Activism: Ur Doin It Wrong

I’m a fan of open carry. I think everyone should have the right to do it if they so choose. I support the various efforts to make it legal in places where it currently is not.

But this?

Moms-Demand-open-carry-slobs-2

No, just no. Stop helping.

You want to normalize the sight of guns in public? Great! Act normal. Like Tam says, “There’s a difference between just carrying a gun and carrying a gun AT people.”

Just like Starbucks just wants to peddle overpriced coffee, Chipotle just wants to sell overpriced burritos (and there are much better sources for both). Neither establishment is asking you to hunt down and kill the beans yourself.

 

Combating Evil One Hashtag at a Time

…with signs? on Twitter? For the love of…

Just go read Larry’s post.

.

.

.

.

Oh! You came back. I can’t really add anything here, but that’s never stopped me from trying before.

Seriously folks? Signs and hashtags and selfies? Really? I’m sure those big bad kidnappers that had no problem abducting innocent girls with the plan to sell them are kicking themselves now. I mean, their evilness is totally trending. They’re never going to bring up their Klout score now. #unfriend #unfollow #uncool

I bet they are totes going to give those girls back now. And they’re going to film it so it goes viral on YouTube. #winning

Dance Monkey makes pouty face, changes world. #filmat11 #firstworldsolutions

Because that’s exactly how brutal warlords do things. They make sure they are in consensus with popular opinion and act accordingly so as not to be shamed. #howitworks

#eyeroll #facepalm #sarcasm

Fun fact: This post contains more hashtags than every other entry combined #uselesstrivia

 

And Here I Was Working Up A Nice Rant

So I was listening to NPR* on my way home from the office on Friday, and they were talking about the whole botched execution** in Oklahoma story that just won’t die. I really had very little intention of ever commenting on the story, certainly not before all the facts came out, but I learned that our esteemed President showed no such restraint..

I was ticked. How dare he even weigh in on this? And not only did he insert himself where he doesn’t belong, but he connected it to the inherent racism in the system? You know, as if the violent death of an innocent white girl wasn’t important. So he’s going to have his chief gun-runner, Eric Holder, investigate the racial bias in the prison system. How dare he?!

Except, that’s not what happened. He didn’t insert himself into the story. He was asked to comment during a press conference. And he didn’t say the death penalty wasn’t warranted and in fact acknowledged that the crimes were indeed heinous.

Obama said at a news conference Friday that he believes the death penalty is merited in some cases and that Lockett’s crimes were heinous. But he says the penalty’s application in the U.S. has problems, including racial bias and the eventual exoneration of some death row inmates.

I can’t really disagree, particularly with the last point. I agree that the death penalty is merited in some cases, but we have to be VERY careful in the application. I am continuing to lose faith that we have a system capable of justly handing down death sentences.

There is a disproportionately large number of black men in prison. Whether that is due to racism inherent in the system or a culture that lifts up criminals while deriding those trying to make better lives for themselves as “acting white” would be a worthwhile investigation and discussion. Are all black men criminals just because black men are over-represented in the prison population? Absolutely not. Do they have to overcome pressure from within their community and their peers to be better than the thugs the rappers venerate? For far too many, I believe the answer is yes.

Being a fine, upstanding member of society doesn’t have a color. Neither does being a thug. My own lily white nephew is a thug because he grew up in a community that celebrated the thug lifestyle. Now he’s in prison where he will more than likely stay for the foreseeable future. Besides, facial prison tattoos make for interesting job interviews. As for me, I will continue to judge people by who they are and not the color of their skin.

We cannot be a just society and accept that sometimes we execute the innocent. Whether that be lethal injection, swat team, or drone strike. Collateral damage in war is one thing, the calculated killing of an individual is another. That’s not a mistake you can correct after the fact.

*Yes, I know. There’s my problem. It’s my regular pressure test of the old circulatory system. As if rush hour traffic couldn’t do it.

**Dude certainly qualifies under my definition of Needed killin’ and wound up dead. I’m shedding no tears. Yes, it was ugly, and we should do better. Not for his sake, but for the sake of our own humanity. He deserved to be beaten, shot, and buried alive just like his victim, but we should not become the animal to punish the animal. We gave him better than he deserved because we are better.

Andrew Branca on Stand Your Ground

This is perfect. Andrew Branca of Law of Self Defense recently debated Stand Your Ground at UC Berkeley. Here are his opening remarks.

Honestly, there is nothing more to be said here. He explained it clearly and succinctly, and in my opinion, won the debate before it even started.

If you care about self defense and the laws surrounding it*, you should be following Andrew Branca.

*This should include roughly 150% of my readership.

And The People Said, “No!”

It is said that there are three boxes to effect political change.

  • The Soap Box
  • The Ballot Box
  • The Ammo Box

The situation in Nevada made people go for the third box. My friend, Peter, has an excellent run down on it and I agree with his thoughts here.

I’m not going to debate whether or not Mr. Bundy is in the right. Honestly, I don’t think I know enough about all the twist and turns and intricacies to make a judgment there.

My takeaway here is that the natives have gotten restless. The people stood up and the feds backed down (at least for the moment. I’m sure it’s not over). This is a bit beyond lighting off a Roman Candle in city limits level of civil disobedience.

The government said, “Respect mah authoritah!” and the people said, “No!”

And that attitude is far from unique. In fact, it seems to be spreading. New York said, “Register you guns,” and the people said, “No!” Same thing happened in Connecticut.

Taking up arms and standing in the way of the uniformed men with guns is a pretty loud “No!” don’t you think? Not a single shot was fired, but I imagine it was heard, nonetheless.

What’s next? I don’t know, but it won’t be the last time the people say “No!”

Feminism Will Never Redefine Beauty

Spotted this going around Facebook. And then this little jewel.

Really? Neither feminism nor some photographer is going to make me see hairy armpits as beautiful. Sorry, not gonna happen. You want to grow them out, fine. They’re your armpits to do with as you like. I’m sure it’s because I’ve been brainwashed by the patriarchy, but I don’t find that attractive and no amount of edgy photography or handwritten signs is going to change that. I’m not ‘perturbed’, I just don’t like it. I’m allowed.

Save for certain fetishes, no one is going to find it attractive if I smear myself with feces* no matter how beautiful I insist it really is. (And before someone jumps in and complains that I’m comparing body hair to fecal matter, no, I’m not. I’m using hyperbole.)

Beauty and attraction take at least two participants, the actor and the audience. If the actor wants to be attractive to a particular audience they will have to conform to the beauty standards of that audience. If person x’s definition of a beautiful woman is tall, blond with big boobs, I’m never going to reach that standard. I’m at peace with that. I fit just fine into other standards of beauty. I will never fit them all and neither will you.

You think being hairy is beautiful? Fine. Go be hairy and find someone that likes that, just don’t insist that I need to accept it as beautiful or find it attractive.

*Crushed up fish scales, on the other hand, are totally acceptable.

Freedom is Dangerous

Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility. -Sigmund Freud

Indeed. Far too many don’t really wish to be free. They want to be children shielded from the consequences of their actions and choices. They want to delegate their protection to someone else.

Responsibility often isn’t fun, but it is necessary to be free. A life without risk is not a life worth living. Guaranteed success is not success at all. It’s mediocrity at best. How can I possibly be the master of my own destiny if I allow someone else to draw the map?

The only place that can guarantee me regular meals, healthcare, and a place to lay my head is a prison. It doesn’t matter whether or not it has walls. And not even there can my safety be assured.

As for me, I’d prefer dangerous freedom over servitude any day.

Don’t kid yourself into thinking you are anything other than a slave when you take your food stamps and welfare. Someone else dictates what you can eat and where you will live. That someone can decide how generous they are going to be. They will lull you into complacency and then figure out just how cheaply your vote can be bought. Already you have been deceived with lies and empty promises.

Freedom does not mean free stuff. It means responsibility. Responsibility for your own welfare, your own well-being, your own safety. It’s a shame that’s thought of as such a radical idea.

Sex, Drugs, and Hobby Lobby

I’ve been kind of paying attention to all the arguments surrounding the Hobby Lobby court case. In short, Hobby Lobby doesn’t want to pay for some forms of birth control that the owners consider contrary to their religious beliefs. The government says, not so fast. These methods of birth control are legal and since you aren’t a religious organization, you must pay for them regardless of your personal convictions.

Huh. Well isn’t that interesting? You know, I’d like a new firearm. I have every right to own a firearm. In fact, it’s a right protected right there in plain language in the constitution rather than hidden somewhere under the idea of privacy. I can’t afford a new firearm at the moment. By this logic, I should be able to compel my employer to purchase one for me. Right? Even if my employer was someone like Michael Bloomberg*.

They can’t refuse. That’d be denying me my right to own firearms. It would directly infringe on my access.

Except that, it wouldn’t. It would just mean that I have to spend my own money on it. It would be none of my boss’s business. As it should be.

Hobby Lobby cannot compel its employees not to use these forms of birth control. They cannot deny access to them. They just don’t want to subsidize it.

*Thankfully, my employer is nothing like Michael Bloomberg.