Last Friday we had a couple of inches of snow. Today, it’s in the high 70s.

Is this because of that lady in Berkeley who has three cars?

Only in Berkeley:

After a moment of hesitation, Shana Rocklin lowers her voice and confesses. Yes, she owns three cars. Yes, she parks them on the streets of her curb-abundant neighborhood. And yes, she deserves to be punished.

In many other cities in America, her automobiles wouldn’t even be an afterthought. But this is not the wide-open Western plain or the freeway-blanketed landscape of southern California, where car ownership is seemingly the 11th article of the Bill of Rights. Here, in a city of causes that have ranged from the profound to the bizarre, today’s target is the clutter of extra automobiles.

In what would be the first law of its kind in the United States, Berkeley is considering a tax on residents who own more than two cars.

A snippet headline from The Onion:

Al Franken Announces New Book Project: Ha Ha, Bush, Your Dog Is Dead

That people actually still use disks.

My home PC, which I built, has a floppy drive but I haven’t hooked it up. Actually, the last three computers I built, I didn’t bother to hook it up. I would throw it out but then there would be this hole in the front of my PC.

I said Tim Lambert was anti-gun here. Apparently, that is not the case. Says Tim:

Unless you think that Lott is some sort of gun, criticizing him is not being “anti-gun”. Nor do I favour more gun control in the US. I have never written anything saying what I think the laws in the US should be—I don’t think that is any of my business. As for Australia, I felt that the laws before 1996 were about right and I do not think that the 1996 laws were a good idea.

Where would I get such an impression? From Mr. Lambert’s own page. And Clayton Cramer.

So, consider said statement about him being anti-gun rescinded. And apologies to Tim.

As a result of all this gun bill stuff, I have added some new folks to the blogroll:

No Quarters, who is also in Tennessee and a potential RTB candidate.

Freedom Sight

Backroad Blog

TriggerFinger

It appears that John Edwards is finally going to throw in the towel. Now the buzz I hear is that he might be considered for the VP slot. I wonder what you, the reader, think about the chances of that. Also, can anyone remember when was the last time that this happened—that one of the primary candidates was chosen as VP? I want to say it was the original Reagan/Bush ticket in 1980.

Some additional topics:
– Pros and Cons of Edwards as the VP choice.
– If not Edwards, then who?
– Hillary!

Discuss!

Trigger Finger has a round up.

Kathy writes:

Every one of those pairs of statements above have been used by both ‘sides’. I’m tired of sides.

Indeed. Party politics have damned the republic.

Per this:

Mary Leigh Blek, the “president emeritus” of MMM, as saying that almost 14,000 children “have died from gun violence” since “our last march.”

Where does that figure come from?

To begin with, Blek is probably referring to the 2000 MMM event. (In 2001, only about 100 people participated and the event is now virtually ignored.) This means she is stating that almost 14,000 children died from gun violence between 2000 and 2004. The figure is almost certainly an extrapolation from prior data.

The definitive source for data on injury-death in America, including gun deaths, is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Taking relevant data for 2001, the latest year available, and multiplying the results by four should provide a figure close to 14,000.

During 2001, the CDC reported a total of 157,078 injury-deaths. On their interactive Web site, if you click “Firearm” under “Cause of Injury,” the figure becomes 29,573. For deaths in children, click on <1 as the lowest in the age range and 17 as the highest. Also select the "No Age-Adjusting Requested" option. The figure becomes 1,433. Multiplied by four, this is 5,732, or roughly 40 percent of what MMM asserts. The 5,732 includes at least two categories of death that do not clearly belong because they do not clearly support MMM’s anti-gun arguments. That is to say, MMM’s use of death statistics coupled with calls for legislative control as a "solution" unmistakably implies that the cited deaths could have been prevented by gun control. It is misleading, therefore, to include deaths that would probably have occurred whether gun laws and, in some cases, whether guns themselves — were present. Maria Heil of the pro-gun Second Amendment Sisters comments on one of the misleading categories: "They [MMM] are not upfront that over half of those deaths are suicides. Suicide is not committed because there is a gun. Studies show that our suicide rate is on par with other industrialized nations, including ones with very strictly regulated guns." Guns are merely one of many methods available. The 5,732 also includes deaths that result from gang activity in which the guns are usually illegal. These deaths would not have been prevented by gun control any more than gang members’ drug use is prevented by drug laws. The honest question for anti-gun advocates is, how many children’s deaths were "caused" by a lack of gun control? The easiest way to reduce both suicides and gang deaths from swelling that answer is to eliminate teenagers from the data; both suicide and gang membership are overwhelmingly teen rather than "child" phenomena. (Moreover, "child" traditionally refers to someone who is pre-pubescent, pre-teen. That’s the image invoked by MMM’s references to "children" and to "playgrounds.") Changing the age parameters on the CDC site to register the gun deaths of children between <1 and 12 years old renders the number, 223 for 2001. Multiplied by four, this becomes 892 or about 6 percent of MMM’s asserted figure. Anti-gun advocates should be stating that, between 2000 and 2004, the gun deaths of 892 children could have been avoided through gun control or prohibition. With valid statistics that are properly used, real debate could then begin. The figure of 14,000 child gun deaths closes off the possibility of honest debate. Indeed, the only way to arrive at that number at the CDC site is to include suicides and gang-related deaths, and to define a child as "anyone under the age of 21." In short, MMM has padded the statistics.

Go Howie.

First up, is this from the AP (via Publicola):

The demise of Republican gun legislation in the Senate and a stalemate over renewing the assault-style weapons ban thrusts gun control squarely into the fall presidential campaign, both sides in the debate say.

The Senate voted 90-8 on Tuesday to scuttle a GOP-sponsored bill that would have given gunmakers liability protection against lawsuits. The vote came after Democrats gained enough Republican support to amend the bill to extend the assault-weapons ban and to require background checks for gun show purchases.

Those provisions caused the National Rifle Association to withdraw its support for the bill, and Senate Republican leaders decided to kill it.

The vote gave Democrats and gun control advocates an unexpected victory in the GOP-controlled Congress and all but eliminated any chance for passage this year of gun legislation. The gunmaker liability bill was a priority for President Bush. It would have shielded gunmakers from suits stemming from use of a gun in a crime.

The anti-gunners are spinning this as a victory. And I will too. See, there’s pretty much a minimal chance of gun control legislation taking center stage this year because politicos don’t like controversial issues during election years.

And a nice little lie from DiFi:

“You can be sure it’s going to be in the presidential campaign as a bona fide issue as to whether the American people want AK-47s, street sweepers and Uzis sold once again,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., one of the chief sponsors of the assault weapons ban.

AK47s, street sweepers and Uzis aren’t sold any way. Semi-auto versions of AKs and Uzis are but the street sweeper is outright banned.

And DiFi vows to continue trying:

“If we don’t get this assault weapons legislation signed into law and it lapses, we will come back with another piece,” Feinstein said.

And the VPC admits the ban is pointless:

Senate action renewing the current federal assault weapons ban will do little to protect America’s police and public from assault weapons, the Violence Policy Center (VPC) warned today. The measure was passed as an amendment to a Senate bill granting America’s firearms industry limited immunity from lawsuits.

“This bill merely continues the badly flawed 1994 ban, which is a ban in name only,” states Kristen Rand, VPC legislative director. “The 1994 law in theory banned AK-47s, MAC-10s, UZIs, AR-15s and other assault weapons. Yet the gun industry easily found ways around the law and most of these weapons are now sold in post-ban models virtually identical to the guns Congress sought to ban in 1994. At the same time, the gun industry has aggressively marketed new assault-weapon types-such as the Hi-Point Carbine used in the 1999 Columbine massacre-that are frequently used in crime. Reenacting this eviscerated ban without improving it will do little to protect the lives of law enforcement officers and other innocent Americans. Now is the time for Americans to demand that Congress and the Bush Administration roll up their sleeves and enact a truly effective assault weapons ban.” [For more information, see the VPC backgrounder Why Merely Renewing the Current Assault Weapons “Ban” Will Not Stop the Sale of Assault Weapons.

Yet, DiFi and other VPC cronies argued that this bill was so important with respect to violent crime just, uhm, yesterday. Odd.

If you haven’t yet peeked at my It’s For The Children post, well, you really ought to. But it reminds me of the debate, way back when, about arming airline pilots.

One of the objections people had was that if pilots were armed, they might get into gunfights with would-be hijackers. This would distract them from their important task of safely flying and landing the plane.

Analogy, of course, is always flawed, but I thought of one anyway.

Suppose a fire broke out in the cockpit. Which scenario is better:
a) The pilot grabs a nearby fire extinguisher and puts out the blaze
b) The pilot concentrates on flying and landing the plane safely

That’s a thinker.

Kerry cannot win the general election. Period. Northern liberals do not get elected president unless they’re handsome and have sex with movie stars. With that and the fact Edwards just quit the Democrats are done in terms of the presidency this year.

I’ll bet one cold beer* on it. Any takers? C’mon! I ain’t scared. Everyone is lukewarm about Kerry, even Kerry.

*or adult beverage of choice. Must be 21 or older to participate. Void where prohibited by law; or if Bush does something really stupid between now and November; or if SayUncle typed this while under the influence of one too many bourbon and Cokes (which is altogether possible). Cash value 1/20 of ¢. Offer expires December 2004.

You may or may not have noticed a new blogger at this site who is not SayUncle. That is quite intentional and welcomed. Thibodeaux has been invited to join the SayUncle team. He is/was a regular commenter here and I felt he had insightful stuff to say. So, I invited him aboard. He described himself as an objective libertarian, which I assume is the same thing as a small l libertarian. Please, welcome him and make him feel at home.

I had taken on a couple other writers a while back but they quickly lost interest. Actually, one never posted at all. Go figure. Slackers.

I have been trying for a while to get more writers for this site. I have long felt that group blogs are the way to go so that you get a variety of opinion. It’s hard to find them as most of them already have blogs and don’t want to come to another site that they don’t own. That is understandable.

I wish other smaller pro-gun bloggers (though they can blog about stuff other than guns, of course) would contemplate contributing here because we are more powerful if we are consolidated. I think it’s better if gun folks have centralized resources that they can draw upon instead of many distributed resources. It makes getting the message out easier.

One caveat, no anti-gun bloggers. I’m biased. Actually, I’m not so much biased as bigoted. See, I assume people who favor more gun control in the US are fucking stupid. I find that assumption to be correct about 99.9% of the time. There are exceptions that I can’t figure out. After all, Tim seems to be a rather intelligent, rational and thoughtful guy. I must conclude he is in league with the forces of darkness as there is no other explanation. Actually, Tim is not evil, he’s Australian. And Tim is right about John Lott most of the time.

So, if interested drop me an email.

Update: Apologies to Tim here.

Inspired by the “Mail Your Locks to Boxer” movement:
Read the rest of this entry »

Hi folks! My name is Thibodeaux, and I’m a blogger.

Well, I am NOW, anyway. And, as they say, I’m just tickled to death! I’m a long-time reader (and some-time commenter) of Say Uncle and other fine gun-blogs. Now, I’ve been given a chance to step up on the soapbox myself.

Now that I’m here, I find myself strangely at a loss for words. I’ll open up the floor for some questions.

Via Rodger comes porn that is safe for work.

That’s funny.

Reed is up urging defeat of the whole bill. Craig is urging defeat as well. Good.

After a week of debate, compromise, and work, both sides are saying No! Rather a waste, I would say. But I am glad. The immunity bill is not worth the amendments.

Update: Hearing lots of Nos and only one yes. Good.

Update2: A thought: This will likely be the last talk of gun control until after the election, which would mean the Assault Weapons Ban is done. Good.

Update3: Not passed. 8 to 90. SayUncle is currently doing the happy dance with his roommate Balkie who is from an undisclosed location.

Via Insty comes the quote of the day:

And no Senator McCain, terorrists don’t buy their weapons at American gun shows and ship them to Iraq. They get them in iraq where they are cheaper and fully automatic.

The post also breaks down which Republicans (you know, the friends of gun owners) voted for it:

Unbelievably, 10 Republicans voted for the ban to be extended: Ten Republicans broke party ranks: Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine, George Voinovich of Ohio and John Warner of Virginia.

I am with Mays on this one. This is about the weirdest and most disturbing damn thing I have ever read.

So, it was speculated a while back that the anti-gunners would attempt to attach anti-gun bills to the pro-gun immunity bill as an effort to kill the bill. The attachments happened.

It was speculated that the NRA was willing to let some anti-gun bills through to get the immunity bill. This was later refuted by the NRA.

The bill has amendments attached even though the White House wanted a clean bill. The Assault Weapons Ban and the Gun Show bill were attached. The senate has to vote on the overall bill. If this happens, it goes to a house committee, which will clean the bill. Then both houses have to vote on the revised bill again. Then, it’s to George “I never met a bill I didn’t sign” Bush for signature.

There are many phases left in it’s passage. Gun owners need to try to kill this at the earliest possible stage or else SayUncle is unnecessarily stressed. Call your senators and tell them to oppose the overall bill. That number again is 1-800-648-3516.

Do not rely on the house to do the right thing.

Update: I forgot the main point I was getting at with this post, what’s going to happen? Are the anti-gunners willing to let the immunity bill pass to get their pet projects? Are the pro-gunners willing to let the amendments through to get immunity? This is rather unpredictable.

I don’t agree with all of it but this is a good read on dog fights.

Points I don’t agree with: 1) Water is effective at breaking up fights, provided you use a hose and not just a pitcher of water. 2) Two same sex dogs can peaceably co-exist once dominance is established. Just don’t leave them alone unsupervised. If you leave them, crate one or both.

Looks like they’re voting on the Assault Weapons Ban right now. God help us all.

Update: Passed 52 to 47. It’s a sad, sad day. The overall bill can not pass or the house needs to kill it. Call your senator and tell him/her to oppose the overall bill.

Update2: Gun show bill agreed to as well. Looks like the whole bill will soon be toast. At least, I hope so. Really is a sad day.

Lying about PAC money? Or just confused? You be the judge. Neither is excusable.

First, the nag: Call your senators (1-800-648-3516) and tell them not to vote for the Assault Weapons Ban or the Gun Show Bill.

For continuing coverage visit the following sites:

The High Road Thread.

The Geek.

Publicola.

Trigger Finger.

Have at you. I missed like 9.

First, Kudos to Jeff for all his adoption work. Next, he reports on a happy ending for Hope.

The Citizens Against Government Waste blog has moved. It is now here and should be a daily read:

The Vermont secession.

NASA loses some equipment.

The president calls for a steroid summit.

That and other goodness awaits. Go there now, after you call your senators.

Regular readers know that John Kerry has missed a great many votes. Via Glenn, now it seems to be mainstream news.

Also, as I reported below, they’re calling Kerry and Edwards to DC to vote on the gun bill. They may want to rethink that (particularly Edwards) in light of Al Gore’s loss in many states over gun control.

I scoop people and get no respect. Bummer.