Hi All,
No I am not having another contest, but I again am bringing up the subject of the recent contest because the tentative winner has not yet contacted me with his name and address. The tentative winner was Jeff as I previously posted, so: Jeff if you want the holster please send me the required email to BBammoguess@aol.com. I am waiting, and you have three more days after 11:59 tonight. If you don't claim the prize by then, it will go to someone else. Two nice holsters from which to choose. Your loss if you don't claim one of them.
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Friday, May 18, 2007
July 4th and Real Immigration ReformThat Opposes Amnesty...
...should go hand in hand. I wonder, is there anyone out there, who has a blog with a big enough circulation/readership, and who would be willing to call for a March on Washington, DC to oppose amnesty of any sort for illegal aliens? I, as a working American citizen, who is concerned with the fate of our nation, would certainly be one of those at the front of the March even though it would require taking a day or two off from work. In the long run, such a march would only help to save our nation's sovereignty, our jobs and our economy. If you can think of anyone who might use their website to announce such a march and to really promote it on a daily basis, please offer my suggestion to them. Thanks.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
An Anti Illegal Alien Post & An Exploding Head...
...would have resulted had I tired to blog yesterday, and that head would have been mine! There was only one subject about which I could possibly have written about yesterday, and that would have been the agreement between the president and the Senate on the proposed Immigration reform bill. I was pretty sickened with disgust and anger yesterday when heard about the latest proposal to allow the 10 to 12 million illegal aliens, thought to be in our country, to become legalized. It almost made me puke when I thought: "What if the estimates are wrong, and it winds up there are really 20 million of them here?". i just cannot stomach the idea that millions of people who have committed a criminal act to enter or remain in the United States will be getting some sort of privileges from that criminal act. If these people admit they are here illegally, then in essence they are admitting they have committed a felony - and George W. Quisling Bush, and many of our Vichy Senators want to reward them by ultimately making them citizens while those who already waited years on foreign shores hoping to legally immigrate to the USA are pretty much pissed upon overlooked by our government.
I could go on for hours on this one, but I will come to the point now, instead of dragging this out and making you read thousands more of my words. We The People Of The United States Of America have to do something, and have to do it now, in order to protect our sovereignty, our culture, our economy from these foreign Freddy The Freeloaders. These people are illegal aliens, not legal immigrants and there is no reason to reward them for criminality so we need to act to prevent such. Here is what we need to do to prevent this travesty of justice:
Go to Numbers USA, join their site, then send in as many free faxes that they have to send in against this proposal. This is free, as in really free. Of course they accept donations, but currently there is absolutely no charge from the site to register for it and to send faxes.
Contact those in White House. Write to the President (although I think this will do little to no good because Bush seems enamored with the idea of rewarding criminals, do it anyway, give him something to lose sleep over in his last days as president). You can use this link to send emails to the president, or you can write a letter and send it to him at:
The President Of The United States of America
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Or you can call the White House to register an oral complaint at: 202-456-1414 (this is the switchboard number, so why not call it and actually ask to speak to the president and vice president - no they will not put you through but make sure to tell them you want to voice your complaint to a live person).
Whatever you do, keep it respectful - no cursing, no yelling, don't hurt the cause.
In addition to the above, here is what you can do, and this will likely stop the proposal if we get in enough complaints. Contact you elected Senators and Representatives in Congress. Use this link to find out who are your Senators, and how to contact them:
http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
If you are uncertain of who is your representative in Congress, use this link to find out who is your Representative in Congress, and how to contact him/her:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
If you know your representative in Congress, this one maybe faster:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml
Write a letter, send them an email, call them on the phone, get the idea across to them that law abiding citizens of the USA, that is: We The people Of The United States of America do not want to reward illegal aliens with legal status in our country! Please do not call them illegal immigrants, since immigrants come here legally and go through the whole immigration process legally. Call them what they are, and keep it respectful, and maybe, just maybe, we can turn around these politicians who only see this as a wealth of new voters, as a way to keep cheap labor here in the USA, and as a way to make it certain that within 15 years or so, Social Security, medicare, Medicaid and most other social programs in the USA will be bankrupt, and our taxes will therefore skyrocket. Do you part to support our country, and to support one another's and our children's futures.
All the best,
Glenn B
I could go on for hours on this one, but I will come to the point now, instead of dragging this out and making you read thousands more of my words. We The People Of The United States Of America have to do something, and have to do it now, in order to protect our sovereignty, our culture, our economy from these foreign Freddy The Freeloaders. These people are illegal aliens, not legal immigrants and there is no reason to reward them for criminality so we need to act to prevent such. Here is what we need to do to prevent this travesty of justice:
Go to Numbers USA, join their site, then send in as many free faxes that they have to send in against this proposal. This is free, as in really free. Of course they accept donations, but currently there is absolutely no charge from the site to register for it and to send faxes.
Contact those in White House. Write to the President (although I think this will do little to no good because Bush seems enamored with the idea of rewarding criminals, do it anyway, give him something to lose sleep over in his last days as president). You can use this link to send emails to the president, or you can write a letter and send it to him at:
The President Of The United States of America
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Or you can call the White House to register an oral complaint at: 202-456-1414 (this is the switchboard number, so why not call it and actually ask to speak to the president and vice president - no they will not put you through but make sure to tell them you want to voice your complaint to a live person).
Whatever you do, keep it respectful - no cursing, no yelling, don't hurt the cause.
In addition to the above, here is what you can do, and this will likely stop the proposal if we get in enough complaints. Contact you elected Senators and Representatives in Congress. Use this link to find out who are your Senators, and how to contact them:
http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
If you are uncertain of who is your representative in Congress, use this link to find out who is your Representative in Congress, and how to contact him/her:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
If you know your representative in Congress, this one maybe faster:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml
Write a letter, send them an email, call them on the phone, get the idea across to them that law abiding citizens of the USA, that is: We The people Of The United States of America do not want to reward illegal aliens with legal status in our country! Please do not call them illegal immigrants, since immigrants come here legally and go through the whole immigration process legally. Call them what they are, and keep it respectful, and maybe, just maybe, we can turn around these politicians who only see this as a wealth of new voters, as a way to keep cheap labor here in the USA, and as a way to make it certain that within 15 years or so, Social Security, medicare, Medicaid and most other social programs in the USA will be bankrupt, and our taxes will therefore skyrocket. Do you part to support our country, and to support one another's and our children's futures.
All the best,
Glenn B
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Newt Gingrich Running For The Presidency?
Well it may soon become a reality, then again maybe not. While driving to work yesterday morning, May 15, I listened to 77WABC talk radio's John Gambling Show. During the show, Mr. Gambling asked Mr. Gingrich if he was about to make an announcement of his own candidacy for for the presidential campaign. Much to my disappointment, Mr. Gingrich said he was not making such an announcement, but did say that he had decided to give it serious consideration, thus leading one to hope he might announce such in the future. It would tickle me pink to see him enter the race.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
Liability For Reporting Suspicious Activity?
If what is editorialized about here http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070514-093346-1946r.htm comes to pass, then our enemies do not need more 9/11 type attacks to defeat us, we will have become a self defeating gaggle of politically insane apologists in that by trying to be politically correct we have totally lost sight of right from wrong. If people are allowed to sue one another because someone reports suspicious behavior to the authorities and no arrest is made, that is absolutely ridiculous. It is the government from which we are protected by the constitution when it says the probable cause is a requirement to arrest or search and seize. Private citizens are not required to have diddly squat in order to give their opinion to authorities that something is suspicious, that is the way it has been throughout history, and that is the way it should remain. As long as a citizen does so in good faith, and not out of maliciousness, they should be protected at all costs from any type of prosecution - criminal or civil. Before a civil or criminal suit could even be considered, the burden of proof in such a case should rest with the person suing, as to that person being able to substantiate, with reasonable certainty, that the other who supplied the authorities with information was being malicious in the first place. That's my two cents - screw the bastards who want to make it impossible for us, by way of our own laws, to defend ourselves from their attempted usurpation of our freedom.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
What if Guns were Outlawed Tomorrow...
...and everyone who was law abiding and had any guns actually turned in all of their guns. What would happen to the violent crime rates. Look to the United Kingdom, where since 1998 guns have been outlawed, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/52378.stm, and where for the last couple of years or so they have been making it a crime to carry something as innocuous as a pocketknife.
Overall, from what I could see, the crime rates go up and down in the UK; however, it became apparent that even while other crime rates seem to be falling, violent crime rates seemed to be rising after the gun ban. Here are some examples of articles that show such:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1446260.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/norfolk/4468777.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/breakfast/3071703.stm
The violent crime rates are flourishing for those countries, gun crime is often referred to as being part of the 'gun culture', see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6549873.stm.
Yet other homicides caused by people using other weapons seem to be the most prominent type of homicides. Arrest over teenager stab death from the BBC at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/6656679.stm
is just one article within which can be seen the continuation of deadly violence.
Of course, there are many other examples of murders and violent crime taking place in the UK. Here are but a few links to fairly recent articles:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/staffordshire/6656159.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/beds/bucks/herts/6655509.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A10177355
The below article talks about the murder rates in Scotland, in a country where there are no handguns allowed, and where it is a crime to carry a knife, and where there has been discussion of making it a crime to carry other things that could be used as weapons:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5366544.stm
Pay careful attention to the type of murders to which they make reference and to the accompanying picture. Make sure to look at what type of weapon was used to kill at least half of the victims. It was not a gun.
Even an article showing a one year decline in the murder rate blames most of the murders on things other than guns. In it the authorities can be seen as calling for a crackdown on knives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4038053.stm
Overall, from what I could see, the crime rates go up and down in the UK; however, it became apparent that even while other crime rates seem to be falling, violent crime rates seemed to be rising after the gun ban. Here are some examples of articles that show such:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1446260.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/norfolk/4468777.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/breakfast/3071703.stm
The violent crime rates are flourishing for those countries, gun crime is often referred to as being part of the 'gun culture', see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6549873.stm.
Yet other homicides caused by people using other weapons seem to be the most prominent type of homicides. Arrest over teenager stab death from the BBC at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/6656679.stm
is just one article within which can be seen the continuation of deadly violence.
Of course, there are many other examples of murders and violent crime taking place in the UK. Here are but a few links to fairly recent articles:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/staffordshire/6656159.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/beds/bucks/herts/6655509.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A10177355
The below article talks about the murder rates in Scotland, in a country where there are no handguns allowed, and where it is a crime to carry a knife, and where there has been discussion of making it a crime to carry other things that could be used as weapons:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5366544.stm
Pay careful attention to the type of murders to which they make reference and to the accompanying picture. Make sure to look at what type of weapon was used to kill at least half of the victims. It was not a gun.
Even an article showing a one year decline in the murder rate blames most of the murders on things other than guns. In it the authorities can be seen as calling for a crackdown on knives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4038053.stm
Another article Tackling The Scourge of Knife Crime @ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5032794.stm highlights all the ways in which the authorities in the UK are trying to lower knife violence. It is ludicrous when you think about it; they sound like a combination of Carolyn McCarthy, Sarah Brady, and Rosie O'Donnell, but instead of seeking to ban firearms, they are now going at knives.
So what is happening in the UK? What is the point of this rant by me? Well, let me put it this way: It seems that folks in the UK are pretty much baffled as to why the violent crime rates keep, for the most part rising, and they seem to want to blame it on the gun culture even though knives and other weapons are used in a great number of the violent crimes. Of course while they still want to blame a lot of the violence of the 'gun culture' and on guns, they also realize in their own misunderstanding sort of way that other evil weapons such as knives are out there< class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">that commits the crime, it is the dirtbag lowlife who does that. What they are missing is that once weapons are removed from the hands of the law abiding citizenry, the average citizen then has little to absolutely no way to defend himself against attack from a lowlife dirtbag who is armed with knife or gun. Just look at the crime stats, crime is going down overall, but violent crime is rising. Doesn't anyone get it. Violent crime is more lucrative than non-violent crime if only because you scare the victim enough to give it all up in the case of a robbery - and note they never mention robberies - they just tell you how burglaries (which by legal definition are unarmed crimes) went down. The folks in the UK are proving a point for us here in the USA. Stripping the people of their firearms and other defensive weapons, invites violent crime to flourish, if only because only the criminals now have weapons, and the criminals are opportunists who know a good thing advantage for them when they see it.
By the way, if none of those articles from the UK convinced you, then just check the last few years worth of violent crime rates for Washington, DC where handguns were outlawed. One of the highest violent crime rates in the United States, and how could that be with guns having been outlawed there for over 30 years! Go figure, but I already gave the answer above.
All the best,
Glenn B
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Happy Mother's Day...
...to all of the mom's who may read my blog, and to all of the mom's of anyone who reads this blog, and in general to all mothers.Most of all, HAPPY MOTHER's DAY to four very special mom's: My mother, my wife, my sister, and my mother-in-law.
I saw my mom yesterday, spent most of the day with her. Yes that is her picture above. She is certainly getting on in years, but she is getting better with age. I love her dearly. We had a very nice time together yesterday at my sister and brother-in-laws place, where she lives. As you can see, she was having a good time to if that smile is anything by which to judge.
Now of the three ladies in the picture showing three babes, only one is a mom, that would be Linda, my wife. No she was not mad, she just did not hear me when I said smile - she is the in the middle. The younger babe to the left is my daughter Celina, who of course would not be here without Linda. My wife is not only a great wife, she is an absolutely fabulous mom; just ask my kids who would be sure to tell you likewise. The other lady to your right in the same pic, is Tante (aunt) Lorraine, my brother's wife. She is not a mom, well that is unless her taking care of my brother is a motherly task which I would guess is the case at times.
About the most recent pic I have of Oma (my wife's mom) Sorry but I do not have any digital pics of my sis, I'll have to remedy that next time I visit her.
So, once again, Happy Mother's Day to all the mom's out there and especially to the ladies in my life whom I just mentioned.
All the best,
Glenn B
And The Correct Guess Was...
...now wait a minute; I figure I'll keep you all in suspense just a moment or two while I lay out my inventory with the actual numbers beside the ammo types. Then I'll give the total and figure out who came closest.But even before that let me wish all of you and your moms a happy mother's day.
Okay, back to business. The ammo that was included in this contest was almost all my ammo as pictured at the right. That was made up of one foot locker's worth, 3 ammo cans' worth, one box of ammo, and one super secret agent's attache case full. There were only 18 entries into the contest so your odds are pretty good of winning.
Here is how the ammo broke down:
Ammo Type & # of Rounds
Mag-Tech .32 Auto 71gr. FMJ 50
Fiocchi .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ 50
Winchester .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ 50
Sellier & Bellot 32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ 50
Winchester .380 Auto 85 gr. Silvertip HP 300
Gold Dot 9mm +P 124 gr. GDHP 1200
Gold Dot 9mm LE 124 gr. GDHP 1050
Gold Dot 9mm 124 gr. JHP 100
Federal 9mm Hydr-Shok 147 gr. HP 1300
Federal 9mm Nyclad 124 gr. HP 50
Winchester 9MM Nato 124 gr. FMJ 550
Smith & Wesson 9mm 115 gr. JHP 50
Winchester.40 S&W 180 gr. JHP 40
Federal .45 Auto 230 gr. Hydra-Shok 100
Remington .45 Auto 185 gr. JHP 300
Western Super X .357 Magnum 158 gr. JHP 100
Remington .38 Special +P 125 gr. semi JHP 800
Federal .38 Special +P 110 gr. JHP 50
Federal .38 Special +P+ 147 gr. Hydra_Shok JHP 50
Winchester .38 Special Super-X 148 gr. Super Match W/C 50
Winchester .38 Special 125 gr. +p JHP 100
Remington .30 Carbine 110 gr. FMJ 50
Federal .223 Remington 55 gr. MCBT 200
Sampson .223 Remington 55 gr. FMJBT 200
Wolf .223 Remington 62 gr. FMJ 40
Wolf Military Classic 7.62x39 124 gr. FMJ 800
Mil-Surp 7.62x54R FMJ 60
Mil-Surp Blue Tip 7.62x54R 60
Remington Core-Lokt .35 Remington 200 gr. SP 100
Winchester Super-X .35 Remington 200 gr. Power Point 200
Winchester 12 Gauge Slug 75
Winchester Super X 12 gauge Slugs 20
Remington Sluggers 12 Gauge Slugs 30
Federal Hi-Shok12 Gauge Slugs 35
Remington 12 Gauge 9 shot Heavy Target 50
Estate 12 Gauge 7 1/2 Shot Game Load 25
CCI Maxi-Mags .22 WMR HP 50
Remington Thunderbolt .22LR 500
Champion .22LR target solid points 2000
CCI Blazer .22LR 500
American Eagle .22LR solid points 500
One Remington Collector's Tin With Knife 300
One Remington Collector's Tin 300
Total more or less 12485
I forgot to mention one box in my earlier breakdown, as above, and that was the box of Bear 7.62x54R soft points, there were only 5 rounds in it; and to be fair I guess I should include that in the total.
So the total was 12,490.
Who came closest to that will be the tentative winner so long as he/she follows the eligibility rules.
Here were all the entries (and a non-entry comment or three) I received on the blog (as per the rules they had to be in a comment to the blog):
gdvan01 said...
5273
Saturday, May 05, 2007 11:22:00 PM
PeteQuad said...
4713
Saturday, May 05, 2007 11:42:00 PM
unixguy@thr said...
11042
Sunday, May 06, 2007 12:22:00 AM
C Philip @ TFL said...
7670
Sunday, May 06, 2007 8:59:00 AM
Sterno said...
9500
Sunday, May 06, 2007 10:19:00 AM
sog@fuse.net said...
8670rds.
Sunday, May 06, 2007 10:27:00 AM
http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/2007/05/www.thefiringline.com said...
7466
Sunday, May 06, 2007 1:35:00 PM
wjbarricklow@hotmail.com said...
11500
Sunday, May 06, 2007 1:59:00 PM
Plink said...
6120 rounds
Sunday, May 06, 2007 6:19:00 PM
lee n. field said...
I'm going to guess 7000 rounds."not nearly enough"
Sunday, May 06, 2007 7:11:00 PM
Anonymous said...
1 dollar Bob
Sunday, May 06, 2007 10:00:00 PM
Anonymous said...
Haven't a clue, but it looks similar to what I currently have stashed. Note: I'm in the process of ordering an update on a few calibers, so I may be stocking a few more rounds.Hang in there,GreyBeard
Sunday, May 06, 2007 10:50:00 PM
evan price @ thehighroad.org said...
7850 rounds
Monday, May 07, 2007 1:11:00 AM
Roadwild17 @ The High Road said...
4,723 Rounds
Wednesday, May 09, 2007 4:32:00 PM
Jeff said...
12,345. :)
Thursday, May 10, 2007 6:28:00 AM
Anonymous said...
17,235Todd2_the_Hiltwww.2theHilt.com
Thursday, May 10, 2007 1:56:00 PM
Michael said...
3,860Manzanita on TFL (although I'm not sure I've ever posted)
Friday, May 11, 2007 8:33:00 PM
Scout26 said...
All of them !!!
Saturday, May 12, 2007 12:45:00 AM
As from what I can see from the entries, there were a couple of people who came close, with their guesses coming in between 11,042 (unixguy@thr) and 11,500 (wjbarricklow@hotmail.com) but the absolute closest, almost bang right on the bull's eye, was the guess of 12,345 by Jeff; making him the potential winner. So Jeff, please be so kind as to get in touch with me via an email at BBammoguess@aol.com and send me a copy of your ID showing you are 18 or older, with your name and address, let me know which holster you want, and remember by your entry you affirmed you followed all of the rules (see: http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/2007/05/guess-how-many-rounds.html for the rules).
Once you get that done, I will send whichever holster you want to you within a few business days. Please make sure to let me know which holster you prefer; and congratulations to you. By the way, thanks to the rest of you. Hope it was fun, and I hope at least some of you enjoy my blog and will come back now and then. There may be another contest in the future since I still will have one holster left over.
All the best,
Glenn B
PS: Special Mention: A nice try by Scout26 who said... "All of them !!!". The trick was you had to guess how many, and all of them does not really tell me how many. Anyway, it was technically wrong anyhow because I forgot to inventory about 400 rounds of ammo I had in another room, along with other ammo I had here and there; and furthermore I did not count a few loose rounds that were in the footlocker. Since I am the final judge and my word is final, Jeff is the tentative winner with his extremely close guess. Nice try though!
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Less than a Half a Year From a Revolution...
...is one way to anticipate how the District of Columbia Circuit Court decision in Parker vs. the District of Columbia will effect 'We The People of the United States of America' regarding our right to keep and bear arms. The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC circuit refused to review the earlier case that affirmed said right is an individual's right. The next, and only legal, recourse remaining for the District of Colombia is to take the Parker case to the United States Supreme Court.
If this case goes to the Supreme Court, a ruling that the 2nd Amendment affords individuals the right to keep and bear arms would affirm that which law abiding gun owners and their advocates have been saying throughout our nation's history. If however, the Supreme Court decides that such right is reserved to the 'militias' of a each state, and therefore is a right not of the individual, the outcome could be horrendous for law abiding gun owners. Of course, the outcome could also be horrendous for our nation as a whole. To remove any right, found in our constitution, especially the right to keep and bear arms, from the individual citizen would be tantamount to removing them all since it is by said right that we as individuals retain the power to overthrow tyranny as did the founding fathers of our nation. They revolted for less than this, and it should be noted that 'the shot heard round the world' (the first shot of the Revolutionary War) was fired only when British troops tried to march on a colonial armory to remove the colonists firearms by force. Approximately 800 British soldiers were marching to Concord, MA, when about 70 (yes outnumbered by more than 10 - 1) Minutemen stood their ground at Lexington Green, MA. When this first battle was over, 8 of the colonists lay dead. Among the dead was the commander of the group; and as a twist of fate and coincidence would have it, his name was John Parker. (Reference: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575042/Lexington_(Massachusetts).html, 5/12/2007).)
The District of Columbia now has 90 days to appeal the ruling of the court. It is ironic that they have been a member of this law suit if only because DC is our nation's capital, and one would think therefore that it would be the protector of our rights when it is just the opposite as regarding the repressive anti-gun laws they have enacted. It is also ironic that DC is involved in this suit in so much as DC wishes to fight crime, and it claims that the anti-gun laws they have on the books are absolutely necessary to thwart violent crime in said city. The facts is, with those same laws in place, DC has recurrently had one of the highest violent crime rates in our country.
With 90 days left to DC to file an appeal, I am guessing that another 90 days, at most, would be what was needed for the Supreme Court to decide the issue and either put it to rest, or put it to the torch. I dare even imagine it possible that they would decide against the 2nd Amendment being a right of the individual, but should they do so it could eventually lead to an armed revolt like the one that commenced on April 19, 1775 with 'the shot heard round the world'. I hope and pray that it works out differently. This right is a right of 'the people', as are the others so enunciated; and with regard to all the others that specifically say a right is that of "the people" they have each been interpreted to mean that the right is that of each individual person, not of a state or the federal government. So should it remain with the 2nd Amendment, that it too is a right of the individual. Let us hope the Supreme Court, if brought to task on this issue, and should they accept to review it, decides such to be the case, otherwise there may yet be another 'shot heard round rhe world'.
All the best,
Glenn B
If this case goes to the Supreme Court, a ruling that the 2nd Amendment affords individuals the right to keep and bear arms would affirm that which law abiding gun owners and their advocates have been saying throughout our nation's history. If however, the Supreme Court decides that such right is reserved to the 'militias' of a each state, and therefore is a right not of the individual, the outcome could be horrendous for law abiding gun owners. Of course, the outcome could also be horrendous for our nation as a whole. To remove any right, found in our constitution, especially the right to keep and bear arms, from the individual citizen would be tantamount to removing them all since it is by said right that we as individuals retain the power to overthrow tyranny as did the founding fathers of our nation. They revolted for less than this, and it should be noted that 'the shot heard round the world' (the first shot of the Revolutionary War) was fired only when British troops tried to march on a colonial armory to remove the colonists firearms by force. Approximately 800 British soldiers were marching to Concord, MA, when about 70 (yes outnumbered by more than 10 - 1) Minutemen stood their ground at Lexington Green, MA. When this first battle was over, 8 of the colonists lay dead. Among the dead was the commander of the group; and as a twist of fate and coincidence would have it, his name was John Parker. (Reference: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575042/Lexington_(Massachusetts).html, 5/12/2007).)
The District of Columbia now has 90 days to appeal the ruling of the court. It is ironic that they have been a member of this law suit if only because DC is our nation's capital, and one would think therefore that it would be the protector of our rights when it is just the opposite as regarding the repressive anti-gun laws they have enacted. It is also ironic that DC is involved in this suit in so much as DC wishes to fight crime, and it claims that the anti-gun laws they have on the books are absolutely necessary to thwart violent crime in said city. The facts is, with those same laws in place, DC has recurrently had one of the highest violent crime rates in our country.
With 90 days left to DC to file an appeal, I am guessing that another 90 days, at most, would be what was needed for the Supreme Court to decide the issue and either put it to rest, or put it to the torch. I dare even imagine it possible that they would decide against the 2nd Amendment being a right of the individual, but should they do so it could eventually lead to an armed revolt like the one that commenced on April 19, 1775 with 'the shot heard round the world'. I hope and pray that it works out differently. This right is a right of 'the people', as are the others so enunciated; and with regard to all the others that specifically say a right is that of "the people" they have each been interpreted to mean that the right is that of each individual person, not of a state or the federal government. So should it remain with the 2nd Amendment, that it too is a right of the individual. Let us hope the Supreme Court, if brought to task on this issue, and should they accept to review it, decides such to be the case, otherwise there may yet be another 'shot heard round rhe world'.
All the best,
Glenn B
Friday, May 11, 2007
Blabbermouths Should Take a Look at a Different View Of The Legal System...
...that can be had if one looks to the legal systems of primarily Muslim countries such as Syria. Such a look can and should be quite enlightening as it applies to such things as our own rights and liberties, and even to how we view politics, and unity of purpose as a nation. See this article: Syria jails activist for D.C. meetings, at the Washington Times. The Syrian's brand of justice is fairly swift as compared to ours, and carries with it penalties much more heavy handed than our own. You have to admit that 12 years for talking to another government is pretty severe by our standards. Yet we have people in our country who constantly whine, and moan, about the unfair treatment of prisoners, the unduly long sentences that our justice system doles out to convicted felons, the deplorable conditions under which our prisoners are housed, and on, and on, and on.
Likewise, we also have people in this country who complain about everything else that they can complain about, which therefore is just about everything. It seems too that we have a lot of seemingly professional complainers whom we usually only hear when they are in fact complaining, and who complain incessantly. Among these, there are no shortage of those who devote themselves to never ending complaining about our government and how it functions. In this list I would include such people as: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Mayor Bloomberg (of NYC), Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congressman Murtha, Senator Kennedy, George Sorros, Senator Harry Reid, Cindy Sheehan. Yes these are primarily democrats or are otherwise very liberal. They continuously slam our government about one thing or another, and that is well and fine under our Constitution; I have no problem with them exercising freedom of speech. What I have a problem with is that they are so negative and anti-current administration over and over again and it causes disunity at a time we need to be unified; but that is just my opinion.
While they are slamming our government, while they are calling our government administration all the bad things they call them, while they protest the war in Iraq, and even in Afghanistan, while they try to slam the current administration at every turn, they had best remember they are Americans and can only do these things because we are all Americans under one Constitution. They need to remember that there are certain people in the world who would like to see our nation destroyed, and to see our people become of another belief system. These people, Bin-Laden, Chavez, Castro, Kim Jong-il and all of their followers would like to see us brought to our knees by whatever means possible. They realize that the mouthpieces of the ultra leftists are actually their allies in that they help to divide our country in a way by which it should not be divided. Yes we can have our differences, yes we can be opposed to policies of one side or another, yes we can speak out about it - but there too comes a time to stand united against a common enemy despite our differences - and this is what blabbermouths like Nancy Pelosi on her trips to places like Syria seem to be missing. Could you imagine the sentence Syria would have handed down to her had she been from Syria. Instead the Syrians cleverly use her foolish readiness to blab against our current administration, while not allowing such for their own citizens. Thereby they accomplish keeping us in a state of disunity, and will always gladly use people like Pelosi to their own advantage; and this seems to be beyond her intellectual grasp.
So instead of trying to bring down one side or another of your own government, would it not make much more sense toward self preservation if we instead tried to work with that other side to fight a common enemy - one that has the destruction of America and our way of life as its primary objective. It is not an impossible task, it has been done over and over again throughout history, and it can be done again, right now. Even the little guy, on either political side, can do something to make sure we stand as a unified nation against our enemies. One of the first things you can do is to write to your politicians and tell them to stop the bullshit in Congress and the Senate, and tell them that instead of trying to bring down Bush, why not try to bring down our enemies. If they don't like the war, so be it, but then if they want the war to end, what is their solution to those who would do us harm. When they can give us that, and show us that it will work better than the war, then I will be in their corner urging them on in a unified effort to stop our enemies. Until that time though, I stand against those who would keep on bitching, moaning, whining, and complaining that we should not be using terms like: The Global War on Terrorism; and I support our current administration when in fact we are fighting a real global war against terrorism, and our president is leading the charge against they who would destroy us and our allies.
All the best,
Glenn B
Likewise, we also have people in this country who complain about everything else that they can complain about, which therefore is just about everything. It seems too that we have a lot of seemingly professional complainers whom we usually only hear when they are in fact complaining, and who complain incessantly. Among these, there are no shortage of those who devote themselves to never ending complaining about our government and how it functions. In this list I would include such people as: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Mayor Bloomberg (of NYC), Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congressman Murtha, Senator Kennedy, George Sorros, Senator Harry Reid, Cindy Sheehan. Yes these are primarily democrats or are otherwise very liberal. They continuously slam our government about one thing or another, and that is well and fine under our Constitution; I have no problem with them exercising freedom of speech. What I have a problem with is that they are so negative and anti-current administration over and over again and it causes disunity at a time we need to be unified; but that is just my opinion.
While they are slamming our government, while they are calling our government administration all the bad things they call them, while they protest the war in Iraq, and even in Afghanistan, while they try to slam the current administration at every turn, they had best remember they are Americans and can only do these things because we are all Americans under one Constitution. They need to remember that there are certain people in the world who would like to see our nation destroyed, and to see our people become of another belief system. These people, Bin-Laden, Chavez, Castro, Kim Jong-il and all of their followers would like to see us brought to our knees by whatever means possible. They realize that the mouthpieces of the ultra leftists are actually their allies in that they help to divide our country in a way by which it should not be divided. Yes we can have our differences, yes we can be opposed to policies of one side or another, yes we can speak out about it - but there too comes a time to stand united against a common enemy despite our differences - and this is what blabbermouths like Nancy Pelosi on her trips to places like Syria seem to be missing. Could you imagine the sentence Syria would have handed down to her had she been from Syria. Instead the Syrians cleverly use her foolish readiness to blab against our current administration, while not allowing such for their own citizens. Thereby they accomplish keeping us in a state of disunity, and will always gladly use people like Pelosi to their own advantage; and this seems to be beyond her intellectual grasp.
So instead of trying to bring down one side or another of your own government, would it not make much more sense toward self preservation if we instead tried to work with that other side to fight a common enemy - one that has the destruction of America and our way of life as its primary objective. It is not an impossible task, it has been done over and over again throughout history, and it can be done again, right now. Even the little guy, on either political side, can do something to make sure we stand as a unified nation against our enemies. One of the first things you can do is to write to your politicians and tell them to stop the bullshit in Congress and the Senate, and tell them that instead of trying to bring down Bush, why not try to bring down our enemies. If they don't like the war, so be it, but then if they want the war to end, what is their solution to those who would do us harm. When they can give us that, and show us that it will work better than the war, then I will be in their corner urging them on in a unified effort to stop our enemies. Until that time though, I stand against those who would keep on bitching, moaning, whining, and complaining that we should not be using terms like: The Global War on Terrorism; and I support our current administration when in fact we are fighting a real global war against terrorism, and our president is leading the charge against they who would destroy us and our allies.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Guess How Many Rounds Contest - A Little Tease...
...may or may not be in order, but I felt like pulling one off, so here is a list of the ammunition in my inventory by caliber, brand, weight and so forth that is the subject of my contest. No, I will not be writing down how many of each I had in inventory, that would defeat the whole purpose of the contest. So here is what was in those boxes; and i'll give the numbers at the end of the contest:
Ammo Type:
Mag-Tech .32 Auto 71gr. FMJ
Fiocchi .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Winchester .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Sellier & Bellot 32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Winchhester .380 Auto 85 gr. Silvertip HP
Gold Dot 9mm +P 124 gr. GDHP
Gold Dot 9mm LE 124 gr. GDHP
Gold Dot 9mm 124 gr. JHP
Federal 9mm Hydr-Shok 147 gr. HP
Federal 9mm yclad 124 gr. HP
Winchester 9MM Nato 124 gr. FMJ
Smith & Wesson 9mm 115 gr. JHP
Winchester.40 S&W 180 gr. JHP
Federal .45 Auto 230 gr. Hydra-Shok
Remington .45 Auto 185 gr. JHP
Western Super X .357 Magnum 158 gr. JHP
Remington .38 Special +P 125 gr. semi JHP
Federal .38 Special +P 110 gr. JHP
Federal .38 Special +P+ 147 gr. Hydra_Shok JHP
Winchester .38 Special Super-X 148 gr. Super Match W/C
Wichester .38 Special 125 gr. +p JHP
Remington .30 Carbine 110 gr. FMJ
Federal .223 Remington 55 gr. MCBT
Sampson .223 Remington 55 gr. FMJBT
Wolf .223 Remington 62 gr. FMJ
Wolf Military Classic 7.62x39 124 gr. FMJ
Mil-Surp 7.62x54R FMJ
Mil-Surp Blue Tip 7.62x54R
Remingtom Core-Lokt .35 Remington 200 gr. SP
Winchester Super-X .35 Remington 200 gr. Power Point
Winchester 12 Gauge Slug
Winchester Super X 12 gauge Slugs
Remington Sluggers 12 Gauge Slugs
Federal Hi-Shok12 Gauge Slugs
Remington 12 Gauge 9 shot Heavy Target
Estate 12 Gauge 7 1/2 Shot Game Load
CCI Maxi-Mags .22 WMR HP
Remington Thunderbolt .22LR
Champion .22LR target solid points
CCI Blazer .22LR
American Eagle .22LR solid points
One Remington Clollector's Tin With Knife
One Remington Collector's Tin
The contest ends this Saturday night at 11:59 PM so click on the link, read the rules, and get your guesstimate in before then.
All the best,
Glenn B
Ammo Type:
Mag-Tech .32 Auto 71gr. FMJ
Fiocchi .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Winchester .32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Sellier & Bellot 32 Auto 73 gr. FMJ
Winchhester .380 Auto 85 gr. Silvertip HP
Gold Dot 9mm +P 124 gr. GDHP
Gold Dot 9mm LE 124 gr. GDHP
Gold Dot 9mm 124 gr. JHP
Federal 9mm Hydr-Shok 147 gr. HP
Federal 9mm yclad 124 gr. HP
Winchester 9MM Nato 124 gr. FMJ
Smith & Wesson 9mm 115 gr. JHP
Winchester.40 S&W 180 gr. JHP
Federal .45 Auto 230 gr. Hydra-Shok
Remington .45 Auto 185 gr. JHP
Western Super X .357 Magnum 158 gr. JHP
Remington .38 Special +P 125 gr. semi JHP
Federal .38 Special +P 110 gr. JHP
Federal .38 Special +P+ 147 gr. Hydra_Shok JHP
Winchester .38 Special Super-X 148 gr. Super Match W/C
Wichester .38 Special 125 gr. +p JHP
Remington .30 Carbine 110 gr. FMJ
Federal .223 Remington 55 gr. MCBT
Sampson .223 Remington 55 gr. FMJBT
Wolf .223 Remington 62 gr. FMJ
Wolf Military Classic 7.62x39 124 gr. FMJ
Mil-Surp 7.62x54R FMJ
Mil-Surp Blue Tip 7.62x54R
Remingtom Core-Lokt .35 Remington 200 gr. SP
Winchester Super-X .35 Remington 200 gr. Power Point
Winchester 12 Gauge Slug
Winchester Super X 12 gauge Slugs
Remington Sluggers 12 Gauge Slugs
Federal Hi-Shok12 Gauge Slugs
Remington 12 Gauge 9 shot Heavy Target
Estate 12 Gauge 7 1/2 Shot Game Load
CCI Maxi-Mags .22 WMR HP
Remington Thunderbolt .22LR
Champion .22LR target solid points
CCI Blazer .22LR
American Eagle .22LR solid points
One Remington Clollector's Tin With Knife
One Remington Collector's Tin
The contest ends this Saturday night at 11:59 PM so click on the link, read the rules, and get your guesstimate in before then.
All the best,
Glenn B
The Little Annoyances...
... are the ones that have historically gotten me the most upset; but somehow that seems to be changing somewhat. Yes I still get upset the most by petty, mostly inconsequential, things that have a way of getting under my skin like: no soap in the shower and I'm already soaking wet, ditto for no shampoo, things moved from where I last put them so I can't find them easily, things I put somewhere other than I thought so I cannot find them easily, nothing ready to eat when I am hungry after a day at the office, traffic jams when I am in no particular hurry to get anywhere, being late when I want to get somewhere on time (usually caused by me), and the list goes on and on. Most of the time I would take out my frustrations by getting angry, and vociferous about it.
I am getting better though. I have been trying for years, and I guess it isn't easy to change a lifetime of the wrong way of thinking and reacting to things, but I am doing it slowly and surely. Today for example, just before getting ready to leave for work, I took the dogs for a quick spin in the back yard to answer nature's call. I pulled the door closed behind me and there was the problem - it closed all the way and locked. Not too worry, I went to look for the ever ready spare key that was ever so cleverly hidden in the super-duper secret hiding place; but of course, it was not there. Yes I got mad, for a moment, but no screaming, no name calling, no muttering (well a little muttering maybe), and I went around the house to see if any of the windows were left open. Sure they were not, except of course for the bathroom window that was about 20 feet over my head! Oh well, I tried to see if any of the basement windows had been left unlocked, so I could open one and squeeze in and lower myself to the basement floor hopefully without killing myself - nope no luck there. What to do? Maybe I could call the wife from a neighbor's house and ask her to come home and let me, the knucklehead who had slammed the door shut behind himself, into the house. As luck would have it, no neighbors were home.
What to do? I checked the mailbox. No one had gotten the mail yesterday, another past pet peeve of mine, but this was good. There was the local rag for me to read. So I sat down next to the two dogs, hoping the one left in the house was not peeing all over the carpet, and I read the paper. Then I thought, why not water the lawn, so I set the sprinkler and went back to reading. Once of twice, I got up to move the sprinkler. The paper was not very interesting, our local one usually isn't, so once done with it I set about watering the potted plants using a watering can so it would kill more time than using the hose. Done with that in too soon a time, I sat back with the dogs, and almost as soon as I sat, they perked up looking toward the front of the house. That usually means one thing, the wife is home or soon to be home. A few seconds later, our car pulls up and out pops the bride. She was kind enough to let me into the house without haranguing me for being a jerk and locking myself out for the better part of two hours in the first place.
So I did better today let's say than I would have done 2 years ago, much better. I was even pleasant to my wife when she arrived instead of venting on her. All I did was asked where the spare key was located, and she told me that the son of ours probably had it, and I imagine I can deal with that later by getting another super secret spare key to be hidden away in a super secret ultimate hiding place of which only I will know the hiding spot. Why I have never thought of this before, after having been locked out more than a few times, is beyond me. I guess all that getting upset blinded me, maybe that is why they call it 'blind rage'. Oh well, I have learned a little bit about how to control my emotions, and usually it centers on doing something else to distract myself - or simply walking away from whatever it is that might get me upset. Not walking away forever, just when I am getting upset, maybe even only on the mental level, sort of like Ralph Kramden when he would say: "Pins and Needles, Needles and Pins, Its the Happy Man That Grins"; then he would grin and count to ten. It works, really it does!
All the best,
Glenn B
I am getting better though. I have been trying for years, and I guess it isn't easy to change a lifetime of the wrong way of thinking and reacting to things, but I am doing it slowly and surely. Today for example, just before getting ready to leave for work, I took the dogs for a quick spin in the back yard to answer nature's call. I pulled the door closed behind me and there was the problem - it closed all the way and locked. Not too worry, I went to look for the ever ready spare key that was ever so cleverly hidden in the super-duper secret hiding place; but of course, it was not there. Yes I got mad, for a moment, but no screaming, no name calling, no muttering (well a little muttering maybe), and I went around the house to see if any of the windows were left open. Sure they were not, except of course for the bathroom window that was about 20 feet over my head! Oh well, I tried to see if any of the basement windows had been left unlocked, so I could open one and squeeze in and lower myself to the basement floor hopefully without killing myself - nope no luck there. What to do? Maybe I could call the wife from a neighbor's house and ask her to come home and let me, the knucklehead who had slammed the door shut behind himself, into the house. As luck would have it, no neighbors were home.
What to do? I checked the mailbox. No one had gotten the mail yesterday, another past pet peeve of mine, but this was good. There was the local rag for me to read. So I sat down next to the two dogs, hoping the one left in the house was not peeing all over the carpet, and I read the paper. Then I thought, why not water the lawn, so I set the sprinkler and went back to reading. Once of twice, I got up to move the sprinkler. The paper was not very interesting, our local one usually isn't, so once done with it I set about watering the potted plants using a watering can so it would kill more time than using the hose. Done with that in too soon a time, I sat back with the dogs, and almost as soon as I sat, they perked up looking toward the front of the house. That usually means one thing, the wife is home or soon to be home. A few seconds later, our car pulls up and out pops the bride. She was kind enough to let me into the house without haranguing me for being a jerk and locking myself out for the better part of two hours in the first place.
So I did better today let's say than I would have done 2 years ago, much better. I was even pleasant to my wife when she arrived instead of venting on her. All I did was asked where the spare key was located, and she told me that the son of ours probably had it, and I imagine I can deal with that later by getting another super secret spare key to be hidden away in a super secret ultimate hiding place of which only I will know the hiding spot. Why I have never thought of this before, after having been locked out more than a few times, is beyond me. I guess all that getting upset blinded me, maybe that is why they call it 'blind rage'. Oh well, I have learned a little bit about how to control my emotions, and usually it centers on doing something else to distract myself - or simply walking away from whatever it is that might get me upset. Not walking away forever, just when I am getting upset, maybe even only on the mental level, sort of like Ralph Kramden when he would say: "Pins and Needles, Needles and Pins, Its the Happy Man That Grins"; then he would grin and count to ten. It works, really it does!
Now the back lawn is watered, the potted plants are watered, the dogs got to go (and the other one inside held it in), I filled the bird feeders, I read the local paper, the dogs and I got to bask in the sunshine of a beautiful and warm day, the dogs and I listened to the birds singing, and I missed work and a doctor's appointment. Yes I caled in to reschedule the appointment, and I called in to work take a vacation day because I had wasted too much of today locked out of my house, and it probably would not have been the best idea for me to drive into Manhattan and then deal with 6 hours of work after having recovered so nicely from my little annoyance. So maybe I had best make this a worthwhile day at home and get something else done.
All the best,
Glenn B
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
A Little Scope Work Today...
...followed by my working a 4x12 shift tonight may leave little time for any additional blogging today. By the way, I don't mean rifle or pistol scope, I mean I am having an endoscopy performed on me today, just a check-up. Oh the joys of middle age!
Later for all of you, have a good day.
All the best,
Glenn B
Later for all of you, have a good day.
All the best,
Glenn B
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Fort Dix - Seemingly A Great Investigation - Why Weaken The Case?
Shoddy investigations of terrorism within our shores have been something of which we seemingly have suffered somewhat throughout our recent history in the USA. So it would come as little surprise to me if upon awakening one day, I was to be greeted by the news that an extremists group had performed another act of terrorism on US soil. As it stands, today we are lucky, and some excellent investigative work seems to have been accomplished, see: At Least 5 Arrested in Alleged Fort Dix Murder Plot at FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270601,00.html
So, it appears that a terrorist plot to attack our soldiers at Fort Dix, NJ has been thwarted. That is a very good thing, yet there are some very bad things to be found in the above linked story. The most obvious is that terrorists are within our borders (it must not have been to hard for them to get here, either they could have crossed illegally - thanks George Bush; or it seems implied in the report that it is possible Bill Clinton may have actually invited them in and given them citizenship after the Balkans war). Well whatever, they are here, and they are plotting to attack us. As per the article these guys had already surveyed multiple targets of opportunity.
While law enforcement officials on the federal and state levels seem, so far, to have done a good investigation on these guys; I almost wonder how that was possible with attitudes of officials as observed in this quote:
""While the group's alleged actions are alarming, it may not have gone beyond the concept stage," a federal source told FOX News."
Someone in the federal government needs a clue as to what makes up a concept, and as to what makes up a conspiracy (the type of conspiracy containing overt acts, and yes legally there is a big difference). A concept my loyal readers is an idea, a thought, a product of the imagination, a broad principal that affects behavior, ones grasp of an idea, a method or plan. That is all that is a concept, it is a product of the imagination, and remains within the imagination, because it is an idea. A conspiracy with an overt act is something else. The plan has already been set by two or more people, who have agreed to carry it out, and which plan has already in some shape or form been worked toward by these individuals in the commission of an overt act to achieve any part of said plan. How could a federal official, speaking about such a case, not realize the difference,. How could he say that the plan was only a concept. If such is the case, there is no conspiracy with or without an overt act.
The truth of the matter, if the report is correct, is that there was a plan to commit a crime, more than one individual agreed to it (simple conspiracy), and one or more of the individuals committed one or more overt acts toward the end of that conspiracy (conspiracy with overt act). The overt acts consisted of them trying to obtain weapons, of them performing surveillance of the military bases and other potential targets. This is a huge legal difference; but the fault of the federal official who allegedly said that this was just in the "concept" stage would not be just that he/she did not know the difference between concept and conspiracy, but that said federal official, and official of our government, just said something very stupid that could be, and probably will be, used in the defense of these alleged terrorists in a court of law. One of the first rules of speaking about a case is, when law enforcement arrests someone with probable cause, law enforcement should never give the other side even part of its defense. In other words law enforcement should do a good job, and therefore when you see announcements about such things, man of the facts are withheld until the time of discovery requires them to be shown to the defense. In addition mouths should remain shut, that is unless what you have to say to the press has been cleared after first being well thought out. Statements like this one about it being in the concept stages are, if actually made, just apparently a product of a blabbermouth who could not wait to get it right by thinking before speaking, and who could not wait to throw a cog into the wheels of justice.
Hopefully there is more than enough hard cold evidence against these defendants to have them convicted without such a statement being given any real weight by a jury.
All the best,
Glenn B
So, it appears that a terrorist plot to attack our soldiers at Fort Dix, NJ has been thwarted. That is a very good thing, yet there are some very bad things to be found in the above linked story. The most obvious is that terrorists are within our borders (it must not have been to hard for them to get here, either they could have crossed illegally - thanks George Bush; or it seems implied in the report that it is possible Bill Clinton may have actually invited them in and given them citizenship after the Balkans war). Well whatever, they are here, and they are plotting to attack us. As per the article these guys had already surveyed multiple targets of opportunity.
While law enforcement officials on the federal and state levels seem, so far, to have done a good investigation on these guys; I almost wonder how that was possible with attitudes of officials as observed in this quote:
""While the group's alleged actions are alarming, it may not have gone beyond the concept stage," a federal source told FOX News."
Someone in the federal government needs a clue as to what makes up a concept, and as to what makes up a conspiracy (the type of conspiracy containing overt acts, and yes legally there is a big difference). A concept my loyal readers is an idea, a thought, a product of the imagination, a broad principal that affects behavior, ones grasp of an idea, a method or plan. That is all that is a concept, it is a product of the imagination, and remains within the imagination, because it is an idea. A conspiracy with an overt act is something else. The plan has already been set by two or more people, who have agreed to carry it out, and which plan has already in some shape or form been worked toward by these individuals in the commission of an overt act to achieve any part of said plan. How could a federal official, speaking about such a case, not realize the difference,. How could he say that the plan was only a concept. If such is the case, there is no conspiracy with or without an overt act.
The truth of the matter, if the report is correct, is that there was a plan to commit a crime, more than one individual agreed to it (simple conspiracy), and one or more of the individuals committed one or more overt acts toward the end of that conspiracy (conspiracy with overt act). The overt acts consisted of them trying to obtain weapons, of them performing surveillance of the military bases and other potential targets. This is a huge legal difference; but the fault of the federal official who allegedly said that this was just in the "concept" stage would not be just that he/she did not know the difference between concept and conspiracy, but that said federal official, and official of our government, just said something very stupid that could be, and probably will be, used in the defense of these alleged terrorists in a court of law. One of the first rules of speaking about a case is, when law enforcement arrests someone with probable cause, law enforcement should never give the other side even part of its defense. In other words law enforcement should do a good job, and therefore when you see announcements about such things, man of the facts are withheld until the time of discovery requires them to be shown to the defense. In addition mouths should remain shut, that is unless what you have to say to the press has been cleared after first being well thought out. Statements like this one about it being in the concept stages are, if actually made, just apparently a product of a blabbermouth who could not wait to get it right by thinking before speaking, and who could not wait to throw a cog into the wheels of justice.
Hopefully there is more than enough hard cold evidence against these defendants to have them convicted without such a statement being given any real weight by a jury.
All the best,
Glenn B
Monday, May 7, 2007
Was France Lucky To Have Had Ethnic Riots?
I think the answer to the above question, over the long run, will turn out to be a definitive 'yes'. As it appears to me, France has already begun to reap the benefits of those riots, you remember them don't you, the ones in which mostly Muslim youths ransacked and burned anything they could lay their hands upon somewhat more than a year or so ago. Yes they seem to have already started to work wonders for France. Of course you are probably guessing as to what I mean, and those of you who realize their presidential elections were yesterday have probably guessed correctly.
Yesterday, Nicolas Sarkozy won the French presidential elections. He is well known as a baby boomer child (he is now first French president elect born after WWII), a conservative, as a pro-American (can you imagine that), as being the son of an immigrant (no Sarkozy is not a French name), yet as wanting to make immigration laws stricter, as being anti-crime, and as being against France's 35 hour work-week. as being for allowing employers to hire and fire with more ease. In addition he referred to those responsible for the 2005 riots in France as "scum".
Now if you look at the list I just gave to you, you will realize that with all you may know about France, over the years since WWII France has not been very supportive of the USA. Even when our donations of money to the victims of the Tsunami dwarfed those of all other nations, France complained that the people in the USA did not donate enough - typically liberal! In addition, despite having what were called conservative presidents over the past few administrations, France has somehow remained very socialistic; therefore its economy has lagged behind the rest of the other members of the European Union, what with a 35 hour work week, and with employers finding it very difficult to fire sluggards because of employment laws. So, knowing these things, you may wonder how on earth did Sarkozy win the election by defeating his opponent: Segolene Royal, who ran on an obvious socialist ticket.
Well, first of all, Sarkozy won by a very good margin, about 54% of the vote, compared to 46% for Royal. The way he did that was by gaining a lot of votes from those across party lines, and from camps other than the conservatives. According to the article: France's President-Elect Sarkozy Plans Quick Reform Package @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270398,00.html:
"Exit polls offered some surprises. Some 49 percent of blue-collar workers — traditionally leftist voters — chose Sarkozy, according to an Ipsos/Dell poll. Some 32 percent of people who usually vote for the Greens and 14 percent who normally support the far-left also went with Sarkozy. The poll surveyed 3,609 voters and had a margin of error of about 2 percent."
Just look at those numbers. Look at how many eligible voters turned out: 85% - WOW! He got almost 1/3 of the votes of those who usually vote for the green party (pretty far left as anyone goes), and 14% of those who usually vote extreme left. The 49% of the blue collar workers is also amazing in that he wants people to work more hours, but then again, he gives a tax incentive, no tax on overtime pay. Yet the question remains, how did he get all those votes.
So how did he do it, in a country like France. Well, I put it to you that he did it with the help of the riots, and the extremist Muslim Arab and African immigrant community. No he did not get great support in that quarter. In fact, extremist Muslims Arab and African Immigrants threatened to riot should he win; and some violence was reported in said article, about 387 cars were burned (here they go again). What Sarkozy did most likely get were the votes of those people who were sick and tired of interlopers ravaging their country. Just look again at the amount of leftists, hard leftists who voted for Sarkozy. What on earth could make someone from the hard left vote for a guy who wants to make people work more, who wants to empower employers in the private sector to be able to more easily fire people, who wants to get tough on immigration, and who supports the United States of America. Yeah, you probably guessed it by now, violence that threatens to take away the liberals ability to be the loudest moaners and groaners in the nation. The rioters pretty much did just that, so the libs, along with the cons, and the middle of the roaders, probably decided it was time to get back to the status-quo of having the French run France. They elected the guy they thought would get that done.
Time will tell if they got what they needed. I don't like every platform on which this man ran. For one, many believe he will bring France into the EU more completely by having France ratify the EU's constitution. I think that is a mistake. He has also been spouting off about global warming and how the USA should lead the world in its fight against it (yes french conservatives are fairly liberal by anyone standards but he seems less so than most). I think France can do well without the socialist agenda of the EU; and I think Frances needs to worry about itself before it worries too much about the global warming lunacies. Maybe he will take care of problems at home first, and things will improve based upon the house cleaning of France itself. Hopefully he will really be tough on crime, really get tough on illegal immigration, really institute immigration reform, really boost the economy through employment laws, and really be a good ally of the USA.
Bon jour,
Glenn B
Yesterday, Nicolas Sarkozy won the French presidential elections. He is well known as a baby boomer child (he is now first French president elect born after WWII), a conservative, as a pro-American (can you imagine that), as being the son of an immigrant (no Sarkozy is not a French name), yet as wanting to make immigration laws stricter, as being anti-crime, and as being against France's 35 hour work-week. as being for allowing employers to hire and fire with more ease. In addition he referred to those responsible for the 2005 riots in France as "scum".
Now if you look at the list I just gave to you, you will realize that with all you may know about France, over the years since WWII France has not been very supportive of the USA. Even when our donations of money to the victims of the Tsunami dwarfed those of all other nations, France complained that the people in the USA did not donate enough - typically liberal! In addition, despite having what were called conservative presidents over the past few administrations, France has somehow remained very socialistic; therefore its economy has lagged behind the rest of the other members of the European Union, what with a 35 hour work week, and with employers finding it very difficult to fire sluggards because of employment laws. So, knowing these things, you may wonder how on earth did Sarkozy win the election by defeating his opponent: Segolene Royal, who ran on an obvious socialist ticket.
Well, first of all, Sarkozy won by a very good margin, about 54% of the vote, compared to 46% for Royal. The way he did that was by gaining a lot of votes from those across party lines, and from camps other than the conservatives. According to the article: France's President-Elect Sarkozy Plans Quick Reform Package @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270398,00.html:
"Exit polls offered some surprises. Some 49 percent of blue-collar workers — traditionally leftist voters — chose Sarkozy, according to an Ipsos/Dell poll. Some 32 percent of people who usually vote for the Greens and 14 percent who normally support the far-left also went with Sarkozy. The poll surveyed 3,609 voters and had a margin of error of about 2 percent."
Just look at those numbers. Look at how many eligible voters turned out: 85% - WOW! He got almost 1/3 of the votes of those who usually vote for the green party (pretty far left as anyone goes), and 14% of those who usually vote extreme left. The 49% of the blue collar workers is also amazing in that he wants people to work more hours, but then again, he gives a tax incentive, no tax on overtime pay. Yet the question remains, how did he get all those votes.
So how did he do it, in a country like France. Well, I put it to you that he did it with the help of the riots, and the
Time will tell if they got what they needed. I don't like every platform on which this man ran. For one, many believe he will bring France into the EU more completely by having France ratify the EU's constitution. I think that is a mistake. He has also been spouting off about global warming and how the USA should lead the world in its fight against it (yes french conservatives are fairly liberal by anyone standards but he seems less so than most). I think France can do well without the socialist agenda of the EU; and I think Frances needs to worry about itself before it worries too much about the global warming lunacies. Maybe he will take care of problems at home first, and things will improve based upon the house cleaning of France itself. Hopefully he will really be tough on crime, really get tough on illegal immigration, really institute immigration reform, really boost the economy through employment laws, and really be a good ally of the USA.
Bon jour,
Glenn B
Sunday, May 6, 2007
I'm Not Much of a Gardener...
...but I do my bit in our flower and vegetable gardens each year; and that does seem to help things to grow better and make the place look nicer even though I don't know all that much about gardening. A perfect example though of me being less than a knowledgeable gardener is I have plants in my yard and I have no idea as to their names.
One of those plants, actually I have two of them, are bushes just along the back of my house. They have been there since long before we bought the place 12 years ago. In that time they went from looking great, to looking like they were about to die, back to looking fairly healthy again. The leaves still seem a bit pale to me, but over the past 3 years I have experimented with different fertilizers, arriving at the conclusion that these bushes like the soil more on the acidic side. I figure they like the soil l
ike that because once I started feeding them azalea food (and they sort of look like an azalea bush but I really don't know) and they started blooming like you see them in the picture. They just started to open a few days ago, must buds are still closed, but there are a lot of buds yet to bloom. It is kind of nice to see that I do have a bit of a green thumb, or at least that these plants are hearty enough to withstand my bumbling in the garden.
ike that because once I started feeding them azalea food (and they sort of look like an azalea bush but I really don't know) and they started blooming like you see them in the picture. They just started to open a few days ago, must buds are still closed, but there are a lot of buds yet to bloom. It is kind of nice to see that I do have a bit of a green thumb, or at least that these plants are hearty enough to withstand my bumbling in the garden. 
I have never seen ones just like these at the garden shops, especially in this color or flower size. This year, I think I will take some cuttings and see if I can get them to root. I did that with some Forsythias last year, and now have a few small Forsythia bushes growing in pots. Once they get a bit bigger, I'll have to find a spot for them. Hopefully this mystery bush will root the same way when I take cuttings from it, because I would like to assure having these around for a long, long time.
By the way, can you believe it, the camera focused just about perfectly on these flowers; I guess there is a first time for everything. Now off to get ready for work for me, I am doing a 4x12 tonight.
All the best,
Glenn B
"New" Discovery - Doing Good makes You Feel Happy...
...can you imagine that! No I don't mean can you imagine that doing good things like: being nice to others, doing your civic duties, having common courtesy, volunteering, being law abiding, being a good parent, and on and on, makes you feel good; what I mean is can you imagine that someone actually thinks this is a new discovery. I find it even difficult to believe that someone went out and did what I believe was wasting someone else's money, and maybe even some of his own, to do such a study - which I will guess is supposed to have been scientific and therefore have the weight of science behind it. The truth is though, someone apparently did just that as discussed in the article Study: Doing Good Makes You Feel Good at FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269900,00.html.
According to said article: "There's a new incentive to doing good things for others: It makes you happier, according to a new study." Now did someone really have to go out and spend time and effort to discover that doing good deeds, acting nicely and the like makes you a happier person. I mean, wasn't that sort of thing already common knowledge; did it have to be scientifically proven, hasn't it been proven throughout the ages already? I wonder, are scientists, or academicians, that much out of touch with reality to not realize that this was simply a fact of nature. Apparently at least one person, the guy who conducted this study, Michael Steger, "...couldn’t help but wonder which behavior makes people happier — seeking pleasure or doing good?".
Let's see, were there already any hints that doing good makes one feel happy? I think there was already a large body of evidence that pointed us in that direction, certainly more evidence than the experiences of 65 students who participated in the study could have amounted to. For example:
1) People we see in the world who seemingly seek pleasure for themselves very often, or possibly more often than they do good, apparently turn out to be despicable, and/or miserable. Some extreme examples of this throughout history, in my opinion, would be: Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, Nero, Josef Stalin, any pedophile you can name. Some examples that are closer to home and less extreme, but nonetheless, are in my opinion
examples would be: Paris Hilton, Rosie O'Donnell, some people who go compete on American Idol, people who are always telling you what to do or not do like PETA members, over zealous politicians, or a consistently grumpy next door neighbor.
2) People in the world who repeatedly do good for others apparently turn out to be loved and quite happy a least about doing good. Good examples of this throughout history are: Louis Pasteur, Florence Nightingale, Joan of Arc. Less extreme , and more modern, examples of such would be: Mr. Rogers (of PBS television fame), Sister Theresa, any person who routinely exhibits some common courtesy, a consistently nice next door neighbor, people who volunteer often to do nice things.
3) Of course, for about the last 2,000 years now or more precisely for about the last 1,977 years or so, we have had this saying going round the world: It is better to give than to receive. No I am not about to start preaching, heck I am pretty much an atheist, agnostic at most toward religious beliefs, but this was and is a good one! People who give of themselves, within reason, usually seem to be those who are the happiest, it is just plain old common knowledge.
4) While stressful, holidays like Christmas, and Chanukah, make people feel happy, and both are times of giving happiness, and are not about seeking pleasure for yourself.
5) Marriages work out much better, and each partner is happier, when each partner is giving of goodness to the other, not when each partner only wants to receive goodness.
6) In any relationship, such as friendship, work associations, school relationships, the people involved seem to be happier when they are good, and do good, as opposed to when they seek self satisfaction only.
I guess I could go on and on about this, but why bother when thousands of years of history, and common sense, have shown that doing good makes one happy or feel good about him/herself. I think the need for a study was a bit ridiculous, and I think one of the reported findings was even more so, and I'll have to repeat one of the above quotes from the article: "There's a new incentive to doing good things for others: It makes you happier, according to a new study." It is ridiculous to say that feeling happy is a new incentive for doing good, and then to conclude that people who do good are happier than those who seek pleasure. You see, if you use happiness that you will feel as an incentive for doing good, you are in effect seeking the pleasure of happiness for yourself; and therefore you are defeating the whole purpose of doing good onto others in that you are seeking self satisfaction because you did good with that goal in mind. The truth be told, when you do selfless good deeds, you do not seek to feel good, you seek to do good, to make others happier or better off, and you do not need or seek the after effect/result of feeling happier before doing a good deed. To do so would only be hypocrisy, and that I think would make you feel miserable in the long run. You do good because you are good already, because you feel good enough about yourself not to worry about what you will get out of it, but rather what good you can do for others. In general, you are a happier or better person already, before the act, who selflessly does good for others, and if doing good results in making you feel happier - well so be it it, you deserve it.
Before I close, I will admit one thing about this study. It was nice to see that academia or science now apaprently believe that doing good is basically its own reward.
All the best,
Glenn B
According to said article: "There's a new incentive to doing good things for others: It makes you happier, according to a new study." Now did someone really have to go out and spend time and effort to discover that doing good deeds, acting nicely and the like makes you a happier person. I mean, wasn't that sort of thing already common knowledge; did it have to be scientifically proven, hasn't it been proven throughout the ages already? I wonder, are scientists, or academicians, that much out of touch with reality to not realize that this was simply a fact of nature. Apparently at least one person, the guy who conducted this study, Michael Steger, "...couldn’t help but wonder which behavior makes people happier — seeking pleasure or doing good?".
Let's see, were there already any hints that doing good makes one feel happy? I think there was already a large body of evidence that pointed us in that direction, certainly more evidence than the experiences of 65 students who participated in the study could have amounted to. For example:
1) People we see in the world who seemingly seek pleasure for themselves very often, or possibly more often than they do good, apparently turn out to be despicable, and/or miserable. Some extreme examples of this throughout history, in my opinion, would be: Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, Nero, Josef Stalin, any pedophile you can name. Some examples that are closer to home and less extreme, but nonetheless, are in my opinion
examples would be: Paris Hilton, Rosie O'Donnell, some people who go compete on American Idol, people who are always telling you what to do or not do like PETA members, over zealous politicians, or a consistently grumpy next door neighbor.
2) People in the world who repeatedly do good for others apparently turn out to be loved and quite happy a least about doing good. Good examples of this throughout history are: Louis Pasteur, Florence Nightingale, Joan of Arc. Less extreme , and more modern, examples of such would be: Mr. Rogers (of PBS television fame), Sister Theresa, any person who routinely exhibits some common courtesy, a consistently nice next door neighbor, people who volunteer often to do nice things.
3) Of course, for about the last 2,000 years now or more precisely for about the last 1,977 years or so, we have had this saying going round the world: It is better to give than to receive. No I am not about to start preaching, heck I am pretty much an atheist, agnostic at most toward religious beliefs, but this was and is a good one! People who give of themselves, within reason, usually seem to be those who are the happiest, it is just plain old common knowledge.
4) While stressful, holidays like Christmas, and Chanukah, make people feel happy, and both are times of giving happiness, and are not about seeking pleasure for yourself.
5) Marriages work out much better, and each partner is happier, when each partner is giving of goodness to the other, not when each partner only wants to receive goodness.
6) In any relationship, such as friendship, work associations, school relationships, the people involved seem to be happier when they are good, and do good, as opposed to when they seek self satisfaction only.
I guess I could go on and on about this, but why bother when thousands of years of history, and common sense, have shown that doing good makes one happy or feel good about him/herself. I think the need for a study was a bit ridiculous, and I think one of the reported findings was even more so, and I'll have to repeat one of the above quotes from the article: "There's a new incentive to doing good things for others: It makes you happier, according to a new study." It is ridiculous to say that feeling happy is a new incentive for doing good, and then to conclude that people who do good are happier than those who seek pleasure. You see, if you use happiness that you will feel as an incentive for doing good, you are in effect seeking the pleasure of happiness for yourself; and therefore you are defeating the whole purpose of doing good onto others in that you are seeking self satisfaction because you did good with that goal in mind. The truth be told, when you do selfless good deeds, you do not seek to feel good, you seek to do good, to make others happier or better off, and you do not need or seek the after effect/result of feeling happier before doing a good deed. To do so would only be hypocrisy, and that I think would make you feel miserable in the long run. You do good because you are good already, because you feel good enough about yourself not to worry about what you will get out of it, but rather what good you can do for others. In general, you are a happier or better person already, before the act, who selflessly does good for others, and if doing good results in making you feel happier - well so be it it, you deserve it.
Before I close, I will admit one thing about this study. It was nice to see that academia or science now apaprently believe that doing good is basically its own reward.
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Guess How Many Rounds...
...I came up with in my ammunition inventory tonight! It might surprise you, yet I am not getting ready for a war, or to go out in a blaze of glory (heaven's forbid), or anything sinister. I will admit though, I like to have sufficient ammunition on hand in case of emergency, and of course to shoot whenever I get the opportunity. Over my past few visits to a local range for some shooting fun, I shot about 1,200 - 1,500 rounds or so of 9mm Luger pistol ammo, and a few hundred rounds at least of .22 Long Rifle ammo.
As for the inventory, it was done on everything you see in the picture at the left, which is not quite all my ammu-nition. It was a fairly accurate count. I counted the ammo in my foot locker, my ammo cans, and in my SHTF grab and go attache case. That included the following calibers: .22LR, .22 Magnum, .32 Auto, .380 Auto, 9MM Luger, .38 Special, .357 Magnum, .40 Smith & Wesson, .45ACP (a 45 maybe my next pistol purchase), .223 Remington, .30 Carbine, 7.62x39, 7.62X54R, .35 Remington, and 12 gauge slugs, buckshot, and game/target loads. All in all it was a fairly sizable amount. Now you have a chance to take a look at the attached picture, and then guess how many rounds I came up with on my inventory count, and then if eligible you may win a prize.
The Contest Rules Are Fairly Simple: The contest begins upon my posting this blog on May 5, 2007, and the contest ends next Saturday, May 12, 2007 at 11:59PM. You must be at least 18 years old or older to participate. Entry is free, although you may have to pay for your email access, etc; in this case 'free' means I am not charging an entry fee. To participate you must be eligible (see all the rules in this post), then simply post a comment to this post, and in the comment tell me how many rounds you believe I came up with in my inventory (regardless of if I counted correctly or not, but yes I was close). You may enter this contest once (of course this will be almost impossible for me to check, so this is on the honor system please). If, at the end of the contest, you come closest to the amount that I came up with in my inventory tonight, you win (if eligible). In case of a tie, I will randomly choose from among the tied entrants. I will try to announce the winner in a comment to this post within 48 hours of the contest end, but no guarantee it will be that soon after the contest ends - I work for a living and cannot always get time online. I will mail the prize (see prize options below) to the winner; the winner must contact me with mailing info within 10 days of the end of the contest. Please note: only one prize to be awarded to only one winner. In the case of any dispute, disagreement, or other figurative pains in my behind - I am the final judge and my decision is final. I can change the rules, or discontinue this contest, at any time, for any reason I deem fit, without any recompense to the participants (mostly just in case I think it has gotten out of hand). If you don't like that don't bother reading further, and don't bother participating.
Now for the Prize: sorry no guns or ammunition; but I guess it can be firearms related. I have an Uncle Mike's model 8103-1, size 3, right hand nylon hip holster for 5 - 6 1/2 inch barrel medium and large double action revolvers, and I have an Uncle Mike's model 8101-1, size 1, right handed nylon hip holster that fits 3 - 4 inch medium semi-automatic pistols. The winner has a choice of ONE of these as his/her prize. These are brand new (well old, but never opened), in the original packaging. Yes that is a picture of the prize options to the right, I guess you can understand why I will not send them to someone who is institutionalized.
I keep ammunition for all the guns I own, and I also have some in calibers for guns that I do not currently own, but hope to someday own. If I never get a gun in a certain caliber, I can always sell or trade that ammo. So some of my ammo has been building up in storage over a few years just waiting for me to get something in which to shoot it. Besides that, ammunition that you buy over the years also has a way of piling up if only because you find a good deal on something, or because you find an ammo type you think helps you to shoot better with one of your guns. Right now, I figure I have just about enough, but by the standards of many a shooting enthusiast, or a survivalist, I have a low inventory. By the standards of the mud slinging media, I suppose I have what amounts to an ammunition dump's worth. The question is though, can you look at a picture of what I inventoried, and then guess how many rounds it is in total?
As for the inventory, it was done on everything you see in the picture at the left, which is not quite all my ammu-nition. It was a fairly accurate count. I counted the ammo in my foot locker, my ammo cans, and in my SHTF grab and go attache case. That included the following calibers: .22LR, .22 Magnum, .32 Auto, .380 Auto, 9MM Luger, .38 Special, .357 Magnum, .40 Smith & Wesson, .45ACP (a 45 maybe my next pistol purchase), .223 Remington, .30 Carbine, 7.62x39, 7.62X54R, .35 Remington, and 12 gauge slugs, buckshot, and game/target loads. All in all it was a fairly sizable amount. Now you have a chance to take a look at the attached picture, and then guess how many rounds I came up with on my inventory count, and then if eligible you may win a prize.The Contest Rules Are Fairly Simple: The contest begins upon my posting this blog on May 5, 2007, and the contest ends next Saturday, May 12, 2007 at 11:59PM. You must be at least 18 years old or older to participate. Entry is free, although you may have to pay for your email access, etc; in this case 'free' means I am not charging an entry fee. To participate you must be eligible (see all the rules in this post), then simply post a comment to this post, and in the comment tell me how many rounds you believe I came up with in my inventory (regardless of if I counted correctly or not, but yes I was close). You may enter this contest once (of course this will be almost impossible for me to check, so this is on the honor system please). If, at the end of the contest, you come closest to the amount that I came up with in my inventory tonight, you win (if eligible). In case of a tie, I will randomly choose from among the tied entrants. I will try to announce the winner in a comment to this post within 48 hours of the contest end, but no guarantee it will be that soon after the contest ends - I work for a living and cannot always get time online. I will mail the prize (see prize options below) to the winner; the winner must contact me with mailing info within 10 days of the end of the contest. Please note: only one prize to be awarded to only one winner. In the case of any dispute, disagreement, or other figurative pains in my behind - I am the final judge and my decision is final. I can change the rules, or discontinue this contest, at any time, for any reason I deem fit, without any recompense to the participants (mostly just in case I think it has gotten out of hand). If you don't like that don't bother reading further, and don't bother participating.
Additional Eligibility Rules: You must be at least 18 years old or older to participate. You must submit an entry via a comment to this post to be eligible. If you are the winner (only one winner), you must email me, or mail me, a copy of your current driver's license, or other federal or state identification, showing your photograph, date of birth and current address. You must be a resident U.S. citizen or legal resident alien of the lower 48 states of the USA (I do not ship to foreign or to Alaska or Hawaii). Also, please no participation by incarcerated/institutionalized people as I knowingly will not send the prize to a jail, halfway house, asylum, mental hospital, or anyplace similar. As winner, you give me permission to place your name, and location (locality and and state) in a post on this blog when I announce the winner (added on May 6, 2007). One other thing, you must hold me harmless for any damages, real or imagined, as a direct or indirect result of this contest.
Important Note: By your participation in this contest, you are affirming you will abide by the above rules, that you are eligible as per the above rules, that your participation is legal, that your receiving the prize is legal and not in violation of any codes, rules, regulations, etc., and that you are affirming that you hold me harmless as mentioned above.
Now for the Prize: sorry no guns or ammunition; but I guess it can be firearms related. I have an Uncle Mike's model 8103-1, size 3, right hand nylon hip holster for 5 - 6 1/2 inch barrel medium and large double action revolvers, and I have an Uncle Mike's model 8101-1, size 1, right handed nylon hip holster that fits 3 - 4 inch medium semi-automatic pistols. The winner has a choice of ONE of these as his/her prize. These are brand new (well old, but never opened), in the original packaging. Yes that is a picture of the prize options to the right, I guess you can understand why I will not send them to someone who is institutionalized. Please keep it nice, and someone will be the happy winner of a decent prize. Good luck to you.
All the best,
Glenn B
(Slight change to rules above as of May 6, to make them a bit simpler, among the changes you are no longer required to email or mail me a statement about your citizenship or legal residency as your participation in the contest is affirmation of such. You still need to email me proof of your age; sorry just too many kids getting in trouble with gun related items lately, and I don't need some lawyer trying to rape me financially if I knowingly send this to a kid. You also need to give me permission to post your name and location in this blog in the announcement of the winner.)
Friday, May 4, 2007
A Blogger's Inspiration
…Well, even though my last post received only three comments, along with thosee comments I found not just words but inspiration. Those nice, and very thoughful comments helped put things into perspective. Then while I was still thinking about whether or not I should keep up blogging, I listened to one of my all time favorite songs, The Highwayman as sung by The Highwaymen (Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, and Kris Kristofferson) . It also helped put things into perspective as to whether or not I would continue with my rants:
Thanks,
Glenn B
"…I’ll find a place to rest my spirit if I can,
Perhaps I may become a highwayman again,
Or I may simply be a single drop of rain, but I will remain,
And I’ll be back again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again…"
And I’ll be back again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again…"
Thanks,
Glenn B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)