Foyle Maduro Toro Review

Tags

, , , , ,

“It’s hip to be square.” So said Huey Lewis and the News back in a time that now seems like a Pleistocene fairytale. Sometimes a square cigar is hip to a square who isn’t. Or isn’t always. Or something. I smoked a square cigar! Actually, it was rectangular (for the Euclidean purists). And I liked it.

Now comes the tale of the Foyle l’Anniversario Maduro, mine being a toro (5 ½ x 55). This sleek beauty is produced by Foyle. Just remember to confirm you’re 21…

nimbus-image-1466437019987

My straight box toro was extremely well constructed. The dark Connecticut, broadleaf wrapper (aged and fermented for three months!) was attractive with a deep coffee-esque, oily appearance.

IMG_20160618_201810552

The enjoyment process itself was smooth from start to finish. The cigar burned even, uniform, with no need for retouch address. The draw was next to effortless and delivered consistent smoke which developed into a rich harmony of flavors.

The binder purports to be Ecuadorian Sumatra; the filler is part Dominican and part Nicaraguan. I suppose this mixture allows for the gracious, sweet notes of coffee and spice with a generous dose of that Esteli earth I so dearly love. Other, more sensitive palates might discern chocolate and soft, dry leather. Whatever you pick out, you’ll admit it’s an excellent taste.

All this excitement is put together in Danli, Honduras. It’s a veritable hour-long geography lesson of the Americas! Foyle is a relatively new boutique brand distributed by Alliance. Their top shelf offerings are the scions of a couple of industry insiders – Dave Topper and Tom Sullivan, me thinks. Insiders, outsiders, whatever – they’ve done a tremendous job in creating this little square standout.

I found the rectangular wonder to be of solid “medium” body. Not too strong, not too soft. I imagine this stick would appeal to just about any and all smokers though a newbie might want to fortify the stomach with a good dinner prior to lighting up.

Me, I enjoyed after a light supper, pairing my toro with a plastic flask of vintage dihydrogen monoxide. It was a fine summer evening for a little work out-of-doors. My essays on government statistics and trade treaties (GAWD help!) were greatly assisted by this very good smoke. By the way, I suspect this stick would pair well with coffee or maybe even a dark beer. Maybe a coffee beer – like Bell’s Java Stout.

As busy and satisfied as I was, I was momentarily lulled into a false sense of cigar safety. That maduro ash hangs on solidly and perhaps deceptively. I suppose there was a good inch and a half of carbon-gray ash sitting atop the stick, simmering wonderfully, when I (carelessly) transitioned from keyboard to waterbottle. My movements toppled the gray column which landed hot side down on the back of my hand. Avoid that if possible! I still bear a small blister from the encounter. Rather than admit a foul on my part, I’ll just say the Folye Maduro is “hand burning good”.

Knock one back when you get a chance. Just, please, knock the ash regularly. You can obtain a Foyle from my friends at Cigars City with low prices, fast shipping, and excellent customer service.

Oh, if you’re not into smoking and writing, perhaps smoking and reading is the thing. I suggest this dark gem would go very nicely with a good book, like mine:

IMG_20160618_191141907 - Edited.jpg

Available at Amazon!

Cheers and happy smoking!

 — Perrin

New Hampshire Nullification

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

They are serious about “Live Free or Die”in the Granite State. A buddy of mine just bought a house there and I’m sure he will appreciate the following “leave me alone” news.

The New Hampshire House passed a bill that would make it the first state in the nation to require courts to inform juries of their right to vote not guilty when the verdict would produce an unjust result. This right, which all juries possess but may not be aware of, is called jury nullification. The bill is now awaiting approval in the Senate.

Yes, all juries in the United States possess the right and authority to nullify a law as it affects a particular defendant via a not guilty vote. Think of it as a vote of conscious. Here’s an example from a case that really happened. An underaged, teenage girl took some naughty selfies and sent them to a friend. Kids do stupid things like that. Governments do worse. The state where she lived (actually happened in multiple places) charged her with manufacturing and distributing child pornography – pictures of herself. The government even acknowledged her as both the suspect and the victim. This is near the absolute height of stupidity. A conviction would put such an innocent (if silly) girl on the sex offender registry, which is supposed to protect innocent (even silly) people from real predators. Supposed to. Really, it’s just another state scheme for power.

If such a stupid case ever made it to a jury, the jury could (regardless of the technicalities of the law) return a verdict of “not guilty” as a guilt verdict (even if correct under the law and by the facts) would be an injustice to the young girl – the victim also, remember.

The Free Thought story goes on:

Even if government has proved that someone is guilty under its law, a jury can let the person go free if it disagrees with the law and the punishment. This is one of the few ways in which citizens have power within the system to counter the irrational tendencies of centralized bureaucracy.

New Hampshire currently allows the defense “to inform the jury of its right to judge the facts and the application of the law in relation to the facts in controversy.” However, the House bill would have judges explain this right to juries which, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, makes it “more likely that a juror will consider this option.”

Judges would be required to make the following statement:

“Even if you find the state has proved all of the elements of the offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt, you may still find that based upon the facts of this case, a guilty verdict will yield an unjust result, and you may find the defendant not guilty.”

If the New Hampshire bill makes it through the Senate and past the governor, it will be an historic moment in the American justice system. The current legal system is hostile to the idea of jury nullification, with judges threatening “secret juries” and police defying injunctions by removing activists.

However, in past times, jury nullification was viewed as a primary and necessary function of juries. As the Cato Institute points out:

“You can’t find references to “jury nullification” around the time of the American Revolution. That’s because it was considered to be part and parcel of what a jury trial was all about. If jurors thought the government was treating someone unjustly, they could acquit and restore that person’s liberty. Jury trials were celebrated–and explicit provisions were put into the Constitution so that the government could not take them away.”

Perhaps New Hampshire can remind the nation that we are not bound by the dictates of government, and we still have the power to protect our fellow citizens from state-sanctioned injustice.

Openly hostile is putting it mildly. A few states indirectly dance around the issue. For instance, the Georgia Constitution expressly says juries are the judges of the facts and the law. However, in reality in the Peach State – as in most jurisdictions, the judge declares himself the arbiter of what the law is and how the law applies to a given case. Judges give “charges” on the law to a jury at the conclusion of evidence and arguments. Some, most charges are “pattern” and are given preemptively by the judge right out of a handbook (complied by other judges in conference). The parties can make special suggestions. But, in no case, will it be permitted to tell the jury they can find a defendant not guilty because they disagree with the law.

Judges put people in jail for contempt and even jury tampering for even trying to get the word out about nullification. That’s hostility in an attempt to preserve power. As CATO points out, this is part of the traditional system for juries. Not just in America and England but all the way back to Athens and Rome. The violent prevention of nullification knowledge is just another part of the near-terminal decline of the trial by jury.

republicbroadcasting.org.

New Hampshire is often in the vanguard of freedom fighting in the U.S.A. Let’s hope the Senate and Governor feel as strongly about decent legal tradition as the House did.

…well…

I did a little follow-up research and discovered that the Senate did not follow through. Instead, on or around May 5th they let the Bill (HB 1270) die a procedural death. Very noble of them. Perhaps more than a few members will suffer a similar electoral fate come November. Anyway, there’s always next session. Live free or nullify.

Straw News: Breaking Gun Control Laws for More Gun Control Laws

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

CBS News did a video story which, I assume, is similar to the pitiful New York Daily News piece on the horrors of the AR-15. CBS News’ Paula Reid bought an AR-15 at a gun store in Virginia to show how easy it is to buy a AR-15 in America. The intention, again as I imagine it, was to frighten the people into accepting gun control. There’s just one problem for CBS News – gun control.

It seems Ms. Reid may have run afoul of the federal government’s laws against “straw purchases” of firearms.

The gun store where a CBS News employee purchased a gun for a segment that aired Thursday on “CBS This Morning” has filed a report with the Virginia State Police and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives over concerns the purchase was unlawful.

The store, SpecDive Tactical in Alexandria, Virginia, said that when CBS News’ Paula Reid purchased the rifle she told the store’s general manager the gun was for her own use. However, when CBS reported on the story they revealed the gun was purchased for the story and transferred to a third party a few hours later. “The rifle we purchased was legally transferred to a federally licensed firearms dealer and weapons instructor in Virginia, just hours after we bought it,” the report said.

The store said they contacted the ATF after viewing the report because they feared the misdirection used by the CBS reporter constituted a straw purchase, which would be a federal crime.

And, I warned about this three years ago. CBS should have heeded my warning. Then, I said:

A straw purchase is where a convicted felon or some other person prohibited by law from buying a gun (an ever-expanding group) pays a “normal” person to buy a gun and then give it to the prohibited person. The website above has all the horrible statistics about this practice. For the average person such a crime can carry severe penalties. [I then told how the ATF, which regulates the law, breaks it all the time with impunity.]

Imagine you’re one of the lucky Americans who still lives in a free state or city (I pray you are).  One evening after work you are walking home enjoying the night air.  You duck down a dark alley to take a shortcut.  Suddenly a scruffy, greasy, shiftless-looking bum of a politician in a trenchcoat comes slithering out of the shadows towards you.  He’s of the desperate variety from New York or D.C. or somewhere.  Instinctively, you assume a fighting stance and drop the safety on your pistol.  But, for once, you are baffled to discover this is a politician who wants to give you money rather than steal it from you.  He offers forth from beneath his smelly, stained coat a paper sack stuffed full of $100 bills.  With all the charm of a diseased wharf rat he tries to entice you to purchase some AR-15s on behalf of his storm-trooper corps.

Once the shock of the situation wears off you may, for a moment, be sorely tempted to take his money, shoot him, and say he was trying to mug you.  Don’t do it!  For one thing, leave evil to the evil.  And, for God’s sake, do not lie for this slimy degenerate!  Have nothing else to do with him!  Rodent-like beings such as our hypothetical politician are often under investigation for corruption by some larger criminal organization.  Loudly and clearly tell the creep you are not interested in breaking the law on his behalf.  Say it several times in different directions so the FBI’s cameras and microphones record definitively that you are not a participant in his conspiracy.  Then tell the rat where to go and continue on your way.  You may have to take a long shower and burn your clothes as a result of the encounter, but at least you won’t end up in prison like the dude in the above picture.

Don’t Lie For The Political Guy!

The shop owner in Virginia didn’t rely on the surveillance state but he did file complaints with the ATF and the VA state police. Hilarius.

I think CBS need not worry about the straw purchase law for two reasons. One, who runs the ATF right now? People sympathetic to terrorizing people into more gun control. Second, given that the AR was to be transferred to an FFL – likely not a “prohibited person”, there’s no technical violation.

However, there is a law concerning the ATF form CBS had to fill out to buy the AR. If they misrepresented information on that form they could be in trouble (but probably not). That’s part of what is wrong with our laws. They allow for selective prosecution – well, maybe that’s an enforcement issue. The main problem is that they are Unconstitutional. I see nowhere in the Old Parchment where Congress has the authority to regulate arms beyond regulating the Militia (that, they have ceded to the states).

All these lovely little laws, 18 U.S.C. § 921, et seq., ad nauseam, can be found in the ATF’s concise little (242-page) Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide (2005). It’s incomplete, yes, and there’s disagreement even within the ATF as to how some of the laws apply, but hey, that’s the government you voted for.

nimbus-image-1466386837558

If there’s a moral to this story, in general, it is to beware of laws, those spider’s webs of injustice. Specifically, here, beware of gun control laws when you’re trying to push more gun control laws.

Happy Father’s Day

Tags

Plusquotes.com

Father’s Day originated in Fairmont, West Virginia, circa 1908. It was a memorial celebration for the 250 father’s killed the previous year in the Monongah Mining Disaster. Pastor Robert Thomas Webb provided the sermon which was sadly not preserved.

Take a little time today to talk to or think about dear old dad.

Most Wolves Run in Packs

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Hussein Obama and the American government are saying over and over that Omar Marteen was a “lone wolf” and a home-grown menace. Their blind narrative helps deflect suspicion of a false flag, lessens scrutiny on their wars and mad immigration policies, and give them a shot (pun) at gun control for the masses. The narrative is dead wrong. It is a myth.

President Obama says don’t worry, the Orlando terrorist was just another “lone actor” operating in isolation, unconnected to any larger group of supporters. In fact, these so-called “lone wolves” are running in packs, and suggesting otherwise gives the public a false sense of security.

Yet Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson echoed Obama, saying Omar Mateen was “self-radicalized” without any religious, ideological or operational support from friends, family or others in the Muslim community.

“What we do know at this point is it appears this was a case of self-radicalization,” Johnson said. “He does not appear to have been part of any group.”

A more accurate picture is that Mateen, an Afghan-American, was part of a disturbingly large Muslim family of sympathizers, supporters and even co-conspirators.

This doesn’t even begin to cover the possibility of government conspirators or sympathizers but it is a great refutation of the simplistic stupidity coming from the Department of Homeland Theater and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. They’re plan is to keep importing radicals. They all must be stopped.

Randy Forbes Gets the SHAFTA

Tags

, , , , , , ,

NAFTA, CAFTA, SHAFTA (ObamaTrade) are programs foisted upon the public by Congress and the Whitehouse under the guise of “free trade”. They’re really about money for large corporations and lost prosperity and jobs for the people. I wrote about ObamaTrade a few times last year as it secretly passed through congress like a wraith.

Do you like secrecy, unregulated bank power, and Washington control of … everything? Like your job? Hate it? Want to give it to some H1-B foreigner? If so, you’ll love H.R. 1314. It covers the globe where NAFTA and CAFTA left off.

SHAFTA just claimed a deserving victim – Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA).

The populist uprising against phony “free trade” and Republicans who love it has taken its first scalp.

Rep. Randy Forbes, GOP establishment stalwart and longtime Obamatrade supporter from Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District, will soon be unemployed. Voters rejected him in favor of his primary opponent Scott Taylor, who stridently opposed Obamatrade.

Taylor blasted Forbes for voting to give President Obama fast track authority to ram through Congress the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a sweeping 12-nation international regulatory pact that would merge our economy with some of the poorest and most repressive on earth.

This move was especially hypocritical for Forbes, chairman of the House Prayer Caucus. Obamatrade would give special economic privileges to countries that persecute Christians, including Vietnam, Malaysia and the Shariah-law regime of Brunei.

After his disastrous vote for fast track, Forbes tried to tap dance around the Constitution-shredding, religious-liberty-trampling Obamatrade agreement.

Dance on out the door, jackass. Begone! Good riddance. I’m glad to see the voters in at least one district are awake and a little angry. Let’s hope and pray this spreads.

Dailykos/Creators

Facts Vs. Panic: More Guns, Less Crime

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I’ve dedicated (sadly) most of my blogging week to the aftermath of the Battle of Orlando. Every time there is a mass shooting, terrorist or false flag, or not) the knives come out for our guns. By “our” I mean “us” – the good guys and gals, the law-abiding, decent, civilized people.

Here’s how the hysterical “thinking” about gun control goes:

Columbine, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Binghampton, Newtown, Pulse/Orlando – mass murder, mass murder, mass murder! The news reports usually start the same way: “IT has happened again!” For a good week after each mass shooting, until the fluff takes back over, all the talking heads can babble about is how dangerous America has become and how much of a gun problem we have. They especially concentrate on the “scary” looking guns like the 50+ year-old AR platform.

There is some truth in this mania. Guns are tools for killing (though they don’t act on their own – they are not inherently dangerous, in lawyer speak). There are more guns around than ever and Americans have for guns than anyone else in the history of the world. And, innocent people do die in large numbers in mass shootings – thus the “mass” label. Given all of this truth, why wouldn’t we benefit from more gun control?

Because, in spite of the shootings and the vast number of firearms out there, America is safer than ever. Actually, it’s not in spite of, but because of the guns we are safer.

If one puts aside the panicked view of the gun-grabbers and looks at the real, hard facts – the numbers – one sees a correlation between increased firearms ownership and lower crime rates. According to the government’s own figures, the U.S. homicide rate is the lower in over half a century. We are safer now than we have been since 1963. Here’s the chart:

ZeroHedge/FBI

The dramatic drop has come since around 1990. What’s doubly amazing and overlooked entirely by the grabbers is that since 1963 the U.S. population has essentially doubled as has the number of firearms in private hands. By there crazed “logic” you should be in a shooting right now. But you’re not. You are as safe right now, with all these guns, than you have been in modern history.

According to the CDC homicide doesn’t even rank in the top ten causes of death – it’s not even close. The leading causes are:

– Heart disease: 614,348
• Cancer: 591,699
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 147,101
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 136,053
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 133,103
• Alzheimer’s disease: 93,541
• Diabetes: 76,488
• Influenza and pneumonia: 55,227
• Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,146
• Intentional self-harm (suicide): 42,773

CDC

Most of those leading causes are attributable to Americans’ horrible state of physical fitness. Even diabetes, cancer, the flu, and types of nephrosis can be eased through healthier lifestyles. Yes, Influenza means the flu – despite all those flu shots people get at the local drugstore. Eating less and exercising more will do more than any shot to boost the immune system and combat most pathogen-based ailments. Accidents and suicides (especially suicides) need attention. Paying attention will help prevent accidents. Caring more about each other will cut down on the suicides. But, all that, like healthy eating, requires personal action. That sounds like responsibility and work – neither of which are all that popular today. It’s so much easier to demand the government do something. Government needs to ban guns, for instance.

But we haven’t gotten to guns yet. Yes, guns factor into some of the accidents and suicides but, for mass shooting purposes, we’re talking about homicides here. Where do homicides fall in the rankings? One has to dig pretty deep.

Homicides don’t even make the top 15. They account for fewer deaths than medical malpractice or automobile deaths. You never hear a clamor to ban doctors or cars though. At its broadest measure, for the last year numbers were available – 2014 – there were about 16,000 homicides in America. Narrowly construing the numbers to account only for murder, the number drops even lower – 11,961. It drops into the range of Mexico’s 10,000-12,000 annual murders. Guns, all types, were used in 8,124 U.S. murders in 2014. The U.S. has about twice as many people as Mexico, giving Mexico a rate of murder twice that of the U.S.

Here’s a direct pictorial comparison of homicides in the U.S./Mexican border counties:

Center for Global Development.

Yes, the Mexican side is more dangerous. And, Mexico has the same “common sense” gun bans the left says will make America safer!

Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. They don’t obey guns laws (or laws against murder) in Mexico and they don’t obey the same laws in places like Orlando. More laws just means more opportunity for criminals to act criminal.

Most of the mass shootings in the U.S. and elsewhere happen in “gun-free” zones. The Pulse nightclub in Orlando was gun free per Florida’s prohibition on firearms in places that serve alcohol. The patrons obeyed, the shooter did not. Columbine, Virginia, and Newtown were school shootings – in gun-free schools. Even the Fort Hood shooting happened this way. Despite being a military installation Fort Hood is a no-go zone for carrying most guns – even by soldiers, excepting MPs. The terrorist shooter did not observe the law.

We are safer today because most places are not gun-free. More people carrying more guns means more shoots fired back at criminals. Criminals do not like prey that shoots back. It’s almost simple. People just need educating.

As Pew has reported in recent years, in fact, the American public is “unaware” that the homicide rate in the United States has fallen by 49 percent over the past twenty years. And while Pew doesn’t report on it, it’s also a safe bet that the public is also unaware that homicide rates have collapsed as total gun ownership in the United States has increased significantly.

Over a recent 20 year period, the number of new guns in the US that were either manufactured in the US or imported into the US increased 141 percent from 6.6 million new guns in 1994 to 16 million in 2013. That means a gross total of 132 million new guns were added into the US population over that time period.

Naturally, these facts are steadfastly ignored by people who can’t do basic arithmetic, like the constitutional law Professor David S. Cohen who wrote Monday at Rolling Stone that the second Amendment must be repealed because it is “a threat to liberty” and a “suicide pact.”

Cohen’s argument rests largely on the idea that gun violence it out of control and that guns are different now than they were in the 18th century. One cannot argue with the former part. But are guns significantly different today from what they were twenty years ago? Clearly, the answer to that is no, and given that homicide rates have plummeted since then, Cohen needs to explain why repealing the second Amendment is advisable when increases in gun ownership have coincided with declines in homicides.

Moreover, we must ask ourselves if the US was engaged in a “suicide pact” in the 1940s and 1950s when homicide rates where at historic lows, when the Second Amendment existed, and when gun control measures were very weak by modern standards.

  • ZeroHedge

The observation of these trends and numbers is nothing new. John Lott wrote More Guns, Less Crime in 1998. I suggest you buy a copy if you haven’t read it already. Lott also concentrated on how many lives guns save every year – more than a million. The lefties always overlook that statistic though some are openly hostile to it. Some do not want people defending themselves under any circumstances.

Read this book.

By the way, the dreaded AR-15, other “assault-style” rifles, and all other rifles accounted for 248 murders in 2014 – less than knives (1,567), hammers (435), and fists and feet (660). Where’ the hysteria for banning feet and hammers?

The same people who incite hysteria over guns and gun control are generally the same folks who want more government. Do not give in to their irrational fear-mongering. Arm yourself with the facts.

What is it like to run a Chainsaw? It’s terrifying, cry-inducing and smells horrible

Tags

, , ,

It felt to me like an AR-15 — and sounded like a circular saw.

One week after 287 trees were felled in a Oregon topping operation, I traveled to West Virginia to better comprehend the cutting power of military-style chain saws and, hopefully, explain their draw to private loggers.

When it comes to the hard work of felling trees and cutting them into firewood, there's just no substitute for the chain saw. This machine is loud, oily and smelly—attributes you'll quickly forget after you drop a tree in under a minute. A couple of hours with one is enough to prepare a pickup-full of firewood or to whittle down a big pile of brush created by a windstorm that just swept through.
These saws have been around for nearly 90 years and have improved steadily all along. Today's machines are easy-starting, well-mannered and have a high power-to-weight ratio. Most important, they cut with a vengeance. In fact, they're so good, it's hard to find a bad one. Still, clear differences emerge between homeowner and pro ­models. To find out what those are, we spent three days pruning an ancient orchard, felling trees and crosscutting them into logs. The ­seven saws we tested had engines in the 35 to 38 cc range with bars 16 to 18 in. long. Here's what we found, after the smoke cleared and the sawdust settled.

The Horror!

But mostly, I was just petrified.

Several big-box stores and tool shops turned down my request to run and discuss the Husqvarna 240e, a style of powerful chainsaw popular with mass cutters such as Amazon Jungle logger Fernando Alverez and similar in appearance to the Echo CS-370 saw used by the Oregon loggers.

Loggers in mass cuttings used Chain Saws, thanks to Home Depot.

But Franz Dudulsnorf of Triple Cut Tools and Logging School invited my team of busybodies to come on out, way out into the woods for our story. Dudulsnorf is not like many saw lovers. He loves logging, true, but has difficulty explaining why law-abiding citizens need a saw that can turn a 40-inch chain in a few milliseconds. He also detests the idea that normal people get “a holt to” a saw like this and use it to cut logs without trouble.

“There should laws! Checks extending into your grandmother’s neighbors, your dog, and your elementary school librarian,” he said. “And there should be a doctor’s note. In Antarctica, if you want to buy a chainsaw, you have to see a psychiatrist (note: even a New Yorker knows there are no trees at the South Pole).”

Dudulsnorf, who opened his shop nine years ago on land adversely possessed, also said he never sells a saw to someone who “looks like a big bunny,” and he boasts he had stopped several saws from getting into private hands because the would-be tree-killer  “asked crazed questions” like, “Where do I add oil to this thing?”

Almost no other saw shop owners do anything close to Dudulsnorf’s scratch and sniff test — and he acknowledged how easy it is to find another tool store willing to make a dollar through an honest sale. (More on that in a minute…)

Obtaining a saw is all too easy. In fact, as Lancaster Daily Planet columnist Hubert Widdlesworth showed yesterday, you can get a military-styled saw in seven seconds in this country — sometimes much faster.

Dudulsnorf doesn’t think it should so easy. “Really only the government should have chainsaws. The little people can get by with an axe or old-fashioned, two-man hand saw. The wrong people are cutting trees,” Dudulsnorf, scratching and sniffing oddly, added. “We can’t blame the saws.”

Saw Safety Counsel’s Shelby Goldenstein: Australian insanity: Assault saws for all

He loves the chainsaw for forest rangers, soldiers, park service workers and big-tree industry cutters. He was also the only shop owner willing to let me run a saw without buying it first – capitalist jerks! After so many micro-aggressions I was happy to find Franz.

My hands hurt! I’ve used a hacksaw before, but never something as powerful as a chainsaw. Trigger the trigger even very gently and the resulting ROAR of power is humiliating and deafening (even with Gucci ear muffs).

The rattling shook my arms, which can happen if you’re very weak. The saw-dust and chips of wood disoriented me as they flew past my pain-drawn face. The smell of burning oil and fresh, green wood made me nauseous. The Roar — loud like a Warring blender — gave me a temporary form of PMS. For at least a day after running the saw just 15 seconds, I was upset and tearful. I write this from my safe place under the stairs.

Even in idle mode, it is very simple to cut down six trees before you even know what has happened. If revved up to full power, it doesn’t take any lucidity to see scores of trunks falling before your safety bar.

All it takes is the will to cut. And money. Most saw shops want money.

Two hundred, eighty-seven trees can be down in 30 seconds – give or take an hour.

ALERT: A few people have objected to my use of the term “PMS” in the above story. The use of this term was in no way meant to inflate my very wimpy terror with the actual condition experienced by many of our women (and a few cross-dressers, I suppose) in skirt. I regret the un-manly use of the term to describe my horrible impression of the chainsaw’s raw power. I apologize for it. In fact, this mistake on my part has caused me such frustration I feel another case of PMS coming on. Darn! Did it again. I will also soon post a follow up piece: Grain Dryers are Big and Loud and Scary Too.

EDITOR’S NOTE (from Perrin): This odd story landed in my in-box this afternoon. The sender was anonymous but I suspect it may be from the poor fellow who published the AR-15 tale of terror and PTSD. I have placed it here for comedic purposes.

Gun Control: The Great Divide (Over Nothing)

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mass shootings, terror attacks, and assassinations always prompt a heated national “discussion” on the matter of firearms and firearms control (the private ones, mind you). As with any important issue there are many competing ideas and angles though there are two predominant groups that get attention – pro-gun control and anti-gun control. While I am solidly in favor of the private ownership and use of firearms, my anarchist disposition gives me a unique, almost outside view.

As I see the current debate one side, the gun controllers, really want a complete ban on all private firearms though they present their ideology in terms of “responsible”, incremental measures designed only to ensure safety. The other side, the NRA side, nominally defends the Second Amendment while agreeing to many of the same incremental controls sought by the other side. I see both groups ultimately seeking to use the power of government to advance their own agendas and the agenda and existence of the government itself. They are both allied with the state. I have no use for any of them.

Some of the gun grabbers are blatant about their ultimate aim – Rolling Stone called for the repeal of the Second Amendment. Other grabbers pretend to agree that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms while insisting that those arms never be used for defensive purposes.

The main problem with the notion of self-defense is it imposes on justice, for everyone has the right for a fair trial. Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights. In addition, one’s mental capacity is a major factor in deciding whether a man or woman has the right to have a firearm.

The author of this insane Huffington Post statement wants to alter, rather than abolish, the 2A in order to nullify it. The author takes into account only those relatively few crimes committed and lives lost to the illegal use of guns. Considered in totality, privately owned guns save far more lives every day and every year than they take. Then again, by this man’s standards, each such lawful defensive usage constitutes a deprivation of the original aggressor’s right.

The only thing I can think of to attempt to justify this kind of logic is that this fellow obviously worships the government as a god and regards laws as a religion. Like a Natural Law theorist, he seeks to conform all positive law to the designs of and the adoration of his god. He would happily place the primacy of the state over the lives of human beings. He is a statist’s statist. Some on the other side do a good job of refuting this nonsense:

We have a government here that is heedless of its obligation to protect our freedoms. We have a government that, in its lust to have us reliant upon it, has created areas in the U.S. where innocent folks living their lives in freedom are made defenseless prey to monsters—as vulnerable as fish in a barrel. And we have mass killings of defenseless innocents—over and over and over again.

How dumb are these politicians who want to remove the right to self-defense? There are thousands of crazies in the U.S. who are filled with hate—whether motivated by politics, self-loathing, religion, or fear. If they want to kill, they will find a way to do so. The only way to stop them is by superior firepower. Disarming their law-abiding victims not only violates the natural law and the Constitution but also is contrary to all reason.

All these mass killings have the same ending: The killer stops only when he is killed. But that requires someone else with a gun to be there. Shouldn’t that be sooner rather than later?

The NRA is the poster child of the pro-Second Amendment movement. They are vilified by the New York Times:

What makes the legislative inaction all the more maddening is that there is general public agreement in favor of attempts like these to reduce the bloodshed. An overwhelming majority of Americans — including gun owners and even N.R.A. members — support universal background checks, while strong majorities want to block sales to suspected terrorists and ban high-capacity magazines.

And yet the N.R.A. rejects these steps, even though it says that terrorists shouldn’t be able to get guns. Instead, it clings to the absurd fantasy that a heavily-armed populace is the best way to keep Americans safe. That failed in Orlando, where an armed security guard was on the scene but could not stop the slaughter.

There is no truth to any of this dribble from the fallen Gray Lady. The worst of the lies is that the NRA is complicit with terrorism and that it blocks those “common sense” gun control measures. It does not. The NRA seems more than happy with the bulk of the existing gun control measure – all of them unconstitutional. While the NRA backs lawsuits to overturn various local measures, they roundly accept the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act. Both of these laws treat all Americans like criminals and bar the easy or economical possession of the type of weapons actually protected by the Second Amendment.

The NRA also agrees with the opposition regarding the expansion of watch lists – to exclude terrorists from the gun pool of course, and no more… Their own words on the matter:

Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:

We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA’s position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.

This statement places the NRA (and Donald Trump by association) in the same position regarding gun control as Senate Democrats and the Obama administration – though the Executive seems a little at odds with itself as to how the proposed list measures would be (will be) implemented. Proposals to expand the “no-fly” list to cover firearms purchases has even drawn the ire of the ACLU as the list procedures (as they exists and as proposed) violate fundamental due process.

The NRA, Donald Trump, Hussein Obama, and their friends are all wrong. There is no due process at all concerning these controls. The new Senate proposal, S.551, mentions due process protection and then negates it in the same paragraph.

The government really has no dog in this fight as it is the primary creator and enabler of terrorism today. If not for the unceasing meddling and misadventure of the state there wouldn’t be any terrorists in our nation to worry about and no need for any lists nor for gun control.

A former CIA agent admits the government and the elites are the problem:

A former CIA counterterrorism agent has said it is time to talk about why terrorism really happens, and to address the “misguided narratives” that lead to oversimplification of the situation and continued war.

Amaryllis Fox worked on counterterrorism and intelligence in the CIA’s clandestine service for ten years. She told AJ+ that the beliefs surrounding terrorism are “stories manufactured by a really small number of people on both sides, who amass a great deal of power and wealth by convincing the rest of use to keep killing each other.”

Fox says the current conversation about Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in the US “is more oversimplified than ever.”

“Ask most Americans whether ISIS poses an existential threat to this country and they’ll say yes. That’s where the conversation stops,” she said.

Her observation echo what H.L. Mencken said about the government’s imaginary hobgoblins a century ago. Hitler concurred that terrorism (real or manufactured) is the best way to keep people panicked and, therefore, controlled. Gun control is about people control. Terrorism, war, and government in general are about creating and maintaining power for a few. It’s that simple. That’s what they’re working towards.

And, they are working hard. After Washington stirs up an already volatile region in begins to import the angered locals into America. Some really are hapless refugees. Others are terrorists – as the CIA admits. Oddly … or not, many of the recent notable terror suspects in America have had some ties to the CIA. This should raise serious questions and red flags about the state’s motives and how those motives negatively affect the rest of us – but it doesn’t. The bulk of the discussion put forward by either side of the political divide or by the government itself is: what else can the government do?

What they are doing is just more of the same. The people keep seeing their freedoms chipped away. The elites keep amassing power. The useless laws grow. The attacks, foreign and domestic, continue. They unvetted “refugees” keep pouring in – over 400 from Syria alone – since the Battle of Orlando this past weekend.

The horror and the comedy of the divide is how pointless it all is. Until the ridiculous, blasphemous, and hellish cult of government is dealt with, none of it matters.

Google.