No S.B. 1062 in Canada!

Ezra Levant writes about religious freedom in Canada.  Quote of the Day:

It’s like poker.

A white, Christian male has the lowest hand — it’s like he’s got just one high card, maybe an ace. So almost everyone trumps him.

A white woman is just a bit higher — like a pair of twos. Enough to beat a white man, but not much more.

A gay man is like having two pairs in poker.

A gay woman — a lesbian like McGregor — is like having three of a kind.

A black lesbian is a full house — pretty tough to beat.

Unless she’s also in a wheelchair, which means she’s pretty much a straight flush.

The only person who could trump that would be a royal flush. If the late Sammy Davis Jr. — who was black, Jewish and half-blind — were to convert to Islam and discover he was 1/64th Aboriginal.

So which is a better hand: A lesbian who wants a haircut or a Muslim who doesn’t want to give it to her?

Nope, adding the wheelchair makes it four of a kind. Sammy Davis was the straight flush.

Muslim? ROYAL flush.

Edited to add:  Back in 2006 I made a similar observation:

Ms. Johnson most definitely violated the law, but will the DA prosecute? Absolutely not. I think they learned their lesson there with Ronald Dixon. She’s an older black woman in a wheelchair who successfully defended herself against a career criminal. (I hate to be the one to say it, but as far as publicity goes the only PC box left unchecked on this one is “lesbian.”) No WAY are they going to do ANYTHING to put her in a position to point out how idiotic and anti-citizen New York’s gun laws are.

I’m still curious as to whether or not they pulled her premises permit.

Quote of the Day – Sultan Knish Edition

Daniel Greenfield certainly has a way of cutting through the bullshit:

The progressive law professors, who are currently the only thing standing between the working class and the abyss, at least according to other progressive professors, not only haven’t worked for a living, but don’t know what working for a living entails and don’t even understand the concept. Other things that they don’t understand include personal responsibility, consequences, elementary arithmetic and human free will.

That last one never fails to throw them for a loop. No sooner do they pass some comprehensive plan intended to ameliorate a terrible problem then they discover that the working people have made a hash out of it. But they never despair because they are certain that there is no progressive solution that cannot be fixed by an even more comprehensive progressive solution.

The philosophy cannot be wrong! Do it again, only HARDER!

Now I Have TWO Shotguns

Got my taxes done over the weekend.  No repeat of last year’s bloodbath, this year the non-interestbearing payroll savings plan paid off, so I dropped a little of it on a new gun – a Mossberg 930 JM Pro Series.  Looks a lot like this:

The specs are:

Gauge 12
Chamber Size 3″
Capacity 10
Barrel 24″ Vent Rib
Sights Fiber Optic Front
Chokes Accu-Set
Overall Length 44.5″
Length Of Pull 14″
Barrel Finish Matte Blue

So what accessories should I get for it?


Comments have been left noting the rather long 14″ length of pull.  In looking at pistol-grip stocks, I see that Choate notes: “The 930/935 shotguns can not be shortened shorter than 13 3/4 inches because of the recoil spring tube that protrudes form the back of the receiver.”

I don’t think I’d use this as a home-defense shotgun.  The barrel is too long.  For that, I’d stick with my 590.  Its barrel is 4″ shorter.  Doesn’t sound like much, but it is.

In Praise of Prejudice

The Arizona legislature has passed a bill and put it on Gov. Brewer’s desk that protects persons, businesses or legal entities from prosecution for exercise of their conscientious objection to government mandates due to sincerely held religious belief.  To wit:  Christians can, without legal threat, deny services to openly gay people.

Hell, I think it’s a terrific idea!  And it shouldn’t be limited to just religious beliefs!

I think persons,  businesses and legal entities should be able to deny services to anyone for any reason without fear of legal entanglement.  The less .gov butts into people’s business, the better, as far as I’m concerned.  Want to deny services to people because they’re black?  Fine!  Jewish?  Go right ahead!  Physically disabled?  Knock yourself out. Cismale gendernormatives?  If you can spell it, sure!

The function of government should not be to punish people for acting on their fervently held beliefs.  It’s function should be to ensure that potential customers are made aware up front who a person, business or legal entity will refuse service to.

They already do that in a tiny way under Arizona Revised Statute §4-229, which states:

A. A person with a permit issued pursuant to section 13-3112 may carry a concealed handgun on the premises of a licensee who is an on-sale retailer unless the licensee posts a sign that clearly prohibits the possession of weapons on the licensed premises. The sign shall conform to the following requirements:

1. Be posted in a conspicuous location accessible to the general public and immediately adjacent to the liquor license posted on the licensed premises.

2. Contain a pictogram that shows a firearm within a red circle and a diagonal red line across the firearm.

3. Contain the words, “no firearms allowed pursuant to A.R.S. section 4-229”.

A sign like this:

So, the legislature should simply extend this logic to whatever other prejudices there are out there and require signage to advise potential customers where they’re not wanted.  Something like this, for instance:

Or this:

That way everyone will know right up front what kind of bigots they will be dealing with, and can decide for themselves whether or not they want to spend their money there. No hurt feelings, no lawsuits.