Category Archives: General Meanderings

The slippery slope of the Chick-Fil-A mess…

Okay, so there’s this. Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick-fil-a said he supported biblical marriage. This pissed a lot of folks off. I get that. Someone said something that offends someone else. Happens every day, and we usually get over it.

One thing I did not hear was Mr. Cathy stating that Chick-fil-a only hires straight married people. Nor did he say that gay single or married people won’t get their top level of service in their establishments. Again, a man stated his own personal conviction, based on his personal beliefs. He exercised his first amendment right when asked the appropriate question.

Now what we see is two halves of the American public polarized. One half is in support of ‘CFA’, and the reasons vary. Some support because they share the belief regarding same sex marriage. Some support because they support free speech. Some support because they believe that what the anti-CFA faction is doing to the employees of the company is flat wrong.

The other half, being offended by the originating statement, have just plain decided that Mr. Cathy is wrong, and therefore the entire company of employees need to be taken to task on it, come hell or high water.

I don’t quite get this. These employees are young and old, Christian, athiest, Mormon, Agnostic, gay, straight, monogomous and bigamous. They come from all walks of life. Some agree with Mr. Cathy’s statement, and some don’t. Some don’t even give a damn about what he believes, one way or the other.

Watch what you rain down on a company because of the personal conviction of one man. This is a slippery slope. If someone does not believe what you believe, cry a river, build a bridge, and get over it. That is what makes this Country. People from all walks of life, different colors, beliefs, origins, or even different destinations. That is America. You want censorship of those who do not agree with you, there are plenty of countries who will welcome you with open arms.

Advertisements

Why a blog?

Blogging is an amazing and interesting thing. When used as a public diary, it basically says, “I want everyone to know about me. I have nothing to hide.” When used as it was originally intended, say for uploading updates on a trip for friends to see back home, it says, “Look at me… wish you were here.” Then there’s that other thing. The random thoughts and commentary on anything from current events to the heavyweight title match between the voices in one’s head.  This is the way a blog is used in majority. This is what I’m doing. Continue reading

Never waste a good crisis…

The media sure has been playing up the anti-gun rhetoric over the Aurora massacre. MSNBS tried to politicize it with the brother of one of the victims, who, would have none of that.

Then there was Ice T and his stance on the second amendment. I must say, I was impressed with how he handled the line of questioning. But what struck me the most was the point he made regarding someone’s desire to commit murder. If they want to, their going to, and guns being legal does not help a psycho do so. This is true as true can be. And this got me thinking…

In the conversations that have been taking shape over this as well as other recent past incidents, the left always seems to point back to gun control.  Within this conversation, the pro-control movement always latches on to the only foothold they have, which is the assault weapons ban. This is the line of scrimmage, where the anti-gun team digs in their cleats and tries like hell to move the ball forward toward the goal. Unfortunately for them, they seem to be met with an effective blitz at every down.

What Ice T said plays well into this blitz. If someone wants to commit a murder, either of an individual or a mass of people, it will be done if they are determined enough. Whatever means used to commit such an atrocity can be classified as an assault weapon. If a man tries to kill another with a stone, he is committing an assault, and therefore the rock becomes an assault weapon. Let’s ban rocks. If a vehicle is used, the vehicle is then to be classified as an assault weapon. That takes cars off of the list of items we can own legally. Following this line of reasoning, just think if someone used their bare hands. Who is going to be responsible for removing the hands off of every person in the nation?

I believe that the only way to prevent such crimes from happening rests in the ability to own, carry, and train in the effective use of firearms. Proof of this ideology can be found in the law books and statistics of Kennesaw, Georgia.

From the pages of Wikipedia…

Gun law

In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21][18]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

Gun rights activist David Kopel has claimed that there is evidence that this gun law has reduced the incident rate of home burglaries citing that in the first year, home burglaries dropped from 65 before the ordinance, down to 26 in 1983, and to 11 in 1984.[19] Another report observed a noticeable reduction in burglary from 1981, the year before the ordinance was passed, to 1999.[20]

Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burglaries [in Kennesaw][21][22], even though the overall crime rate had decreased by more than 50% between 1982 and 2005.[23]

The city’s website[24] claims the city has the lowest crime rate in the county.

One could also look at the firearm ownership in Switzerland. Attempts at gun related assault, whether fulfilled or failed, stand a roughly 1:250,000 people.

This nation has some nasty habits. One of those neon boils on the flesh of our society is our negatively reactionary nature. One only needs to look at what Homeland Security has turned into to understand that every time a heinous crime is committed, the people who stand to lose the most are the law abiding citizens. We were attacked by men from the middle east, so rather than profiling at the airport, we will inappropriately search children, little old ladies, and people with prosthetic devices. And if we cry foul, they release the hounds and your life becomes a nightmare. Such is the case with the anti-gun lobby. If one obtains a gun by any means, legal or otherwise, and commits a crime, you, the law abiding gun owner, PTA member, and soccer mom, become the potential criminal. Welcome to the watch list.

I leave this with what I would call an anonymous quote…

You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

Just a rambling of thought.

Update… as if to make my point...

Wow. Just, wow again

I wasn’t aware that a pile of decorated dust mops were so damn socially aware. I mean, is anybody in this once great nation really so damn stupid that they actually care about what a glorified sock puppet manipulator says?

Muppets Boycott Chick-Fil-A – Kevin Glass.

NEWS FLASH!!! It was revealed today that muppets aren’t real, and therefore do not eat chicken to begin with. No great loss to Chick-fil-a.

Shepherd Diaries… The initiation.

Bonding, day 2

About eight months ago, one of my regular customers gave me a six month old German Shepherd purebred. No papers, which is fine with me. I really have no care for such things as I gladly accepted the dog for companionship and security against all the woodsy creatures that like to get in my yard and eat the landscape. Besides, I’ve seen the Westminster Dog Show on TV, and frankly, I’m too lazy to put that much effort into a dog’s appearance and mannerisms.

I have owned many dogs in the past. Whether it was the family dog growing up, which we had four, or the two I had when I struck out on my own, no real training was ever needed really. They were all protective of the kids in the neighborhood. Only one, a Black Lab/Chow needed to be put on a chain. For the most part, just living day by day, they all wound up real mellow when it was called for, and playful when appropriate.

There was never any real bonding to one particular person either. Not one of these dogs was prejudiced towards anybody. They were friendly to all, except the occasional bully who tried to pick on the kids in the neighborhood. For the most part, all our dogs in the past were just part of the gang. Rocco the Shepherd however, is an entirely different story.

The day we brought him home, his name was Nugget. The name wasn’t bad, but we changed it so as to kind of take ownership. He was scared to death and extremely withdrawn. Not because he was beaten or abused in any way, but because he had run with his pack (siblings) up to that point, and was also quite attached to his previous owner. Right away, I wanted to do everything to help him accept this new living arrangement.

Once we got him to the house, I had to clean his vomit out of the back of my truck. When we brought him in, my wife immediately went to take a nap. Meanwhile, I brought him in to what was going to be his safe area (where he’s lying right now as I type) and introduced him to the over-sized pillow he would call his bed. (He has since chewed it up into a vast mess that necessitated a thorough cleaning of both yard and house.)  He tucked himself into the corner as tightly as possible and gave a leery, frightened look at everything. He wouldn’t really let me near him for a bit.

After sitting at the desk for nearly an hour trying to get him used to my presence, I finally committed what my wife thought was a hygienic atrocity. I laid down on the pillow right next to Rocco. That was all it took. He bonded with me right off the bat. I had no idea how strong that bond was going to be…

to be continued…

Lovin’ John Lovitz

From Jon Lovitz twitter account…

(H/T Breitbart)

Life interrupted…

Normally, I would spend more time perusing the news and more posts might be forthcoming. I’m in the middle of one of those projects that requires 90% of my attention until said job is complete. Doing a major teardown on my vehicles engine isn’t something I was planning to do any time soon, but well, there it is.  Hoping to focus more on this blog soon…

Was glad to hear…

Score One for American Sovereignty: Law of the Sea Treaty Sinks in the Senate – Townhall.com Staff.

Just… Wow.

EXCLUSIVE: Criminals steal $400 gold chain off neck of 3-year-old boy sitting in his stroller in Brooklyn – NYPOST.com.

Facebook spy? How about SWATing?

Almost everyone has suffered the trials and tribulations of Facebook. Constant changes that erode your privacy, nobody to get in contact with directly to problem solve when your account is hacked, and you just know that they are storing information. Face it, knowingly or not, Facebook spies on it’s users. Pay attention to the news and you will hear about someone who took a stance that FB didn’t like, and BOOM! Their account was temporarily blocked.

Now I’m sure that most of you have heard about all the new rage called SWATing. It made the news recently when someone read a conservative blog and got offended. Said person (Kimberlin) did a little research and came up with a hometown and address of residence for said blogger. Said offended jerk calls the police in the bloggers town and reports a massively heinous crime in progress at the bloggers address. Next thing you know, said blogger is awakened from his peaceful slumber by the gentle whispers of a SWAT team.

Now back to everybody’s favorite/most loathed social networking site. What would you do if you got swatted by a software program at Facebook?

Well, according to Mashable.com, it just could happen…

The screening process begins with scanning software that monitors chats for words or phrases that signal something might be amiss, such as an exchange of personal information or vulgar language.

Then what?

If the scanning software flags a suspicious chat exchange, it notifies Facebook security employees, who can then determine if police should be notified.

People often get laughed at or avoided like crazy uncle Joe when they spout off about the NannyGov having whole rooms dedicated to this, yet here this humble little corner room of the internet has admitted that they themselves have and use this software. Hmm.

Check out the link above and read the whole article.

h/t Drudge