Yet another fatal shooting, this time at Texas A&M.

As I noted in a previous post about the shootings at the theater in Aurora, Colorado, there will continue to be these kinds of violent, random acts involving lunatics and guns, because this country lacks the political will to actually do anything.

But I was going to note that, since the pro-gun folks' favorite proposal is to let everyone have and carry arms, this means that people will really need to be armed to:
1) Go to the movies.
2) Go to a place of worship, regardless of religion or denomination.
3) Go to class, high school or college, or just be walking by a school.
4) Go out to a bar, even the "artsy" kind that you might find in Seattle.
5) Go to a museum, such as the Holocaust Museum.
6) Work in any organization that might be seen as supportive of "liberal" causes.

I got that list from events that have happened or almost happened in the last couple of years, and I didn't even have to think more than about 30 seconds.

I wonder when the pro-gun people might want to rethink their proposed approach.  Does anyone really think that would be a credible deterrent when nutjobs with a grudge and a desire to be famous are involved?  And how many more innocent people might get shot if, all of a sudden, there was a crossfire in any of these places (like in a dark movie theater filled with smoke and lots of confusion) that leaves people nowhere to flee?

What a crazy country this is.  I guess it's a good thing that we really don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us, because the rest of the world thinks we are insane.

Republican Senator believes that limiting high capacity rounds “restricts freedom.”

I want to know what, exactly, a regular non-military, non-law enforcement person really needs assault weapons and high capacity magazines.  What, exactly, are they going to do with those?  What possible purpose, besides the ones we have been witnessing, can there be for owning such firepower?

Well, a number of Republican senators certainly believe that, even if there may not be identifiable use, any attempt to restrict access would be a “restriction of our freedoms.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) drew a fairly strict line in the sand on Sunday with respect to the coming debate over gun control, suggesting that there is a constitutional right to buy high-capacity clips and magazines. 

"Does something that would limit magazines that could carry 100 rounds, would that infringe on the constitutional right?" host Chris Wallace asked Johnson on "Fox News Sunday." 

"I believe so," Johnson replied. "People will talk about unusually lethal weapons, that could be potentially a discussion you could have. But the fact of the matter is there are 30-round magazines that are just common. You simply can't keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals who want to do harm. And when you try to do it, you restrict our freedoms."

Yep, that certainly makes sense.  I definitely remember the Constitution, or maybe it was the Bill of Rights, or maybe it was the Gettysburg Address, that specifically said that a citizen of the U.S. must have access to firepower that can kill dozens and maybe hundreds of people in less than a minute.  Even though I believe that flintlocks were the order of the day back around 1775 and 1776.

For a political party that just LOVES to view the Constitution in what they believe was the original intent of the Founding Fathers, they certainly can stretch a point when it comes to guns.

This is the mentality I am looking at when I said in an earlier post on this subject that this country will never change.  Mass killings of innocent bystanders by lunatics with easy access to any weapon their hearts desire and a chip on their shoulder will not stop, because this country’s priorities have “absolute freedom with anything to do with high power weaponry” is much higher on our list than is keeping civilians safe.

Yeah, I know, if anyone were reading this blog and I got comments, someone would no doubt say that even with the type of restrictions I am talking about, we wouldn’t have stopped this particular person from killing people, if that is what he wanted to do.  And you know what?  You may be right.  But you also may be wrong.  Maybe low capacity clips might have slowed this guy down.  Maybe….  If he didn’t have an assault rifle, he might, must maybe, might have thought twice about his plan.  The thing is, we can’t know for certain until we try.  And we aren’t going to try.  Because this nation’s priorities are totally out of whack.

Now, of course, if this attack had been perpetrated by a fanatical Iranian, our course as a nation would have been very easy to determine.  We go bomb Iran and start another middle east war that will be much more difficult to win and/or extract ourselves from than Iraq.  The TSA would no doubt make it that much more difficult to get on a commercial airplane.  The Dept. of “Homeland Security” would issue more color-coded alerts.  The government would probably push for mass use of surveillance drones to spy on activities of anyone that looks suspicious.  But since this was a nutjob loner white guy, well…  There’s just nothing that can be done about that.

I just can’t fathom Senator Ron Johnson from the state of Wisconsin going on Fox News and saying something like this, three days after the horrific day in Denver.  He makes me a bit sick to my stomach.  But, to others, he is no doubt hailed as a “True American.”


UPDATE:  Sorry this is difficult to read.  I have absolutely no idea why Blogger decided to put this posts text in grey against a black background.  I didn't do that and can't figure out how to change it.

One more thought on guns and the lack of gun control in America.

Here's a comparison to think about when debating gun violence in this country.

On 9/11, one of the worst days in American history, somewhere around 3000 people were murdered in cold blood by a number of fanatics.  Over that event, this country ended up starting two wars (even if Iraq wasn't about 9/11 directly, George Bush certainly used the opportunity to get his war of choice), each of which set a record for the longest war this country had ever participated in.  Thousands of American soldiers were killed, and tens of thousands were maimed for life.  Over a trillion dollars was spent, and hundreds of thousands of civilians from both Iraq and Afghanistan were killed.  That's what this country did in the name of the 3000 people who died on 9/11.  "Never forget!"

On the other hand, somewhere between 9000 and 10,000 people in the U.S. are killed by gun violence each and every year, and we do absolutely nothing.  Let me repeat that.  Between 9000 and 10,000 people in the U.S. are killed by gun violence each and every year, and we do absolutely nothing.

The ability of Americans to rationalize away anything that contradicts with their established beliefs is nothing short of dumbfounding.

UPDATE:  Actually, Cognitive Dissonance was the term I was looking for.

UPDATE:  Here is actually what looks like to me a non-satirical commentary from The Onion, courtesy of Balloon Juice.

12 dead in a shooting rampage outside of Denver at a Batman movie.

This country is really, really sick. I am not sure I am not talking about a country which can continually produce nutjobs that believe they need to solve their grievances by taking out guns and blowing away innocent people. Yes, every country has the lunatics, such as Norway, for example, but this country seems to have more than our fair share.

But again, what I am talking about is the fact that these types of events are so damn commonplace. They seem to happen several times a year now. And I will absolutely goddamn guarantee that this event will be all but forgotten within six months, just like the shooting at Virginia Tech was. Just like the horrific shooing of Gabby Giffords at a campaign event outside a shopping mall in Tucson.  Those have all but been forgotten, except when someone brings up Giffords every now and then.

 Any attempt by anyone to actually DO anything about gun violence in this country will be met with overwhelming opposition, and the attempt will crumble. Any attempt will be labeled as “Political Opportunism” and “Government Overreach.” The country, as a whole (which is different than a majority of the population, because that doesn’t factor in money, the NRA, and political timidity), would rather have these sickening events a couple of times a year where countless innocent people die or come through the event with horrible physical and psychic scars, than actually curtail anyone’s easy access to as many guns as they want. THAT is what is important in this country. Innocent lives are not important in the face of letting crazy people have guns.

Don’t give me that crap about statistics. I can show you just as many statistics about how having guns in someone’s home increases the change, by a large amount, of someone getting shot accidently.

 Don’t give me that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” No, guns do kill people. That’s the predominate reason that many guns are manufactured and sold. Sure, there are rifles and shotguns made specifically for hunting of animals (which I think is cruel and absurd, but do recognize it as a legitimate form of “recreation”). But most guns are made to kill people.

I feel so badly, just like I do after every shooting. Nothing will happen. People will wring their hands and say, “how horrible.” And other people will immediately go into their defensive/pre-emptive offensive mode, ready to stomp on any attempt to do anything about curtailing gun violence. And absolutely nothing will happen. This is the norm. People die in car crashes, no one wants to take away people’s cars. (I have actually heard that one as an argument.) Therefore, by extension, why worry about a few nuts with guns which we can’t do anything about anyway? Don’t concern yourself that we haven’t actually TRIED to do anything. We just know that we can’t solve the problem. So, let’s just forget about this, shall we? Good. Too bad about all those kids that were killed and injured because they wanted to see the new Batman movie. That’s just how it goes.

I hate this country.

UPDATE:  This is in response to the first comment I received on my post, only about 10 minutes after I hit post.  I thought about addressing this "argument" in my original post, but I was so upset and in a hurry that I didn't go there.  Not that it would have mattered to those people who think that the best/only solution to gun violence in this country is to arm EVERYONE.  Yep, sure can't see any problems with that....  No, I am sure that drunken disputes at 2 a.m. in a bar that currently only results in broken teeth and bloody knuckles would NEVER result in a gun fight.  Just like the case of Trayvon Martin in Florida didn't end up with a 17 year old kid dead because some hot shot with a gun and a chip on his shoulder (who wasn't even drunk at the time) decided he was going to instigate something.  No, guns certainly don't empower people with feelings of control, machismo and invulnerability.  No, and I am sure that when something did come up, no more innocent bystanders would be hurt or killed in the crossfire.  20 people shooting in a dark movie theater with smoke bombs and tear gas going off?  No, no chance of anyone else getting hurt.

Goddamn, I cannot understand this country.  People have lost sight of all perspective and ideology is REQUIRED to drive all responses anymore.  No logic.  No understanding of anyone's problems other than their own, either real or imaginary.  Only mindless tribalism.  "They" are against this, so "we" MUST be for it!  And vis versa.

I still maintain that the 2nd Amendment was written to address the issue of the government being able to raise a fighting force (i.e., "militia") very quickly, as there wasn't a standing army back then.  To me, that's simple logic.  But a huge percentage of the people in this country believe that it means that anyone, even those with a history of domestic violence and mental illness, should be allowed to have as many guns as they want, without any government "interference" at all.  It's perfectly fine to have to go through mandatory training and getting a drivers license to drive a car, but guns?  Hey, it's all good.  No regulations necessary.

And I am just as sure that I will get more crazy comments like that first one.  I may end up using my authority as owner of the blog to delete those comments, of course....  You want to advocate arming the entire country?  Go get your own damn blog.

UPDATE:  I revised the number of dead in the title from 14 to 12.  Initial reports on events like these are always confused/confusing and will always be subject to correction after things settle down a bit.

UPDATE:  Ah, great.  The shooter booby-trapped his apartment.  That's just great....  This guy really meant to go out in a blaze of glory, or whatever that amounted to in his sick, twisted mind.  I don't care how badly anyone may think that "society" or the government has treated them.  There is absolutely no justification for this.

Thank you, Texas, for being a leader in the drive to let crazy people carry guns anywhere.

From Huffington Post:

GRAND PRAIRIE, Texas -- A gunman opened fire at a child's birthday celebration at a Texas roller rink, killing five people, wounding four others and then killing himself as the private party turned to panic and some fled screaming in their skates, police and witnesses say.

Authorities ascribed the gunman's rampage to an apparent domestic dispute and said no young children or rink employees were killed during the shooting that erupted about 7 p.m. at Forum Roller World in Grand Prairie, about 20 miles west of Dallas. Some people at nearby businesses said they watched as adults and children spilled from the rink in horror.
...

Police said the gunman began arguing with a woman in Forum Roller World's front area where the party was being held, although the rink was not open to the public because the family had rented it for several hours for the private party.

Clearly, this is a perfectly valid reason to pull a gun on someone, because they couldn't get into a roller rink when they wanted to. But by gosh, if all those kiddies going to a birthday party at a roller skating rink would have been packing heat, you know, then this would have never happened.

I guess if places like Norway get almost 100 of their young people slaughtered by a madman with a gun and a grudge, then I guess it's OK if the U.S. has our own "incidents" every now and again. Like almost every single day....

Well, that whole conversation about gun control sure vanished quickly, didn't it?

Not that I expected anything different. An assassination attempt that was incredible not for the fact that it happened but in that it didn't succeed on a sitting U.S. congresswoman, but did manage to claim the lives of a number of other people including a 9 year old girl and a District Judge was just a few weeks ago. It appeared that we MIGHT actually finally getting around to addressing issues like how an unstable person managed to get a gun at a gun show, and maybe that clips that hold 30 bullets maybe aren't really all that necessary. But no. That is now "Old News." It is been overtaken by Egypt and whether or not Republicans are still going to try to satisfy their base by trying to repeal "Obamacare." We are now talking about whether or not Obama "lost" Egypt and that Bill O'Reilly believes that God causes the tides and not the moon.

Jesus, what a country. We deserve every single thing that happens to us.

Several reasons why American citizens should be allowed to carry guns anywhere they want to.

- If you are at your son's high school basketball game and the ref makes a terrible call, you can threaten to shoot him.

- If you are driving on the freeway and someone cuts you off, you can threaten to shoot him.

- If you come across an actual crime in progress, you can shoot the criminals or anyone else who is standing around that also has a gun out and looks like he might be a criminal. (Of course, there is absolutely zero chance that the police, when they happen upon the scene, or even another citizen armed to the teeth, that they would shoot you because, to them, you look like you might be a criminal.)

- At political events, if someone says something or displays a sign that you disagree with, you can threaten to shoot him.

- If you are at a bar and getting pretty sloshed while watching your favorite football team, you can threaten to shoot anyone who is cheers when the other team scores a touchdown.

- If you are coming back to your parked car and you see someone putting a flyer underneath the windshield wipers but you think he might actually be trying to steal your car, you can threaten to shoot him.

- If you are protesting at a Family Planning clinic, you can threaten to shoot anyone who works there or looks like they might even be thinking about going in the door.

Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma and Arizona must have really by idyllic places to live in the 1880's, you know, because everyone had a gun and that made everyone extremely safe. Those shootouts in bars and the streets must have really been entertaining. It's really too bad that we don't allow those anymore.

I am almost as despondent about the response to the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords as I was the shooting itself.

I was correct that no one would ever consider that some of the imagery and inflammatory language may not be appropriate. Nope. The overwhelming response of the right has been very predictable. It’s not their fault. Those weren’t gun sights. How dare liberals use this incident to try to score political points. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for even thinking such a thing. Bill O’Reilly is terribly angry, and we all know he has never been angry at anything before, ever, at the New York Times and we should all condemn them.

*Sigh*

It is all so predictable. And insane, too, of course. I would have never thought that people could be so stubborn, so insistent that their “side” is always right and the other side is always evil, and that all narratives absolutely must be adjusted accordingly, no matter the situation or the cost to American citizens and the country as a whole. The narrative must be preserved!

Here are some of my thoughts about some of the bigger narratives that have emerged in the last couple of days.

Narrative 1: The shooter is obviously mentally unstable. The use of sometimes violent rhetoric and imagery by the conservatives and right wing pundits of this country had no impact on this guy. He would have done what he did anyway.

My response: That is quite possibly true. We don’t know for certain. But given the political climate of this country right now and the real and threatened violence (see my previous post) that is coming from the right these days, don’t you think that it might be prudent to tone it down, even though there is may be no direct evidence that the shooter was motivated by political hate speech? Wouldn’t that be a wise thing to do?

Narrative 2: Both sides have a problem with out of control political hate speech.

My response: Nope. No they don’t. This is almost purely a right wing problem. See my previous post.

Narrative 3: Liberals want to control dissent by outlawing certain language.

My response: What a horseshit strawman that is. No one is saying that anything about censorship. We are calling for self-restraint. Those are two very different things. Morons.

Narrative 4: This country doesn’t need more gun control laws. We actually need less. If more people in that crowd had been armed, this tragedy wouldn’t have happened.

My response: Yeah, that’s a really smart idea. Have all sorts of people open up with their weapons into a crowd that is already in shock. Lots more people would have probably ended up shot than they did. Plus, it wouldn’t have stopped the guy initially. He came up behind Giffords and shot her in the head before anyone knew what was happening. He then opened up with a semi-automatic pistol filled with 32 cartridges. And it is obvious that, even if this lunatic knew that everyone in the crowd was armed, he would have gone through with his attack anyway. He knew he was going to be caught and possibly gunned down, and he did it anyway.

Narrative 5: The gunman wasn’t a conservative! He was a leftist! He said his favorite books were Mein Kamph and To Kill a Mockingbird!

My response: You are now insulting our intelligence. This is just one more example of saying the first thing that comes to mind that could possibly, just remotely possibly, be true and conservatives think this somehow addresses the issue. The guy wrote tracts, although just barely coherent, about the evils of government and how the government wants to control the population by the use of grammar. He was also on about U.S. currency not being backed by gold and silver. Plus, he specifically targeted a Democratic congresswoman he didn’t like for assassination. Does that sound like a liberal to anyone? All you can come up with to support your position is the guy’s reading list? And when is Mein Kamph a favorite of liberals?

There may be more narratives out there. I may update this post if I think of more.

I’ll just leave you with the latest cartoon from Tom Tomorrow, via Salon. I think he hits it on the head.

So, is this what Sharron Angle meant by exercising our Second Amendment Rights?

Here's what she said while running for U.S. Senator in Nevada.

“You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact, Thomas Jefferson said it’s good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.”

“I hope that’s not where we’re going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying, ‘my goodness what can we do to turn this country around?’ I’ll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out.”

It wasn't Harry Reid this time. It was Ms. Gabby Gifford, a U.S. Representative from the state of Arizona. Is this what Sharron Angle meant? If Republicans don't win at the ballot box, then they are free to use guns? If so, I guess she is getting her wish.

Is this the armed revolution that Glenn Beck is constantly referring to?

I'm just so sick of this. I am sick of living in a country where hypocrites seem to be always the ones that get to set the rules, and mentally unstable people are spoon fed hate filled rhetoric. Democrats and liberals are apparently considered to be fair game for no other reason than they have a different opinion than do the hard core conservatives.

I have actually been predicting something like this for about a while now, ever since crazy people started carrying guns to Town Hall meetings and rallies for Barack Obama. It was just inevitable. We have had many close calls and some idiots actually carried out their insane delusions. Did we just have a couple of explosive packages go off in Maryland at some government offices? I think I saw where the authorities thought that the sender was upset about some traffic policies or something. We had a maniac crash a small airplane into an IRS building because he was upset about his taxes. The message we are constantly hearing is that government is evil and you are fully justified in taking violent action against it. How can anyone I'm rather surprised that more people haven't gotten killed.

Perhaps, just perhaps, this will be the last straw. This will be the thing that pulls us, as a country, back from the brink. Perhaps. But I really doubt it. I really am waiting to see what Fox News, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, and their kind come up with to excuse themselves. I can't see Beck or Limbaugh ever apologizing or rethinking their position, ever. They are paid to be bombastic assholes who are always right and never, ever will admit to a mistake. Oh, they will probably issue some half-baked statements trying to cover their collective asses, just like Glenn Beck did when Byron Williams became inspired by Beck's tirades to go shoot up the Tides Foundation. Oh, no, Beck had nothing to do with this! He's only an entertainer! A rodeo-cowboy! How could anyone believe that Beck had anything to do with that? I'm also waiting to see what kind of BS that the NRA comes out with. I am sure it will be some self-serving statement that acknowledges no guilt, deflects all blame, and probably tries to blame liberals somehow.

My heart goes out to all the shooting victims and their friends and families. I hope Ms. Gifford can recover so that she may live a full and meaningful life.

The remainder of my heart is a very black place right now. It is unfortunate, I suppose, that I don't believe in God, Heaven or Hell. Because if I did, I would sincerely pray for those people who advocate violence against those they disagree with the very hottest corner of hell for all eternity.

UPDATE: Some "morning after" thoughts on the Arizona shooting.

I see that many are calling for "both parties" to turn down the rhetoric. BS. I do not see ANYONE on the left, except for maybe a few little bloggers or anonymous commenters, ever calling for violence. Congress people do not do it. Rachael Maddow and Keith Olbermann are always highlighted as liberal commenters. I have never, ever heard them advocate violence. They are some of the ones asking for people to turn it down. This "both sides do it" crap is just that, crap. This is almost exclusively a right/conservative issue. Just look at this list of violence and threatened violence against prominent figures since 2008. Please. I do not see a whole lot of violence or threatened violence against the right or their organizations. This is NOT a problem for "both sides."

Even if this nut that shot the congresswoman yesterday and a whole lot of innocent bystanders isn't a tea party crackpot, even if he isn't a Glenn Beck fan like Byron Williams was (discussed above), even if he wasn't affected by Sarah Palin's election map with cross-hairs over many political races, there is still the issue of this intense and hateful rhetoric egging on people who may be so inclined. Because I am sure that the reaction from all this intense criticism by the left of the right's hateful BS is going to be something along the lines of "Hey, it wasn't our fault! This guy is just (one more) nut. You can't prove any connection."

I call bullshit. Human beings are incredibly easy to manipulate. Just look at TV commercials. Companies wouldn't spend billions of dollars trying to influence human behavior (in that case, buying their crap) unless it works. You can get people to believe anything if you try hard enough. My favorite example is the Hitler Youth. Of course, at this point, someone will know screech "Godwin's Law!" If you mention Nazis, then you are obviously not a serious person. My point here is to take that the Nazis took a very extreme position and were able to convince many people that they were like gods. So, why then isn't there a connection between this hateful bile that is filled with implied violence completely isolated from society? Propaganda works, especially for people who would like to believe whatever is being pushed in the first place.

So, Glenn Beck, Sharron Angle, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, you do not get a pass here!! You are culpable in this horrific shooting. All that needs to be discussed is the extent.

UPDATE 2: Yep, I was right. That didn't take long. Those symbols on Sarah Palin's political map during the campaign, the one that said "Don't retreat. Reload!" Those were not gun sights. Those were "surveyor symbols."

Uh-huh. Yeah. And I'm Tinkerbell.

UPDATE 3: Here are some of the visuals I mentioned earlier.



This first one is the campaign material targeting, and I do mean targeting, some Democrats. Those do not look like "surveyor's symbols" to me. I find it just amazing that Palin and all of the conservatives right now will never, ever admit they were wrong about anything or apologize to anyone about anything. This could have easily been taken care of by, "Sorry. Yes, that was inappropriate. Our campaign shouldn't have done that." If that would have occurred, the story would have been over, for the most part. But trying to pass those off as surveyor's symbols? Please...



This next one is something was seen around the internets during the campaign last year. Nope, no visual imagery there. Move along, nothing to see here.

The next time I hear this "both sides do it" meme, I would like someone to give some examples like this from the left.

The Georgia legislature is at it again, gives thumbs up to carrying guns in Atlanta Hartsfield airport.

From U.S.A. Today:

Lawmakers in Georgia have approved a bill that would allow gun owners to carry their licensed firearms at parts of Atlanta Hartsfield, despite the airport's vigorous opposition.

The legislation, which is waiting for Gov. Sonny Perdue's signature, would permit carrying of firearms in areas that are not controlled by the federal government, such as terminals and parking lots.

It expands on a state law passed in 2008 that allows Georgia residents with firearm licenses to bring concealed weapons onto public transportation, in parks and recreational areas and into restaurants that serve alcohol. Gun advocates have since been lobbying to expand the law to include the airport.

Well, now. Isn’t that just the most wonderful thing you could imagine? I am betting that if they could have gotten away with it, they would have approved carrying guns into areas controlled by the federal government, including airplanes. That’s how insane this seems to have gotten. There is absolutely no reason to need to carry weapons anywhere near an airport. What’s the point? Does the Georgia legislature really think that people with guns will deter hijackers or terrorists? Or is it more just because those evil lie-burals don’t want guns at airports, as well as many other places? This goes to the point I made in an earlier post. It just has to do with human psychology and what passes for social norms these days. Conservatives promoting gun ownership are now hard-wired to not accept ANY limits. There doesn’t have to be a reason, other than “no one tells ME where I can carry my gun!” That’s obviously the only rationale at play here.

Christ, don’t these people have real problems to fix?

Update: Louisiana, not to be outdone, introduces a bill that would allow carrying people to bring guns into churches.

"God gives us locks on our doors," said Horton, adding: "We buy fire extinguishers in case there's a fire." This bill would simply offer a "final stage of security" for those churches that choose it.

Uh-huh...

Well, it's good to know that the state of Louisiana doesn't have any REAL problems that they might try to deal with.

News Of The Future: Robots Win Right To Keep and Bear Arms.

The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, found in favor of the plaintiff, The National Rifle and Particle Beam Destructor Association (NRPRDA), that robots should be considered to be citizens if they were built in the United States of America and therefore should be allowed to possess and carry firearms. The NRPRDA released a statement hailing the decision as "a victory for all Americans, whether they are mechanical, carbon-based or multi-national corporations." Opponents of the ruling predicted an increase in firearm and particle beam destructor deaths, due to the fact that a majority of the mechanical persons designed and built today run Windows 2030 Excelsior! (TM), which some software designers stated has a tendency to randomly jump between applications. Ex-half-term President Sarah Palin and current spokesperson for Clairol Hair Products, stated that she "was thrilled, you betcha, because Russia has millions of robots just waiting to march into Alaska."

Delusions of grandeur much?

Nine members of a militia group who named themselves the Hutaree have been arrested for, among other things, sedition and attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction.

From the NYTimes:

The indictment said the Hutaree, in anticipation of a war against its enemies, had been engaging in “military-style training,” from weapons proficiency drills to “close quarter battle drills” and the use of “ambush kill zones.” The small group had acquired guns, ammunition, medical supplies, uniforms, communications equipment and “explosives and other components for destructive devices,” it said.

After attacking the police, the members planned to retreat to several planned “rally points” and wait for the authorities to come after them. They were preparing fighting positions as well as “trip-wired and command-detonated” bombs, it said.

“It is believed by the Hutaree that this engagement would then serve as a catalyst for a more widespread uprising against the government,” the indictment said.

In addition, Mr. Stone had announced, “a covert reconnaissance exercise” in April, during which “anyone who happened upon the exercise who did not acquiesce to Hutaree demands could be killed,” the indictment said.

The United States attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, Barbara McQuade, said the government raided the group this past weekend because that exercise would have “had the potential of placing an unsuspecting member of the public at risk.”

The Hutaree Web site features the motto “Preparing for the end time battles to keep the testimony of Jesus Christ alive” and a video showing rifle-toting men in camouflage running through woods and firing weapons.

“Jesus wanted us to be ready to defend ourselves using the sword and stay alive using equipment,” the Web site says, adding, “The Hutaree will one day see its enemy and meet him on the battlefield if so God wills it.”

By Monday, the Stones’ house stood empty, its front door ajar and two dogs still tied up in the were.

The Stones’ two sons were among those arrested. Joshua, the eldest, left the local school system after the fifth grade in 1999 to be home-schooled, and the younger son, David B. Stone Jr., 19, had never been enrolled, an official said.

Also charged were Joshua J. Clough, 28, of Blissfield, Mich.; Michael D. Meeks, 40, of Manchester, Mich.; Thomas W. Piatek, 46, of Whiting, Ind.; Kristopher T. Sickles, 27, of Sandusky, Ohio; and Jacob Ward, 33, of Huron, Ohio.

They could face a maximum penalty of life in prison if convicted of the most serious charge, attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction.

There are so many aspects of this story that are so disturbing and raise so many questions. One of my first reactions, and I will just get this out of the way now, is that I feel very sorry for the two kids involved. They never had a chance. They were indoctrinated with their parents’ craziness from the time they could walk. They were “home schooled”, which ensured that they would never receive any learning that would contradict that craziness. Really, they never had a chance. But by now, it is probably too late to hope that they might be rehabilitated and become productive members of society, rather than someone on the outside trying to tear down that same society.

My very first reaction, however, was one of absolute horror. What could possibly be wrong with these people that they would think that killing a policeman would help them in their fight against the ultimate fictitious enemy, the Antichrist? These people saw themselves as “God’s Warriors”, and they couldn’t even keep their stupid yard clean? If there ever were a good example of “white trash”, it would seem to be these people. I don't believe in God, but if there is such a being, I would really hope that He would be truly offended that people like this believe that they think they can speak for him and murder other people in His name. But, throughout history, there have always been such people and there always will be. God thinks exactly like they think. What a coincidence.

Without knowing any of this group personally, here is my take. These people have so little self-worth and extremely few prospects for the future, they had to come up with this crap about being “God’s warriors” in order to give their feeble lives some meaning. It’s a grown up version of having some sort of “secret club” when you are a kid, with secret signs and a secret hideout, and a big plan about something or other that gives membership in this club a reason to be proud of. It’s also all about blaming others for their troubles. In today’s society, it’s always someone else’s fault for whatever problems you have. It’s never your fault. These people are losers in the biggest sense of the word, and they couldn’t accept that. So they anointed themselves as “God’s warriors”, doing God’s bidding and going forth to fight the Antichrist. What b.s. Yet, this concept is what ruled these people’s lives, and continues to rule the lives of many more people just like them.

I really try not to make many inflammatory statements here on this blog. I don’t like to use the anonymity of the blogsphere to be a jerk on purpose with the intent of attracting readers. I’ll leave that particular to trick to the followers of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. But I see one possible future of this country as an armed revolt of stupid people. But you know what would happen? If successful, it wouldn’t be the stupid people who would end up on top. It would be the bright boys and girls who manipulate the anger of those stupid people. No, I am not going to get into comparisons with Nazi Germany. That always has a way of clouding the point anyone is trying to make. But the Russian Revolution, that might be an apt comparison. Look who ended up in change, Lenin and his gang. It wasn’t the proletariats. They were just the tools for the unscrupulous and power hungry to gain control.

If these people really wanted to give their lives purpose and be able to legally run around trying to kill the bad guys with really big guns, why didn't they all join the military? But no. That would be actually hard work and they would have other people telling them what to do. This way, they get to play soldier (and God's soldier at that) on their own terms. When they get tired at the end of the day, they can tell themselves they did a wonderful job in support of a great purpose and then go home and watch Fox News on television, so they can renew their anger at all the people in the United States who make them mad.

“Domestic terrorism” in Seattle.

I guess only the rather liberal Pacific Northwest feels free to call something what it actually is; domestic terrorism. Because, you know, terrrorists are always foreigners.

Here is a link to the story in the Seattle Times. The suspect apparently pulled up beside a patrol car on Halloween night and opened fire on two officers, killing one and wounding the other. Premediated murder. He was also apparently involved in a bombing also against police offices earlier in the month. And the clue that tied to the two crimes together? A small U.S. flag was left at both crime scenes.

When police raided this guy’s apartment, there was a confrontation and he tried to shoot at the arresting officers. He was, very appropriately, shot by three officers. He survived and is in the hospital. A search of the suspects apartment “turned up bomb-making materials, improvised explosive devices and two rifles, including a "military-style assault rifle" similar to the type of weapon police believe was used to kill Brenton and wound his rookie partner, Officer Britt Sweeney. More hazardous material was found later Saturday, and at 8 p.m. residents in Monfort's building were evacuated briefly, according to Tukwila police dispatch.”

(Note: This is about five miles from where I work. Also in the same area is the truck plant where Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer used to work and and Lake Sammamish State Park, which is where Ted Bundy first learned how to lure young women into his beat up Volkswagon bug. About 25 miles down the road in Tacoma is where the D.C. sniper bought his rifle used to kill a number of people while he was hidden in the truck of his car, modified specifically for that purpose and where he killed one of his first victims.)

This event won’t even make the national news, because it is such “small potatoes.” After all, it was only a single policeman that was killed by a lone nutjob. Nothing to see here, no conclusions to be drawn. This comes right on the heels of the horrific killings at an Army base in Texas and several killings in Orlando at a business complex.

The atmosphere in the country right now is just heavy with the potential for violence. Lots and lots of angry people being egged on by their favorite radio or television “entertainer”, easy access to guns, the disintegration of all social restraint, all are contributing to this potential. In the eyes of many, it is now acceptable to take out their anger and frustration by killing people. I can’t believe that many on the right are still spouting off with implications of violence and killing. Michelle Bachmann spoke of people coming to Washington D.C. to confront lawmakers, using the following language:

"I'd love to have every one of your viewers to join me so we can go up and down through the halls, find members of Congress, look at the whites of their eyes and say, 'Don't take away my healthcare.'"

"The American people realize this is it. Just like that brand new Michael Jackson movie came out, ‘This Is It.’ This is it for freedom. If you believe in liberty, and if you’re rejecting tyranny, this is it. Dr. Mark Levin wrote a seminal book that really swept this country called Liberty and Tyranny. And that’s what this debate is about next week. Liberty and tyranny."

The last time I heard the words “the whites of their eyes” and “tyranny” used together, it was about the Revolutionary War. This was, no doubt, intentional by Bachmann. But she is using references to taking up arms against an oppressive government (which at that time was Britain). She is purposely trying to stir up the anger of people at the very government of which she is a part, and insinuating that violence is acceptable.

This is not going to end well. There are already too many angry nuts out there with guns who are more than willing to go out and kill Americans against whom they hold a grudge, real or perceived. This is why many of us rational people were aghast when people starting bringing loaded guns to town hall meetings where President Obama was speaking. Legal or not, that is an insane thing to do. There is no upside.

This is not going to end well. It may not even end at all. This may now be the normal condition of this country. And that scares me a lot.

The Second Amendment, applied to today's society.

Commenter Snorghagen at Sady, No!, pegged this absolutely correctly. Here is the updated reading of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is quite clear on this subject:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of demented reactionary whackjobs to keep and bear arms to prevent imaginary attacks from non-existent boogeymen shall not be infringed or questioned or anything and they can do whatever they want and it’s all totally OK because if anything bad happens it was the other guy’s fault anyway.

How else can we explain these nuts who bring loaded guns, including assault rifles, to town hall meetings?

THIS is one reason that many think our current policy on guns is insane.

(I have the distinct feeling that I am going to annoy a number of people with this post. Talking about guns and gun control is about as risky as talking about religion, if you don’t know your audience. There are some very strong feelings on all sides of this discussion. However, I guess the point of writing on a blog is to say what you think. And, of course, having a blog means never having to say you’re sorry.)

From the Seattle PI:

Sound engineer fatally shot outside motel room

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

TWISP, Wash. -- A sound engineer who worked on live performances by the likes of B.B. King, Nirvana and Alice Cooper has been shot to death at a motel in Twisp, Wash.

Tom Pfaeffle, 49, staying with his wife on vacation at the Blue Spruce Motel, apparently put his room key into the wrong door Friday night and was hit in the upper chest by a bullet fired through the closed door, Police Chief Rick Balam told KING Television of Seattle.

Pfaeffle died two hours later at Mid-Valley Hospital in Omak.

A second shot went through a wall into another room and landed harmlessly on a guest who was doing a crossword puzzle in bed, motel owner Randy Martin told The Wenatchee World newspaper.

A 57-year-old man surrendered without further incident and was jailed for investigation of second-degree murder and assault, Balam said.

I've been to Twisp. It's a very small town and it is very frightening to see this.

It seems to me that, by arguing greater and more lenient access to guns, gun rights advocates never make the concession that their some (not “all”, by any means and not even “most”, but certainly “some”) of gun rights advocates are also trigger-happy hotheads that support open ownership of guns because of the feelings of power and control it gives them. “Don’t screw with me! I’m armed!”

I have seen this up close and personal. I usually don’t go into too many personal details in this blog. That isn’t its purpose. But I think this time, I have some relevant personal information. When I was in my early 20’s, I guess it was, my younger brother and I were confronted by my stepfather, who was always angry and blamed everyone else for his supposed problems. He was very drunk, as usual, but this time he had a loaded pistol, which was decidedly unusual, that he kept waving in our direction. He would check that it was loaded every so often, either to reassure himself or to intimidate us, which is more likely. He kept waving this gun at us and demanding that we “love him!” Yeah, threatening someone with a loaded gun is a sure fire way to get someone’s love and admiration. We just kept him talking until he eventually passed out on the kitchen floor. We then hid the gun somewhere. During this episode, I really couldn’t believe it was happening. Thinking about it afterwards, I felt decidedly fortunate for my brother and me to have come out of the episode uninjured and alive.

That’s the mindset I see out there. Those are the people who desire that the entire population be armed; the kind of people who think the problem with our society is that we don’t have enough threats of violence and intimidation and general, overall high levels of testosterone. I would guess, but am not certain, of course, that this is the kind of guy who fired his gun through his locked door of his motel room at someone who was mistakenly trying to open the wrong door. I have done that myself. I guess I should count myself as being lucky I survived.

I have absolutely no hope that anything will change here in the U.S. Too much money, too much intimidation, too many people thinking about themselves and not about what else is really going on in the country, for anything to really change. “Those damn Democrats better not try to take my guns!” That’s the mindset, and no politician is going to pick that fight. It’s better to coddle up to the gun lobby and gun ownership supporters than try to perhaps do something intelligent.

I suppose the only lesson learned from this story is that you better be very sure what hotel room you are in before you start trying to open the door.

Every once in a while, this blog gets a hit because of a rather disturbing search.

Here’s one example.

http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&q=this%20country%20should%20exacute%20liberals&btnG=Google%20Search

In case you can’t find the search words in that, they are “this country should exacute liberals.” “Exacute…” That’s nice. A hateful SOB that can’t spell. I found it a little reassuring that of all the finds that this search came up with, it appeared to me that the vast majority were pointing out such lunacy, not promoting it.

I understand that there are really “Two Americas” out there, Rachel Maddow’s beliefs notwithstanding. There are a huge amount of people out there who really do think President Obama is the Anti-Christ, or that liberals really want to destroy the country. They actually believe that. But it is really sobering when you come across people who advocate violence. I had an earlier post about the hate mail that Jessica Lynch got because she started telling the truth about what happened to her.

I understand that the two sides are pretty much locked down in their positions, so that neither side is going to listen to the other or admit that they might have a valid point now and then. So, it’s rather difficult to argue that “my side” is correct and righteous and the “other side” is full of crap, because there is someone on the other side who is arguing exactly the same thing. Therefore, the argument should become (but usually doesn’t) one about demonstratable truths. Which side really was correct about thus and such (for instance, the presence of WMD’s in Iraq)? But in today’s society, facts do not seem to matter as much as loudly articulated opinion. Facts do not hold much sway anymore, and for that I hold the Bush adminstration responsible. Conservative talk radio certainly started this, but the Bush administration codified it. That is the way the conservatives of this country operate now. All basis for having a rational, reasoned discussion is now gone. I think that is probably one of the worst things that the Bush adminstration did to this country. But my point here is this. What else can we look at to see the difference in the two sides?

Here’s one. It takes no great effort for anyone who can use Google to find all sorts of threats, veiled and otherwise, made by conservatives. Against Obama, against liberals, against anyone who disagrees with the conversative world view. It is much more difficult to find that amount of venom and hatred in the form of actual threats coming from liberals. Our extreme radicals might go out and do stupid stuff like spike trees to keep loggers from cutting them down, burn down huge McMansions under construction to protest our society’s use of resources, let loose a bunch of minks from a mink farm to protest animal cruelty, etc. I cannot remember anything (the 60’s Weathermen aside) that comes close to threats of physical intimidation and violence that we see coming from the extreme right these days. And we have loons like Michelle Malking egging them on, and then have the gall to say that they aren’t responsible. No, it’s perfectly reasonable to publish the name, address and phone number of someone you disagree with. What do you expect is going to happen, Michelle? No, of course you didn't mean that your listeners should call up that phone number and threaten the person who answers. How could that every enter our minds?

I really do not see the two sides of this country coming together any time soon. The right has just become too ensconsed in their belief that everything that Democrats and liberals do is evil, and must be opposed with all their might. For our side, we have gotten pretty damn tired of being threatened and insulted with everything that conservatives can throw at us, such as “traitors”, “Saddam lover”, “terrorist sympathizer”, etc. Liberals and Democrats are now finally fighting back, after getting pummeled since the Nixon administration, and the conservatives and Republicans don’t like it.

I do believe one thing that the wingnut right keeps pointing out. Their side has the guns. If our society starts breaking down and everyone reverts to the days of the wild west where the gun ruled everything, I know which side is going to lose. And that does not make me feel very secure.

UPDATE: Here's more rightwing lunacy (courtesy of Sadly, No!) This guy takes it several steps further when he muses on what should happen next after all the liberals in this country are killed. And he is apparently quite serious about it, too. And here I thought openly advocating murder was against the law. The mindset of these people is absolutely amazing. This guy apparently wants to murder the 52% of the people in this country that voted for Obama, I guess, because he's upset that "liberals are destroying this country." Godzilla-sized irony, that.

Senator Clinton invokes the assassination of Bobby Kennedy as a reason to stay in the Democratic race.

And, according to Keith Olbermann’s commentary posted at Americablog, this isn’t the first time she has said this, either. Go read or watch the entire thing, it’s worth it. She implies that she needs to stay in the race because someone might assassinate Senator Obama, the first black man who is the frontrunner to become the next president of the United States. If she didn't mean that, I have absolutely no clue as to what she did mean. It isn’t like this isn’t a real concern, given the amount of hate filled people in this country who also have easy access to guns, or that they aren’t being stirred up already by the lunatic pundits and radio shock jocks. This country has already seen the assassination of Martin Luther King and Medgar Evers, leaders of the movement to empower black people of this country. And then, she has the audacity to apologize to the Kennedy family, but not Obama!

She is rightfully getting her butt handed to her in the press, by everyone. I do notice that the Democrats are among the most vocal. That’s one difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Republicans can say anything crazy they want and the party will find a way to dismiss it and bash the critics. Democrats say or do something beyond the pale and there is no hesitation in them getting nailed by their own party. But, that isn’t my main point here.

Clinton has become like every other politician that becomes too enamored of himself or herself, or else becomes too desperate. They feel that they are allowed to say anything that comes into their heads to justify their claims or actions, and it’s the audience’s fault if they take it somehow badly. I used to really like Senator Clinton. I once heard her speak and she was great. But she now sounds a lot like George Bush. Her rationalizations for staying in the race change on a weekly, if not daily, basis; just like Bush’s rationalizations for why we are in Iraq or why tax cuts for the rich are a good thing. She will say and do anything in order to advance her own goals, and she has lost sight of the fact that she is starting to resemble a complete and utter lunatic.

I can’t figure out Ms. Clinton’s psychological makeup here. I really can’t. Is she that much in thrall to her drive for power that she becomes blind to every other concern? I have a difficult time any one person could be that much of a narcissist. She apparently can’t even recognize the damage she is doing to herself, much less the Democratic party. She used to be one of the party “elders”, whether that label was deserved or not. She was respected and held a position of great influence within the party. She is rapidly making herself into a pariah. Is that what she really wants? Even if she were to somehow snatch the Democratic nomination from Senator Obama, does she not recognize the cost to both herself and her party?

I wish this were over. Lord, I wish this were over.

Hillary Clinton photo from here.

Another truly maddening case of "It’s O.K. If You Are A Republican" (IOKIYAR).

It’s truly amazing what Republicans (or Rethugs, as I like to call them, as that name sort of says it all) get away with. Things that cause the wingnuts to go incendiary are legion. Democrats make the slightest misstatement, or even make a perfectly reasonable statement that can be taken out of context and replayed over and over, and the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannities of the world send out the signal that their rabid listeners should start howling with outrage. The press picks it up and it becomes the story du jour for several news cycles, if not longer.

A good example of this is Michelle Obama’s comment when she said she was “proud of this country for the first time” after during her husband’s campaign. I understood perfectly what she meant. This country, after all, has a history of violent racism, subjugation and, going back a bit further, slavery of an entire race. O.K., it’s perfectly reasonable to assume that she meant, now that the country seems to be not only willing but desiring to elect her husband, a black man, as President of the United States, she is proud that the country may have finally overcome some bit of its racist past. That marks a pretty significant departure from our past. That was obviously the context in which she spoke. Yet, the wingnuts went wild. To illustrate, here’s a link to Faux News and another one to Michelle Malkin. (Note: the only reason I am providing real links are that I wanted to give real examples, not a second hand, unsubstantiated statement and I also know they aren’t going to get much in the way of traffic from my blog links.) Anything to manufacture a little outrage. Actually, a lot of outrage. And this is still going on. Listening to these idiots, Michelle Obama is a racist who hates America. Give me a frickin’ break.

Yet, Rethugs and their wingnut echo chamber get to make all sorts of statements and the press lets them get away with it, scott free. Here is something that ex-presidental contender Mike Huckabee said about Michelle’s husband, Senator Barack Obama. Via dday at Hullabaloo:

During a speech before the National Rifle Association convention Friday afternoon in Louisville, Kentucky, former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee — who has endorsed presumptive GOP nominee John McCain — joked that an unexpected offstage noise was Democrat Barack Obama looking to avoid a gunman.

“That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair, he's getting ready to speak,” said the former Arkansas governor, to audience laughter. “Somebody aimed a gun at him and he dove for the floor.”

Ha, ha. That’s really hysterical. Mike, your sense of humor is dee-lightful. Making jokes about shooting at the leading Democratic presidential contender AND a black man to boot. Wonderful. I just cannot stop laughing.

I can understand how there are always going to be people that have a rather sick sense of humor and stay very stupid and vile stuff. But when it comes to a public forum and high publicity value people like Mike Huckabee, why does our press continually let these people get away with this?

Personally, I disagree with Michelle Obama. I am not very proud of this country, and haven’t been for about the last 25 years. The last seven, however, have been pure hell.

How expensive is gasoline going to get?

I have seen a couple of stories on this (this one is from Balloon Juice), probably from the same source, which essentially say this. Oil refineries have been shielding the gasoline buying public from the true cost of gas by the fact they have been hedging the price of oil for some time. I don’t really understand hedging. Here is the Wiki explanation:

In finance, a hedge is an investment that is taken out specifically to reduce or cancel out the risk in another investment. Hedging is a strategy designed to minimize exposure to an unwanted business risk, while still allowing the business to profit from an investment activity. Typically, a hedger might invest in a security that he believes is under-priced relative to its "fair value" (for example a mortgage loan that he is then making), and combine this with a short sale of a related security or securities. Thus the hedger is indifferent to the movements of the market as a whole, and is interested only in the performance of the 'under-priced' security relative to the hedge.

So, it would appear that the refineries have been pumping out gasoline and other petroleum-based products that are more in line with oil at around $85 a barrel. It is now running around $125 a barrel. That’s getting very close to being underpriced by about 50%. When the hedging runs out and the “real” cost of gasoline (not counting the oil companies rather obscene profits, of course) shows up at the pump, how do you think most Americans are going to react, especially if they haven’t been given any warning that this is coming? Gas is currently about $3.75 a gallon locally. I don’t know what it is in the rest of the country. I believe that Washington state is one of the highest places in the country, due to the taxes involved. But if, in the space of about a month, gas were to jump from around $4 a gallon to $6, that’s going to cause some people to really start freaking out. And that assumes that the price of crude oil remains the same, which it won’t, of course. These stories I have seen have predictions that the price of gasoline at the pump might hit anywhere from $6 to $8 a gallon, and possibly even beyond.

If the price to fill up even a small car that gets good mileage starts hitting $60 or $70 each time up pull up to the pump, this country is going to really start feeling some fallout. I think we are already to that point. It hasn’t started really hurting yet. I am, in no way, marginalizing the impact on low and middle class families that rising fuel costs and food prices are having. There are many, many families that are already struggling. They are facing choices of how to pay for food and utility bills. This is a terrible thing for many people. I am talking more about the impact at a national level, however cold that might seen to the people already in trouble. I haven't even factored in the still very real possibility of an economic meltdown due to the sub-prime mortgage mess.

When 80% of the regular commerce which could be called “optional”, such as going out to the movies or sporting events, going out to dinner, buying new clothes, furniture and home appliances, the economic impact is going to be severe. People are just not going to be able to keep up with anything except the basic necessities, such as food, energy for getting to work and keeping the house warm in winter. And this assumes they still have jobs. Those jobs are going to dry up when there aren’t any customers left.

I am hoping I am wrong, but this could end up resembling the Great Depression or perhaps Italy after World War II. It won’t be pretty. And what really worries me is that there are lot of very angry, very wound up conservatives with guns who have been essentially told by the nutjobs on radio and television that they are absolutely right to be upset, it’s someone else’s fault they are in this predicament and they should go out and do something about it right now!

That possibility, however small, really has me concerned.

R.I.P. Charlton Heston

I didn't like his politics, particularly his stance on guns, and his acting seemed, at times, one dimensional. His role in the new updated Planet of the Apes, where he tried to warn everyone about humans and guns I found particularly weird, given his beliefs. Wasn't he president or spokesman of the NRA at one time? But still, it's really a huge loss when a legend of the screen passes. He will be missed.

Photo from Walls of Fame Hollywood Photos.