Mental illness

so CJ, in a thinly disguised attempt to say that supporting laws that restrict people with mental illness from firearms ownership proves that the Second Amendment is not absolute fails to overlook the obvious portion of my reply:

We are a nation of individual rights, and it doesn’t matter if everyone else committed a certain act yesterday, I didn’t.

 Today, there is a story from CBS Atlanta that proves my point: 1 in 5 children in the US has a mental disorder, according to the CDC. Now this doesn’t mean that our kids are any different than we were, or even than our grandparents. What it means is that the definition of what constitutes a mental disorder is being expanded to include nearly everyone. That is why trying to predict who should have their rights preemptively removed is wrong and will result in a short ride to tyranny.

If you are so mentally ill as to be a danger, then you are too mentally ill to be out in public. If you cannot be trusted to own a firearm, then you can’t be trusted to have gasoline, fertilizer, matches, or pointy sticks. In other words, you can’t be trusted to be without a custodian.

Authority, responsibility, and accountability

I was a part of the fire party when I was stationed onboard the USS Dwight D Eisenhower during the years of 1987-1992. One of the major events that occurred when I was stationed on her was when we collided with another ship that was sitting at anchor. (PDF warning) At the time of the collision, I was standing less than 100 feet away on the flight deck. I was a fire team leader of a pair of impromptu hose teams that put out a small fire, and I was reassigned to do a damage investigation by a Lieutenant that had taken over damage control. Even though several compartments were damaged, and opening one watertight door revealed that the compartment beyond was GONE, the Navy called the damage to the ship “minor.”

The Navigation Officer and Commanding Officer’s careers both ended that day, even though the Captain was not present on the bridge when the collision took place. The reason for this is simple: When you are in charge, you get to take credit for what your subordinates accomplish, but you also have to take the ultimate blame when your subordinates screw the pooch.

That is why I don’t begrudge the fact that President Obama gets to bask in the reflected glory of SEALS finally bagging Osama Bin Laden. They did the job, and the guy at the helm gets some of the credit. That is what it means to be in charge. At the same time, the IRS fiasco, the Beghazi disaster, and the other problems that we see unfolding are 100% laid at Obama’s feet.

When I was in the military, we were taught the principles of leadership. There are three of them, and leadership cannot exists where any one of them is missing: Accountability, responsibility, and authority. One cannot lead if they do not have the authority to change things, be held accountable for the results, and take responsibility for the outcome. It seems that Obama has mastered wielding the authority, but has not learned a thing about responsibility. One can only hope that he will be held accountable.

Youtube and Google

Screw you. I can’t post comments on Youtube videos without using my real name any longer. There is no longer an option to use a screen name. Couple that with the fact that Reader is gone, and I am going to have to find another place to host this blog, or I will be shutting it down. I will also soon be moving away from a gmail address for my email.

Individual rights

In comments to this post, CJ wants to know:

 what happens if someone comes out with statistics that say people with
blue eyes are 87% more likely to use a gun to commit a crime, or some
other ridiculous ‘fact.’

 We already have facts like that. Black Americans are statistically 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than any other segment of the population. That does not mean, however, that we pass laws restricting the activities of all blacks. We are a nation of individual rights, and it doesn’t matter if everyone else committed a certain act yesterday, I didn’t.

DUI limits

One night while working as a firefighter, I was serving as the company officer of a truck company when a call came in to the neighboring company’s response area for an accident. During the dispatch, it sounded pretty serious. The Battalion Chief, who was at my station, told me to be ready to be dispatched to set up a landing zone for a medical helicopter, because he had a funny feeling that we would be needed.

Well, we wound up at the scene, treating a woman who was seriously injured, while the first unit to arrive on scene was busy doing CPR on her baby. Being the only paramedic on the truck full of EMTs, I was incharge of her care. I tried everything, every trick that I had in my knowledge base, but the woman died. So did her baby.

It turns out, according to her own family members, who were driving in the car behind her, she ran the stop sign, and was hit by a pickup truck that did not have a stop sign. The accident was clearly and unequivocally her fault, and that mistake cost her life, and her child’s life.

The problem here is that the State of Florida requires blood samples of every driver involved in a fatal crash. The driver of the truck, who did not seem impaired to me, had a blood alcohol of 82. He did admit on scene that he had 2 glasses of wine with dinner. I know what you are thinking- but his BAC did support the fact that he had only two. The State limit is 80. He was charged with and convicted of two felony counts of DUI manslaughter, and sentenced to twenty years in prison, and the accident wasn’t even his fault.

Why the long story? Because the government is cutting the DUI limits again. From 100, where it was thirty years ago, to 80 in 1999, and now to 50. After the limit was reduced from 100 to 80, traffic fatalities actually went up the following year, not down. My guess is that the law is working to reduce drinking and driving, and the amount of income that the government is getting from DUI fines is declining, and the number of paying customers that DUI attorneys is getting is falling. Perhaps the cops aren’t getting enough opportunities to earn free vacations for DUI arrests.

The truth is that the DUI law changes have had no discernible effect on the rate of traffic fatalities. Of course, the fact that the government uses traffic offenses as a cash cow, with Florida making $100 million a year  and Virginia doing the same from traffic tickets, has nothing to do with it. In California, it was recently discovered that 1,600 DUI checkpoints yielded only 3,200 DUI arrests (two per checkpoint), but resulted in $40 million in traffic tickets and 24,000 vehicle confiscations. Cops also won, being paid $30 million in overtime to staff the checkpoints.

Five years later

Not quite five years ago, I complained that the war on terror had allowed the government to take onto itself a host of new powers that turned this nation into a dictatorship. My Republican friends told me that the Patriot act was needed to fight terrorism. I said:

The fun part is going to be where I get to point out to my Republican friends that the powers being abused by Obama are the same ones they gleefully gave W.

 Why did I say that? Because of all of the powers the TSA was granted, on top of the Patriot Act. Well, here we are in the midst of watching those nifty tools that were left in W’s tool shed being abused by the other guy.

Don’t be a jerk

There is a guy in Tennessee by the name of Leonard Embody. Mr. Embody feels like he is making a stand for liberty and gun rights by parading around Bicentennial Mall with a loaded AK-47 clone pistol slung across his back. He also is known to walk around local parks.
What he is doing is completely legal, and he thinks that he is making progress on the gun rights front by being in your face with gun rights.
When it comes to open carry in the promotion of gun rights, there is a lot of controversy among bloggers in the pro-gun community. Uncle has this to say:

I don’t think it’s an effective way of getting converts. That doesn’t
mean that I oppose open carry. But if you’re open carrying trying to
get people to turn pro-gun, it’s probably not a good marketing
technique. 

He also had this to say:

  Carrying a shotgun into a library is not going to win hearts and
minds. It’s going to turn people away. This bill is going to draw more
attention to the incident that led this politician to propose the bill.
And not your rights.

You have rights. We get that. But when you’re focusing on your right
and acting like a jerk, people tend to focus on that whole being a jerk
part. There are effective ways to to win hearts and minds with respect
to OC. Flashing guns at librarians and toting a shotgun on your back are
not some of those ways.

This is like the kiss-ins that gay groups used to have. I’m all for
gay rights and support gay marriage. But I don’t think a bunch of gay
dudes kissing at the mall is effective at converting people to their
cause.

You guys suck at marketing. And that’s it.

When you engage in activism, there are a number of ways to go about it. One way is to be arrested, and either fight in court on Constitutional grounds, or be a martyr for the cause. Another way is to win the hearts and minds of the people. Scaring Suzy Soccermom by being all in her face with a heater is not the way to do it.
If your point was “you can’t stop the signal” with regards to the Liberator pistol, then you use Pirate Bay or Kim.com for that. It’s anonymous, and Suzy Soccermom already thinks those guys are kooky but harmless.

The tactic of putting the file out and then retracting it several days later wasn’t ever going to work to advance gun rights. What it did do was let you brag about how “edgy” you were.  Minuteman proves that he is a post whoring jerk that is just looking for accolades and pats on the back when he links to my blog in an apparent dick measuring contest.

Don’t be a jerk. That won’t win you any converts.