus Carry in Virginia
Looks like the Attorney General of Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli, has ruled that University of Virginia can’t bar people with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus. Virginia is similar to Pennsylvania in this regard, in that there’s no law against carrying on campus, but universities have generally been free to set policy. Cuccinelli’s position appears to be that UVa’s prohibition is too board, contrasting with a Virginia Supreme Court case over Mason’s policy, which was upheld, but which the court noted was narrowly tailored.
Giant Killer Plant Stalks New York
I have never heard of this weed until now, but apparently it is taking over New York:
This noxious weed has spread across the state, threatening humans with sap that causes severe burns, blistering, permanent scarring and even blindness.
No, it’s not Mayor Bloomberg, but Giant Hogweed. The Wikipedia description matches the article. I think we need to close the Giant Hogweed loophole and make sure that people on the terror watch list cannot buy this plant.
Laddite
Miguel has coined a new term. Here’s some more example of Laddite activity. Meanwhile they are flushing pro-gun comments down the memory hole. And they wonder why they are inconsequential in the new media space. An echo chamber might be good for keeping followers appropriately frothing at the mouth, but it does no good for the overall health of your movement when dealing with people who are not mouth frothers.
We certainly have our own mouth frothers, but on the whole, we’re a lot better at making reasonable arguments than they are.
A Few More Things About Rahm’s Ordinance
A few things I think I missed in the Rahm BS Gun Range Ordinance:
- It seems to require individual employees hold an FFL, or at the least the shooting facility itself to have one, yet a shooting facility, under the set rules, can’t transfer guns to patrons except on a temporary basis for Chicago’s required training. Will ATF issue an FFL for a shooting range that does not sell or rent guns?
- ATF requires that you comply with local zoning regulations. Chicago’s regulations make it unlawful to operate a shooting range without a license anywhere in the city, but you can’t get that license without an FFL. Can you get the FFL without the license?
- It seems to require that range masters receive firearms training, which begs the question of how you become the first range in Chicago, which means you need to leave the city, which is the whole point of Ezell in the first place.
- The language for disqualification for a license to operate a shooting range facility says “has ever been convicted, or found liable in an administrative adjudication, of a felony, a misdemeanor involving a firearm, or any other law concerning the manufacture, possession or sale of firearms…” By the “administrative adjudication” standard, I believe someone could be denied a license to operate for a single violation of this ordinance.
- If you’re leasing space, and the landlord is a felon, or has committed some minor infraction with a gun, or commits such afterwards, you will lose your license to operate the range.
- The law defines “applicant” as “any person who is required to be disclosed pursuant to section 4-151-030(b), but in 4-151-030(b), the requirements for who has to sign the application are nonsensical, since it has to be signed and verified by oath of affidavit, by the applicant, but the applicant is anyone required to be disclosed. The requirement on who must be disclosed is lengthy. Who is the one who has to sign and verify the application?
Flying Car Finally Hitting the Market?
While it’s good to see a company tossing new ideas into the General Aviation community, I’m pretty underwhelmed by the news that we may finally soon have a real flying car. As much as I’d love for something that’s really practical in this role, I’m not sure this is it, mostly because of the price, and because it will neither be a very good car or very good plane for that price.
Mentioned in the video, the range is about 400 miles, and the cost somewhere between $200,000 and a cool quarter million. Other than the novelty/cool factor, what does it practically get you? Well, you can drive the plane home to your garage, so it’ll save on having to store the plane at an airport. You can decide to fly one part of a route, and drive another.
A used Cessna 172 Skyhawk can be had for 25 grand. How much storage can 225,000 pay for at a local general aviation field? How many rental car days can a tenth of that pay for to get you to and from and airport? The Cessna has a range of close to 700 nautical miles, while the Terrafugia flying car ranges to 425 nautical miles. The Cessna’s cruising speed is 122 knots, topping out at 163 knots. Terrafugia’s flying car cruises at 93 knots and tops out at 100 knots.
Now it’s fair to note that the Terrafugia is a Light Sport Aircraft, but even in comparison to other aircraft in that category, it’s still really expensive, even if more comparable in terms of performance. The other issue is that the Terrafugia has a very low ground clearance for a plane, and combined with the four wheel undercarriage, I would imagine makes crosswind landings more tricky than in a regular aircraft. I’d be worried about wing scrape and tail scrape if you don’t nail your landing exactly right, though it looks like the Terrafugia has a smaller, extra set of wheels in the tail section.
My conclusion is this is a rich person’s novelty. A great way for keeping up with a Jones’, if you’re a little weird. I’m also really curious how you work insurance for one of these things. I’m guessing you need an auto policy while driving, and another policy for when it’s being used as an aircraft.